Grappling Overrated [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Grendel

03-29-2003, 03:24 PM

Hi Pseudoswitch,

Originally posted by pseudoswitch
People who dismiss grappling arts as unnecessary usually haven't trained in them for any appreciable amount of time.
That's not true in my case. I'd say those who think they need to supplement Wing Chun with grappling don't have good Kung Fu. That's not necessarily their fault. It's hard to find, and when found, hard to learn.

They should definatley not be overlooked IMO. Talk is cheap, but the proof is out there, a good grappler will more often than not be able to take down a striker.

I don't know about a "striker," but a good skilled Wing Chun person, no, not likely. The grappler would never get in and take the punishment, IMHO. Good Wing Chun can make you fight as if you were 100 pounds heavier. If all else is equal and your opponent is 100 pounds heavier and you grapple with him, you will likely lose. Using Wing Chun, you may have a chance.

That can't be disputed.

Oops. :rolleyes: LOL!

I think more of us should come to the realisation that WC and grappling arts don't have to be mutually exclusive. Learning BJJ groundfighting won't affect the way you do your WC, will it???

Yes it will.

Similarly, there's no reason why you can't apply WC principles and techniques on the ground, in addition to grappling techniques, as and when appropriate.

Except for the addition of "grappling techniques," I agree with this statement.

Anyway, just some thoughts,

It's good you're thinking. :)

I think that the only thing ever lacking in Wing Chun is good teachers with its complete understanding. I do see vulnerabilities to grappling attacks in most people's Wing Chun in lack of a good horse and lack of power in their strikes---two related problems.

Naturally if you let a grappler get you in a choke or successive arm bars, you're done if the grappler has a clue. Also, it is possible to retain some Wing Chun structure on the ground.

Regards,

pseudoswitch

03-29-2003, 03:36 PM

Hi Grendel,

Which grappling art/s have you studied, and in what way does studying a grappling art interfere with one's WC training/performance?

Martin Foot

03-29-2003, 03:42 PM

By rigorously & systematically examining & practising the application of the principles of your Martial Art to the environment you wish to master, whether you are standing upright, or “Grappling” on the floor, you will find the answers within the principles.

If it isn’t working for you at the moment, then with perseverance and further embodiment of those principles you will evolve beyond where you have been in violation of the systems principle criteria and therefore taken advantage of.

Ultimately it’s a fluid application of principles from which the techniques flows.

It’s all in there

foolinthedeck

03-29-2003, 03:54 PM

can i add my two cents - hope i'm not off topic..

i find that a lot of WC people dont like to get into holds and grapples because 'its not wing chun' and so they confident pak and lop etc..

for my own part i love to be put in holds just so i can see which way the energy is moving, this is odne with pretty low quality JJ people, but the concept is to be grappled in chi sau and just listen to your body.

theres no subsitute for good (perfect?)wing chun which stops you being grappled in the first place, but it is useful to know how a grab works.

in many basic ones, by moving with the energy you are not hurt at all, you are tied up but then so is the other guy who has to 'hold' you, when he changes you change because you are relaxed and sticking to his energy.

i always try to use my chi sau in any situation, i just wish there were more styles with something akin to chi sau, and ego's to match the relaxation to play with!

Grendel

03-29-2003, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by pseudoswitch
Hi Grendel,

Which grappling art/s have you studied, and in what way does studying a grappling art interfere with one's WC training/performance?
Wrestling, JJ, Judo, Street Fighting

I also used to be a "condition" athlete and looked it, running cross-country, playing water polo, swimming in competition, and power lifting to supplement my judo training when I was at that stage. But, it wasn't until I began to seriously study Wing Chun that I really began to understand control of my body, which is the precondition to effective control of others.

I believe that grappling arts require considerable conditioning and strength training. That interferes through the time it takes away from training Wing Chun and the different muscular development. Perhaps I've never really refined my "grappling" to the level of any art, but with few exceptions, when doing just grappling, strength seems to rule the day. This being the case, this is diametrically opposed to Wing Chun principles. As you know, Wing Chun is not about using gross muscle power, but rather about using structure and position to overcome speed and strength. It is said that Yip Man was good at that. :p

If you ask me if I think you can do both in combination, I'd answer a qualified "yes," but if you ask me if your Wing Chun will reach a level of mastery doing so, I'd give you an unqualified "no."

Most people never grasp the most subtle and important aspects of Wing Chun. Grappling is much easier to comprehend, and so when push comes to shove, I think that is what would be used, giving away a huge advantage. My opinion is only reinforced by the limited success of Wing Chun trained fighters in competition. I see them abandon Wing Chun---trying to outgrapple the grapplers, not using refined Wing Chun skill which requires body unity, good structure, position, and footwork.

Regards,

pseudoswitch

03-29-2003, 04:28 PM

Hi Grendel,

Originally posted by Grendel

when doing just grappling, strength seems to rule the day. This being the case, this is diametrically opposed to Wing Chun principles. As you know, Wing Chun is not about using gross muscle power, but rather about using structure and position to overcome speed and strength.
I see what you are trying to say, but isn't strength or power in WC a by-product of speed?

If you ask me if I think you can do both in combination, I'd answer a qualified "yes," but if you ask me if your Wing Chun will reach a level of mastery doing so, I'd give you an unqualified "no."
So what you are saying is that if a person studies a grappling art, were strength is the primarily developed attribute, he/she will automatically attempt to use brute strength when performing their WC? This seems to infer that the person has very limited awareness of WC principles and does not have much concious control of their physical expression.

I see them abandon Wing Chun---trying to outgrapple the grapplers, not using refined Wing Chun skill which requires body unity, good structure, position, and footwork.
You're not from Yip Chun lineage are you? :D There are many WC schools who seem to neglect the importance of power and strength in their practice. Yes stucture and postioning and very important, but without a fair amount of strength, speed and power, it aint gonna do you much good. How about: Unity > Good Structure > Postion > Footwork > Speed > Power. ;)

Peace,

pseudo

03-29-2003, 04:29 PM

Exceptionally well put, Grendel.
- kj

azwingchun

03-29-2003, 05:49 PM

I have to agree as well Grendel. I think that many people do constantly look for that magic pill (art/style/system) that will give them the uppper edge on the competition. But if they look deep enough into what they have, they can usually find the answer (speaking in terms of Wing Chun).

Unfortunately, it isn't always the Wing Chun practitioners fault, depending on what level they are. Maybe, thay haven't traveled that far in their Wing Chun training yet, and just don't see the answers to their questions. Or in some cases, just poor instruction.

I believe Wing Chun has the answers to any question, though, not always so obvious. And I have never felt that I needed to add other styles to this system. ;)

Grendel

03-29-2003, 07:28 PM

Hi Pseudoswitch,

Originally posted by pseudoswitch

I see what you are trying to say, but isn't strength or power in WC a by-product of speed?

No. Power in Wing Chun is a product of long bridge energy or long and lasting energy as KJ says. Fast hands and strength will not give good Wing Chun. Just fast enough and just strong enough for your structure is the key. Strength is good only after you learn to control it, and then it adds to your power.

So what you are saying is that if a person studies a grappling art, were strength is the primarily developed attribute, he/she will automatically attempt to use brute strength when performing their WC? This seems to infer that the person has very limited awareness of WC principles and does not have much concious control of their physical expression.

Yes, it does imply what you say, IMHO. Otherwise, why would they be trying to supplement Wng Chun where it is not weak.

You're not from Yip Chun lineage are you? :D

Now, now. I didn't tease you. I respect the Yips for who their father was, but they have not kept their father's skills.

There are many WC schools who seem to neglect the importance of power and strength in their practice.

But, mostly they overemphasize it too early in development, thus ensuring that they never get Wing Chun power, although they may have formidable fighting ability. I guess it depends what you want. But, those schools will never develop students who can stand with the real deal.

Yes stucture and postioning and very important, but without a fair amount of strength, speed and power, it aint gonna do you much good.

Oh, yeah? Have you never met a smaller, older person whose own skills defeat your own? I have, but I'm working on being like them in regards to my approach to Wing Chun. With developed Wing Chun attributes, my natural qualities enable me to be "all that I can be." :D

How about: Unity > Good Structure > Postion > Footwork > Speed > Power. ;)

That is the preferred order in which each is taught and developed in Wing Chun. Without structure and position, true Wing Chun power doesn't come. Speed, as I've said---just enough is plenty, because position defeats speed. Footwork is minimized when you have learned your structure. There's no dancing in Wing Chun.

Originally posted by KJ
Exceptionally well put, Grendel.

Hi KJ, Thank you.

Originally posted by Azwingchun
I have to agree as well Grendel. I think that many people do constantly look for that magic pill (art/style/system) that will give them the uppper edge on the competition. But if they look deep enough into what they have, they can usually find the answer (speaking in terms of Wing Chun).
Hi Azwingchun,

I believe Wing Chun is the magic pill. But, you know how it is with pills you buy from the corner pusher, you never know what you're gonna' get. :)

Unfortunately, it isn't always the Wing Chun practitioners fault, depending on what level they are. Maybe, thay haven't traveled that far in their Wing Chun training yet, and just don't see the answers to their questions. Or in some cases, just poor instruction.

The latter, most often. Something about that leads to greater pontification on the web. You and I being exceptions, of course. :)

I believe Wing Chun has the answers to any question, though, not always so obvious. And I have never felt that I needed to add other styles to this system.

I haven't found a case yet where Wing Chun doesn't have the answers in its principles.

Regards,

reneritchie

03-29-2003, 07:54 PM

If you have personally handled several grapplers (one at a time ;) ) of similar size and build and days of months of years of exprience as you, then you are absolutely correct because you *know* so, and I respect the heck out of you and your views.

If not, and you learn WCK for fighting, you're talking out of the wrong end of your body, and since highschool and collegiate wrestling (not to mention football) are very well funded in the US, and involves constant training against highly resistant oppoents, you may well have to figure out in real life one day what you dismissed so easily.

If not, and you just play some WCK for fun and hobby, then more power to you, and what does it matter?

Other random notes:

"Long bridge" is classically used for Hung Ga and similar systems, whereas WCK is famous for "short bridge"

Rather than looking for a magic pill, some people enjoy being well rounded, like a general practitioner rather than a specialist heart surgeon, both a fine and function better than the other in their circumstances. Since MMA fighters are becoming more common, however, Sun Zi's ancient advice on "knowing your foe" seems as valid now as then...

Some people study WCK to be better fighters. Some study WCK to be better at WCK. The two are not the same thing.

Competitive grappling requires conditioning because you compete with it everyday against other highly skilled individuals. If you fought other great WCK fighters all out with any frequency, you'd also likely need good condition to minimize gassing (has happened in some actual WCK fights, even in HK) and especially injuries and wear and tear that would cut into your training and hence you edge. If you're doing it for self defense, however, martial grappling probably seeks the same efficiency as any other good MA.

And a final question: Do people *really* think WCK is so difficult to understand and attain skill in? Does it make sense that a system designed to maximize fighting proficiency wouldn't be as efficient in training as it seeks to be in application? Does it strike anyone as odd that people nowadays seem to spend up to 10x longer (sometimes more) under their sifu than their sifu did under their sigung, and in many cases, still feel they have nowhere near the skill of their sifu?

yuanfen

03-29-2003, 10:05 PM

"Long bridge" is classically used for Hung Ga and similar systems, whereas WCK is famous for "short bridge"

((Wing chun has long bridge and short bridge!!))

Sun Zi's ancient advice on "knowing your foe" seems as valid now as then...

((Correct but knowing your foe does not mean playing your foe's game))

Grendel

03-30-2003, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by reneritchie
If not, and you just play some WCK for fun and hobby, then more power to you, and what does it matter?

That's another subject. Try to focus, Renee. :p I was talking about Wing Chun, which you have never demonstrated to know other than in dubious history. :rolleyes:

Other random notes:

What else? :rolleyes:

"Long bridge" is classically used for Hung Ga and similar systems, whereas WCK is famous for "short bridge"

Just ignorance of real Wing Chun on your part. You are one of the many who will never know Wing Chun because you think you already do.

Rather than looking for a magic pill, some people enjoy being well rounded, like a general practitioner rather than a specialist heart surgeon, both a fine and function better than the other in their circumstances. Since MMA fighters are becoming more common, however, Sun Zi's ancient advice on "knowing your foe" seems as valid now as then...

Non sequitor's---your speciality.

Some people study WCK to be better fighters. Some study WCK to be better at WCK. The two are not the same thing.

You're still rambling.

Competitive grappling requires conditioning because you compete with it everyday against other highly skilled individuals.

You're preaching to the choir here. :rolleyes:

If you fought other great WCK fighters all out with any frequency,

Would you be my partner? :p Just kidding. I go through a lot of partners going all out. :p If you knew Wing Chun, you wouldn't suggest that.

you'd also likely need good condition to minimize gassing (has happened in some actual WCK fights, even in HK) and especially injuries and wear and tear that would cut into your training and hence you edge. If you're doing it for self defense, however, martial grappling probably seeks the same efficiency as any other good MA.

Yes it does. But it doesn't have the same engine. To apply your fondness for analogy: It's the difference between a Mack truck and a Lamborghini.

And a final question: Do people *really* think WCK is so difficult to understand and attain skill in?

I am a person who has found it to be hard work to attain certain skills. Mediocre low-level skilled "sifus" and their students such as you profess are very common and uninteresting to me.

Does it make sense that a system designed to maximize fighting proficiency wouldn't be as efficient in training as it seeks to be in application?

No. But, just as it takes years to find Taiji and other real TCMA, so it is true of Wing Chun, and development continues in the dedicated practitioner. I would say the system of Wing Chun Kuen itself can be learned solidly in about ten years. One's Wing Chun may continue to improve over a lifetime, apparently. Not in your case, of course. :p

Does it strike anyone as odd that people nowadays seem to spend up to 10x longer (sometimes more) under their sifu than their sifu did under their sigung, and in many cases, still feel they have nowhere near the skill of their sifu?

Someone might agree with you, but it's inapplicable in my case. Some of us have teachers who are also constantly improving, as well as being in constant touch with the essence. I have demonstrated to my satisfaction that I am more proficient than many so-called "masters" and "sifus," and while I am no great shakes by my own standards, I am a good fighter and still improving.

dbulmer

03-30-2003, 01:54 AM

Personnally I marvel at some of the grapplers. The skilled possess all the attributes of WC - skill, hard work, body structure , economy of motion. To suggest otherwise strikes me as being somewhat arrogant.

While Joy is correct to point out that WC has its own arsenal of grappling most WC/WT guys myself included don't get to see these treasures for quite a while because we are learning other skills to give us a good foundation. The ground arena is an area that WC does not want us to be for a variety of reasons.

I find grappling scary - it's a range I don't train regularly in and sh*t does happen so I'd rather be familiar with what might come and learn how to deal with it rather than be wondering how I might use WC on the ground - if I am on the ground I want my actions to be second nature - to react and counter attack. When I do train in it, I use different muscles and end up aching all over in a way that I never do in normal WC.

There's nothing wrong with WC it's just we don't train enough in anti-grappling at lower skill level to be able to handle the skilled who do train. The more skilled WC guys may not end up on the ground but for the unskilled like me there's a reasonable possibility that it might happen. If on the ground I am going to get a beating or die I'd rather go out fighting than be clueless.

TzuChan

03-30-2003, 02:00 AM

foolinthedeck

03-30-2003, 02:10 AM

all this talk reminds me of the Greek Myth of Heracles Labours.
remember how he fought against the great Antaeus - a great warrior who had never lost a match. As long as he remained in contact with the earth he was invincible.
Heracles lifted him aloft and thus slew him.

theres a message here

captain

03-30-2003, 03:36 AM

all of the instructors i have spoken to who teach
ground/grapple based arts/styles have been
hugely friendly and helpful.[including bjj].it would
take nothing to walk into a bjj/judo gym and simply
say."hi,my name is rene cretien,i do wing chun but would
like to learn some ground and grapple just incase".i
did, and they guy was super helpful.he even told me
he considers himself strike before ground.and believe
me,judo and jj are far easier to learn than you might
imagine.it is not a defeat for wing chun of failiure for you
to check this out.

reneritchie

03-30-2003, 06:48 AM

Hi Joy,

How are you using the term "Long Bridge"? Personally, I have no problem with Sun Zi's expression either way. We added the long pole to the system, rather than just knowing how to fight it. If some find adding some core ground fighting experience helpful beyond merely understanding the tactics, more power to them.

Grendel,

I have no interest in exchanging personal attacks, bad for you, bad for this board, bad for our art. BTW, it's 'Rene', not 'Renee'

yuanfen

03-30-2003, 09:46 AM

Rene: You mentioned that wc was primarily short bridge. How are you using the term? In the antinomies of Wing chun as TCMA
there is both short bridge and long bridge work. The pole enhances both- but one has to develop the motions first. We use the pole in a wc way not the hung gar way.

Folks I know were doing ground practice in wing chun training before we ever heard of BJJ. After sporting grapplers got used to the novelty of bjj chokes- which are illegal in sporting- gaps between grapplers have been narrowed.

If one learns how to write, one can adjust to writing while standing up, lying down, sitting etc. If one internalizes the body
shaping and mechanics of wing chun well- one can fight standing uo, sitting down or lying down. Given a choice standing up is better- but wc training and spirit when one stays the course in learning it- carries the great understanding of body mechanics
in wc as an art into different venues- even ones that are not preferred.

It takes good instruction, practice and time to learn wing chun well- and good teachers have to know how to bring newbies along while the main structure and dynamics are being assembled.

Newbies and not so good wing chunners can not only be taken down but can be kicked to pieces by folks whose specialty is kicking. It takes a while to for newbies to get past technique orientation- some never get past that stage,

A brother in the art was handling jj folks well- before going through the Machado system and continued to handle them well after going through the Machado system. Its a mistake to assume that all wc folks prepare only for parochial encounters.

Grapplers should NOT be understimated and I have no problem with folks working with grapplers to understand what they do.
But wing chun has built in defenses against grapplers.

BTW, I grew up around top flight grapplers in two countries. Oklahoma (my home state in the US)
is one of the if not the wrestlingest state in the US- practically evry junior high school has wrestling. Some earlier.Wrestling even runs in families. I have had to deal with wrestlers in for real in pre wc days. If I had played their game, I would have lost. But I play my game. I have raised one young man who started in Fong wing chun and went on to become the number one seeded high school wrestler in Oklahoma before he left.From time to time
I have continued experimentation with grapplers and my more experienced students have too. Just reinforced the depth and wisdom of wing chun approach to body unity.

A bad version of any art can collapse under pressure- ditto for wing chun. One should develop first class wing chun while at the same time not undestimating other stylists.

pseudoswitch

03-30-2003, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by yuanfen

Grapplers should NOT be understimated and I have no problem with folks working with grapplers to understand what they do.

One should develop first class wing chun while at the same time not undestimating other stylists.

Totally agree with ya on both counts :)

Savi

03-30-2003, 11:40 AM

As I understand it, grappling is a reality of combat. It has its time and place (if it happens it happens). Should your WC fail you, and the attacker takes your center you must know how to operate in those conditions.

Chi Sim Weng Chun has many grappling techniques, as it operates on the philosophy of subdue rather than kill.

Hung Fa Yi also has many grappling techniques and counters. None though that I have seen so far which require you to be on your back, or ‘roll-on-the-floor’ type stuff. Everything I have seen so far is designed to keep you on your feet against grapplers.

But the main point is that if the reality of the moment requires you to be on the ground, you must be able to deal with it and get yourself back to where you are proficient in fighting. If your WC can ward off or counter a ground attacker/grappler at that moment, more power to you! That means your WC is good. Still, I think grappling being overrated has nothing to do with combat, but might fall under opinion (IMO :) ).

Peace,
-Savi.

reneritchie

03-30-2003, 12:44 PM

Savi - very good points. That philososphy seems common in Fujian derived MA, and classically seen in White Crane's motto. Another good point is that even with his Weng Chun Kuen knoweldge, Andreas also attained good proficiency in contemporary grappling (at one point he was Rickson's German rep, I think), so probably has excellent insight into their strategies and countering them with his own.

Joy - WCK commonly referred to Hung Ga and other similar systems as Dai Ma Cheung Kiu, or Big Horse Long Bridge, while we were Siu Ma Duen Kiu, Narrow Horse Short Bridge. While every generality has its exception, as you mentioned WRT the pole, I don't think WCK uses the same "long bridge" mechanics for power as Hung Ga. I use the term "short bridge" and "short power" in keeping with the lack of physical space needed to apply WCK, and the nature of the power to go into and disrupt, not merely through and displace.

azwingchun

03-30-2003, 01:14 PM

Savi wrote:

Should your WC fail you, and the attacker takes your center you must know how to operate in those conditions.

I prefer to say, should you fail Wing Chun. I don't like to think Wing Chun will fail me if done properly. LOL! ;)

Zhuge Liang

03-30-2003, 01:19 PM

Hi Rene,

Although my experience is limited, there are a couple of things I want to add...

Originally posted by reneritchie
"Long bridge" is classically used for Hung Ga and similar systems, whereas WCK is famous for "short bridge"

We make the distinction between long bridge and long bridge energy. Long bridge, or rather, long hands, is the common notion of reach. Long bridge energy, as we define it, is a type of energy we try to express in our Wing Chun. Some of its qualities were mentioned already. Long and lasting. Ken will sometimes say Choy Li Fut is "Churng Sao Durn Kiu," or "long hands, short bridge energy," whereas Wing Chun is "Durn Sao Churng Kiu," which is short hands, long bridge energy. Other people call it different things. For instance, when Tsui Seung Tin is explaning "Nim Lik," I noticed that many of its qualities overlap our notion of long bridge energy. It also shares some qualities of Tai Chi's "peng jin" from the descriptions of it that I read. (Although my knowledge of Tai Chi is infantile at best, so take that as you will)

And a final question: Do people *really* think WCK is so difficult to understand and attain skill in? Does it make sense that a system designed to maximize fighting proficiency wouldn't be as efficient in training as it seeks to be in application? Does it strike anyone as odd that people nowadays seem to spend up to 10x longer (sometimes more) under their sifu than their sifu did under their sigung, and in many cases, still feel they have nowhere near the skill of their sifu?

I think that depends on the level of skill your looking for, your teacher, and your own personal aptitude. In my case, two years under Ken isn't nearly the same as Ken's initial two years under Leung Sheung. Whereas I show up for class twice a week and "kinda" get a workout, he use to train nearly forty hours a week in class, and that's not including the extra training he did and other times, including doing huen saos on the bus, doing gan saos on parking meters he walked by, doing stepping drills with a bowl of rice in his hand eating dinner, etc. Then of course there's Leung Sheung and Lok Yiu who actually lived with Yip Man in the very early days.

So it would be completely unsurprising to me, that if I studied "10x longer" at my current rate, that my skills will still nowhere near his. And that's not even taking into account that in my 10 years of trying to play catchup, he's going to continue to develop as well.

Don't mean to come accross sounding sifu-worship like. Just presenting one reason on why "people nowadays seem to spend up to 10x longer..." (although I'm not sure I agree with that either).

Regards
Zhuge Liang

wingchunalex

03-30-2003, 02:03 PM

I agree that grappling is over rated. it is a fad i think. i totally see the 60's- karate, 70's-kung fu, 80's-ninjutsu, 90's- bjj, now- krav maga, trend.

a friend of mine saw a video of a fight where a guy tried to grapple with another guy and when they grappler came in the guy just brought his elbow down on the back of the grappler's head and it was over.

with mma comps all i see is to guys who buy into grappling.

I think a "striker" who gets taked down by a grappler just doesn't have a good enough defense.

I'm not putting down grappling, if thats your think thats cool and its good that works for you.

I just think wing chun doesn't need to be suplimented with groundfighting. the whole point of wing chun is to stay up. and if you haven't bought into grappling then you'll fight harder to stay up, and train to stay up. its not like if you fight a grappler you have to go to the ground.

reneritchie

03-30-2003, 02:04 PM

Zhuge Liang,

Thank you very much for your reply. I think I understand how you're using the term. Something like "persistance" of power. We use Duen Ging (short power), but the quality of that power, as you point out, can be done in many fashions, including "persistant" We also use terms like Chung Ging (Thrusting Power) to help with the quality.

We also distinguish between "short" and "long" in terms of application. The commonly seen WCK (punches, kicks, etc.) is "long" in this sense, since it involves the elbows/knees out to the hands/feet. "Short" then is the close body application, from the torso to shoulders and hips, inlcuding the throws.

Also a very good point about the length of time wrt the hours in the days in the years. An old friend once said, jockingly, they didn't have TV back in China in the old days, so MA was one of the ways to pass the time.

Ultimatewingchun

03-30-2003, 03:38 PM

The only wing chun grappling I've ever seen or learned from either Moy Yat or William Cheung (with the exception of literally just one technique done on the ground...an escape from someone who has mounted you and is now punching down towards your head, taught by William Cheung; which, though an excellent move, is still something he concocted himself)...

the only "grappling" I know of are certain STANDING wrist, elbow, shoulder locks, some chokes, and several sweeping takedowns and throws...

in other words. more like some sort of wing chun CHIN NA stuff rather than full-blown grappling ( which of course would include groundfighting).

Neither have I ever seen or heard of any wing chun books, magazine articles, training videos, lineages, instructors, etc. that make the claim that grappling on the ground has always been a part of their wing chun system.

This being the case, I have to conclude that this type of full-blown grappling has never been a part of wing chun...

THEREFORE...how can anybody really make the argument that groundfighting type grappling should just be ignored...it's just simply NOT PART OF THE SYSTEM...but that doesn't mean that it is a scenario that one can afford to ignore....The Wing Cun elders were not GODS.

ANYBODY, and I mean ANYBODY...could slip on a wet floor, or get attacked from behind, or is reclining or perhaps even sleeping when attacked...and therefore would have NO CHOICE about being in such a groundfighting situation.

What are you , Mr. or Miss Wing Chun, going to do then?

Do you really think that against a truly skilled grappler in this situation that SOMEHOW your wing chun techniques will still save your ass, even though you're now flat on your back?

Talk about a magic pill... my God... please spare me the Mary Poppins details!

Ultimatewingchun

03-30-2003, 03:54 PM

Before anyone gets the wrong idea:

The move against the punch coming down on you while you're on your back that GM Cheung "invented" starts out with a wing chun-type response to the punch...

But then turns into a pure grappling somersault-type reversal after the punch has been stopped and the punching arm grabbed...

in other words: TRUE GROUNDFIGHTING.

Not the kind of move you could improvise on the spot with all of your "wing chun" training.

GM Cheung thought about the possibilites inherent in such a technique for quite awhile before he started experimenting with it and then teaching it.

Grendel

03-30-2003, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by pseudoswitch

Totally agree with ya on both counts :) [/B]
Yep. Good advice.

Grendel

03-30-2003, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by reneritchie

WCK commonly referred to Hung Ga and other similar systems as Dai Ma Cheung Kiu, or Big Horse Long Bridge, while we were Siu Ma Duen Kiu, Narrow Horse Short Bridge.

This is a descriptive recognition of the need for maintaining fighting distances.

Wing Chun's long bridge ENERGY is a different matter and involves the development of structural characteristics through proper training.

While every generality has its exception, as you mentioned WRT the pole, I don't think WCK uses the same "long bridge" mechanics for power as Hung Ga.

It was you who inserted Hung Gar into the conversation. Their terms and understanding add nothing to Wing Chun.

I use the term "short bridge" and "short power" in keeping with the lack of physical space needed to apply WCK, and the nature of the power to go into and disrupt, not merely through and displace.

Understood wrt short power, etc. Wing Chun long bridge energy however is effective at any fighting distance and is present in trained short range exertions.

yuanfen

03-30-2003, 04:06 PM

Rene sez:
Joy - WCK commonly referred to Hung Ga and other similar systems as Dai Ma Cheung Kiu, or Big Horse Long Bridge, while we were Siu Ma Duen Kiu, Narrow Horse Short Bridge. While every generality has its exception, as you mentioned WRT the pole, I don't think WCK uses the same "long bridge" mechanics for power as Hung Ga. I use the term "short bridge" and "short power" in keeping with the lack of physical space needed to apply WCK, and the nature of the power to go into and disrupt, not merely through and displace.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets not get lost in terminology. Fora variety of reasons-
wing chun is an uneven art on who does what. There ceratinly is arrested development in many parts of the wing chun world...
from what I have seen over the years. Again for those who feel the need for learning other sytems- I have no problem with it. But my view also - as I have consistently stated- if you learn a boxing hook a good boxer will beat your hook, if you learn bjj- a bjj- ist will beat your techniques, if you add muay thai kicks, the muay thai guy will beat your kicks. The specialist of a technique will beat the dilletante generalist.

Great care is appropriate in generalizing about ALL of wing chun.

Wing chun as an art is as extensive an art that there is. Even though we prefer not to go to the ground- we should not be helpless when there. Even though we excel at close quarters we should not be intimated when we are further away from contact.
Regarding long bridge versus short bridge. Firstly one must distinguish between forms, spinoffs from the forms, timing, chi sao and gor and lat sao AND developmental routines.
Whether the long/ short distinsctions are applied to stances, energy
or forearms-bridges- wing chun has them all. Thus- On the pole we not only uses the short stance, we use quite a few other stances including the low wide horse ( say ping ma) for training purposes.
The wide horse has uses for punch training as well. Look at a younger Moy Yat punching to the side from wide horse. A good wing chunner trains to protect his center line from all directions
and vertically and horizontally.
But anyone can do what they want to as I am sure they will.

Merryprankster

03-30-2003, 05:32 PM

Oh for crissakes.

If you train well against a wide variety of people who are good at what they do, rather than foiling half-assed, badly executed "attacks," from people who DON'T know what they're doing, you'll be fine, regardless what you practice.

If, on the other hand, you're content to say "this is how we defend takedowns," while only having ever practiced this against another non-grappler who charges you like an enraged tard with bad posture, you deserve your impending beatdown.

Sword cuts both ways--Mark Coleman didn't keep his hands up and got knocked out by a head kick. Go figure :rolleyes:

t_niehoff

03-30-2003, 07:15 PM

Merryprankster wrote:

Oh for crissakes. MP

That about sums up my feelings on all the "wisdom" spouted in this thread. TN

Terence

yuanfen

03-30-2003, 08:03 PM

:rolleyes: As statements-

That makes two non sequitur-s.

anerlich

03-30-2003, 10:59 PM

A Chinese teacher told me once that Americans know allot, but Master little.

A British teacher told me once that Americanskeep forgetting they aren't the only Caucasians in the world, too.

Grappling IS overrated.

Probably not as overrated as Wing Chun.

As Theodore Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap.

Grendel

03-30-2003, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
:rolleyes: As statements-

That makes two non sequitur-s.
Yuanfen,

I'm glad someone else is keeping track besides me. :p

Originally posted by Anerlich

A British teacher told me once that Americanskeep forgetting they aren't the only Caucasians in the world, too.

Hi Anerlich,

That Brit teacher apparently didn't even realize that not all Americans are Caucasians. :confused: :D Only some of us are, I'd guess, and with all the blending and newcomers, it's getting harder to tell all the time. Just look at Yuanfen's kids---good examples of the "norm." :D What Americans have in common is not race---it's English, culture, and borders.

Grappling IS overrated.

Probably not as overrated as Wing Chun.

True. Yet each has value for someone. There are no easy martial solutions. To every dilemma posed by one approach, there is a counter, even if it means adapting or adopting the other's approach. It'll take someone more insightful than me to figure out Wing Chun's weakness though. :D Even if I knew one, I wouldn't tell anyone.

Like heck I wouldn't. :D I'll spill the beans. The weakness of Wing Chun is the dilution of the teaching by too many self professed experts. All grapplers have to do is pick and choose their opponents from among those lineages, or wait until the Wing Chun art completely dies out and then dominate in and out of competition.

As Theodore Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap.

90% of Sturgeon's writing is crap. :D :D :D

Regards,

anerlich

03-30-2003, 11:53 PM

That Brit teacher apparently didn't even realize that not all Americans are Caucasians.

Yeah, OK, though my statement didn't necessarily imply ALL Americans were Caucasians either. the point was that generalisations are stupid, this one being no exception. Being an Aussie I guess I'm different to Americans in "Ng Mui's" teacher's eyes (or he would have said gwailos or Westerners), though we all seem to be stomping Iraqis together, soldiers of Chinese descent from both countries (and perhaps Iraq) no doubt included.

According to "Ng Mui's" teacher, would Chinese/Americans know a lot and master little, or the reverse? Was "Ng Mui's" teacher a Chinese/American? And if so, where was he on the issue? Is his teachers statement true of both Chinese and American grapplers as well?

bougeac

03-31-2003, 02:05 AM

from personnal experience and from watching literrally hundreds of no holds barred fights i would say that its MUCH easier to take someone down, than to keep someone from taking you down...

people seem to go on and on about how they will take someone out with a barrage of strikes before the take down occurs, i think we should make a clear distinction here against who that would work against...

against some muppet who is very drunk and decides to try and do a "ken shamrock" against you i would say you have a chance..

against someone trained at efficient takedowns, you will be on your arse before youve thrown your first punch...

if you dont believe it, go down to your local judo/jiu jitsu/shootfighting gym, book a private lesson with an instructor
and be prepared to eat some humble pie... (and lets not start saying "oh ,im at a disadvantage because i cant use full power strikes/eye gouges/"deadly" techniques on the grappler" if you truly want the truth, put on pads, im sure they wont mind)

as regards using wing chun on the ground, you can certainly use it down there but you must practice wing chun ON THE GROUND, if you want to be able to use it there...

it is incredibly stupid to assume that if the fight goes to the ground (and it will if not over quick) that you will automatically be able to tailor the art to fit a ground situation, unless youve spent considerable flight time practicing wck on the ground , youre deluding yourself...
any range you are unfamiliar with ,if encountered in a real fight, will cause panic, which begets defeat (i know ,ive been there).

captain

03-31-2003, 02:55 AM

goodness me,you guys!like is said, go and try some grapple/ground
classes,the teachers are more helpful than you would imagine.
and the styles are easier to learn than the "fear" some of you
express.though rene,from your first posting on this thread.what
happened to your "wrestler's challenge" section in your YKS
book?have you reversed your opinion?

t_niehoff

03-31-2003, 05:45 AM

bougeac wrote:

from personnal experience and from watching literrally hundreds of no holds barred fights i would say that its MUCH easier to take someone down, than to keep someone from taking you down...B

Yes, just as it is much easier to punch someone than avoid being punched. ;) Compare how much of your (not you personally, the general 'you') training time you spend on dealing with punches and kicks and how much time you spend on learning to deal with someone trying to take you down. And how much of either is spent training with skilled, resisting partners. TN

I don't see the point of the discussion -- if your opponent is better at what he does (regardless if you think it overrated) than you are at what you do, you will lose, regardless of whether he does TKD, BJJ, stgreetfighting, etc. You may think that your sh1t doesn't stink because you do fill-in-the-blank lineage but all that really matters is what you can personally do. And the only way to know what you can do is by trying to actually trying to do it against skilled, resisting opponents. If you don't do that, then IME your "opinion" is worthless. Andrew Nerlich was absolutely correct when he wrote: "As Theodore Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap." TN

Terence

pseudoswitch

03-31-2003, 06:13 AM

Originally posted by bougeac

as regards using wing chun on the ground, you can certainly use it down there but you must practice wing chun ON THE GROUND, if you want to be able to use it there...

Very good point. I think some WCK lineages practice from the ground, maybe TWC and WT????

UltimateFighter

03-31-2003, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Ng Mui
Grappling is considered by many to be the Achilles heel of Wing Chun. So many WC students and WC styles try to supplement their art with ground tech.
I think this is unnecessary , because good Wing Chun does not need to go to the ground. If your opponent can get past the WC kicks, punches, elbows and knees to take you down, its not lack of grappling skills that lost the day, but lack of WC skills.
A Chinese teacher told me once that Americans know allot, but Master little. You can try to be a Jack of all trades or you can concentrate and perfect your Wing Chun. Grappling is just one of the fighting ranges, it is no better or worst.
It is part of a dying fad now. In the 60’s there was Karate, the 70’s Kung fu, the 80’s ninjujitsu, the 90’s Brazilian Jujitsu and next will be Krav Maga .
Wing Chun is enough, if you want to supplement your style, go to the shooting range.

Oh dear.

First of all, grappling is not a 'fad'. That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. Wrestling is the worlds oldest combat art and dates back over 5000 years. That is over 10 times as old as Wing Chun. Wrestling has always been considered the 'King' of fighting arts and the best base for fighting, and rightly so. Grappling styles such as submission wrestling are very effective becasue grappling is so natural to humans. Strikers can deal with them but they need to train specifically against grapplers to know what they are doing. Just look at the Boztepe -Cheung fight. Two Wing Chun "Masters" and within 10 seconds they have abandoned any Wing CHun and are wrestling and rolling around the floor attempting to improvise rather badly.

Secondly you don't seem to understand that grappling is an integral part of Wing Chun. The concepts can be applied to grappling and that is what makes WC a "system" rather than style.

I have had enough of people claiming they know what "good Wing Chun" is. The fact is, strikers who discount grappling and groundfighting will get RAPED in a real fight. It has happened again and again, and will continue to do so. If you are unable to use your WC in a fight it is because of a failure of 3 things:

1/. A failure of you to adequetly use the techniques required.
2/. A failure of the system in coping with the attacks whether grappling or otherwise.
3/. A failure of the training used by the system in being unable to create a fighter capeable of actually fighting effectively.

So to all those keyboard warriors who see a WC fighter who has lost a fight against a wrestler or other style then say "he didn't do proper WC" you have missed the point. If a style is unable to create a good fighter after a reasonable time of training, it is not a good style. After a reasonable length of time doing wrestling or boxing, a fighter can do very well. WC and other traditional arts should be the same, but it depends on how the training is done. If all you ever do is chi-sau and forms, and you don't spar properly or learn how to USE WC AS GRAPPLING, you will get spanked.

reneritchie

03-31-2003, 08:25 AM

Joy,

Lets not get lost in terminology.

LOL! Thanks, I did feel it was being flung around a bit lost-like 8) People can use any term they want, be it "long bridge energy" or "Nim Lik" but when personalized terms are created, it also creates a need to communicate how they are being used to others.

Wing chun as an art is as extensive an art that there is.

Not to split hairs, but IMHO WCK is rather specific, but due to its conceptual nature, it can be extended and blended, as many people have done over the years. Time will tell which extensions and blends have merit.

if you learn a boxing hook a good boxer will beat your hook, if you learn bjj- a bjj- ist will beat your techniques

There're two sides to this. Great grappler's who've learned a little striking have been doing very well against straight strikers, since they're not worried about closing and getting taken down, and the straight strikers are. This gives the grapplers with a bit of striking more confidence in engaging, at which point they can clinch and go down. Likewise, the strikers who've learned a bit of grappling are also doing well with a sprawl'n'counterpunch strategy that stimies the groudfighting game. Where it does hold true is when they try to fight the other person's fight, ie. learn a little stand up and try to go toe-to-toe with a K1 fighter, or learn a little submission and try to hang on the ground with an expert. The balance, if you care to explore it, seems to be sticking to your own fight, but knowing enough of the other aspects to shut them down.

wing chun has them all

Most things that try to do all things do many things badly. IMHO WCK doesn't have them all, and doesn't have everything (though some people have adapted it beyond its original framework), but it does have its own area and in that area it's pretty darn fantastic. (not at all like butter spread across too much bread 8)

But anyone can do what they want to as I am sure they will.

Yup, and usually claim it as *the way*.

we use quite a few other stances including the low wide horse ( say ping ma) for training purposes.

Yes, that was one of my original points. The pole was added, along with its own unique (from WCK) elements such as the Sei Ping Ma, Ding Jee Ma, and related footwork and power development concepts (too bad there wasn't an internet back then so other WCK people could have griped about how it wasn't needed and WCK was already complete and others could have moaned about how they needed to add the long bow as well for ballistics... ;) ) Now some are doing the same with the unique (from WCK) postures of grappling and its related training work, and history will tell.

MP, TN,

Merryprankster wrote:

Oh for crissakes. MP

That about sums up my feelings on all the "wisdom" spouted in this thread. TN

Terence

True dat.

Cap'n,

what
happened to your "wrestler's challenge" section in your YKS
book?have you reversed your opinion?

Not at all, re-read what I wrote. Sum Nung never hid behind theory, never just talked about how he couldn't be taken down or how WCK was of all and in all, he went out and tested it. He tried his WCK against provincial champion Greco, Olympic, and Shuaijiao, he also tried boxers, kickboxers, etc. And he *proved* he could stop them, not just once, but several times.

TN,

if your opponent is better at what he does (regardless if you think it overrated) than you are at what you do, you will lose

Only if you're dumb enough to let it be a fair contest ;)

"As Theodore Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap."

Probably higher, but no one ever thinks they're not part of the 10%.

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 09:07 AM

Most things that try to do all things do many things badly. IMHO WCK doesn't have them all, and doesn't have everything (though some people have adapted it beyond its original framework), but it does have its own area and in that area it's pretty darn fantastic. (not at all like butter spread across too much bread 8)
(Rene)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether WC "has it" or not depends on your WC.
On the net and in artciles it is easy to generalize about
wing chun in general.

I dont always understand your analogies. In this case- not being a bread and butter man.... chapatis, nan, puri, nochee- yes.
And ghee spreads easier than butter.

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 09:12 AM

UFC sez:If a style is unable to create a good fighter after a reasonable time of training, it is not a good style.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yuanfen's theorem: most fights occur off camera.

t_niehoff

03-31-2003, 10:36 AM

Joy wrote:

Yuanfen's theorem: most fights occur off camera. JC

LOL! Yes, that's what everyone says -- but it was Wang Xiangzhai, the founder of YiQuan, that wrote (as part of his open public challenge): "To consider yourself a first-rate boxer behind closed doors is worthless." Everyone and their teacher are great fighters, have tremendous power, have the sensitivity to toss folks around like rag dolls, etc. -- just ask them. ;) Then ask them to come out from behind closed doors and show what they can do. Terence's theorem: If they can't do it on camera, they can't do it off camera. TN

Terence

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 11:02 AM

If they can't do it on camera, they can't do it off camera. TN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not do it on camera- gee that would eliminate Yip Man(fighting). Leung Jan, Chen Fake, Chen Wanting, Sun Lu Tang, Gama, Ray Robinson as a lightweight when he was supposedly faster than as a middleweight, a young John L Sullivan("I can lick any man in this house")among a host of other folks. Was Wang Xiangzhai on camera? Or do we take depositions?

Too bad that so many folks cant entertain us in our living rooms..
if only they knew of Terence's theorem!

Ultimatewingchun

03-31-2003, 11:03 AM

Someone has attempted to take you down...but wait...to counter this you're using Long bridge energy, short bridge energy, both bridges...the Brooklyn Bridge, (did I tell you it's for sale?)... or perhaps, if you have already "wiped out" a bunch of wing chun "Masters" and "Sifus", and have gone through all of your sparring partners (like Grendel has)... you're now just kind of relaxing on the Golden Gate Bridge...

After all this - REALITY starts to take its inevitable toll upon your consciousness..."EXCUSE ME, BUT YOU'VE GOT AN APPOINTMENT BACK ON...PLANET...EARTH..?"

After all this, let's get right down to where the rubber hits the road:

Tell me...Grendel...Yuanfen...wingchunalex...azwingchun ...

EXACTLY how - and I want DETAILS, not slogans or rhetoric...
you will use your WC (and ONLY your WC) to defend against the following scenario:

Your opponent is 6'2" tall, and weighs 210 lbs. - he's big, he's strong, he's a skilled fighter and he's TOUGH...(ie.- you won't knock him out with one strike (No...you didn't manage to get his eyes or his throat or his groin with your first shot...No...the astral body of neither Ng Mui nor Yim Wing Chun is next to you whispering instructions or sending you their love...)

He attacks with a boxers' tight (elbows close to the sides of his body) jab/cross combination...and the moment you start to engage his arms he covers up...pushes in...starts grabbing your arms, thereby edging his body closer to you now... and goes into a head- inside double leg takedown if you were in a neutral stance...or a head-outside single leg if you were in a front stance...

I want to hear EXACTLY what your response is to this...?

NEXT: He attacks with a lead leg (tight) roundhouse kick toward one of your legs if you're in a neutral stance or toward your lead leg if you're in a front stance...I assume you will lift a leg at this point...yes?...and at the moment of engagement leg to leg he reaches forward with both arms (again..his arms and elbows are close-in toward the center of his body)...grabbing at whatever he can get...your leg...your arms...again working his way forward closer to you...grabs at you to secure a throwing- type takedown or perhaps a sweeping-type takedown on the leg (the only leg) you still have on the ground...

Give me the DETAILS..!

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 11:08 AM

ultimatewingchunsez:Give me the DETAILS..!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer- show me the money!

Ultimatewingchun

03-31-2003, 11:11 AM

Come on...Yuanfen...You can do better than that!?

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 11:42 AM

For money or for principle -yes.

Contrived scenarios are boring!
If this- then that- then what.....

KenWingJitsu

03-31-2003, 11:49 AM

Are people still falling for this trollign tactic.

Should I say what I REALLY wanna say? lol.

Guys, please don't feed the trolls.

Trolls, please PROVE that your wing chun is enough to disable any grappling attacker and then you'll be believed. Leave your fairy tales to the internet forums............................................ ....oh wait sorry...you are.

lol

John Weiland

03-31-2003, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
Someone has attempted to take you down...but wait...to counter this you're using Long bridge energy, short bridge energy, both bridges...the Brooklyn Bridge, (did I tell you it's for sale?)... or perhaps, if you have already "wiped out" a bunch of wing chun "Masters" and "Sifus", and have gone through all of your sparring partners (like Grendel has)... you're now just kind of relaxing on the Golden Gate Bridge...

After all this - REALITY starts to take its inevitable toll upon your consciousness..."EXCUSE ME, BUT YOU'VE GOT AN APPOINTMENT BACK ON...PLANET...EARTH..?"

LOL! :D Nice to see some humor here. :)

EXACTLY

Wing Chun is not formulaic. It is impossible to predict what I would do. My response is to the energy I feel and the openings I see.

how - and I want DETAILS, not slogans or rhetoric...
you will use your WC (and ONLY your WC) to defend against the following scenario:

Your opponent is 6'2" tall, and weighs 210 lbs. - he's big, he's strong, he's a skilled fighter and he's TOUGH

Are you saying he's bigger and stronger than me? Yeah, that gives him a better chance. You gotta watch the big guys. :)

...(ie.- you won't knock him out with one strike (No...you didn't manage to get his eyes or his throat or his groin with your first shot...No...the astral body of neither Ng Mui nor Yim Wing Chun is next to you whispering instructions or sending you their love...)

He attacks with a boxers' tight (elbows close to the sides of his body) jab/cross combination...and the moment you start to engage his arms he covers up

I do Wing Chun, so some may not recognize this approach. If he attacks, that's perfect. If he's throwing jab/cross combos, I'd step in and clock him. As for engaging his arms, why would I do that other than to move them out of the way?

...pushes in

Nope. He can't push in if my Wing Chun is good. Let's be realistic. :p

...starts grabbing your arms

Gee, I've never had my arms grabbed before. What could Wing Chun possibly do in response? No looking at other's papers. :rolleyes:

, thereby edging his body closer to you now... and goes into a head- inside double leg takedown if you were in a neutral stance...or a head-outside single leg if you were in a front stance...

By this time I've hit him at least three times. He's all but knocked out and staggers as he shoots in, his balance and center way off. I punch him a few more times and he just lays there. :D I drink his beer and chat up his woman.

I want to hear EXACTLY what your response is to this...?

There are just too many possibilities.

NEXT: He attacks with a lead leg (tight) roundhouse kick toward one of your legs if you're in a neutral stance or toward your lead leg if you're in a front stance...I assume you will lift a leg at this point...yes?

This is his opening? Where did this start? On a mat? LOL! I'd likely stomp his kick, but it would depend.

I appreciate what you are trying to do in this post, but it's just not that simple.

mun hung

03-31-2003, 11:51 AM

In response to the original question - I think that some of the grappling arts are very good, but are DEFINITELY overrated. IMO - grappling (BJJ in particular) came into the public eye most recently via the UFC. Most fighters outside of grappling were not prepared or expecting all out groundfighting and had never trained defenses for the shoot and other takedowns and were taken by surprise by this approach. I would think that any good standup fighter that lost to a grappler during those times would certainly have a different approach to fighting now.

So in the end - I must give credit to all of the good grapplers that "woke" so many of us up to their approach to fighting. Which IMHO was a great lesson in itself. But by the same token - it's no longer any surprise. ;)

As far as Wing Chun needing to be supplemented by a grappling art? Absolutely no. The answers were there all along.

Ultimatewingchun

03-31-2003, 12:05 PM

What I'm trying to do with my last post is flush out all of the FAIRY TALES by challenging those who believe in them to give REAL answers...TO A POSSIBLE SCENARIO THAT COULD HAPPEN...

and so far I don't hear any SERIOUS ANSWERS...

and do you know why there are no real answers being given:

because wing chun...OF AND BY ITSELF... has some very serious problems dealing with the scenarios I suggested...

and also because some people around here are only half the fighter they think they are...

AND THAT IS A VERY UNFORTUNATE COMBINATION...

Not 100% sure what exactly Kenwingjitsu was getting at with his trolling comment...perhaps he could explain it further?

mun hung

03-31-2003, 12:07 PM

UltimateWingChun - there are no set formulas to fighting. "If I did this" and "then I would do that" conversations are fruitless.

"I would jump up and do a flying side kick"

"I would step aside and punch you in the groin"

"I would gong sau midair and counter with a sun punch as I am landing from my side kick"

"I would pak your punch and biu jee your eyeball as soon as you touch earth"

"I would".......

:D :D :D

KenWingJitsu

03-31-2003, 12:11 PM

Victor. Trolling is stating an opinion that is obviously wrong in an attempt to ellicit a strong opposing reaction,. Either the "troll" is delibrately talking smack or......................the troll is truly ignorant.........or in denial........(river Egypt lol).

I don't know which it is, but.................talk is cheap. I DARE anyone who thinks grappling is overrated to step up and prove it....typing on your computers doesn't count. Y'all know who you are.

talk is cheap. Come on 'wingchunners' there's a Jiu Jitsu school near you. :p

John Weiland

03-31-2003, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by mun hung
In response to the original question - I think that some of the grappling arts are very good, but are DEFINITELY overrated. IMO - grappling (BJJ in particular) came into the public eye most recently via the UFC. Most fighters outside of grappling were not prepared or expecting all out groundfighting and had never trained defenses for the shoot and other takedowns and were taken by surprise by this approach. I would think that any good standup fighter that lost to a grappler during those times would certainly have a different approach to fighting now.

Good point. Grappling will always be an important component of arranged competition such as UFC's.

So in the end - I must give credit to all of the good grapplers that "woke" so many of us up to their approach to fighting. Which IMHO was a great lesson in itself. But by the same token - it's no longer any surprise. ;)

That's mirrors my thinking vis-a-vis this discussion. Everybody's got to analyze their approach with the awareness that there are more grapplers out there. Kinda' like a few years back, I woulda' assumed that a street opponent would have some boxing or karate background. Or at least seen it on TV. :D

As far as Wing Chun needing to be supplemented by a grappling art? Absolutely no. The answers were there all along.
Yes. Anyone is welcome to pursue more than one art. As for teaching more than one, I have some qualms about that myself, but as long as the students understand that's what they're getting, then caveat emptor, which does not imply a negative appellation.

Most of us will find our skills to be somewhere around the norm for our respective arts. That doesn't bode well if we engage in combat with the top guys from our own or another martial skill.

Cheers,

planetwc

03-31-2003, 04:48 PM

So where are the "PURE" Wing Chun fighters who have won ANY NHB/MMA event with NO background or crosstraining in grappling against an MMA fighter.

Where are the "PURE" Wing Chun fighters who have won against a pure grappler?

MMA based fighters (crosstrained in grappling, Muay Thai and Boxing) have a track record in terms of fighting, and winning.
By either submission or TKO.

Too much here on this forum is almost like religion and "faith", which I think is misplaced in this context. An MMA guy knows what works for him and what doesn't because he has trained it and used it against a resisting opponent. And more to the point he continues to do so and generally has no problem testing it as a combat athelete to find out what does and does not work.

Whereas here we seem more content to quote Wing Chun scripture and cannon as if that somehow equates to actually stepping into a ring/cage and throwing down. "I will use my holy structure and smite my grappling foe". "Because I have good Wing Chun, I shall not be taken to the ground." "I am impervious to Muay Thai kicks."

Evidence? Proof? Well I have none, just "faith". :rolleyes:

If the answers "were there all along", then why were they not in evidence in the fighting of Traditional Chinese Martial artists in early and present day MMA/NHB events, let alone stopping by the local BJJ school and trying you hand with them.

Now it is no longer a surprise about what a grappler can and will do. So have Wing Chun students trained REALISTICALLY against single and double leg takedowns? Suplex? Power Slams? Judo throws? BJJ drag downs?

If so, where did you get the expertise of the opponent who is feeding you those techniques? Did they cross train in a grappling art to a level of competancy?

In what way are grappling arts or better still MMA trained students "overrated"? Is it because they actually fight and win against TCMA people over and over and over again?

Please name 3 Wing Chun fighters who have gone to a BJJ dojo had a challenge match and won?

Until that occurs on a basis consistent with the victories seen by MMA fighters, there is a lot of denial going on here.

Originally posted by mun hung
In response to the original question - I think that some of the grappling arts are very good, but are DEFINITELY overrated. IMO - grappling (BJJ in particular) came into the public eye most recently via the UFC. Most fighters outside of grappling were not prepared or expecting all out groundfighting and had never trained defenses for the shoot and other takedowns and were taken by surprise by this approach. I would think that any good standup fighter that lost to a grappler during those times would certainly have a different approach to fighting now.

So in the end - I must give credit to all of the good grapplers that "woke" so many of us up to their approach to fighting. Which IMHO was a great lesson in itself. But by the same token - it's no longer any surprise. ;)

As far as Wing Chun needing to be supplemented by a grappling art? Absolutely no. The answers were there all along.

KenWingJitsu

03-31-2003, 05:24 PM

Where are the "PURE" Wing Chun fighters who have won against a pure grappler?
There are none. They are currently aslumber in dreamland.
Too much here on this forum is almost like religion and "faith", which I think is misplaced in this context.
Heh. Correct. Fantasy land..living in denial...river in Egypt lol.

I can't really add anymore except I agree wholeheartedly with planetwc and ultimatewingchun

yuanfen

03-31-2003, 06:14 PM

Planet wc joining the mma drumbeat sez:
So where are the "PURE" Wing Chun fighters who have won ANY NHB/MMA event with NO background or crosstraining in grappling against an MMA fighter.

Where are the "PURE" Wing Chun fighters who have won against a pure grappler?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong assumption- that nhb/mma is universally accepted as the
reality test. Name me some current not over the hill top five WBC ranked boxers who have entered NHB.Different show folks enter different shows.

One brother has fought pure grapplers and one- his student fought in a rage in the cage event and won. The guys I know dont come on KFO to brag about their acheievements. Its simply a net chat list. I dont brag either.

Atleast for myself- I have respect for grapplers but you dont have to do their version of "grappling" for self defense against them. Based on testing- not faith.

But net list funny farms are not juries.

Rill

03-31-2003, 06:43 PM

yuanfen is correct, but we're not seeing anything in this thread that hasn't been done to death a thousand times.

I drink his beer and chat up his woman.
Honestly, John - you drink his beer?! That's just mean!

wujidude

03-31-2003, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by Rill
[snip]

Honestly, John - you drink his beer?! That's just mean!

I'd drink my own beer and then go home to my woman. That's what I'm gonna do now.

azwingchun

03-31-2003, 07:30 PM

Well, since you took some of my targets away, such as eyes and throat, I would have to react to whatever was open. But as far as playing the online forum UFC game I will end it here.

I do find it funny that you have excluded eyes and throat attacks in your online fight challenge. The reason I say this is, anytime I have had a friendly conversation with anyone who was a grappler, they always laugh and make some comment about how I would try to poke their eyes out. When in reality, the old famous kung fu eye gouge has immediately got me out of trouble with a grappler. No, not in NHB this was a reall down and dirty fight out at a party. I must admit, I was shocked when he took me down, but I took the shot which was open, that was the eyes.

I have used this in 3 different fights, two on the ground and one standing. As far as the throat, I have also used this also to win fights, more than a few times. But enough of me, maybe I was just lucky to have had these great results with these types of fanatsy techniques, but by god they worked when I needed them.

By the way, say what you will about me for not engaging in these online fantasy fights, but if you gave me that situation in real life over and over, my techniques or reactions would possibly never be the same. But it was fun to think about. ;)

Miles Teg

03-31-2003, 09:59 PM

The old arguement that keeps popping up though, is if you are allowed to poke their eyes out then grapplers are allowed to as well. In fact they are probably in a better position to do that if you have been mounted. There are plenty of other nasty things they could do if they were in a more realistic situation as well. One is grab your hair/ears and slam your head repeatedly against the hard ground.

Eye poking isnt some special secret wing chun technique. Anyone can do it, and if those techniques are what you are relying on then......... where are the other skills you develped in Wing Chun?

As for whether grappling is effective or not. Ive been thinking lately about this and I think that it is effective and realistic as far as fighting arts go. For one thing they are not practicing 'if he does this Ill do that' type stuff. THey are constantly at work with a resisting partner. So basicaly they are doing a form of Chi Sau. Grapplers have a 6th sense and adjust to different situations quickly/instantly. Just like what we are aiming to do in chi sau.

Another point I would make is in reference to my recent practice in Judo. I now practice it occasionally as I am now living in Japan and there is no W.C. A guy from my work introduced me to the school and at first I wasnt all that interested in learning. The first thing I had to practice was Newaza (ground technique). Basically some of the old teachers would let me get on top and hold them, and then they would roll out very easily. These people had no problem dealing with me and Im embarrassed to say I had similar defeats from a young high school girl. Now training to avoid going to the ground is great. But what I thought about was what happens when for some reason you do end up on the ground. Cause I found that its a completely different ball game down there. There are different principles at work down there. If you are planning to apply W.C principles down there, I think you are going to be surprised. Even if you can use them the guy you are doing it with will be one step ahead.

Anyway in my opinion any martial art that advocates constant practice with resisting/moving partners (as in Chi sau or ground work) is going to be more effect than those that practice self defensive type drills, forms and air tan da's etc.

mun hung

03-31-2003, 11:13 PM

I agree also that whenever you are constantly training with a resisting/moving partner you have a much better chance than imaginary kung fu.

I respect groundfighters, and I have quite a few friends who are very good at it. I even attended a seminar or two and trained a little with some of my BJJ/JJ buddies. I would'nt want to be caught on the floor with any of these guys, but I don't think any of them would like getting hit by me either. At least when I'm on the floor I can always tap out. :D

To each his own. If you like grappling - do it. Just don't call it Wing Chun later...please.

John Weiland

03-31-2003, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by Rill
yuanfen is correct, but we're not seeing anything in this thread that hasn't been done to death a thousand times.

Yes and yes. I'm satisfied with the points that have been made in support of the Wing Chun approach.

Honestly, John - you drink his beer?! That's just mean!
It was hypothetical after all. Actually, it would depend. :p (On the brand of beer.)

Regards,

captain

04-01-2003, 03:39 AM

wait a second guys,do we do a different wing chun?ok,ive only had a couple of lessons,but the wing chun i saw,i knew iwould
make mince meat out of my judo.all the time i was thinking "wow,i
try some judo here,im toast before i can even get in close".
im perfectly serious,and again,go grapple,its easier than you
might think.
rene,if sum nung did so well against grapplers,etc,then why
do you seem so tentative on wck at the moment?atleast it
seems that way?

UltimateFighter

04-01-2003, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by mun hung
So in the end - I must give credit to all of the good grapplers that "woke" so many of us up to their approach to fighting. Which IMHO was a great lesson in itself. But by the same token - it's no longer any surprise. ;)

As far as Wing Chun needing to be supplemented by a grappling art? Absolutely no. The answers were there all along.

No, the answers were not there all along. Wing Chun does not have 'all the answers'. That is an arrogant and foolish statement based on blind belief. For you or anyone to make that claim, you would have to know everything about fighting and everything about all the hundreds of different martial art styles. Your mistake is your assumption that WC is some sort of 'magical' art that has all the answers. It has some good techniques in its ideal suited area which is close range standup fighting, and it can be adapted for other ranges but it does not do grappling, groundfighting or ranged standup fighting as well as arts which train in them specifically.

The human body is capeable of many things that are not in Wing Chun and the physical act of fighting goes beyond using a set of formal techniques. So, if in a fight and there is the oportunity for a choke, it should be used as there is no more effective way to finish a fight from certain positions. This is not WC, hence WC has not got 'all the answers'. The WC answer would probably be striking from behind which is less efficient. So clearly, there are some things that WC is not as good at. I myself am very good at applying chokes having done Judo for a good few years (and BJJ techniques are an exact copy of most Judo chokes), and consider it one of the best weopons in my arsenal. However, from the frontal range WC excels and that is one of the reasons I train it.

Again, I say that WC/WT will have success only when they train actual fighting and sparring and learn to cope with the grappling/ground game. From here, there is nothing wrong with learning submissions as this can only improve you. All the Gracies train standup fighting as it is recognised that BJJ in itself is not complete as it is pitiful for standup. WC people should realise that it is traditionaly weak in groundfighting, and you are only as strong as your weakest range.

yuanfen

04-01-2003, 05:00 AM

Ultimatefighter sez:The human body is capeable of many things that are not in Wing Chun and the physical act of fighting goes beyond using a set of formal techniques.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above perspective is an indicator of limited and incomplete exposure and absorption of wing chun. But this rot re-occurs on threads under the label "wing chun".
Why not take it to one of the other forums which are dedicated
to fighting, general kung fu, and the like.?

Merryprankster

04-01-2003, 05:17 AM

Cause I found that its a completely different ball game down there. There are different principles at work down there.

Bingo. Something I've been saying for awhile. Body movement do's and don'ts are COMPLETELY different.

t_niehoff

04-01-2003, 05:43 AM

yuanfen wrote:

Ultimatefighter sez:The human body is capeable of many things that are not in Wing Chun and the physical act of fighting goes beyond using a set of formal techniques.
--------------------
The above perspective is an indicator of limited and incomplete exposure and absorption of wing chun. But this rot re-occurs on threads under the label "wing chun". JC

I agree with Joy -- if someone sees WCK as a fighting style that is limited to using a set of formal techniques (a beginner's mindset IMO), then they are missing a great deal (and it begs the question of how they can call their art 'conceptual'). TN

+++++++++++++++++++

captain wrote:

rene,if sum nung did so well against grapplers,etc,then why
do you seem so tentative on wck at the moment?atleast it
seems that way? c

The mere fact that Sum could make his WCK work at a high level does not mean anyone else can -- how many of us have received his level of instruction (from a great fighter), have his innate talent, have his drive to train, have a great deal of fighting experience, etc.? It is never about what one's sifu can do or some ancestor could do (as we are not them) but what we personally can do. There are lots of good judo people that would wipe the floor with most WCK folks, not because judo is "superior" but because of the difference in training, experience, etc. TN

+++++++++++++++

Miles Teg wrote:

The old arguement that keeps popping up though, is if you are allowed to poke their eyes out then grapplers are allowed to as well. In fact they are probably in a better position to do that if you have been mounted. There are plenty of other nasty things they could do if they were in a more realistic situation as well. One is grab your hair/ears and slam your head repeatedly against the hard ground. . . Eye poking isnt some special secret wing chun technique. Anyone can do it, and if those techniques are what you are relying on then......... where are the other skills you develped in Wing Chun? MT

Very sound analysis IMO. One problem I see all the time is that folks find things that work against people of low skill ("I used it in a fight and it worked!") and they think they've found *the* answer; what they don't seem to grasp is that *their answer* may be completely ineffective against a skilled opponent. If someone thinks that their deadly eye or throat poke will work against someone skilled in groundfighting, then go try it at a bjj school. The only way to test these things isn't by "thought experiments" ("well, theoretically it should work") or by being able to pull it off against your schoolmates (imagine if folks at bjj school 'pretended' to fight like WC'ers to give their schoolmates "experience" agasint WCK!) but against resisting folks skilled in other methods. TN

Terence

UltimateFighter

04-01-2003, 05:56 AM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Ultimatefighter sez:The human body is capeable of many things that are not in Wing Chun and the physical act of fighting goes beyond using a set of formal techniques.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above perspective is an indicator of limited and incomplete exposure and absorption of wing chun. But this rot re-occurs on threads under the label "wing chun".
Why not take it to one of the other forums which are dedicated
to fighting, general kung fu, and the like.?

Your statement is an indicator of low level understanding of martial art intention and conception. Wing Chun is conepts that can be applied in a variety of ways. If you disagree with my correct statement that the human body is capeable of many movements not advocated by Wing Chun principles and techniques then you are SEVERELY misguided, brainwashed and just plain wrong. Of course we are capeable of many fighting movements not advocated by WC. WC does not have all the answers. Maybe if you get to a decent level of understanding in your martial arts one day, you will realise that blind faith in one system as being all encompasing is very wrong indeed, and a potentially fatal error.

captain

04-01-2003, 05:59 AM

actually,terrybaby,i made that opinion after seeing both
styles in action.and i have used my judo in a fight with
some success.but the wck i saw,was so fast and close
up,id be pounded before i could make a pin/grab.

yuanfen

04-01-2003, 06:31 AM

Miles sez:
The first thing I had to practice was Newaza (ground technique). Basically some of the old teachers would let me get on top and hold them, and then they would roll out very easily. These people had no problem dealing with me and Im embarrassed to say I had similar defeats from a young high school girl
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miles- I understand your points.
My careful measured response is as follows---
what you have run into are two different learning theories.

1. some begin with groundwork and then try to learn some punches and other standup worl later.

2, Good wing chun first teaches you stand and root properly. Most folks dont. Then move properly- chum kiu- most folks dont,
Then adjust in all sorts of ways- vertically, horizontally and in between- chum kiu and biu jee. When the latter stages are properly learned - ground work eyeopeners are there. Wing chun involves a full cycle of learning to stand up, turn, move and then bend down , fall and roll.

Two different cycles. One's choice.

I can tell you that without knowing judo newaza, that I can throw folks off me as well. Same for my current advanced students.
Same for my sigings and many of my wc brothers. And if I am on top- so many wing chun motions are available if your wing chun body shaping is in place.
When I began wc I had the opportunity of learning newaza from several top flight teachers. I chose to learn from up to down rather than down to up. I much rather send people down...to my friend- hard ground.

Those who are uncomfortable with their wing chun should jump ship. Those who stay the course with good instruction and practice will learn much more IMO.

Current wing chun is an uneven stew.

There is a basic problem in contemporary culture that is at work-IMO-
not seeing and sticking with good things in their entirety and
pursuing every attractive stimulus.

yuanfen

04-01-2003, 06:33 AM

captain- I can tell you- with good wing chun- grapplers would have a hard time completing their holds.

Ultimatewingchun

04-01-2003, 07:53 AM

Just got done reading UltimateFighter's brilliant post that starts with a quote from mun hung and then continues with ..."No, the answers were not there all along. Wing Chun does not have all the answers"...

And immediately after, the next post is from yuanfen, attacking UlimateFighters points, and ends with.....

"But this rot re-occurs on threads under the label "wing chun". Why not take it to one of the other forums which are dedicated to fighting, general kung fu, and the like?.

It's yuanfen, and Grendel, and some others who are serving up ROT on this these threads labelled "wing chun"...

By the way...yuanfen really exposed himself by suggesting that UltimateFighter take his thoughts to OTHER FORUMS WHICH ARE DEDICATED TO......FIGHTING....

Let me say that again.....FIGHTING !!!

yuanfen is not interested in wing chun as a FIGHTING art.

Why don't we just start ignoring...and I mean TOTALLY ignoring...the posts of people like this so that we (those who understand the value of MMA)...can continue to have an uninterrupted conversation on some very valuable topics...in terms of how to make our WC more suitable for...FIGHTING...

and leave the rest of the bible-toters to go their own way!

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 08:01 AM

One problem I see all the time is that folks find things that work against people of low skill ("I used it in a fight and it worked!") and they think they've found *the* answer; what they don't seem to grasp is that *their answer* may be completely ineffective against a skilled opponent. If someone thinks that their deadly eye or throat poke will work against someone skilled in groundfighting, then go try it at a bjj school.

I can say to you that in my case, it did work and has worked in several situations. And no, I don't rely on these sort of techniques, in fact I don't rely on any certain techniques in general. In fact, as Wing Chun pratitioners, we shouldn't rely on any certain techniques at all, we should react, not plan our movements. Just as any martial artist should, IMHO.

I usually don't allow myself to get into these discussion, for the fact that there is no win for either side. Though, I am a little amazed by how many practitioners limit their Wing Chun. For example to say that if I get behind someone and choke them, this isn't Wing Chun. I don't get this at all. What makes anyone of us such a Wing Chun great that we are able to tell others what Wing Chun is or isn't? By the way, I do use the choke. I also learned it in my Wing Chun before the UFC was around, back when Wing Chun people felt safe around grapplers. LOL!

I will admit there are Wing Chun people I have seen that made me cringe. But who am I to judge them? I am not the official Wing Chun police. There are so many branches, systems, histories in Wing Chun, who's to say what Wing Chun is to be or should be or even was for that matter?

;)

reneritchie

04-01-2003, 08:35 AM

Cap'n: I think you're reading into what I say, not reading what I say. My sigung also used to say "you can't talk about good or bad systems (of martial arts), only whether the individual in question can use it". WCK vs. grappling is nonsense. All you have is your WCK, and no matter what anyone else has done, its what you can do that matters. IMHO, thinking/hoping/praying you can do something is foolish. My sigung proved time and time again what he could do, and he did so by testing himself continuously against other types of fighters, from the long bridge systems, from grappling, from western methods, from internals, etc. It wasn't theory for him, it wasn't the warm and cozy blanket pulled up over his head that let him sleep at night. It was his reality.

I love WCK. But my love's not blind or stupid. WCK is a certain specific method designed to systematically improve fighting skill, given the context and culture of its evolution. Calling it "everything" is akin to calling it "nothing", infinite density as invisible as no density at all. It makes it a cartoon, a delusion.

Now I do believe the concepts behind WCK can be extrapolated and extrapolated brilliantly, but that's the individual, not WCK, and if it doesn't work, its their failure, not WCK, as certain as when it does, its their success. Masaad Ayoob's Stressfire is to me a brilliant example of WCK concepts applied to combat hand gunning. Such examples, however, need a deep understanding of the concepts, real utilization of them in application, and profound experience in the environment in question.

WCK does not historically have *any* groundfighting (though it does have, as Victor said, standing grappling). So WCK people thinking they'll be just fine and dandy on the ground is as funny as an old school BJJ person or wrestler thinking they'll be great standing up (watch Royce Gracie or Dan Severn's early standup). It's as silly as a grappler spouting off about how they're art is "complete" and they don't have to worry about multiple opponents, impact or bladed weapons, or getting caught in the shoot by a great striker because of yadda yadda yadda.

On a Kung Fu forum, its amazing people keep forgetting the Kung Fu (effort) required to be expert in something (including ground fighting), and the Sifu/Todai concept, or the importance of guidance from someone skilled in the area in question (hopefully generationally wise).

David Williams and Dhira are correct. Until pure WCK systematically wins NHB/MMA (and not b!tch!n about the rules, everyone gives up their deadly eyepokes and groin bites going in, and at least WCK wouldn't have to worry about being put down if the action wasn't heavy the way grapplers have to worry about being stood up) in a *consistent* manner, all we're talking about are isolated, annecdotal examples, and its difficult to distinguish WCK itself from other factors like the individual in question being a great fighter in general, the opponent being sub-par, etc. (And for the other excuse, that NHB/MMA isn't "reality" most of them still do far more real "tests" in their schools for those).

That's my 2 cents on the subject, and remembering that, historically, those with unreasoned, passionate faith have usually burned everyone else at the stake, I'll mozey along...

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 08:57 AM

With due respect to what you are saying about grappling, I do have a question for you. It involves your website. You state on this forum that Wing Chun doesn't have the answers to fight against grapplers, but your website says otherwise.

This isn't to discredit what you are saying here, just wonder why your websites presents a whole different view point?
;)

Ultimatewingchun

04-01-2003, 09:22 AM

John Widener:

A fair enough question which now requires a bigger step out into the open - I carefully worded my website so as not to upset my sifu, Grandmaster William Cheung, who I will always be indebted to... and who I still believe to this day is the best standup fighter I have ever seen...

I'm also still convinced to this day that the reason Emin Boztepe decided to bullrush William in the hopes of taking him to the floor is because Boztepe wanted no part of GM Cheung's standup skills...

be that as it may...rather than call my website ULTIMATE WING CHUN...( meaning: Traditional Wing Chun plus Catch-as-catch-can
Wrestling) - I have chosen to present it they way I have...

Sooner or later a day of reckoning will come with my Sifu...as has happened beteen us from time to time...and hopefully I might be able to "reach" him a little bit with persuasion...

But as of right now - although he has always taught some standup wing chun chin na techniques, as well as the one and only groundfighting technique I alluded to earlier in this thread -

Nonetheless...He still believes that the answer is more along the lines of anti-grappling than actual grappling...in terms of dealing with grapplers.

I do not subscribe to this point of view...and due to my life-long real life experience firsthand as to what a good grappling tech can do....

I'll never take that point of view.

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 09:32 AM

Fair enough answer, though I have a question for you. By the way, this isn't isn't to slam you or anyone from this lineage. Despite any disagreements you and I have (or anyone else for that matter). I am one who doesn't follow blindly, and my kung fu brothers can back me on this. I believe in testing it, and I have in many situations, though, I don't go looking for trouble just for the sake of testing it. So, with that said, I respect all Wing Chun practitioners, whoever they are, or who they represent.

My question to you is, if you have been with Grandmaster William Cheung so long, I am sure that he has shown or taught you his ways of groundfighting. Do you think they are not good applications? Or they don't represent good, true Wing Chun? If you prefer not to answer in respect to your Sifu, I can completely understand. ;)

The reason I ask this, is the website seems to make claims of having the answers against grapplers.

04-01-2003, 09:41 AM

Wow. What an emotional thread.

Some of my meager thoughts, FWIW.

There are no unbeatable techniques.
There are no unbeatable styles.
There are no unbeatable people.
Hand-to-hand combat is far from the greatest, most prevalent, and most certain of all risks most of us face in this world today.
As with everything in this life, you pays your money and takes your chances.
Anyone who believes they have the one and only 100% right answer, doesn't.
Remember "Paper, rock, scissors," that "only a fool is sure," and Indiana Jones.
In general, choices made in consideration, context and balance of one's entire life are superior to choices made on the basis of only a single fear factor or risk. IMHO, of course.

It is interesting reading all the various and often forceful opinions.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Ultimatewingchun

04-01-2003, 10:10 AM

John Widener:

I thought I made myself clear on this point:

GM Cheung does not teach actual groundfighting....other than the one-and-only technique I decribed earlier against someone who has mounted you and is now punching down at you...

other than that...in all the 20 years I am his student (this coming August,2003 will make 20 years)...he has never taught any actual groundfighting ... the only other move I can ever recall is one where you've been thrown to the ground and your opponent is still standing...how to use your legs to catch his legs and sweep him off his feet....so that you can get back up.

The all-out grappling that I have incorporated into the classes I teach come primarily from catch wrestling and some jiujitsu...that I have learned elsewhere...not from GM Cheung.

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 10:15 AM

Sorry, you're correct, I misread your post. How are his feelings about your changes or additions? Since you seem to represent him? ;)

Zhuge Liang

04-01-2003, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by kj
Wow. What an emotional thread.

Some of my meager thoughts, FWIW.

There are no unbeatable techniques.
There are no unbeatable styles.
There are no unbeatable people.
Hand-to-hand combat is far from the greatest, most prevalent, and most certain of all risks most of us face in this world today.
As with everything in this life, you pays your money and takes your chances.
Anyone who believes they have the one and only 100% right answer, doesn't.
Remember "Paper, rock, scissors," that "only a fool is sure," and Indiana Jones.
In general, choices made in consideration, context and balance of one's entire life are superior to choices made on the basis of only a single fear factor or risk. IMHO, of course.

It is interesting reading all the various and often forceful opinions.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

If you think your "reasoning" and "logic" will work in the real world, then you're living in fantasy land! Unless you've tested your reasoning skills agaisnt resisting, ******* bafoons in real life, you're going to have your ass handed to you when you try to talk sense to the next neck-less, lowbrow, neanderthal. Why don't you go to the VingTsun forum and see how your fancy "consistent, well thought out arguments" fare? You're in for a surprise. Unless you add illogical-tunnelvision-do to your training regimen, you're always going to have holes in your debating skills. I AM RIGHT! YOU ARE WRONG! I WANT ATTENTION, AND YOUR AFFIRMATION THAT I AM THE GREATEST AND THE SMARTESTESTEST!!!!!

Regards,
Zhuge Liang

Ultimatewingchun

04-01-2003, 10:25 AM

John Widener:

"Since I seem to misrepresent him".....

You've just exposed yourself as being hostile....

Therefore...you get no more answers!

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 10:35 AM

I don't know how you took that as hostile. That was an honest question. Why are you so defensive? You yourself said that the grappling you have isn't from him. I know how many Sifus are about students adding to the system and then teaching it under their name.

Relax a little, I am just very curious what others teach and why. Not intended to stir anything up. I believe this is what this forum is about, sharing ideas on how and what each of us do in our Wing Chun.

So, if this is hostile, sorry, I call it learning. It was never meant as a poke at you. Just clarification on a misunderstanding. ;)

04-01-2003, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Zhuge Liang

If you think your "reasoning" and "logic" will work in the real world, then you're living in fantasy land! Unless you've tested your reasoning skills agaisnt resisting, ******* bafoons in real life, you're going to have your ass handed to you when you try to talk sense to the next neck-less, lowbrow, neanderthal. Why don't you go to the VingTsun forum and see how your fancy "consistent, well thought out arguments" fare? You're in for a surprise. Unless you add illogical-tunnelvision-do to your training regimen, you're always going to have holes in your debating skills. I AM RIGHT! YOU ARE WRONG! I WANT ATTENTION, AND YOUR AFFIRMATION THAT I AM THE GREATEST AND THE SMARTESTESTEST!!!!!

ROFLOL. You are commensurately affirmed. :D

Regards,
- kj

yuanfen

04-01-2003, 11:04 AM

ultimatefighter sez:
yuanfen is not interested in wing chun as a FIGHTING art.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hell I am not- as usual wrong inference.

HuangKaiVun

04-01-2003, 11:06 AM

There's A TON of grappling in Wing Chun.

For example, the "downward prayer" move in the Biu Jee set is a great way to shoot downwards against an incoming frontal takedown.

When I do it, I don't look exactly like the form. But that downward dropping motion is what I need when guys try to shoot in on me to take my legs out. My hands are usually grabbing the other opponent's limbs or torso in that scenario.

By dropping my center of gravity below the opponent's, I manage to use that grappling technique to keep myself on my feet. Being short actually works to my advantage.

Let's also not forget how the double arm blocks right after the 3 fuk sao + pak sao combinations in Siu Lum Tao can be used as rear sleeper holds or headlocks.

reneritchie

04-01-2003, 11:41 AM

If you think your "reasoning" and "logic" will work in the real world, then you're living in fantasy land! Unless you've tested your reasoning skills agaisnt resisting, ******* bafoons in real life, you're going to have your ass handed to you when you try to talk sense to the next neck-less, lowbrow, neanderthal.

If you've seen KJ's posts before, you know she been der, done dat, and pried a T-Shirt from dem bafoons cold, dazed hands... 8)

reneritchie

04-01-2003, 11:50 AM

HKV,

A classmate of mine won a local NHB tourney in the early 90s. He did end up on the ground, and naturally ended up in side control, where he applied rising knees until the guy gave him his back. He then squeezed the guy's head in between his forearms (like in between two Lan Sao's) until the guy tapped. That's an example of extrapolating the concepts, IMHO, and also of proving their effectiveness against resistant opponents, moving it beyond the realm of theory. (I believe they ended up on the ground because the guy, a nationally competitive TKD and Judo guy) made the mistake of trying a spinning kick, which my classmate rushed in on immediately. That broke the guy's balance, but he was able to grab onto my classmate and pull my classmate down with him - dynamic balance in combat not being the same as rooting in SLT ;)

mun hung

04-01-2003, 12:08 PM

(Quote) Originally posted by UltimateFighter

"No, the answers were not there all along".

Maybe you have no idea of what I'm talking about because your Wing Chun is very limited. But that's probably not your fault.

"That is an arrogant and foolish statement based on blind belief. Your mistake is your assumption that WC is some sort of 'magical' art that has all the answers".

You've got me painted all wrong. I'm not a pansy@ss fantasy kung fu guy. I've been in alot of streetfights. I love the "martial" aspect of the art and that's why I practice it. I believe in experimenting and testing your skills. No magic. Just hard training against unwilling partners and sparring. I'm recovering from a fracture right now (my second) and it aint from ballroom dancing.

"It has some good techniques in its ideal suited area which is close range standup fighting, and it can be adapted for other ranges but it does not do grappling, groundfighting or ranged standup fighting as well as arts which train in them specifically".

An apple is an apple is an apple.

"The WC answer would probably be striking from behind which is less efficient".

I know several good chokes myself, but since when is striking someone in the back of the head not efficient? Imagine getting hit with an elbow anywhere in the back of the head or neck.

If you like ground grappling - do it. Just don't say Wing Chun is inefficient because you don't understand it completely. I totally respect JJ/BJJ/Judo and I like the way they train. I have alot of friends who train either JJ/BJJ/Judo. I totally respect their shoots and takedowns just as they respect my elbows and knees. Who would win? The better fighter. Not necessarily the better style. Do whatever you like.

Ultimatewingchun

04-01-2003, 12:23 PM

John Widener:

My apologies - now we're even. Yoy misread one of my posts and I misread one of yours....you didn't say "misrepresent"...you said...

"Since you seem to represent him" (GM Cheung).

Again, a fair question...but this will be my final answer on this topic for the time being...

How does he feel about my changes and additions...since I represent him?

I have been trying to avoid ever having to tell him face-to-face that I think his anti-grappling concepts and techniques (though excellent in their own right)...are not enough...in terms of dealing with attempted grabs and takedowns and actual groundfighting.

It wouldn't be the first time I've ever said or done something he didn't like...but at this point in time I prefer a less confrontational approach when dealing with him.

I regard William Cheung as a martial arts genius; the same way I
look upon the likes of, say, Bruce Lee, Muhammad Ali, Mas Oyama
Yip Man, the original wing chun elders,, perhaps you could even include Helio Gracie..and since I'm on the subject...let me also mention Lou Thesz, perhaps the greatest professional catch wrestler of all time-(even better than Karl Gotch). etc. etc.

The point being that I have enormous respect for the man...although if I ever find that I have to have this conversation with him...I will tell him exactly how I feel.

Now....taking my own advice about not getting sidetracked:

My next post will be about how I would defend (using wing chun and/or grappling) against the 2 scenarios I posed the other day, and then I would enjoy some feedback from those who have an open mind about MMA and wing chun.

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 12:50 PM

No apologies needed, though accepted my friend. Sometimes it is very easy too read to much into or just plain misread a post. I have been caught in this a few times myself. ;)

I will add, though not intended directly to you or anyone in particular. I think these discussions are great, until they lead into finger pointing or who is right and who is wrong. We all seem to be doing Wing Chun, regardless what each of us have to say. I persoanlly, haven't found the need to add to my Wing Chun, as far as outside arts or systems go. I will also say that I am not one to follow my Sifus in the past, as far as what they say is law. I was and will always question things that don't seem to add up in my eyes and in many occasions been lucky or unlucky (depending on how you look at it) to test them in real situations.

I even at one point in my training left my organization for 5 years to soul search (not only martial arts), and trained in various styles of martial arts. This including Wing Chun, and was able to clear up some matters which I felt unsure of in my original system of Wing Chun. Without going into details on all of my questions or uncertainties, grounfighting was one. Not that we didn't have it, but, if it was truely Wing Chun?

And after all that so-called soul searching, I feel that if trained, the applications can be used on the ground. Is it the same stuff as BJJ or any other actual grappling art? No, it isn't, but it is there, IMHO. Some say that there is just enough to get you back on your feet, some say there is a whole system. Regardless to any certain opinions, I do see applications.

We can sit here all day and ask questions like 'what would you do if", but this isn't realistic in my viewpoint. I always say that you can 'what if' yourself right off a cliff if you want too. The most common answer to 'what if' when speaking to someone who grapples is 'that wouldn't work because....'. No, matter what someone says there is always a come back. It reminds me of watching a Pride fight once and one of my friends (non-martial artist) kept saying what he would have done. That is very easy to do, but not always so easy to do when you are the one fighting.

Again, I am not pointing fingers or trying to discredit others. In fact, I find the various ways or paths of Wing Chun very interesting and obviously great topic. That is the reason for this forum, isn't it?

;)

azwingchun

04-01-2003, 12:57 PM

By the way, I would like to add that after 5 years I came back to that certain organization. What I found was my Sifu had hooked up with another well known master during that time, and the things I felt were in Wing Chun all the time or needed to be there to be a complete system. Well, they were there when I came back.

;)

yuanfen

04-01-2003, 01:49 PM

ultimatewingchun-
you have mentioned catch wrestling many times and Gotch and Thesz and others.

Without linking to wing chun controversies-

I have mentioned Gama before. Gama was born in old undivided India in 1880 - was deeply and economically devastated by the partition of India in 1947 and died poor and ill in Pakistan around 1960.
But many historians regard him as the greatest wrestler of all time. He was only around 5'7'' in height and about 210 in weight- but he couldnt be moved or thrown. He defeated everyone who accepted his challenge, including the Eoropean and some say world champion at that time- Stanley Zybysco. He threw the well known American wrestler Benjamin "Doc" Roller 13 times within 15 minutes, He couldnt be taken down and he preferred slamming folks to the ground and then kneeling on them in victory rather than rolling around on the ground.
Gama defeated every Japanese wrestler who faced him Gama challenged the Japanese Judo champion-Taro Miyata- who declined. he challenged Frank Gotch- who declined. He challenged Russia's Hackenschmidt who decline.The late Nat Fleischer of the Ring Magazines- boxing and wrestling magazines believed that Gama would have made short shrift of both Gotch and Hackenschmidt. He also defeated an American younger than Gotch- I dont remember whether it was Thesz- but the American later said that it was for show.

I have never seen but would love to see an old 1950 mpvie entitled
"Night and the City" with Zybysko(over the hill) and Mike Mazurki-
it was catch as catch can and also had elbows and strikes-no holds barred.
Gama in his time demonstrated that he could not be taken to the ground by the best wrestlers in the world.

But Gama's training is not easily duplicated in our times and Indian wrestling drastiaclly declined with the lack of sponsorship and the rise of Olympic point wrestling.. a differnt game..

Among the great good fortunes I have had was to see the old time pit wrestlers in Calcutta- even Gama used to come for visits-
I was too young to fully appreciate what i was seeing... but the fragments were illuminating lessons on the movement of the human body.

captain

04-02-2003, 02:42 AM

hmm,well ive used judo in a fight,and ive witnessed [felt]
wck up close.the only way i saw my judo working[against wck],is after
a palm strike or some such wck strike[then applying a pin/grab].the wck i saw [although
taught in a very fiendly place]was brutal and taught in a
realistic way.[ie looked like fist fights ive seen/been in].but
the sum nung thought,youre saying [rene]was that his mind
was aware of how/why/where he could use the wing chun
with other fighters.he must have had supreme confidence in
his ablilities,must have.so ok then,weve all shared opinions,now
how do we expand this.for me,im going to try what sum nung
did,ask grapplers and other flks if i can try this.a feel there is another wck book in all this.

UltimateFighter

04-02-2003, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by mun hung
since when is striking someone in the back of the head not efficient? Imagine getting hit with an elbow anywhere in the back of the head or neck.

If you like ground grappling - do it. Just don't say Wing Chun is inefficient because you don't understand it completely. I totally respect JJ/BJJ/Judo and I like the way they train. I have alot of friends who train either JJ/BJJ/Judo. I totally respect their shoots and takedowns just as they respect my elbows and knees. Who would win? The better fighter. Not necessarily the better style. Do whatever you like.

The fact that you questioned why striking the back of the head is inefficient tells me that you are at a very very junior stage of training and have probably never been in a fight in your life. The beginners from their first class are told never to punch the back of the head. You asked why this is inefficient? I would have thought anyone with sense would have known the answer but I will explain for your benefit. The back of the head is strongly protected by the skull which is much harder than your hands. Striking the back of the head will therefore damage your hands severley possibly resulting in you being unable to punch with them and cause swelling whilst only minimally damaging the opponent. If you are to strike from behind, the back of the neck is a much better target but even then it is often difficult to generate power from a grounded positon, or to be sufficiently accurate to have good results. If you are behind the opponent then sinking a good choke is a much surer way of taking the opponent out in minimul time.

You likely have no grappling experience at all which is why you think that whatever you have done in your WC class is comparable. This is unfortunately a grave mistake that many WC people with no grappling ability make when trying to discuss what techniques to use on the ground. There is a world of difference between the grappling styles such as wrestling and Juso and WC. If you don't have any experience in this area, your really will not have any idea what you are talking about when it comes to grappling.

Rill

04-02-2003, 07:05 AM

I would have thought anyone with sense would have known the answer but I will explain for your benefit. The back of the head is strongly protected by the skull which is much harder than your hands. Striking the back of the head will therefore damage your hands severley possibly resulting in you being unable to punch with them and cause swelling whilst only minimally damaging the opponent.

Umm, I don't know about you.. but my skull happens to extend round to the front of my head, too.
Perhaps you should get yours looked at?

04-02-2003, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter

The fact that you questioned why striking the back of the head is inefficient tells me that you are at a very very junior stage of training and have probably never been in a fight in your life. <snip>

You likely have no grappling experience at all which is why you think ...

In general I find that you have a lot to offer in terms of legitimate considerations for discussion. You also appear to have better than average writing skills. I believe the constructiveness of your posts and your personal credibility would further improve by avoiding unnecessary and logically flawed ad hominem assertions. Unless we actually know someone's background, we cannot reliably surmise their experience or what they "think" based only on casual forum discussions or nebulous assumptions. By avoiding attacks on the person, readers will also be less likely to perceive the post or poster as intentionally offensive or rude.

I have no qualm with the remainder of your post[s] which addresses technical issues, and I would encourage you and everyone to continue constructive discussions of that sort.

This is merely a genuine effort to offer constructive feedback and some candid observations in case you or others find it to be of any use.

Best Wishes,
- Kathy Jo

AndrewP

04-02-2003, 07:49 AM

I don't know about the rest of you but punching the base of the skull is VERY effective. I have never applied it in a fight because I don't fight. Palming is safer of course and kneeing is the worst. Can't really apply it in practice because of damage and injuries. Not good. My sifu has told me that he has used it in fights on occassion and it is effective. Just feeling a few "taps" there makes me respect that striking point. Of course I am not talking about applying it on the ground.

AndrewP

UltimateFighter

04-02-2003, 09:50 AM

Originally posted by Rill

Umm, I don't know about you.. but my skull happens to extend round to the front of my head, too.
Perhaps you should get yours looked at?

The question related to punching the back of the head. If your punching the front of the head, you punch below the eye line for the same reason that above the eyeline is nothing but hard skull.

As for the guy who says punching the back of the head is "very effective" yet has never tried it himself: I suggest you try punching the back of someones skull and see how your hands feel afterwards. Maybe then you will appreciate the finer points of the effectiveness of a good choke or blood strangulation. If you still don't believe me, then read Bruce Lee's personal account of his fight with Wong Jack Man. I believe the reason Lee first started to doubt the effectiveness of Wing Chun was because he applied chainpunches to the back of Wongs head. The result was his hands got damaged and balooned up afterwards. Lee's mistake of course was to apply the wrong tool for the job, but it seems even 35 years later people have still not learned from this mistake.

Rill

04-02-2003, 10:03 AM

If your punching the front of the head, you punch below the eye line for the same reason that above the eyeline is nothing but hard skull.
If you take your fist, you'll find it fits very nicely indeed into most areas around the face, side, and the lower parts of the skull at the rear. Likewise, a punch to the upper area is also effective, as a sihing of mine demonstrated some time ago when he was tackled (while walking his daughter in a pram... sheesh), and proceeded to take chunks out of the top of the mans skull with his fist. Obviously, a palm strike is the preferred option because it can shape itself better to the skull, but punches do just fine because.. you know, I was about to explain the structure of a WC punch, but then I asked myself if I should really need to.

We've had this argument before - I don't believe anyone changed their views then, either.

As for your comments regarding WSL and Bruce Lee, I have not heard any tales of this particular fight, so perhaps you would be good enough to share with us? I'm very interested to hear of an occasion where Bruce managed to actually land chain punches on WSL.

Ultimatewingchun

04-02-2003, 10:18 AM

Without even getting into the issue of whether or Gama was really the greatest wrestler of all time...

Why don't his fans study up on his technigue and training methods since he "could never be moved or thrown"...and add this to their fighting skills...

Since they have already began to play the "My favorite wrestler is better than your favorite wrestler game" (ie.- Thesz vs. Gama)...

it wouldn't be much of a stretch now to start incorporating some of Gama's stuff into their wing chun arsenal...

WE WON'T TELL ANYBODY !!

But now on to bigger and better things:

They first part of this story is true - The other day I visited someone I had never met before at his place of business, and I was standing in the corner of a room...there was a wall about two feet directly behind me and another wall directly on my right (also about two feet away)...When he first appeared he was standing directly in front of me and we both were in what you could call a neutral stance position...He stood , I would say , at least 6'2'' tall and at least 200-210 lbs. ( I am 5'10" and weigh 165). I am very strong; but chances are this guy was at least as strong, and in all probability, given his size - somewhat stronger.

Now here's the hypothetical scenario:

Supposing that, for whatever reason, he steps in and throws a tight jab/cross combo toward my face - and then starts driving (pushing) in towards me... with his hands and arms relatively close to (what we call his centerline)...and then goes for a head-inside double-leg takedown by attempting to grab me behind both of my knees...

Now given his size and strength, and given the lack of space to move, and given the straightness of his punches, my attempt to counter him might be:

(A) hit him first
(B) pak/da (slap block his jab and hit him)
(C) pak the jab..bil/da the cross (slap the jab away & thrust block and hit back against the cross)

To do this I would not only have to be very fast and precise given the fact that I don't have much room to move ...but also deliver a near-perfectly delivered strike into his eye, or throat, or temple area, or solar plexus to stop him dead-cold in his tracks...

And if he's still coming after my strike... my chi sao skills in terms of re-directing him and taking advantage of his attempts now to push in with his hands and arms in order to go for my legs...

those chi sao skills (including a possible sidestep to my left - which is the only "free path" directly out of the line of fire ...
all of these skills would have to be executed absolutely flawlessly and with great speed.

Is it impossible for me (or any other skilled wing chun practioner)
to do this?

NO! IT'S ALL POSSIBLE!

But here's the problem: WHAT IS PLAN (B) IN THIS SITUATION ?

Maybe I sneezed just as he began to attack...or I didn't quite get enough sleep last night...or I was distracted because some of his friends began to appear out of the corner of my left eye...

WHATEVER IT IS...So all I managed to do against the jab/cross was to slap them aside and avoid getting hit, but now his push in is also past my chi sao range (because of the same distractions) and he now starts diving for my legs...

Do I really want to put all of my marbles now on an elbow strike (or perhaps a palm strike) to the back of his head/neck area as he goes down for the double-leg?

Do you realize how fast you'll go down if your elbow or palm strike doesn't INSTANTLY collapse him?

Remember: you're now pretty close to being completely up against the wall behind you!

NO...in this instance, I believe a better PLAN (B) is now to snake my right hand down under and around his face, wedging it by his jaw thereby turning the right side of his face upward toward the ceiling (and his left side facing straight down towards the floor)...

Connect my hands near his jaw...all the while beginning to put my upper body weight down on him by bending forward from the waist (thereby wedging the top of his head up against my solar plexus/chest area) - so he can't pull back and away -then I begin lifting my hands and forearms up (and add some extra pressure by goose-necking by right wrist upwards)...and turning my body slightly to the right so as to make it hard for him to start trying to reach my groin with his hands (I can also lift my leg or knee to help with this if need be)...

The pressure or his face/jaw area and the cranking pressure now on his neck will become EXCRUCIATING...thereby either finishing him completely or, at the very least, softening him up big-time for the finishing elbow strike, knee strike, etc.

Do you know what saved me here more than anything else?

THE FACELOCK/NECK CRANK !!!

BUT THIS IS NOT A WING CHUN MOVE...THIS IS A CATCH WRESTLING SUBMISSION HOLD...

GET THE POINT ???

Now I don't expect the bible-toting wingchunners to get the point, and if they respond to this post with jibberish I'll ignore it..

But for those of you who have an open mind I would welcome your input ...

UltimateFighter

04-02-2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Rill

If you take your fist, you'll find it fits very nicely indeed into most areas around the face, side, and the lower parts of the skull at the rear. Likewise, a punch to the upper area is also effective, as a sihing of mine demonstrated some time ago when he was tackled (while walking his daughter in a pram... sheesh), and proceeded to take chunks out of the top of the mans skull with his fist. Obviously, a palm strike is the preferred option because it can shape itself better to the skull, but punches do just fine because.. you know, I was about to explain the structure of a WC punch, but then I asked myself if I should really need to.

We've had this argument before - I don't believe anyone changed their views then, either.

As for your comments regarding WSL and Bruce Lee, I have not heard any tales of this particular fight, so perhaps you would be good enough to share with us? I'm very interested to hear of an occasion where Bruce managed to actually land chain punches on WSL.

Chunks out of the other mans skull?.............I think you have fallen victim to exaggerated fairy tales and been unfortunately brainwashed. Punching the top of the skull above the eyeline is NOT effective and has got NOTHING to do with the WC vertical fist. If you think otherwsie, would you care to explain the details of your argument as I have done, rather than saying "becasue my Sifu says so" which is all your previous post was.

As for the Bruce Lee fight, read his account of it. He gave it in an interview I beleive. If you search it I am sure there are numeruos source that will provide the link.

mun hung

04-02-2003, 11:29 AM

(QUOTE) Originally posted by UltimateFighter
The fact that you questioned why striking the back of the head is inefficient tells me that you are at a very very junior stage of training and have probably never been in a fight in your life. The beginners from their first class are told never to punch the back of the head.

When did I say punch the back of the head???

You're a pretty funny guy. I think you've been punched in the head too many times. :p

mun hung

04-02-2003, 11:44 AM

And as far as not being in a fight my whole life - ha! Probably alot more fights than you've been in tournaments, pal. And I'm still walking around smiling. :)

Rill

04-02-2003, 11:50 AM

Rather like the last time this happened, I am regretting I let myself make a comment at all. All you can offer is that the top of the head is hard and round and doesn't make for a good punching area, while you are clearly ignoring the structure of the fist, and the idea behind an incapacitating strike. You insult others for their ideas, complain that people take the words of their instructors or kung fu family as the truth, and insinuate that the rest of us have no concept of fighting and are beginners, yet all you can offer is your 'hard and round' excuse once more. Your logic astounds me.

Recalling from the last time we did this, the structure of the punch lends itself to allowing efficient transfer of force via the bottom three knuckles, as well as stability. Put your bottom three knuckles against a wall and you will notice there is no room for wobbling, as opposed to if you were attempting to use a conventional fist where the index finger would provide pivotal point from which the wrist can move easily, and is the cause of injuries. Strikes to hard objects (like a wall or the dummy) still may hurt, but they're not going to break anything, and they're still going to be effective because of the intention of a strike to the head.

Strikes to the head are performed with speed rather than weight. If they were performed with weight, then WC would be no good for small people. Not everyone can get bigger, but everyone can get faster. Hence, the impact of a fast moving object colliding with your skull, be it a hammer, fist, lump of wood or even if you trip and hit something, all contribute to a knockout effect when the brain collides with the skull as it bumps around in its liquid vat. Several of these strikes quickly performed were advocated by WSL, which is mentioned in several articles, and presumably the concepts of a knockout are widely known.

Therefore, any mass that is travelling with sufficient speed and weight (note that the human arm is weight enough and when combined with the stance and movement adds the mass of the body), will be a cause of concern for the largest neanderthal with the thickest skull you can possibly find because of the effective transfer of force. Additionally, if correctly performed, the person will not suffer an injury because the structure is sound and the wrists are strong. I believe yuanfen pointed out in the last thread on this that there have been several recorded boxing matches where knockout has been via blows to the back of the head, which I'm sure you could find if you searched his posts.

This is what we learn in our first class. I don't expect you to agree, mostly because your best counter to chain punching is a shoot, and you've just advocated choking from behind rather than striking, and that pretty well sums up your wing chun knowledge. I would, however, suggest you go read kj's post again, as it contains some tips regarding the intellectual level of your conversation that would be useful.

Lastly, I searched Google and could find no reference to an interview where Bruce Lee states he performed ineffective chain punches to the back of WSL's head. If you would be kind enough to back up your sources, I'm sure there's several people who would be interested.

Ultimatewingchun

04-02-2003, 02:31 PM

Two slight corrections to my last post:

After the face lock is applied...."and turn my body slightly to the...

....LEFT... is what I meant to say.

Secondly: I should have said PLAN (D)....not Plan (B).

Marky

04-02-2003, 03:42 PM

Hi Ultimatewingchun,

If the guy is nearly half a foot taller than you, and 40 pounds heavier, he's just thrown a jab and a cross, he's rushing you, AND you're almost against a wall, then why did he suddenly reach down and try take you down from behind the knees? Why wouldn't he just slam you into the wall?

yuanfen

04-02-2003, 04:36 PM

A contrived scenario.

UltimateFighter

04-03-2003, 04:12 AM

Originally posted by Rill

Strikes to the head are performed with speed rather than weight. If they were performed with weight, then WC would be no good for small people. Not everyone can get bigger, but everyone can get faster. Hence, the impact of a fast moving object colliding with your skull, be it a hammer, fist, lump of wood or even if you trip and hit something, all contribute to a knockout effect when the brain collides with the skull as it bumps around in its liquid vat. Several of these strikes quickly performed were advocated by WSL, which is mentioned in several articles, and presumably the concepts of a knockout are widely known.

Therefore, any mass that is travelling with sufficient speed and weight (note that the human arm is weight enough and when combined with the stance and movement adds the mass of the body), will be a cause of concern for the largest neanderthal with the thickest skull you can possibly find because of the effective transfer of force. Additionally, if correctly performed, the person will not suffer an injury because the structure is sound and the wrists are strong. I believe yuanfen pointed out in the last thread on this that there have been several recorded boxing matches where knockout has been via blows to the back of the head, which I'm sure you could find if you searched his posts.

You've just advocated choking from behind rather than striking, and that pretty well sums up your wing chun knowledge. I would, however, suggest you go read kj's post again, as it contains some tips regarding the intellectual level of your conversation that would be useful.

Lastly, I searched Google and could find no reference to an interview where Bruce Lee states he performed ineffective chain punches to the back of WSL's head. If you would be kind enough to back up your sources, I'm sure there's several people who would be interested.

Wrong again. The Wing Chun/Tsun punch is often applied with full body weight to achieve the knockout effect. Boxers wear gloves hence their situation is totally different as they don't have to worry about protecting their hands. The fact that you are advocating going for a knockout by punching above the eye-line tells me your understanding is of a low level. Regardless of style or vertical fist, YOUR HANDS WILL GET DAMAGED, end of story. You have mis-understood the idea of the vertical fist. The vertical fust provides slightly more support for the wrist but this is not fullproof as damage can still occur, and furthermore, the knuckles will still get seriously damaged. In WC we aim for a knockout by punching the face below the eyeline or the throat. Obviously you have never heard the famous "face to face" principle of WC which advocats striking the opponent to the front or side of the face, but not behind the head. Secondly you are wrong in your assumption that everyone can get faster in their punches. There is a limit to hand speed based on the ratio of fast twitch muscle fibres. The idea that "Wing Chun is faster is better" is a common beginners attitude.

Again you discount chokes. The fact that I use chokes effectivly has got nothing to do with my Wing Tsun ability. It is a very effective move that adds to my arsenal. By discounting them totally, all you are doing is opening yourself to ridicule by any serious martial artist. Chokes are a technique advocated by my Sigung, head of the EWTO GM Keith Kernspecht, so they are good enough for me. Like I said, strking is an option under certain circumstances, but usually a choke is more effective from behind.

Lastly, here is a link to the artucle which quotes an interview from BlackBelt magazine. It says the following:

That the fight with Wong was the reason Lee quit, and then later repudiated the Wing Chun style, was confirmed by Lee himself in an interview with Black Belt.

"I’d gotten into a fight in San Francisco (a reference, no doubt, to the Bay Area rather than the city) with a Kung-Fu cat, and after a brief encounter the son-of-a-***** started to run. I chased him and, like a fool, kept punching him behind his head and back. Soon my fists began to swell from hitting his hard head. Right then I realized Wing Chun was not too practical and began to alter my way of fighting."

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/99vs66/1980.html

Ish

04-03-2003, 05:32 AM

would you prefer to take a punch in the back of the head or punch someone else in the back of the head?

I've had the oppertunity to try both of these and although hitting someone in the back of the head did hurt my hand its certainly isn't as bad as gettin hit.

Thats only my oppinion and doesn't mean i think its a good idea to do, i was just curious.

black and blue

04-03-2003, 05:42 AM

In the article BL is taking about a fight, but not one with WSL, as far as I can tell.

04-03-2003, 06:18 AM

A tiny woman successfully choking out a large muscular man with a big neck is not convincing to me as a most effective and efficient strategy. :eek:

Rather than significantly increase her advantages, it further increases her risks while compromising her most valuable fighting attributes (posture and rootedness or even feet on the ground at all, lack of over commitment and ability to change quickly, sensitivity and responsiveness, relaxation rather than a stiff platform to utilize, etc.). A feather of a woman does not prefer to grapple a huge male regardless how many XJJ, judo, wrestling, or other arts she has learned as a supplement, unless she wants to be a ragdoll. The disparity is too much. (Of course she doesn't prefer to fight him at all, unless ultimately compelling to do so; I'm not talking contests or training.)

In Wing Chun we always consider the least common denominator in terms of physical capability. At least I do. That in itself is a very high demand.

I'll be the first to uphold that in a fight you do what you must and what comes to you regardless of what art you practice or how far along you are in your development within the framework of an art. Choke, pinch, scratch, tear, claw, bite, improvise weapons, or whatever else is at your disposal even when your Wing Chun seems not to be. At least then you will still be with the spirit of Wing Chun. Within the art there are preferred strategies and disciplines for considered and demonstrable reasons. If not, then it's anything goes, and why pursue an art at all.

Fighting and Wing Chun are not the same set of things. Fighting is a scenario in time in which fewer or greater elements of one's art may or may not be evident. Wing Chun is something one continuously and increasingly grows into, and vice versa. The more that Wing Chun is internalized (through time and process), the more Wing Chun will be at one's immediate and effective disposal even in the unforgiving scenario.

FWIW, I also don't advocate chain punching someone in the back of the head; that would be silly given other options. I don't mind at all hitting in the back of the head if that's what is called for, understanding that there are always better and worse times and options for hitting.

Just some thoughts and generalizations for offering a different perspective.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

t_niehoff

04-03-2003, 06:21 AM

A couple of points . . .

Bruce is referring to his fight with Wong Jak Man. TN

Instead of arguing about how the punch should be done ("speed rather than weight", "full body weight to achieve a knockout", etc.) or where one should punch (back of head, front of head, somewhere else), or what you should or shouldn't do in specific scenarios, I suggest you consider the words of Hawkins Cheung, "Theory is great but can *you* do it?" If you are smaller and weaker (less musculature), can you make your punch do what you claim it should do? It's fairly simple to test. TN

Terence

UltimateFighter

04-03-2003, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by Ish
although hitting someone in the back of the head did hurt my hand its certainly isn't as bad as gettin hit.

Thats only my oppinion and doesn't mean i think its a good idea to do, i was just curious.

Obviously I would rather punch someone in the back of the head then get punched there. It does do damage, but the point is it also adversly damages your hands. I would rather cut their blood supply to the brain for a few seconds from behind with a strangle hold and render them unconscious which is relatively easy to do if performed correctly, and which has no negative effects on me.

As for KJ comments that a woman choking out a big man is not ideal: I think neither is the idea of her punching the back of his skull with her small hand. I am always of the opinion that in a self defence scenario a woman should never wait for an opportunity to finish the fight but should attempt to make an escape if any opportunity arises.

The Bruce Lee comment is a direct reference to his fight with Wong Jack Man. But that is besides the point of why I posted it anyway. It simply highlights the views of a man with vast fighting experience coming to the conclusion that punching the back of the head or any hard area of the skull ain't too clever.

vingtsunstudent

04-03-2003, 07:59 AM

firstly, i would like to appoligise if this a bit all over the place.
rather than rave on about all my own personal experiences you can do a search and find that i am usually very forthcoming in both my victories and slip ups.
UF, if punching the back of the head was not a viable target to cause damage to then why is it(the rabbit punch) outlawed in all forms of sport fighting, and i'm pretty sure that includes mma.
if a target is open to attack, you better well take it because you may not get another chance, time is of the essence in a real fight and the longer it goes on there is more chance you will make mistake or your opponent will get lucky and you could be hurt.
i've seen more people seriously injured from falling on the back of their head and splitting it open and the like in a fight than i have seen people who have been knocked to the ground and landed on their face. whether it's with the ground or not, that tells me that alot more damage can be caused to your opponent from a strike to the back of the head than could possibly be caused to your fist.
worst case scenario, a good single blow to the back of the head if unlucky enough could even cause death and i hardly think that a hurt or brocken fist compares to this.
'' If your punching the front of the head, you punch below the eye line for the same reason that above the eyeline is nothing but hard skull.''
sorry i disagree,do you not think that your hand can just as easily be damaged by things like teeth, a solid jaw, a slight movement of the head or even your own punch being slightly off target. if your going into a fight limiting your own options of targets then you are already behind the eight ball.
how many times have you hit someone full force in the face? what about the back of the head? or are you now taking bruce lees word that it's not a viable target?
besides that if your going to quote an article and use a reference to it make sure you read it right firstly.
now a couple of questions for a few folks and these are in no way meant to be disrespectful-
KWJ in your profile it says that you have trained for years in a variety of styles, do mind letting us know the time spent in each and also do you really think that if you are learning differnt styles all at once that you are fully going to get the most out of them.
UWC instead of hitting us with a host of 'what if's' perhaps you could give us actual reasons why you feel the way you do about adding the ground game to your arsenal, have you personally encountered problems on the street with your wing chun? have you had many street fights? or are you just noting that in the sport of NHB you need to have it?
now i want to add a few of my thoughts as to the UFC & MMA.
are they a good way to learn to use your stuff?
well unless your like me and you don't really have to many moral problems with getting into real fights on the street then there probably is not much closer these days.
however they are still not real fighting.
no matter what when you enter that cage you know there are rules that you both have to fight by, you know their is a referee or a cornerman who can stop it, you know where you are and why your there and are focused, you know he has no friends, is not going to mabye pull a weapon, is not wearing steel capped boots that could smash your shins or knees upon entry, maybe of concern might be that kerb or window behind you(and yes people have died from having their head rammed into the ground or being put through windows)
also lets not forget that in the real world that fights can and do happen at a seconds notice, things like thinking about paying the bills or having had a fight with your girlfriend, or being a little under the weather or you've had a few drinks or that bloke who just asked you for a cigarette only did it so as to get close enough so as to king hit you and steal your wallet all make reality a whole different ball game.
with all this latest fuss and peoples huge admiration for the grappling arts i also have to ask are people that stupid that they don't think that not every technique these people try to pull off on the streets turns out rosie.
i have worked with and saved friends of mine who are very good grapplers from situations where things turned ugly and they made just as many mistakes as the average joe brawlers i have worked with, why? not because they're not the be all and end all but again simply because there are to many variables in reality to think that having even learnt from the grand poo baas of several different arts for 50 years that you will not make mistakes or be unlucky in the heat of battle.
do i think wing chun has all the answers? hell yes and the more i look the more options i find.
do i think that people should learn some grappling?
well, i believe that every student should, once they've spent enough time in wing chun and fully understand and are able to use it well enough that their techniques will not be easily disturbed, go out and try many different arts(boxing, karate, TKD, grappling etc) not for years or even months but long enough to get a look at what and how they do things, not so that you can use or even incorporate them but merely so you can now go back and look at and even further understand your wing chun and how you will make it work for you against all opponents, because like i said i think you'll find all the answers are there but without a good deal of time of quality training or being one of the very fortunate few in this world who are just born natural fighters with a brilliant brain for what is not odvious to most or even a little outside help you may never look in the right place and find them.
vts

UltimateFighter

04-03-2003, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by vingtsunstudent
UF, if punching the back of the head was not a viable target to cause damage to then why is it(the rabbit punch) outlawed in all forms of sport fighting, and i'm pretty sure that includes mma.
if a target is open to attack, you better well take it because you may not get another chance, time is of the essence in a real fight and the longer it goes on there is more chance you will make mistake or your opponent will get lucky and you could be hurt.
i've seen more people seriously injured from falling on the back of their head and splitting it open and the like in a fight than i have seen people who have been knocked to the ground and landed on their face. whether it's with the ground or not, that tells me that alot more damage can be caused to your opponent from a strike to the back of the head than could possibly be caused to your fist.

vts

It is perfectly legal in MMA to strike the back of the head though seldom used. In boxing it is outlawed becasue they wear GLOVES. Hence a high degree of force can be issued without risk to the hand. Smaller gloves were introduced in MMA to protect the hands, as before this many strikers were breaking their hands when punching. Hand protection benefits strikers all round for this reason and for bare knuckle it is always a risk punching in case of connection with the hard skull. Like I said, you can take out your opoonent by punching the back of his head IF you are accurate but you WILL damage your hands. Hence a choke is usually more effective and on the ground, it is always more effective. How many times must I repeat myself before this sinks in? Striking from behind is an option but risk of injury to hands and the necessary accuracy of the strike to do damage means that choking/strangling from this position is usually more efficient.

Also a small point to Vingtsunstudent:

Learning the use of paragraphs would be helpful for you in future.

vingtsunstudent

04-03-2003, 08:47 AM

''Like I said, you can take out your opoonent by punching the back of his head IF you are accurate but you WILL damage your hands.''
UF,i think a better option than WILL is COULD, through the posts of yours that i have read over the time you have been here, i am yet to hear you speak of actual experiences of your own and only what you have been told or read.
i know it's easy to lie here in comptuter laa laa land but how about you give us some first hand references of actual incidents you have been involved in to back up your statements.
if you wish to be honest and say you have no real fight experience to speak of that is fine, nobody will hold it against you or think any less of you for it. i'm sure there are plenty on here that are proud of the fact they have never really had to use their stuff. more power to them.
vts

mun hung

04-03-2003, 10:31 AM

UF - yes, please tell us about some of your real life encounters.

I have never thrown a punch to the back of someone's head, but I have given someone an elbow to the top/back of their head as he was rushing me. That ended the fight. And thank God, he suffered no permanent damage. This was a long time ago. I could'nt imagine doing that to someone now.

Although I've never been hit in the back of the head in a fight, it's got to be the worst. Firstly, you don't really see it coming at all so you can't even be prepared for the impact. Secondly, your brain slamming around inside your head can't be a good thing.

As part of an anti-grappling lesson, my instructor was demonstrating certain strikes to the back and top of the head one day and I was the volunteer. He just "tapped" me on the back of my head with his palm - and all I saw was black for a moment. As heavy as his hands are - I could'nt even imagine him really putting his hand down. What I'm getting at is - it does'nt take much to do lots of damage by way of the head.

Ultimatewingchun

04-03-2003, 04:00 PM

Marky:

He didn't connect with the jab/cross - but now sees (what he thinks is) an opportunity to back me into the wall - pull my legs out from under me - drop me on the floor with my back up against the wall - and proceed to demolish me with just about any move he wants to use at that point...

KJ:

One of my students is 5'4" tall and 105 lbs. - and after she learned how to apply the PROPER LEVERAGE with the face lock - she's very formidable with it...much more so than if she had resorted to the elbow or palm strike idea...In the scenario I gave she is about to LOSE ALL OF HER POSTURE AND ROOTEDNESS...
because this very big guy is pushing her up against the wall and about to dump her right on her back...BUT HE MAKES THE MISTAKE of offering her his face/head/neck area...(all vulnerable places)...she takes the opportunity and makes him pay!

vingtsunstudent:

I have added the groundgame to my arsenal PRECISELY BECAUSE
I have had many street fights and THEREFORE KNOW FROM REAL EXPERIENCE the value of being able to transition to grappling; not instead of wing chun - BUT IN ADDITION TO WING CHUN - which is a STANDUP martial art with no groundfighting - but groundfighting is PART OF THE EQUATION - in terms of what a
REAL CONFRONTATION MIGHT ENTAIL.

Yuanfen:

Here's my response to your usual nonsense: ------------------------

Marky

04-03-2003, 05:47 PM

Hi Ultimatewingchun,

Thanks for the clarification.

In that scenario, I would try to hit the guy.
If I fail, I would try to hit again.
If I succeed, I would hit again.

As for details, you can fill them in for me, I don't have a good imagination. If you decide that he beats me up, that's life! Just let me know where I went wrong, so I can work on it the next time I'm in Fantasy Land.

anerlich

04-03-2003, 11:50 PM

Man, this timeless debate just goes on and on and on.

Strikes to the back of the SKULL are not likely to do much damage unless they are with something heavy like an elbow or knee. Or the rock, brick or tire iron the guy that attacks you picks up or is carrying. Even getting hit in the back of the skull is a bad idea if your face is on asphalt.

However, a strike to the occipit or just below on the neck can be a very damaging and incapacitating strike. A dropping elbow delivered from the side to a bent over opponent to here is an almost guaranteed KO (please don't asssume from this that I'm saying this means all you have to do to stop a double or single leg is elbow the guy - I too have grappling experience and know better).

A statistic quoted to me by one of the longest teaching and most respected KF instructors in Australia was that 90% of FATALITiES in street fights come from a falling person's head striking the pavement of something nastier like a kerb, rock, etc.

The turtle is a great strategy in events where strikes to the back of your head are disallowed. Sakuraba is really good at this. Anywhere else, you can get seriously hurt.

I think you'll find vts actually knows a reasonable amount about grappling - at the very least, he knows one of Australia's better BJJ practitioners.

captain

04-04-2003, 02:58 AM

Jimmy [the original gangster] Cagney said that when he was
growing up,and getting into fist fights,he could do more damage
to a persons skull with gloves on.he felt bare fists was safer
than gloved boxing,and that gloves increased the power and
therefore the skull damage.
he has some great [but i guess in a way sad] stories of his
fist fights in his authorised biography."you dirty rat!!!".

russ

UltimateFighter

04-04-2003, 06:52 AM

I take it you are asking me about my real 'streetfight' encounters, I am glad to say that I have managed to avoid many potential situations such as this and not had to resort to physical violence too often. If you can avoid a fight then that is usually even better than having to win one. To be honest, I mainly rely on 'intimidation' to avoid conflict. I don't look like an easy target for any potential attacker.

I actually posted one of my experiences of a fight a while ago where I successfuly used grappling to choke an opponent from behind. I ended the encounter without throwing a single strike which at the time would have escalated the situtaion and for which I felt no need. One of the greatest advantages of grappling is that it allows the use of only minimul force to 'control' and subdue the opponent.

I got into a fight with a guy outside a club a few months ago and manged to stun and semi-ko him with a straight punch. It had hip turn and my bodyweight behind it. I can thank my WT training for giving me the instinct to just hit forward with maximum impact instead of dithering around thinking what to do. Incidently, I connected him right on the 'button' (the chin) which is why I feel the strike was so effective. He fell back and then his friends and various onlookers interveened and the incident ended.

My adivce is that most confrontations start from the conversation range (or in this case, the snarl expletives and foam at the mouth stage) and therfore you shoud be aware of how you can align yourself to throw that first punch and hopefully end it.

Remember, the fewer movements needed for a successful outcome, the better!

Knifefighter

04-04-2003, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by kj
A tiny woman successfully choking out a large muscular man with a big neck is not convincing to me as a most effective and efficient strategy.

Have someone teach you how to properly apply a rear naked choke and you might change your mind.

LOL at the people who still think you don't need to supplement a striking art with grappling (or supplement a grappling system with a striking art). You guys are a couple of generations behind the curve.

vingtsunstudent

04-04-2003, 08:37 AM

Ultimatewingchun
thanx for telling us that, now would you mind sharing with us some of these first hand accounts. i'm sure nobody would see it as bragging and infact most of the people on here who have not been in a real fight might find some of your encounters enlightening and actually help them to understand what wing chun fighting might look like, what techniques you have found to be useful so as they may better understand them and also so why some might better understand your reasoning behind feeling you need to add ground or grappling skills to your arsenal.
don't take this to harshly or the wrong way but just saying you have had many street fights won't lead many to believe your thoughts on the need to add things to the system, the proof is in the pudding and with the 'what if' scenarios you have added i find that there is just too much dreamland involved with that type of thinking and justification.

UltimateFighter
i'm sorry bud but the 2 simple things you have mentioned are not really any justification for the way you are dishing it up to people with all this 'odviously you have no real experience' replies when they disagree with what you believe to be the way things will or will not go down.
i think it is good that you have had to experience the harsh realities of combat and came up trumps but i have personally chocked out 5 times that many people in 1 night and had to hit more people and throw more than one punch on way to many occassions to believe that you have any right to offer up what reality is all about and what everybody should be doing with their training with that little amount of first hand experience.

anerlich
thanx my aussie friend, you are right, i have been lucky enough to meet, train, work and actually fight with just a couple of decent bjj guys.
the reason i personally know some holds is more to do with what i did for a living, and unless i wanted to be in court all the time they were alot better option than just knowing wing chun.
damm, i suddenly was attacked whilst having a ciggie at work one night by a guy who tried to tackle me to the ground and still managed to finish smoking whilst i guillotined him unconscious(from a standing postion- no i wasn't taken down) while a good friend of mine who has an excellent ground game stood watching in disbelief.
could i have finished him or any of the others i have had to deal with with nothing but wing chun? sure could of, but for me at those times i must admit knowing just enough saved me a hell of alot of money.
now do i still consider myself a pure wing chun man? hell yes, as much as anyone who has only ever studied wing chun and nothing else.
and has learning a little of their game stopped me from using nothing but pure wing chun? hell no.
my only advantage is that i to know enough of what other games people are playing to use nothing but good wing chun(unless luck isn't on my side, which so far it has been)
like i said it is my belief that you can always go and learn just enough to understand how and why and how to deal with it.

just one quick thing i would like to add to all this, although many kung fu or stand up fighters like to believe that will not be taken down just as many grapplers believe that fights will quite often go to the ground.
this simply isn't true, again i've worked with and seen good grapplers try to even get drunks to the ground and fail.
why is this if that is their speciality? because again, fighting hardly ever goes exactly to script, if it did, we would all be fighting gods.
the only 2 times i personally have gone down is when i have been out and been blind drunk and i don't think any amount of skill would have kept me standing on those ocassions, hell, i was almost on the ground without the aid of an opponent as for the rest of the times i have had to fight on slippery tiled floors against multiple opponets at once amonst other stupid places and conditions and have yet to be taken down.
can you stay on your feet at all times? yes, but believe me it takes some very hard training, some very good footwork, a heap of real fight experience, the desire to win at all cost and be the one who doesn't go home any uglier and most importantly for me so far and more than likely everybody else who has never been taken down the luck of the gods.

like i said earlier, i think wing chun does have all the answers it's just sometimes you need to look somewhere else to have those answers brought to your attention.

sorry for raving on so much and sorry if anyone thinks i'm full of it and just like to brag, but i'm sick of people offering up the gospel to everybody and calling them trolls for their beliefs(be them right or wrong in those beliefs) without one scrap of evidence or at the least a story (yes people who have really fought will know whether a story sounds real or not) to support that they have actually been on the street and kicked $hit to justify the abuse thay are hurling at some around here.
for those that might be worried i'm talking about them, i'm sorry. but if you aren't full of it and give us some ideas behind your beliefs that sound real enough, then you have nothing to worry about then do you.
vts

Knifefighter

04-04-2003, 08:44 AM

Why would you even consider doing this? You've got the person's back. You don't need the range and motor movements that striking with the hands provides. If you are going to strike to the back of the head, it should go without saying you do it with your elbows.

vingtsunstudent

04-04-2003, 09:04 AM

of course you are correct knifefighter, but as you probably know things can happen all to quickly and you may find yourself punching through pure reaction, i don't think anybody said it was the best option only that it is an option and that there is really only as much chance of damaging your hand there as there is on any other part of the head or face.
atleast they are my thoughts, but as always i could have misread the original arguement to its use and be wrong.(which would be a first:eek: )
vts

Ultimatewingchun

04-04-2003, 09:27 AM

I see a pattern emerging here:

Once again I'm posting on a thread wherein "the wing chun, the whole wing chun, and nothing but the wing chun, so help me God"
folks are coming out of the woodwoks like insects...or should I say...like Sunday school children.

Yuanfen...vingtsunstudent...Marky...mun hung...Grendel...

The bottom line to all this is that you people make the claim that grappling is overated and not necessary to learn because wing chun has all the answers to ALWAYS STAYING ON YOUR FEET,
if only it's done correctly...if only you understood it better...trained in it harder...had a better Sifu than you do, or did have...ya da, ya da, ya da...

You would then always be able to stay on your feet...no one would ever be able to make you fight on the ground, etc.

In addition, some of you have the audacity to suggest that those of us who say otherwise haven't been able to adequately use our wing chun on the street...that's why we now advocate learning how to grapple...or worse yet: you now demand details of our street fighting encounters...so that you could try to pick that apart ad infinitum...and ad nauseum...

So I'll play your game for a minute:

There's the time back in my Moy Yat days when after punching someone with a left hook...followed by two chain punches - he went down and I found myself sitting on his back and punching him again, this time in the back and the side of his head (no, I didn't hurt my hands)...in fact..I began to be afraid of what I was doing to him since we were on the sidewalk adjacant to Coney Island Avenue in Brooklyn ,right in front of the Aamco Transmissions that I was the manager of at the time...and this being a big, major thoroughfare, the police drove up and down this avenue very frequently...

so I let him up...(big mistake)...this guy was about 5'11'' and weighed at least 230 lbs. (I found out later that he was a semi-pro football player)...I'm standing there in my neutral stance with a right hand lead (something,by the way, I would never do now...thank you, William Cheung) he charges with a right hook punch toward my face and I punch straight out and clock him first right in the nose with a left vertical punch...he jumps back from the pain (I found out later that he already had a broken nose from the first left hook I hit him with)...but back to the story...he now fakes the same right hook and then lowers his head and charges me and successfully drops me to the floor on my back with the same exact move I posted about the other day (head-inside double leg) - only in this REAL LIFE SCENARIO I'm describing now there is no wall behind me...and I've just been thrown onto the concrete...He then proceeds to start gouging my eyes with both his hands...gouged them VERY badly...and eventually I finally managed to WRESTLE (again, let me say thank you to catchwrestling, which I studied for 4 years beginning at the aga of 12) ...WRESTLE... my way out of the situation , pushed off and got back up on my feet... at which point I went back into
the Aamco and the fight was over. A friend of mine immediately drove me to an eye doctor who put medicine in both eyes and patches over them.... my friend drove me home, led me up the stairs to my apartment...picked me up the next morming, drove my back to the doctor... who informed me soon thereafter that if I hadn't come to him the night before ...the gouging was so bad I would have (in his opinion) awoken up in the morning to find out that I was blind!

Or how about this: some years later - about 6 months after I started Traditional Wing Chun under William Cheung - I fought (and beat 2 guys) my size- I vertical punched the guy right in front of me with my left hand and he went right down on his back - BUT- his friend standing on my right immediately started to put me into a headlock with his right arm - I came back up at him before he had a chance to complete the hold with a right hand uppercut to his ribs - he immediately let go and started to back away from me ...I followed him with the TWC hop entry technigue, to which he not only jumped back some more but then actually turned his back and began running away...I turned around to find that the first guy was back on his feet...I did the entry again and he backed up just slightly..so I follwed with a rear front kick that just missed catching him right in the balls...he now decides to turn his back and run also... but I chase him and clock him with a left hook to his ear...dropping him again and this time he didn't get up...in fact...the blow to his ear required 6 stitches to close the wound....They called the police to try to have me arrested...I told the men in blue that they started it and it was two against one...we all spent the night in jail...and all dropped the charges the next day...

Are the wingchunners now going to tell me the hooks and uppercuts were not necessary...not good wing chun ...?

Are they going to say that I should not have resorted to wrestling my way out of the first situation...?

Do the wingchunners have a clue about...ANYTHING...as regards a real streetfight...and what could possibly happen...?

Let me just say this:

You people are SCARED TO DEATH of ever having to grapple on the ground...

This whole thread is about wingchunner ANXIETY about being off their feet and on the ground...

It's about...FEAR...YOUR FEAR... and with each successive post you people make you convince me more and more that ...YOU...
haven't had enough street encounters...otherwise you would understand the value of being able to grapple if you have to...

I have been holding out a hand to you (as have others) to help lift you people up OUT OF YOUR FEAR; but now that you insist upon constantly biting that hand...I'm letting you go...and you can
fall back down into the pit of non-reality all by yourself...

This will be my final post on this thread...enough of wasting my time with fear...a HUGE part of martial art training is intended to teach one how to be fearless!

vingtsunstudent

04-04-2003, 10:47 AM

'for those that might be worried i'm talking about them, i'm sorry. but if you aren't full of it and give us some ideas behind your beliefs that sound real enough, then you have nothing to worry about then do you.'
did you miss this part or are are you truely worried that your justifications would not lead us to believe that by having added grappling you done what YOU believe to be the right thing for YOU. like i said, all i wanted is your reasoning and not just a 'i'm right, your wrong, so you are all pussies and know nothing' answer.

'It's about...FEAR...YOUR FEAR... and with each successive post you people make you convince me more and more that ...YOU...
haven't had enough street encounters...otherwise you would understand the value of being able to grapple if you have to...

I have been holding out a hand to you (as have others) to help lift you people up OUT OF YOUR FEAR; but now that you insist upon constantly biting that hand...I'm letting you go...and you can
fall back down into the pit of non-reality all by yourself...'

yep, your right, i'm just plain and simply a liar.
i still think you should read my post again and see what i believe is needed to make wing chun work for ME and that i only offered up advice and why i think this way so as others could get a different perspective. unlike you i have not needed to carry on like a 2 year old to everybody who disagrees with me without first giving some of my first hand experiences as to why i believe what i do.
just because god(that being you in this case) feels he needs to add doesn't mean others do and that are wrong and of no experience for not doing so.
and i'm sorry to tell you big man you are definitely far from the only one who HAS been in real fights and with posts like that last one all you will have me believe is that it is you who has some sort of inadequecies and faith in yourself that you need to carry on like that. maybe these anger and mental problems are what has led you to not fully understand what you've learnt and thus created a viod in your skills that you need to cover with something else.
if you hold out your hand to help everybody in this way i'm surprised you haven't had the living $hit kicked out of you on plenty of ocassions.
i feel sorry for your students having to put up with such a smarta$$ know it all, who odviously lacks in the communication department, like you.
love
the no skilled and never fought
vts

vingtsunstudent

04-04-2003, 11:01 AM

sorry, i forgot to add that i find it funny that you wish to tell everybody how wrong they are here and how lacking in experience we are yet you haven't even had the balls to talk to your own sifu about it.
talking so tough over the net yet such a little scaredy cat as to face your own teacher about inadequacies you feel that your system or his teachings hold, even when he with many more years experience may be able to help with the concerns.
but then again, i did forget that you are a know it all.
gee, i hope to have a room full of honest and devoted students just like you one day.
vts

azwingchun

04-04-2003, 11:21 AM

Are the wingchunners now going to tell me the hooks and uppercuts were not necessary...not good wing chun ...?

Ultimatewingchun, you may not reply to this, but here it goes anyway. I don't know that I would say that this isn't Wing Chun, we have a form of both in our system. ;)

vingtsunstudent

04-04-2003, 11:23 AM

azwingchun
be careful, unless you are also learning grappling you have nothing to offer the almighty knowing one.
vts

Ultimatewingchun

04-04-2003, 11:46 AM

vingtsunstudent:

The next time you're in New York City get in touch with me.

You and I should have a face-to-face "chat".

azwingchun

04-04-2003, 11:59 AM

I hear ya, thanks for the advice. LOL! But seriously, I don't have any problems with how anyone performs or trains their Wing Chun, honestly. The only thing I don't understand is how many Wing Chun (hardcore Wing Chun) people seem to doubt their Wing Chun skills. And I am not speaking about anyone here in general. As mentioned before, I very seldom like to get into these type of discussions. Due to the fact that these type of online discussions are a no win situation.

We can discuss who has what, and what you would do against what, but to be honest this means nothing. It is always easier to say what you would do than to actually perform it when the blood and sweat are flying. Just my opinion for what it matters anyway.

I am one that believes (as I have said before, as have others), there are only so many ways humanly possible to attack or defend. Or for the human body to move in general, and through an understanding of this it is up to the practitioners to determine the proper responses for those various attacks or defenses.

I think many people live in the 'what if' way too much. Not that they aren't important or have their place in martial arts. But as said before, you can 'what if' yourself right off a cliff if you go far enough.

This is a great discussion, though too bad it got into a finger pointing game by our own brothers and sisters in Wing Chun. ;)