so I watched a UFC fight last night...

[Gangsterfist]

Hey guys/gals-

So, last night I am at a bar with my roomate watching the UFC thing on Spike TV. You know that kind of behind the scenes show, it was the first time I actually watched it. There were these two guys on there that were training to fight each other (totally forgot the names sorry :( ). So I decided to watch the fight, and I watched the whole thing, and I noticed that none of it really followed any wing chun principles at all. I was curious after watching this fight that if wing chun principles were applied, would it have changed the outcome of the fight.

For example I saw the following:

sloppy circular hooks
backing off and retreating
chasing limbs
over commitment

Now, I am not saying that wing chun principle is the only way to fight, obviously thats not the case. What I am curious about is would a good wing chun fighter survive against this type of stuff. I was watching the fight and noticed a lot of close quarters stuff happening, lots of clenches, etc. However, the fight never once went to the ground, they both stayed on their feet.

Now, a few times in the clench I saw many opportunities for peeling and covering elbows. Which can really hurt someone is done right. I saw many opportunities for one of the guys to rush in, like when their opponet gave them a circle kick. They could have rushed in and attacked right then.

A lot of the fight was both of them playing in each other's kill zone. By this i mean at the end of their techniques. One concept of wing chun is to be inside and close to your opponet. A lot of times the sword analogy is used. Would you rather be out away from your opponet in stabbing range, or would you ranger be close next to the hilt, where they could not stab you. Not once was anyone sticking to an opponet. You don't stand out at an arms length from your opponet, you are asking to get hit really hard that way. Instead you move in and dominate and control. At least that is how wing chun has been for me.

Now, with all these recent threads about wing chun for sport, or the 0 to 100, or the wing chun in the UFC, etc. I thought I would post this. I thought it was weird since there was no angle stepping, no centerline attacks, nothing really that wing chun stresses as a core.

These guys were good fighters don't get me wrong. They both had MMA training with what looked like bjj and muay thai, or at least it looked that way to me.

Now, the whole time I watched this fight I was curious, that if I could work out with one of the guys for 6 months and train him some basic wing chun stuff, would it have made a difference. I am talking basic concepts, foot work, and centerline theory. Who knows if it would have made a difference, but I was still wandering if it would.

A lot of people say wing chun has a bad rep in the ring because its too dangerous of an art. Others claim that the art is designed for combat and it cannot be adapted to ring fighting rules. Some people say that gloves hinders our ability. After watching this fight on the UFC spike TV thing, I know that a good wing chun fighter very well could have won against either of those two guys fighting. It would just require someone young, and in shape to train wing chun for the ring. I am not volunteering by any means, full contact ring fighting is not for me, I like to be injury free, and I would like to be able to not have any permanent injuries.

There were so many occasions where wing chun elbows could be applied. Chi sao skills could have definately helped while in the clench. Centerline theory could have been applied everytime a circle kick (round house) was used. These things would require timing and proper training but I can easily see that they could be applied.

I do not really watch a lot of k-1, NHB, or UFC as of late, but after watching it last night I think I might start to watch it more often.

The purpose of this thread was just an observation I saw last night while watching a UFC match. People who say wing chun is not for the ring are wrong IMHO. During the fight I found myself saying stuff like, "Go IN!" "attack the center" "Cover your center" "Angle step that" so on and so forth. So, I saw tons of times where wing chun could have been used, and could have been used effectively.

However, I digress, if you did train wing chun for the ring you would have to do some physical conditioning outside of wing chun forms. You would have to be in pretty good shape is what I am saying. Other than that, I can totally see wing chun be really effective in the UFC. If done proper of course.

[Phil Redmond]

That was a good observation. Conditioning is the key. Like you said, most UFC guys use wild punches and very little standup technique. But since they are well conditioned they can get away with the sloppiness. Of sourse there are exceptions. Some NHB/UFC guys do have a good standup game. I personally know that WC can be used in full contact. Again, conditioning is the key. Also, anyone can be taken down so mat knowledge is essential for anyone going into UFC/NHB competitions.
PR

[Ernie]

good observations Gfist ,
there is one huge factor you need to consider pro. fighters or just very tough guys have the ability to weather the storm

so even if you are right [in position angle and so on ] it just doesn't matter , they will break you with what would like on the outside as a bad or sloppy action

they can take what you dish out and give you back a much larger serving ;)

look at chi sau [common reference point ] when you play with a big strong type that has no feeling just makes shapes and tries to run you over and dominate ,
you can play and get the right spot and clean line but then they guy will amp up get all stiff move as fast as he can like a drowning man clawing at the water , this is turbulent non responsive energy , but uncrispy raw power is hard to deal with .
sure with skill the tables can be turned
but not always ;)

[Gangsterfist]

Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of taking one of those guys and coaching them with some wing chun concepts. Taking hits and being able to dish it out for 5 min rounds (its what they were doing last night) takes it out of you. So, you have to be in great shape.

[t_niehoff]

I don't think they're good "observations" at all; I think what gangsterfist is doing is what so many nonfighters do -- looking at it from a theoretical POV of what he believes good fighting should look like. It's all fine and dandy to "analyze" and "critique" these performances from the comfort of one's barstool or armchair -- oh, they did this and that poorly, they didn't use WCK "principles" (which, of course, would only make them better), etc. The most laughable part was his suggestion that he could train them to be so much better! Why would real fighters want to train with someone that hasn't proven he could fight his way out of a wet paper bag? Because of your theory? So that you can explain to them how it should work? LOL! My suggestion is that you actually go fight some NHB fighters and then tell us how "sloppy" these guys really are (maybe you'll find out that this is the nature of fighting -- it's sloppy), how they just do all kinds of things poorly (maybe you'll see that they're not so poor after all and your "good" ideas just won't work), etc. It's always amazing that guys that couldn't last 30 seconds in the ring know how it should be done.

[anerlich]

A lot of people say wing chun has a bad rep in the ring because its too dangerous of an art. Others claim that the art is designed for combat and it cannot be adapted to ring fighting rules. Some people say that gloves hinders our ability.

A lot of people say a lot of things. IMO WC don't normally enter such events, as they would have to go through a cycle of rule familiarisation and a period of losing before they start winning, and many are not prepared to risk the mystique and aura of deadliness and invincibility with which they massage their egos.


After watching this fight on the UFC spike TV thing, I know that a good wing chun fighter very well could have won against either of those two guys fighting.

A lot of theory and what if.


I am not volunteering by any means, full contact ring fighting is not for me,

And funnily enough nor is anyone else.


There were so many occasions where wing chun elbows could be applied. Chi sao skills could have definately helped while in the clench. Centerline theory could have been applied everytime a circle kick (round house) was used. These things would require timing and proper training but I can easily see that they could be applied.

Apparently you're wrong. They have never been applied in the ring, so empirically you have to conclude they can't. otherwise they would have.

Good boxers will box. Good kickboxers will kickbox. The money is a lot better.

The UFC and Pride are IMO still mainly about grappling. You can complain about the lack of stand up technique, but many matches are showcases of excellent grappling technique well applied.

[Gangsterfist]

I don't think they're good "observations" at all; I think what gangsterfist is doing is what so many nonfighters do -- looking at it from a theoretical POV of what he believes good fighting should look like.

Thats cool you are allowed your own opinion just like I am allowed to have mine.


It's all fine and dandy to "analyze" and "critique" these performances from the comfort of one's barstool or armchair -- oh, they did this and that poorly, they didn't use WCK "principles" (which, of course, would only make them better), etc. The most laughable part was his suggestion that he could train them to be so much better! Why would real fighters want to train with someone that hasn't proven he could fight his way out of a wet paper bag? Because of your theory? So that you can explain to them how it should work? LOL!

I was actually referring to someone who is a lot more skilled in wing chun train them. I am not a teacher, I am not a coach, and I am definately not a sifu. I have stated this many times in previous threads. I would never have any intention of training anyone to be a professional fighter. I never once specifically said I would train them personally. You just assumed I did, which looking back I can see why my wording may not have been the best.


My suggestion is that you actually go fight some NHB fighters and then tell us how "sloppy" these guys really are (maybe you'll find out that this is the nature of fighting -- it's sloppy), how they just do all kinds of things poorly (maybe you'll see that they're not so poor after all and your "good" ideas just won't work), etc. It's always amazing that guys that couldn't last 30 seconds in the ring know how it should be done.

I digress, I stated several times in this thread I was curious if it would have changed the outcome. Did I ever once say it would guarantee a win? No, I certainly did not. I also stated conditioning is a major part of ring fighting. I am not a professional ring fighter, nor do I ever want to be. I would like to keep my body injur free for as long as possible. Fighting in full contact fights seems to increase your chances of a permant injury. I don't want to risk it. Its not for me. I stated that already.

So, please next time try to understand what some people are saying before you jump to conclusions. I simply commented that none of the fighting followed any wing chun concepts. It was an observation. If you think that wing chun concepts could have NOT worked with the situations I stated then please counter argue them. I very well could have been wrong, but try not to make this thread into a petty argument flame war.

Thanks,
GF

[Gangsterfist]

Anerlich-

This peticular fight actually never went to the ground. It went into the clench at lot, but never the ground.

However, yeah I agree with you most of those fights tend to end up rolling around on the ground.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Without even getting into gangsterfist's first post on this thread...let me go another route.

Make it your business (G) to check out the fights of people like Fedor, Mirko Cro Cop, Antonio Nogueira, Randy Couture, or Chuck Lidell (both past and future fights)...to name a few of the very best...

and you WON'T see wild hook punches, sloppy wide open easy-to-counter kicks, backing up when it's not necessary, etc.

Instead you'll see some of the best fighting around today.

[Knifefighter]

\and I noticed that none of it really followed any wing chun principles at all. I was curious after watching this fight that if wing chun principles were applied, would it have changed the outcome of the fight.Watch Vitor Belfort's KO over Silva in the UFC. That is the closest you will come to seeing WC principles applied successfully in an MMA event. The problem with "WC principles" is that they are too one dimensional and require too much muscular power to be applied successfully in the realm of MMA's.

[Mark Swiadas]

"The problem with "WC principles" is that they are too one dimensional and require too much muscular power to be applied successfully in the realm of MMA's." -- Knifefighter

Hi Knifefighter,

Would you be willing to give one or two concrete examples of this problem? I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around exactly what you mean!

[SevenStar]

.

Good boxers will box. Good kickboxers will kickbox. The money is a lot better.

The UFC and Pride are IMO still mainly about grappling. You can complain about the lack of stand up technique, but many matches are showcases of excellent grappling technique well applied.

..........

[Phil Redmond]

Well if you get knocked out by a sloppy punch it's still a knockout. ;)
Terence, do you believe a WC fighter can be trained to be effective in NHB?
Also, since you train in WC what are the good things about it?
Phil

[Happeh]

Ummmm. I have an observation.

Aren't elbows illegal in UFC fights?

That was one of the main points in the first post. The comments about how it is obvious and you could charge in and do this and that? I agree with the guy saying the comments sound like someone who has not been fighting.

I think UFC is realistic fighting. People in real life are going to charge and try to take you to the ground if they can. There really aren't that many people in real life who can stand up and exchange punches. I doubt if you will ever run into a really good kung fu guy on the street who is going to exchange technique with you like in a movie.

Realisticly, almost all fights are a bigger guy who knows he can win fighting with a weaker guy. The bigger guy throws a punch or a kick and the weaker guy gets beat up. I don't know if I ever saw a real life fight on the street or anywhere that was an equal fight. It is always a bigger or stronger guy attacking a weaker person.

I seen a gang jump a homeless man. I seen a group of guys beat up their friend after a concert and leave him in the parking lot. That was weird. I seen big guys punching the heck out of little guys. The little guys can't even fight back because of the size difference. I think the rest of the ones I saw were all of the clinch, headlock, roll around on the ground variety.

I think the closest I saw to anything like a real fight was 2 senior guys in class one day. They were doing chi sau for the hell of it and suddenly one of them staggers backward and stumbles into a wooden dummy. Everyone in class stops and looks. ;) The guy that stumbled was ****ed and had a reptuation for a really bad attitude. I think he was a criminal. They chi sau again and he does the double hand push down thing? I forget the name. The other dude goes straight down into the floor. It was really impressive. Not just a stumble or a push backward but a slam straight into his belly right down into the floor.

Both doods were big. 220 or 230. 10 or 15 year students. I think I was right about the one guy being a criminal with a bad attitude. The other guy got up off the ground and was all polite and friendly afterwards. ;) Kinda scared lookin.

The funniest part? The criminal guy was a haircutter. ;) Better not be making fun of those beauticians. You never know.

[t_niehoff]

One -- among many -- of the problems WCK people have looking at these sorts of fights is they have the WCK blinders on, for example believing their "theory" provides objective standards, such as that straight punches are inherently better (superior) than looping punches (is the front straight kick better than the wide thai kick?). My point, gangsterfist, is that you don't have a clue about the reality of fighting (because you don't fight) and so you have no real basis on which to judge -- you're basing your views solely on your (poorly conceived from hearsay) "theory" of fighting. That's why I said to go do it yourself and then make the comments. You may see, for example, that many of those "mistakes" you saw were intentionally chosen by the fighters for a reason, and a good, or at least, defendable, reason. I could explain them to you but unless you have the experience, it wouldn't do any good (you'd still have the blinders on). In theory so many things sound great; getting in the ring exposes most of it as BS.

Yes, Phil, IME WCK is a sound fighting method. My criticism isn't of the method itself, but rather of most of it's so-called "practitioners" and snake-oil salesmen who give the art a bad name.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . Yes, Phil, IME WCK is a sound fighting method. My criticism isn't of the method itself, but rather of most of it's so-called "practitioners" and snake-oil salesmen who give the art a bad name.
Whew . . , thanks Terence. I was hoping to hear that from you. :) I understand that not everyone's goal is to be a fighter. But, I'll have to agree with you that "we" need to do more contact/realistic training if "we" want to be effective fighters. Of course you need sound basics to achieve that goal.
Phil

[sihing]

One -- among many -- of the problems WCK people have looking at these sorts of fights is they have the WCK blinders on, for example believing their "theory" provides objective standards, such as that straight punches are inherently better (superior) than looping punches (is the front straight kick better than the wide thai kick?). My point, gangsterfist, is that you don't have a clue about the reality of fighting (because you don't fight) and so you have no real basis on which to judge -- you're basing your views solely on your (poorly conceived from hearsay) "theory" of fighting. That's why I said to go do it yourself and then make the comments. You may see, for example, that many of those "mistakes" you saw were intentionally chosen by the fighters for a reason, and a good, or at least, defendable, reason. I could explain them to you but unless you have the experience, it wouldn't do any good (you'd still have the blinders on). In theory so many things sound great; getting in the ring exposes most of it as BS.

The problem with this is that again you make a great assumption just based on Gangsterfists post that he has NO experience in the relem of fighting. Another thing, if a theory is sound and logical, like the straight punch is superior than the looping round, then it is about application, to which some do not understand. If looping punches is what comes out of you when the heat is on then the indication is lack of training, not using what is needed when the time is right? I've seen the UFC show also, although not on a regular basis, but what I have seen of the fights are not of the highest caliber, not to say that Coture and Lidell are lousy trainer/coaches, just that the talent pool may not be the best. The are better fighters on "CONTENDER", than on the UFC show. Plus, since when is the ring REALITY??

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Mark wrote this:

"The problem with "WC principles" is that they are too one dimensional and require too much muscular power to be applied successfully in the realm of MMA's." -- Knifefighter

Hi Knifefighter,

Would you be willing to give one or two concrete examples of this problem? I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around exactly what you mean!"

........................................

I'd like to give an answer to this - because Dale (Knifefighter) is definitely right about the Vitor Belfort knockout over Silva - IT IS the closest thing to Wing Chun ever displayed in a NHB event.

And Belfort did it by first connecting with a rear cross...followed by a classic straight blast chain punch attack while literally chasing Silva from one end of the Octagon to the other in a straight line.

And his elbows weren't exactly "in" either - but they were closer to his rib area than a typical boxing punch.

But the chain punch attack IS very one dimensional, isn't it? (Silva obviously never saw it before - so he got caught...As a wise man I know has often said: "If you've never seen it before - it's probably going to hit you.")

And by "too much muscular power" being required, I think that Dale means the short range straight line striking that Wing Chun almost exclusively employs is NOT conducive to knockout power (no matter how many threads to the contrary that people like Hendrik choose to post)...it requires quite a few "typical" wing chun vertical punches to land to cause a knockout against a big, strong opponent - whereas one or two solid rear crosses, hooks, or uppercuts can often do the job.

The "problem" with the wing chun vertical punch is that the hips and shoulders are not in play (torque) the way they are in boxing...so BIG muscular power would be required to knock somebody out...

Hence Vitor Belfort's (wise) decision to use a more elbows flared out (and hip/shoulder torque rotation) method of delivering his version of wing chun punches.

Ah...but you say that the tailbone tucked in, power coming from the hips and center of the body will provide the extra power needed?...Too easy for your opponent to back (or circle) away from it and/or start to block or parry - another example of the one-dimensional aspect of wing chun attacks. (It's almost exclusively short range in nature).

Phil Redmond: I have the Belfort/Silva fight on tape - I'll send it to you...maybe you can post it on this forum?

As a final note: I AM an advocate of "typical" wing chun straight line striking - as long as other types of punches are also in the arsenal and used appropriately when an opening is there (ie.- Belfort "set up" the chain punch ending with a rear cross that connected and put his opponent on his heels...IME, the reverse can also happen - a few chain punches that land can set up an opportunity for a rear cross or hook punch fight-ender...or possibly the wing chun punches set up a kick, knees, elbows, a throw, a sweep, a takedown, an armlock, or a chokehold)...

but if you try to keep on straight line punching - a good opponent might easily recover - whereas completely changing the line of attack (and the method) has the element of surprise working for it.

And deception is a big part of successful fighting.

And one of the biggest elements required for deception is having various ranges, methods, strategies, and techniques to work with.

[sihing]

Mark wrote this:

"The problem with "WC principles" is that they are too one dimensional and require too much muscular power to be applied successfully in the realm of MMA's." -- Knifefighter

Hi Knifefighter,

Would you be willing to give one or two concrete examples of this problem? I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around exactly what you mean!"

.................................................. .....

I'd like to give an answer to this - because Dale (Knifefighter) is definitely right about the Vitor Belfort knockout over Silva - IT IS the closest thing to Wing Chun ever displayed in a NHB event.

And Belfort did it by first connecting with a rear cross...followed by a classic straight blast chain punch attack while literally chasing Silva from one end of the Octagon to the other.

And his elbows weren't exactly "in" either - but they were closer to his rib area than a typical boxing punch.

But the chain punch attack IS very one dimensional, isn't it? (Silva obviously never saw it before - so he got caught...As a wise man I know has often said: "If you've never seen it before - it's probably going to hit you.")

And by "too much muscular power" being required, I think that Dale means the short-range straight line striking that Wing Chun almost exclusively employs is NOT conducive to knockout power (no matter how many threads to the contrary that people like Hendrik choose to post)...it requires quite a few "typical" wing chun vertical punches to land to cause a knockout against a big, strong opponent - whereas one or two solid rear crosses or hooks can often do the job.

The "problem" with the wing chun vertical punch is that the hips and shoulders are not in play (torque) the way they are in boxing...so BIG muscular power would be required to knock somebody out...

Hence Vitor Belfort's (wise) decision to use a more elbows flared out (and hip/shoulder torque rotation) method of delivering his version of wing chun punches.

Ah...but you say that the tailbone tucked in, power coming from the hips and center of the body will provide the extra power needed?...Too easy for your opponent to back away from it and/or start to block or parry - another example of the one-dimensional aspect of wing chun attacks. (It's almost exclusively short range in nature).

Phil Redmond: I have the Belfort/Silva fight on tape - I'll send it to you...maybe you can post it on this forum?

As a final note: I AM an advocate of "typical" wing chun vertical striking - as long as other types of punches are also in the arsenal and used appropriately.

I have that tape also, and Vitor isn't using the typical WC chain punch for sure, but like the others have said it is the closest thing yet in the NHB fights that resembles the WC movements in any way.

As for the above from Victor, I do have some disagreements. Firstly, you do not need any more "Muscular Power" than to just raise the arms and shoulder to perform the punch correctly. Like Victor said, the power of the boxer’s punches mainly comes from a hip/shoulder rotation, utilizing the torque of the body, problem is trying doing this movement and chasing and/or retreating at the same time while punching?? If you can accomplish this maybe you can throw 2 punches per step? A good WC man can throw double that effect. Also, the power comes from not a torque of the body but from the whole body moving forward, as we all know, so it is a different power generation than the boxers, but not less effective. When I teach a introductory class to people checking out the school, I show them the chain punch and emphasize four advantages of this motion:1) straight line movements are faster movements than the curve/round punches, so therefore you can be a slower puncher but make up for it in efficient straight line movement, 2)the WC punches are non-telegraphic, meaning there is no wind up like the torque movements of the boxer/karate guys due to the fact they are not square with their opponents, so the opponent has a harder time to see the punches coming, 3)the WC punches allow movement at the same time since no torque is involved, like mentioned above, 4)the WC punches allow easier interrupt ability and the ability to go from offense to defense faster than other ways of punching. These are just four reasons, there are many others. The analogy I like to use is like a push, the punch is like a push with a snap on the end. If you were to push a fridge in your kitchen from one side to the other, would you go on the side of the fridge, put your palm on it and torque your body to move it, or would you get behind it and put your palms close to your center and push it across? I would do the latter, as this way you are using the whole body to push the heavier fridge, this is the same principal for applying the punch. It may be one dimensional, but like the example of Vitor vs Silva proved, when someone hasn't seen or experienced a movement like this, it will more than likely land on you, and in this case since WC chain punches are like a "Machine gun" action, once 1 is landed more are quickly on the way.


James

[fa_jing]

Guys don't charge in without great care because they either want to avoid a takedown or walking into a punch. You have to remember that these guys are fairly evenly matched. I saw a good level of standup in the semi-final fight.

The elbow that won the fight might as well have been from Wing Chun or any other Asian MA. Very well done. I'm wondering if other people see the validation that this gives the art you practice. Not to mention the other lessons about hanging in there, that one blow can change the outcome of a fight.

The most Wing Chun-like fighter I have seen in the ring is Kostya Tszyu. No, it's not wing chun, but it is crisp, highly technical fighting. Here's someone who can beat a hook with a straight, has a mean left hook of his own, uses footwork to dominate an opponent. Who has deceptive hands and can switch which hand is forward without swapping his feet. Who has all the qualities of a fighter from physical preparedness, to great courage, to cerebral calculation. That's the level of technique that I think is required to use wing chun or any other complex martial art effectively. Watch some of this man's fights if you get a chance.

[Ultimatewingchun]

fa jing:

What venue does Kostya Tszyu fight in?

Boxing...K-1...UFC...Pride...???

Never heard of him.

[sihing]

fa jing:

What venue does Kostya Tszyu fight in?

Boxing...K-1...UFC...Pride...???

Never heard of him.

He's a top ranked boxer if not a champion, Andrew Nerlich knows lots of this guy as he has mentioned him before, and Rolf C has mentioned that Kostya has been training with a Kung-fu teacher in Aussie land for a while now learning Iron palm for his fists and other things...

James

[t_niehoff]

sihing wrote:

The problem with this is that again you make a great assumption just based on Gangsterfists post that he has NO experience in the relem of fighting.

**If he had that experience, he wouldn't have made the post he did. Only theoretician/nonfighters would say those sorts of things. Just like you.

Another thing, if a theory is sound and logical, like the straight punch is superior than the looping round, then it is about application, to which some do not understand. If looping punches is what comes out of you when the heat is on then the indication is lack of training, not using what is needed when the time is right?

**The trouble is that "theory" may sound logical and seem sensible to you, but that it is flawed because it's not taking some important things into consideration that you can only discover by fighting. This is why the experience is necessary. Looping punches aren't inferior to straight punches; they each have advantages and disadvantages; they each have their place. I've met and worked with a couple of NHB fighters that throw lots of looping punches and they were former golden gloves boxerss. They know how to throw straight punches, they can do them in boxing. When they fight NHB, they change how they punch to take other aspects into account. If you fight, you'll see that. If you don't, you'll just have second-rate theory.

I've seen the UFC show also, although not on a regular basis, but what I have seen of the fights are not of the highest caliber, not to say that Coture and Lidell are lousy trainer/coaches, just that the talent pool may not be the best. The are better fighters on "CONTENDER", than on the UFC show. Plus, since when is the ring REALITY??

**If you don't think a NHB fight is reality, then go do it. It's always folks that don't fight that beleive they know what reality really is. Any one of those guys would destroy you in no time. But, they are lacking in talent! LOL!

[Knifefighter]

Would you be willing to give one or two concrete examples of this problem? I'm having trouble wrapping my brain around exactly what you mean!
WC is a very dogmatic style for the majority of its practitioners, as can be seen by reading through the posts around here. An MMA fighter, on the other hand, needs to be open-minded and willing to use whatever works best. He’s got to be well-rounded, able to not only throw straight punches and kicks, but also hooks, uppercuts and round kicks. He’s got to know when to move in and press the attack, but also realize when it is best to retreat and get out of trouble. He’s got to be able to stay outside, keep mobile, and know when to "be on his toes". He also needs to be able to get inside and maintain a sturdy base. Any "WC principles" that would be effective, such as including straight punches, are already incorporated into the MMA system.

The MMA fighter has to constantly confuse his opponents and needs a wide variety in his arsenal so that the other fighters have a hard time figuring out what he is going to do next. The MMA fighter may keep the fight standing in one match, take the fight to the ground in another, play defense in still another, while coming out and blasting in his next fight. He might finish one fight with strikes, the next with a choke, another with an arm lock, and still another with a leg submission. The WC philosophy, on the other hand, is generally one-dimensional and easily figured out by other fighters.

The MMA fighter needs structural, attacking, and defensive modes that are able to fend off or set up takedowns. The WC approach is not very effective in this realm.

MMA is also a very power-oriented game (this is one reason you don’t see a lot of boxing type jabs in MMA). A fighter using WC techniques will be hard-pressed to generate enough power to damage a well-conditioned MMA fighter that is in his weight class.

These fighters are being coached by some of the best in MMA. To think that you could somehow change the outcome of their fights by bringing in someone to "teach them wing chun principles" is ludicrous.

[Mark Swiadas]

Hi Victor and Knifefighter,

Thank you for your clarifications and examples!



--Mark

[Knifefighter]

Aren't elbows illegal in UFC fights?Elbows are legal. The fight referenced above was won with a Muay Thai elbow.

[Kevin Bell]

[[What venue does Kostya Tszyu fight in?]]

Hey Victor,

Light welterweight if im correct, he's fighting Ricky Hatton in Manchester UK in June me thinks. Looks like its gonna be one h*ll of a fight. im sittin on the fence on this one as to who the winner will be though... :)

[Knifefighter]

The problem with this is that again you make a great assumption just based on Gangsterfists post that he has NO experience in the relem of fighting.

He DOESN’T have any MMA fighting experience. Nor do you.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Thanks for the info, Kevin.

Let us know how the fight turns out.

[Knifefighter]

The "problem" with the wing chun vertical punch is that the hips and shoulders are not in play (torque) the way they are in boxing...so BIG muscular power would be required to knock somebody out...

Exactly… once Victor lost some of his size and power and the other fighters had seen his one dimensional attack, he got smoked in subsequent fights.

[Knifefighter]

Also, the power comes from not a torque of the body but from the whole body moving forward, as we all know, so it is a different power generation than the boxers, but not less effective.

While you might be able to use this one time against an untrained guy on the street, it is not effective in the realm of MMA fighting.



the WC punches are non-telegraphic, meaning there is no wind up like the torque movements of the boxer

Every time you talk about boxing, you show your ignorance about it. Boxing doesn’t have telegraphic punches.


The analogy I like to use is like a push, the punch is like a push with a snap on the end. If you were to push a fridge in your kitchen from one side to the other, would you go on the side of the fridge, put your palm on it and torque your body to move it, or would you get behind it and put your palms close to your center and push it across? I would do the latter,

This is exactly the reason your punching will be less effective than a boxer’s punches. The body mechanics used when striking are analogous to the movements of throwing. The body movements in grappling or lifting are more analogous to your pushing example. That is why grapplers don’t rotate their bodies when they are producing power in grappling, but boxers do.

[Knifefighter]

and in this case since WC chain punches are like a "Machine gun" action, once 1 is landed more are quickly on the way.

The problem with the "machine gun" approach is that power production in human muscle decreases as you speed up the number of punches thrown.

[fa_jing]

I agree that the average level of ability on the "Contender" show is higher than in the UFC show. In fact, I don't want to take a UFC guy and teach him some wing chun. What I want to do is take one of the "contender" guys, teach him basic grappling and kick defense, then send him to the UFC. 'Cause if I'm going to train a guy, I want him to kick some ass!! :D

FWIW I like wing chun and other CMA alot. I think you could teach a bit more triangulation to MMA fighters. But mostly I think their stuff is tight. If they have bad defense, they have bad defense. If they can't make parrying work for them, it isn't because boxing/Muy Thai parrying is somehow inferior to Wing Chun parrying or the skill is less teachable. One thing, though - you won't catch them doing something they can't make work for them because of some "principle."

All the young fighters need to improve, that's why the coaches yell so much.

[fa_jing]

Kostya Tszyu has been dominant at 140 lbs in the world for a few years. Nobody in that weight class can touch him, but this weight class is not loaded with talent. Nevertheless, pound for pound he is one of the best fighters in the world and he is a joy to watch. He may be moving up to 147 and fighting De La Hoya this summer....

[sihing]

While you might be able to use this one time against an untrained guy on the street, it is not effective in the realm of MMA fighting.




Every time you talk about boxing, you show your ignorance about it. Boxing doesn’t have telegraphic punches.



This is exactly the reason your punching will be less effective than a boxer’s punches. The body mechanics used when striking are analogous to the movements of throwing. The body movements in grappling or lifting are more analogous to your pushing example. That is why grapplers don’t rotate their bodies when they are producing power in grappling, but boxers do.

Well then educate me Dale. Everytime I see a pro fight on TV I see allot of turning hips and shoulders, although done at a very fast rate with precision. If the punches were not telegraphed then how is it possible for the other fighter to evade some of them?? That fact is that boxers do not fight square, like the WC fighters do, therefore they have to move, even a bit, there shoulders and hips to execute their punches (jabs maybe being the exception). Although in the beginning stage of learning WC the power will not be the same, as one gets used to it and learns it well, the power will increase. Again, I would rather sacrifice a all or nothing approach to punching than being able to hit him many times a second with hard punches. For some reason people seem to mis-interrpret the WC chain punches as pu$$y punching, lol. Okay if that is the case then anyone would let me hit them on the nose with no worries then? I don't think so....

James

[sihing]

The problem with the "machine gun" approach is that power production in human muscle decreases as you speed up the number of punches thrown.

No problem, the brain will be punished enough after the 4th one anyways, from the trauma of hitting the skull walls back and forth. Grab someone's head sometime and shake it hard for a couple of seconds and see how they feel after...

Gotta run to the Kwoon, later....

James

[Knifefighter]

For some reason people seem to mis-interrpret the WC chain punches as pu$$y punching, lol. Okay if that is the case then anyone would let me hit them on the nose with no worries then? I don't think so....


A 10 year old girl could punch you in the nose and do damage if you just sit there and let her. Doesn’t mean she could do any damage if you were resisting, moving, and hitting back.

What I would be willing to do with you James is stand toe to toe and trade my boxing type punches to your face in exchange for your WC punching to my face for 30 seconds… no worries at all.

[Gangsterfist]

Well,

My personal experiences are as follows:

Karate tournaments, sparring (did about 4 or 5 during my karate days and medaled a few times, sparing was continous full contact with protective gear)

Been in 5 or so real street fights since I trained MA. One was 2 guys Vs me. Never really "won" or "lost" any of the fights. I dealt damage and took damage and was able to walk away. IMO I would say I won, since I was able to walk away. I have also fought a few drunks since I live near about 30 bars, but then again fighting drunks is easy so it doesn't really count. Most of them are in a walking black out when they come into my yard.

I have trained a bit with some marines, and will be going to a hardcore fighting seminar next month hosted by a kung fu teacher and his marine brother. It covers all grounds of fighting. The marine was in afghanistan and iraq, so he has real life expereince in life or death combat.

I have never tried out for a professional fight or an ametuer fighting circuit with the intention of going pro.

My experiences may not be as broad as some others here but I don't think that should matter in the terms of discussion. Since everyone here is just 1's and 0's on an internet msg board.

My main point of this thread was, and still is, if no one uses wing chun principles in professional full contact ring fighting, then how come we all say wing chun is so effective? I am not in any way dissing wing chun, nor am I wanting to start a Wing Chun VS MMA argument. That argument is old, and I don't wana dig up that dead horse and beat it some more.

So.....

I watched some more NHB K-1 and UFC since the last match I saw. Guess what, still I have not seen really any wing chun prinicples applied. Why is this? Is MMA more effective? Is wing chun just not really studied by ring fighters? You know a lot of us stroke our egos on this forum and say stuff like wing chun is very deadly and blah blah blah. Which, I don't doubt. WC in the hands of someone who is skilled with it could very well be deadly, just like any other martial art.

Really, I was trying to get some feed back as to why is it not used? Is MMA the only way to go in right fighting? Would someone who studied WC be worthy in the ring?

Now, if they were to train angle stepping, triangle foot work, centerline theory, bridging, and sensitivity, would they not be more effective? Obviously, since there is no wing chun guy in the ring thats all theory. I just found it amusing that all the major fights weren't using wing chun at all, and its a system where its known to be effective, or at least people say its really effective. Personally, in my real fights even the one time I had that was 2 guys vs me, wing chun has helped me out, I don't really doubt it. So, if wing chun is so effective why is it not being used, or why is something similiar not being used?

That was my observation.

To knifefighter:

I don't train WC to be a ring fighter. I train for health, to stay in shape, and protect myself. What do you train for KF? What are your experiences which makes your knowledge so much more vast than mine?

[Knifefighter]

What are your experiences which makes your knowledge so much more vast than mine?


You were commenting about using WC in MMA, something you have absolutely no experience with. By your own admission, you have never done a MMA fight.

I happen to have a bit of experience in MMA fighting. I have 10 MMA fights and about 40 NHB type weapons fights under my belt. I also competed as a Golden Gloves boxer and as a kickboxer.

I have a background in WC and have attempted to use it on a variety of occasions in sport fighting.

[anerlich]

If the punches were not telegraphed then how is it possible for the other fighter to evade some of them??

By that logic, if you train your WC students well, they should be able to hit you at will without you being able to pak sao or bil sao, since the WC punches are not telegraphic and even trained fighters cannot evade or block them.

So learning all the WC techniques for blocking attacks from out of contact range is a waste of time, as WC punches can never be seen, countered or evaded.

Doesn't add up, does it?


I would rather sacrifice a all or nothing approach

Good technical boxers NEVER use an all or nothing approach. And BTW, Jack Dempsey advocated the moving forward behind the punch approach you say is unique to Wing Chun. You should read his book, that way you'd know a little about boxing, it's on Stickgrapplers' MA archive site.

You've watched "Choke" and a few UFC's and instructionals, and you feel you're equipped to lecture people with years of BJJ and/or wrestling about grappling. You watch boxing on TV, and feel you know as much or more about it than Dale, who's been doing it for decades. That's your right, I guess, but don't get affronted if someone calls you on your prejudices, judgements made from a state of ignorance of the subject.

Much of boxing tactics, especially defense, are more efficient and economical, and safer, than some WC techniques. Do some real research sometime, at worst you might learn something.

If ANYONE in boxing, kickboxing or MMA thought that WC gave them significant advantages, they'd employ it. These people are not fools; inflexible thinking will not get you anywhere in any martial sport. There's lots of money to be made. If anyone though this stuff would give them an edge, they'd pick it up in a heartbeat.

My si-hing's school in Queensland entered fighters in an NHB show in Brisbane on the weekend. Twelve fights, nine wins, two gold and two silver medals. WC influenced kickboxing :p and BJJ..

[sihing]

By that logic, if you train your WC students well, they should be able to hit you at will without you being able to pak sao or bil sao, since the WC punches are not telegraphic and even trained fighters cannot evade or block them.

So learning all the WC techniques for blocking attacks from out of contact range is a waste of time, as WC punches can never be seen, countered or evaded.

Doesn't add up, does it?



Good technical boxers NEVER use an all or nothing approach. And BTW, Jack Dempsey advocated the moving forward behind the punch approach you say is unique to Wing Chun. You should read his book, that way you'd know a little about boxing, it's on Stickgrapplers' MA archive site.

You've watched "Choke" and a few UFC's and instructionals, and you feel you're equipped to lecture people with years of BJJ and/or wrestling about grappling. You watch boxing on TV, and feel you know as much or more about it than Dale, who's been doing it for decades. That's your right, I guess, but don't get affronted if someone calls you on your prejudices, judgements made from a state of ignorance of the subject.

Much of boxing tactics, especially defense, are more efficient and economical, and safer, than some WC techniques. Do some real research sometime, at worst you might learn something.

If ANYONE in boxing, kickboxing or MMA thought that WC gave them significant advantages, they'd employ it. These people are not fools; inflexible thinking will not get you anywhere in any martial sport. There's lots of money to be made. If anyone though this stuff would give them an edge, they'd pick it up in a heartbeat.

My si-hing's school in Queensland entered fighters in an NHB show in Brisbane on the weekend. Twelve fights, nine wins, two gold and two silver medals. WC influenced kickboxing :p and BJJ..

Andrew,

They may be able to attack me with me being unable to counter it, in the right range that is. Problem is most attack to early so therefore the WC punches will be seen. The key here is getting into the close range safely. When that does happen it is very hard to defend a WC punch. Remember when Cheung got tested on his punching speed, they basically said that if he got within a foot & half of you that most would find it very difficult to react fast enough, therefore they would get hit. This is due to many factors, Cheung's own natural gifts of fast hands, but also in his efficient striking movements.

Pro Boxers (in the lighter weight divisions) maybe don't use an all or nothing punching approach, but they have trainers, technology and time to learn this lesson. Those that don't have this luxury will throw the haymakers, which can still be effective if they land.

Yes I have watched Choke, and other BJJ videos but I don't ever recall "Lecturing" anyone on how to do BJJ. How could I since I'm no expert in that realm, but I do have enough years in the Martial Arts to form an opinion on things, like watching boxers box and wrestlers wrestle, lol. IMO some of their methods are less effective than what my WC has to offer. As for me trying to tell Dale a thing or too about Boxing, it is obvious, lol again. Boxers do not fight square on with their shoulders when they fight, so therefore they have to twist/rotate/torque their shoulders and hips to generate power and distance with their punches, this is obvious and you don't have to be an expert boxer to realize this. And concerning Dale, if it is wrong for me to challenge his boxing expertise, why is it okay for him to challenge mine concerning WC? It's fair to say I have more experience and expertise with WC as compared to Dale, and he criticizes my WC theories and concepts all the time.

Oh Yeah, when students from my kwoon decided to fight full contact they did very well, all with one technique that Sifu told them to use. Bil Sao side step and Kick with chain punch follow up. One fighter was warned for excessive contact in his first fight for landing this simple technique too much, so we too have had success with Contact fighting. This is all good regardless of where it comes from, so cheers to your Sihing Andrew for his fighters success.



James

[sihing]

A 10 year old girl could punch you in the nose and do damage if you just sit there and let her. Doesn’t mean she could do any damage if you were resisting, moving, and hitting back.

What I would be willing to do with you James is stand toe to toe and trade my boxing type punches to your face in exchange for your WC punching to my face for 30 seconds… no worries at all.

And what would this prove?? That you can knock me out and I can do the same to you?

Yes I agree that resistence, moving and also attacking is a much better thing to do than just sitting there. Anything can happen, the question is which Art better prepares one for that resistance, movement and hitting back?? You think MMA type tactics which involve learning many methods and requires more time, I think WC which takes less time and is simple once absorbed. Looks like we have a disagreement in opinions again Dale, so lets just agree to disagree.

James

[Gangsterfist]

Two guys got into a fight outside where my friend works. One guy hit the other guy once, he fell down and smacked his head on the curb. Putting him in a coma, he eventually recovered, but he got all that from one hit. The man who hit him was charged with attempted manslaughter. So real fighting carries real consequences.

So, yes KF, it is possible a 10 year old girl could hit someone and kill them in one hit.

Has there ever been a successful wing chun fighter in a professional MMA full contact type event? I am just curious, is all.

Personally, I am not really into violence, I am very laid back actually. I have lost it though before and picked a fight, everybody has done that before. Most of my fight experiences have either been ametuer competition (tournaments) or real fights. I guess that doesn't qualify me as an expert by any means in the MMA world, since I have never competed in a full contact MMA match. I also enjoy not getting injured, but thats a personal preference. I know tons of people who tried to compete and now have long term injuries, some are minor others have plastic joints now. Thats not for me.

However, my point being, if wing chun concepts are so combat effective why do I hardly see any in the ring. I think chi sao skills would definately help in clinch situations. Sparring at heavy contact they have helped me.

Knifefighter,

What are your experiences with wing chun in full contact MMA matches?

[sihing]

Gangsterfist,

I honestly believe that the MMA world are not really investigating the WC or have preconceived notions about WC, although I'm sure others on here have different opinions about this. Also, it maybe more difficult for them to incorporate our principals and concepts when some of what they already train in contradicts it. Too much to relearn and getting rid of old habits maybe too much for them to want to attempt and therefore take too much time away from their main training systems and development. As I understand it, each MMA fighter has a main style or method of fighting and builds upon that, some with grappling background emphasized that add in some stand up skills to supplement, visa versa for standup fighters and grappling. Would I want to fight any of these guys? Nope not really, as I too do not enjoy getting injured or pain, lol. But if the circumstance warranted it I would fight one of them if I had to in self defense or defense of a loved one, what choice would I have in those types of circumstance, to just give up would not be one of them. So therefore in those cases, the attack would be taken to them and not recieved by them, in order for more chance for success. If they can defend it and still take me out then at the least I tried, the opposite may be true also, know one can make 100% guarantees, but the difference in intensity levels (Spirit) and such can make that much of a difference IMO.

James

[Gangsterfist]

james,

I think thats what I was concluding also. I have friends who train in different styles are are really effective. One of my teachers encourages me to one day cross-train, but he says I should have several years in wing chun and I should have the system down. Well, I got several years down, and I have gone to a couple of their classes but I still feel akward doing their system, just because its different. I think maybe another 6 months or maybe even a year of training wing chun to refine some things then I'll go cross train on a serious level.

Perhaps thats just the case. Either way, you can incorporate crosses, jabs, compact hooks, round houses, elbows, etc into wing chun, and I think you can incorporate some basic wing chun concepts into other arts. I just think no one has perhaps found the method of which to do this effectively. Then again, who knows, I could be completely wrong.

[t_niehoff]

sihing,

You are living in a fantasy world, swallowing all the "propaganda" expoused by the nonfighting/theoreticans in WCK. Those "machine gun punches" will get you killed if you try them against anyone with decent skills (you may be able to make them work against some stiff, but so will a reverse punch from the hip!). This is a perfect example of what I mean by theoretician -- if you ever tried it against someone with decent skills/attributes in fighting (not the "sparring" you demo'd on those links) you would not be saying these sorts of things. Go do it, man. Try it against a good NHB/MMA fighter and you'll see right away that you are wrong in your beliefs.

No one can convince you that your beliefs are wrong by arguing with you -- in theory, all kinds of things sound reasonable. This is why there is so much BS in the "martial arts." Folks believe what they want to hear, especially if it can be presented or argued in some way that sounds reasonable or demonstrated in cooperative environments. But that doesn't mean it will work, particularly in a fighting environment against anyone with decent levels of attributes or skill. it's really only through actual experience fighting can any person develop a discerning mind and a critical eye that will allow him/her to see through the BS that surrounds us.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"No one can convince you that your beliefs are wrong by arguing with you." (Terence...talking to James Roller)

THREAD AFTER THREAD...James argues endlessly with people who clearly have more knowledge and experience than he does - and stubbornly refuses to see anything other than what he wants to see (or has been told to see by his instructor).

Maybe he means well, I don't know.

But what is clear is that the net effect of all this is to hijack discussion-after-discussion as an attempt (consciously? unconsciously?) to throw it off course.

There have been some excellent posts on this thread, in terms of analysis of Wing Chun and other MMA approaches to fighting - so let's not lose sight of that.

I think what is emerging is a consensus, amoung some people anyway, that Wing Chun principles, strategies, and techniques have much to offer a good fighter if he understands both the strengths AND THE WEAKNESSES of the system...

and makes his adjustments accordingly.

[t_niehoff]

Here's a simple example -- being able to finish/stop your opponent. For most WCK "practitioners" this is purely theoretical: they believe that if they do this or that, like "machine gun punches", it will finish their opponent. But they've never done it, and certainly never done it against someone with good attributes or good skill. They just *believe* should they ever need to fight, that their theories will work. Some others hold that they won't even try to finish (apparently, they at least recognize that they don't have the skills to finish) and talk about "escaping." In both cases, it's all theory.

Who trains to finish opponents -- by actually finishing their opponents? Fighters. Boxers actually get in the ring and practice what they are trying to do: knock their opponent out. BJJist roll on the mat and actually practice what they are trying to do, choke a guy out or break a limb. These are difficult things to do. It takes a great deal of practice to finish someone. And you don't get that skill/ability without actually doing it. And doing it a lot. If you don't train to finish by actually finishing, you won't be able to do it against anyone with significant levels of attributes or skills.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"You can incorporate crosses, jabs, compact hooks, round houses, elbows, etc into wing chun, and I think you can incorporate some basic wing chun concepts into other arts. I just think no one has perhaps found the method of which to do this effectively. Then again, who knows, I could be completely wrong." (Gangsterfist)


ACTUALLY....a number of people (myself included) have been working on this very thing - because Wing Chun is basically a very close and straightforward linear infight - so finding ways to use techniques from other ranges and angles (like the ones you mentioned) makes so much sense...and while we're at it...let's not forget clinch work, takedowns, and grappling.

On an earlier post you mentioned that certain aspects of wing chun chi sao training could be utilized while in the clinch - and you're right...and the same with being on the ground.

There are a number of things that Wing Chun can bring to the MMA table - as you alluded to on the very first post of this thread - in terms of principles (ie.- centerline, ultra straight line striking, simultaneous use of both hands when striking, parrying, blocking... some basic trapping, grab and strike, heightened tactile sensitivity to the opponent's energy and force, etc...)

but the BIGGEST thing to keep in mind, imo, are the striking opportunities Wing Chun presents when very close to the opponent...let's say...

IN-BETWEEN the longer range punches and kicks - AND THE CLINCH. (As well as adding a few new tricks when actually fighting IN the clinch).

This is where Wing Chun could really bring something "new and improved" to the MMA table, so to speak.

But the other side to the coin is this:

Other arts (boxing, Muay-Thai, kickboxing, wrestling, BJJ, etc.) have much to offer WING CHUN in the respective ranges that these arts concentrate upon.

[sihing]

sihing,

You are living in a fantasy world, swallowing all the "propaganda" expoused by the nonfighting/theoreticans in WCK. Those "machine gun punches" will get you killed if you try them against anyone with decent skills (you may be able to make them work against some stiff, but so will a reverse punch from the hip!). This is a perfect example of what I mean by theoretician -- if you ever tried it against someone with decent skills/attributes in fighting (not the "sparring" you demo'd on those links) you would not be saying these sorts of things. Go do it, man. Try it against a good NHB/MMA fighter and you'll see right away that you are wrong in your beliefs.

No one can convince you that your beliefs are wrong by arguing with you -- in theory, all kinds of things sound reasonable. This is why there is so much BS in the "martial arts." Folks believe what they want to hear, especially if it can be presented or argued in some way that sounds reasonable or demonstrated in cooperative environments. But that doesn't mean it will work, particularly in a fighting environment against anyone with decent levels of attributes or skill. it's really only through actual experience fighting can any person develop a discerning mind and a critical eye that will allow him/her to see through the BS that surrounds us.

I'll answer both this post and one from Victor P.

Firstly, I'm not trying to portray WC as a Martial Art this is unbeatable or that anyone that learns it is undefeatable, because simply put it is up to the individual to 1st learn it correctly and understand it, 2nd train hard consistently to make it your own, and 3rd to be able to use it when needed (don't freeze up when in a fight). I don't look at individuals and say because of this or that attribute that they personally possess that his style of fighting is effective, I look at systems and what they have to offer. There are plenty of other MA out there that are effective and to take anyone with any fighting experience lightly is the first mistake when in a confrontation.

Now, to go out and test myself against a NHB fighting to see if my "Machine Gun" like punches work or not, is this a real test? Is the intensity level there? Will I be motivated enough to even want to prove this "theory"? Probably not. As Human Beings we have intelligence and the ability to theorize about many things. The same theories that I may have about my WC, the NHB fighter has also. Who's to say that I haven't knocked someone else out while training in the past to prove that my theories or my Sifu's theories work? No one here would know? Let's just say that I have total faith in the theory and have proven them to be fact to me. But since we are on a internet forum, everything we say is theory because there is no face to face interaction. My experience is not yours and visa versa. The facts are that the NHB fighter has to be able to apply what he does on someone to be effective at it, the same holds true of me and my abilities. So the question is how effective is their delivery system. No one can say that the punching action I use will not work or is "fantasy", because of so and so's skills or because of so and so's experience, because anything can happen in a situation, and no one can guaranteed a win in every fight they have.

Another thing, the chain punch is not the only thing to look at here. As someone that has skill in WC you cannot just take one aspect and seperate it from everything else the encompassess someone's skill. Yeah, someone may be able to counter the chain punches because there is a counter, but built into the WC system and learned through Chi-sao and other methods is the ability to adapt and interrupt one's own movements. Plus who says I won't set up the chain punch with something else first? Too many factors involved to say that the technique or concept is "fantasy". Also, if the other fighter is capable of countering my technqiues then why am I unable to counter his? Because he is a unbeatable NHB fighter and trains like a mad man to full fill his ego?

Victor,

I do mean well, and I do not look at myself as all knowing and unbeatable. I've have always tried to be open minded and I have looked at other ways of doing things, and their methods. Also, my Sifu is not just a WC Sifu, but also an instructor in 3 other methods of fighting as well as a scholar in regards to Martial Arts in general. If you ever get the chance to see his library and video collections you will realize that for yourself. Just like Bruce Lee did, he has investigated many different ways to do Martial Arts and has come up with what I consider to be the most effective method I have seen so far, IMO.

James

[sihing]

Here's a simple example -- being able to finish/stop your opponent. For most WCK "practitioners" this is purely theoretical: they believe that if they do this or that, like "machine gun punches", it will finish their opponent. But they've never done it, and certainly never done it against someone with good attributes or good skill. They just *believe* should they ever need to fight, that their theories will work. Some others hold that they won't even try to finish (apparently, they at least recognize that they don't have the skills to finish) and talk about "escaping." In both cases, it's all theory.

Who trains to finish opponents -- by actually finishing their opponents? Fighters. Boxers actually get in the ring and practice what they are trying to do: knock their opponent out. BJJist roll on the mat and actually practice what they are trying to do, choke a guy out or break a limb. These are difficult things to do. It takes a great deal of practice to finish someone. And you don't get that skill/ability without actually doing it. And doing it a lot. If you don't train to finish by actually finishing, you won't be able to do it against anyone with significant levels of attributes or skills.

So the top fighters hurt their sparring partners and break limbs and fight that intensly everyday of their fighting career? I don't buy it, because if they did there wouldn't be sparring partners to spar with, and the risk of injury to themselves would be much higher. Remember when Foreman got hit in a sparring session when he was fighting Ali and they had to delay the fight? It's physicall impossible to fight at high intensity levels on a daily basis, as the body will eventually break down and not be able to function. Why hurt yourself in sparring sessions and risk that when there is nothing at stake. It dulls your blade and takes the edge off when you really need it. Moderation is the key when sparring and training.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

"...my Sifu is not just a WC Sifu, but also an instructor in 3 other methods of fighting as well as a scholar in regards to Martial Arts in general. If you ever get the chance to see his library and video collections you will realize that for yourself. Just like Bruce Lee did, he has investigated many different ways to do Martial Arts..." (James Roller)


MORE OF THE SAME...listen James, you've really got to start having second thoughts before doing any more posts like this one.

How could you possibly know how many videos, books, articles, etc. I have in MY COLLECTION ???

Or the collections of many other people around here?

Or how many decades, years, months, weeks, days, hours...I have spent (and continue to spend) investigating martial arts?

How many boxing matches I've seen...UFC and PRIDE fights...how much actual sparring/rolling I've done ?

How many actual streetfights I've had in my life?

And again - the same with so many other people.

You ARE living in a fantasy world, as Terence put it...because you think that "your sifu" is beyond everybody else - and because you think that "your" analysis of his methods is sooooooo accurate....

WITHOUT GOING OUT AND TESTING YOUR THEORIES...in a real situation (ie. - sparring/fighting all out against a skilled opponent using methods that you and your instructor DON'T endorse).

So much self-delusion going on here...but my goal now - where you're concerned - is to try and undo your hijacking when the threads involved interest me...

because trying to convince you by logical argument (or trying to get you to put your theories to the test)...isn't working.

[Gangsterfist]

Exactly what I was getting at victor. However, I am of the mindset if it uses the WC core concepts then in fact its wing chun. If it sounds like a duck and looks like a duck, then its probably a duck.

Now, the one thing I see all these MMA guys do, is they play in each others kill zone, and they do not crowd the space. You know like you see those guys that do chi sao demo tapes and its just them executing a bunch of techniques at arms length. Attacking in their opponets kill zone. Where as good wing chun IMO, will crowd the space and get out of that kill zone. Get in close and destory the opponet. If my opponet expands, I expand, if they contract, I expand, so on and so forth.

Of course going in and crowding the space is not with out risk. You will probably have to take a few hits when doing this. So, entry technique, and conditioning take into play here.

Other than that, the sloppiness I see if probably from fatigue, and well anyone will get sloppy the longer they fight. So using wing chun effeciency may help you last longer in the ring. Of course you need to be conditioned still to be professional.

In some of the fights I have seen that go into clinch situations, I see a lot of opportunities for close range compact elbow strikes, which I never see any one do. I see more of the muay thai type elbows. However, they are effective, there is no doubt about that.

I once sparred a golden gloves boxer/military guy and he also does MMA, and he is good at it. He is a shorter stocky guy who is really fast. We were sparring with head gear and mma gloves. He was bobbing and weaving, and moving all around, while I was in my bai jong. We exchanged blows and I would try to stick. After a few rounds of this I noticed my footwork pretty much mimiced his to stick to him when he would move out of the way of my attacks. This went of for a while and I noticed a bunch of things about his style of fighting. It is different than mine, he did like 6 yrs of moy yat system or someone else before training with us. He also has a good friend who teaches HFY, and has trained with them in the past. He mainly trains at my kwoon though under my sifu. He has a wrestling and jujitsu background I think. He will shoot take me down to the ground and we will roll when sparring. He is extremely aggressive so I get a great cardio work out sparring him.

So, you can use wing chun foot work but when your opponet wants to play around in your kill zone (arm to leg distance) bobbing around and weaving you gotta pick up your feet to crowd his space. I also think its natural human reaction to back off and not want to get too close on the account of they think its easier to counter or dodge at a distance. Makes sense you have more time to see the attack coming. So crowding the space definately puts you at risk.

However, maybe its not who faster, its who gets there first. Which with proper centerlien theroy I think it could help out the average MMA guy. Perhaps its just a matter of taking the risk for the reward, which is something some trainers don't like the idea of.

[fa_jing]

The principle of the chain attack is used all the time in the ring. It called the "1-2", or jab-jab-cross, or "hit him until he goes down"

Now, using the same attack over and over and alternating hands in a completely simple and predictable fashion just doesn't seem logical, unless the opponent is at your complete mercy. When I trained wc, I always thought that the chain punch was a principle and that "roll punches" was an exercise to improve punching speed. Closer to how you would actually apply it was the "three arrow" punching drill which is high-high-middle-low-low-middle-high-high etc. Roll punches can be effective but in spurts of 2 or in rare cases 3. Beyond that you have turned your brain off and just flailing.

JMO

[sihing]

"...my Sifu is not just a WC Sifu, but also an instructor in 3 other methods of fighting as well as a scholar in regards to Martial Arts in general. If you ever get the chance to see his library and video collections you will realize that for yourself. Just like Bruce Lee did, he has investigated many different ways to do Martial Arts..." (James Roller)


MORE OF THE SAME...listen James, you've really got to start having second thoughts before doing any more posts like this one.

How could you possibly know how many videos, books, articles, etc. I have in MY COLLECTION ???

Or the collections of many other people around here?

Or how many decades, years, months, weeks, days, hours...I have spent (and continue to spend) investigating martial arts?

How many boxing matches I've seen...UFC and PRIDE fights...how much actual sparring/rolling I've done ?

How many actual streetfights I've had in my life?

And again - the same with so many other people.

You ARE living in a fantasy world, as Terence put it...because you think that "your sifu" is beyond everybody else - and because you think that "your" analysis of his methods is sooooooo accurate....

WITHOUT GOING OUT AND TESTING YOUR THEORIES...in a real situation (ie. - sparring/fighting all out against a skilled opponent using methods that you and your instructor DON'T endorse).

So much self-delusion going on here...but my goal now - where you're concerned - is to try and undo your hijacking when the threads involved interest me...

because trying to convince you by logical argument (or trying to get you to put your theories to the test)...isn't working.

Jeez for a guy with so much knowledge and experience, hard to tell sometimes by your vid's....Please Victor, quit trying to lecture me and make me think I'm looking like a idiot or something. It's all about source of information, and my reference to Sifu's credibility is just that, he's a source of information, not all knowing because no one is, but a very accurate and large source of information, and quality information at that. You use GM Cheung all the time, and it's fair to say he has nothing on my Instructor when it comes to actual real knowledge in regards to streetfights and kung fu knowledge. Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did, and why you have a problem with that is obvious, jealousy, because no one can do that if you can't right or Cheung, lol. Like the two of you are the one and only's. So IMO it would be a good idea to learn from someone with high quality skills. Face it Victor, I can say whatever about whoever and prove it, and you still wouldn't believe me just because of your personal feelings toward me and my Sifu, plain and simple. Luckily for me I give a rat's a$$ about what you think and your opinions on what WC needs.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

"You use GM Cheung all the time, and it's fair to say he has nothing on my Instructor when it comes to actual real knowledge in regards to streetfights and kung fu knowledge. Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did..." (James Roller)


YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR FRIGGIN' MIND, james....

Which is going to be all I'll say for now - as it's always OUTRAGEOUS NONSENSE statements like this that allow you to hijack thread after thread and turn attention to YOURSELF...even if it means that you become the subject of ridicule - which it almost always does.

But I'm not going to take the bait this time....and will now act to bring the thread back to the interesting and informative course it was on; that is, for people who understand that Wing Chun is about fighting - and not about playacting and then backing away when their number is called.

[Ultimatewingchun]

[QUOTE=fa_jing]The principle of the chain attack is used all the time in the ring. It called the "1-2", or jab-jab-cross, or "hit him until he goes down"

"Now, using the same attack over and over and alternating hands in a completely simple and predictable fashion just doesn't seem logical, unless the opponent is at your complete mercy. When I trained wc, I always thought that the chain punch was a principle and that "roll punches" was an exercise to improve punching speed. Closer to how you would actually apply it was the "three arrow" punching drill which is high-high-middle-low-low-middle-high-high etc. Roll punches can be effective but in spurts of 2 or in rare cases 3. Beyond that you have turned your brain off and just flailing."


YOUR SECOND PARAGRAGH does make sense, fa jing, but your opening statement to the point that the jab-jab-cross is the equivalent to the wing chun chain punch is simply not true. The principle behind the chain punch attack - when understood - is to use this approach when a very close inside position has been attained and the opening is there for the first punch to land (without being hit back by your opponent) - and now a second and possibly a third punch is possible.

The jab...followed by a rear cross...is a whole different animal. The jab is used by boxers to create an opening for the cross...or perhaps a hook off the lead jab, etc. - along with an elusive footwork - but all of it is initiated AT A LONGER RANGE - and usually at different angles (lines) than the wing chun chain punch attack.

What I advocate is the use of the jab (and some corresponding footwork) as one way to get close enough to square up and start working the wing chun inside game.

As for the cross, or hooks, uppercuts, etc. - they are good tools to have at certain ranges (the rear cross) and angles (hooks and uppercuts) that aren't really part of the wing chun game also.

[Matrix]

Jeez for a guy with so much knowledge and experience, hard to tell sometimes by your vid'sJames,
You should look in mirror when you make a statement like this. I don't want to get involved in a dispute between you and Victor, but when I read this line I just couldn't help myself. My bad. :rolleyes:

[Ultimatewingchun]

BTW...speaking of Vitor Belfort and the rest of the MMA guys...

there's going to be a PRIDE tournament coming up in Japan (not sure if it starts in May or June) wherein some of the very best will be competing in their weight class (185-205 lbs.)...

Randy Couture
Wanderlai Silva
Chuck Liddell
Vitor Belfort
Tito Ortiz
Kazushi Sakuraba

...and some others.

[Jamesbond_007]

I have a lot of tapes/DVDs of most of the UFC fights. One (I think it was UFC 2 or UFC 3) a Wing Chung fighter fought. This was back in the early 90's when the rules were no biting, eye gouging, or fish hooking. That was it, anything else wnet. This was also when you would fight 3 times in one night against any size guy.

In the fight the Wing Chung martial artist was a black sash and had many years under his belt. The fight started, he went out in is wing chung stance. His opponent, kicked him in the guy, then rushed forward and took the Wing Chung guy to the ground. The Wing Chung guy lasted 5 seconds on the ground, getting pounded like there was no tomorrow, until his corner threw in the towel.

It was a good fight. I'm not saying WC is no good, it's just fighters need to cross train and fight many different opponents from different styles. This will help you figure out what works and what doesn't. It also helps you apply theories against non -willing opponents. This is what a lot of MMA guys do. I have sparred and fought with smoe MMA guys (still do) and they are not as wild as they look. Most of them are very good and strong. Additionally, most of them don't have the egos you see in a lot of traditional MA schools and are really cool to hang out with.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Nice input, 007.

And speaking of NHB, MMA fighters...I think Fedor is the best.

From Russia with Love.

[Gangsterfist]

I have a lot of tapes/DVDs of most of the UFC fights. One (I think it was UFC 2 or UFC 3) a Wing Chung fighter fought. This was back in the early 90's when the rules were no biting, eye gouging, or fish hooking. That was it, anything else wnet. This was also when you would fight 3 times in one night against any size guy.

In the fight the Wing Chung martial artist was a black sash and had many years under his belt. The fight started, he went out in is wing chung stance. His opponent, kicked him in the guy, then rushed forward and took the Wing Chung guy to the ground. The Wing Chung guy lasted 5 seconds on the ground, getting pounded like there was no tomorrow, until his corner threw in the towel.

It was a good fight. I'm not saying WC is no good, it's just fighters need to cross train and fight many different opponents from different styles. This will help you figure out what works and what doesn't. It also helps you apply theories against non -willing opponents. This is what a lot of MMA guys do. I have sparred and fought with smoe MMA guys (still do) and they are not as wild as they look. Most of them are very good and strong. Additionally, most of them don't have the egos you see in a lot of traditional MA schools and are really cool to hang out with.


I saw that fight it was short, and the wing chun guy looked out of shape if you ask me, but it was kinda hard to tell with his black uniform on.

[Mark Swiadas]

"In the fight the Wing Chung martial artist was a black sash and had many years under his belt. The fight started, he went out in is wing chung stance. His opponent, kicked him in the guy, then rushed forward and took the Wing Chung guy to the ground. The Wing Chung guy lasted 5 seconds on the ground, getting pounded like there was no tomorrow, until his corner threw in the towel." -- 007

In my opinion, even worse than the fight itself is that the Wing Chun guy (Steve Faulkner?) was labeled by one of the fight announcers as, "The best Wing Chun fighter in the world today" (and I'm quoting!). So when a fan of mixed martial arts (or anyone, for that matter!) hears that label, and watches that "Best Wing Chun fighter" get taken down and beaten in the space of 44 seconds, I can understand completely why they would think all Wing Chun is lousy!

[Ultimatewingchun]

I think we should find out who that ring announcer was and chain punch him.

[fa_jing]

Good point about the differences between the jab-jab-cross and the wc chain punch, Victor. I was thinking more about the chain attack principle which I've heard referenced in multiple CMA's, and also thinking about those wc/vt/wt guys who actually try to use chain punches to enter... something I was never taught in the 3 years I studied wing chun, FWIW.

Seems to me that if you recognize the correct usage of the chain punch as Victor described, and limit yourself to that situation in using it, it would be effective. I would add that achieving that kind of control over a closely-matched opponent, who stays in motion, will occur infrequently.

[Gangsterfist]

Yeah you will see people trying to chain punch for entry techniques. You will see chi sao demos where they are just executing a bunch of techs in each others kill zones.
Its trained that way, b/c it can work that way. So, I see why people want to stay in striking distance.

However, whenever I chi sao or spar, or fut sao, or whatever I can always hear sifu in the background saying, go in, go in! We train to first establish position, to be really close to our opponet in sticking range. You can get there by foot work, entry technique, counter-technique whatever. Once in that real close range you can chain punch your opponet. You strike and the other fist is chambered for the next strike. The hands change positions simultaneously.

In MMA matches there is lots of bobbing, weaving, moving around, etc. They always play in each other's kill zones. I know its much easier to say than do, but I think its maybe why wing chun isn't looked for ring fighting.

Are we not most effective when we are right next to our opponet?

Wing chun has advantages in trapping range, correct?

However, what happens when traping range becomes clinch, or even grappling range?

Wing chuners should love it when our opponets come into us like that. However, I think some dogmatic thinking maybe hinders some wing chun practitioners into thinking that it cannot be used. So, some of them conform to their opponet and will also start bobbing and weaving, and then in return you are playing their game and not making your opponet play yours.

Like I mentioned earlier. There is a MMA guy who trains at the same kwoon I do. he is tough, strong and aggressive. Likes to take you to the ground, likes to clinch, and likes to prance around the ring like a boxer. Against someone who is skilled, yes its hard to be effective. If it were easy everyone would be a pro fighter.

So things I think that need to be trained outside dogmatic thinking for a wing chun guy to be really good in the ring are:

1) Foot work - must be able to go from standing still to up on feet and moving around fast (should practice all ranges of foot work).

2) Train how to handle trapping range from clinch to grapple. How to crowd the space and control the space and maintain once you controlled.

3) train grappling, just train it. Do bjj rolling, get a feel for the basics of grappling. Practice shrimping, triangling, alligator crwals, etc. Those things will give you good grappling attributes.

4) Go in, crowd the space. Get out of the kill zone. Get in there and do what wing chun is suppose to do best.

These are just my opinions from watching some fights lately. None of them seem to follow wing chun principles or concepts. However, I agree that the wing chun concept should be adaptable and flexible to all situations. Perhaps thats why some of the best ring fighters in the world don't train wing chun, who knows :confused:

I think that it could be used though, if the proper fighter were to train some of this stuff. The hard part would be finding someone who is both conditioned and skilled enough to be a ring fighter and doesn't have lots of other training that would be counter-productive to wing chun training.

[anerlich]

However, what happens when traping range becomes clinch, or even grappling range?

Trapping range and clinch range are IMO the same. If you can touch the guy's elbow, you can arm drag him. If you can touch his wrist, you can grab it and duckunder. Adding strikes is optional.

The distinction between clinch and grappling range is pretty vague too. Most seem to regard clinch as standing grappling.

[anerlich]

Vitor Belfort and Tito Ortiz are set to fight in UFC 51. They must be slumming, as we all know the UFC is inferior to this "Contenders" thing.

Should be interesting for us!

Vitor with his WC-stolen tactics, discussed earlier, :p , vs Tito who one of James' students accosted at a party and got to admit that he'd "never fought any real fighters, like Wing Chun guys" - I paraphrase and exaggerate, but only slightly.

The Wing Chun world awaits the outcome with bated breath, <sarcasm> as this will be an obvious true test of WC principles in the ultimate arena, and prove once and for all WC's rightful place as the best system in the universe.</sarcasm>

[Crusher]

From listening to some of you guys talk about UFC and full contact fighting I can tell you have never really sparred or full contact fought, I belive wing chun is an ok art and I belive that if it was so good of an art these fighters would have added wing chun to their fighting skills they are not dummies and there is alot of money to be made. from what I can see Wing chun lacks training for resistant oppenants.
Also Wing Chun can become a solid art by full contact fighting if they would full contact fight to weed out useless techniques and strengthing the art. Alot of you guys try to analize fighting with science looks good on paper but not so good in a fight, if you want to be effective fighter start using drills in a full contact situation it will help you become a much better fighter . Also there are many styles that have open challenges from other style and they do this to learn what will work and what wont and by doing this they grow as fighters. Also I hear Wing Chun is to dangerous for the ring come on fellas that is a sad excuse most styles are dangerous, another thing I hear is some traing for health thats good, or they say these people have families all of the fighters in the contender have families most of the UFC guys have families what does that have to do with sparring? also the reason why Wing Chun does so poorly in tournaments is that they do not train realistically not all schools but most if you put the gloves on and fought on a regular basis you could be good in the ring. I am not trying to put Wing Chun down just saying it is time to stop making excuses for the art and start traing for real drills and chi sau will not get it in a real fight only a fight will prepare you for the real deal. Good luck in your training. :)

[sihing]

Firstly Crusher welcome to the forum. Second, who’s making excuses? Yes to be a complete fighter you have to use your skills full contact, this is agreed I believe by most all on here. Forms and Chi-sao are part of the whole, not all that WC has to offer. When we spar in class it is not WC vs. WC, it is whatever vs. WC and against multiple opponents. In the competitions we have entered (not many) we have been very successful. When I myself entered point tournaments (long ago and it was the only venue available) I found it to be a big joke. You could have stood there and let them hit you full on and nothing would have happened, because they had no power behind their techniques, and in the end it reminded me of a game of tag. But essentially IMO Wing Chun is not meant for sport or competitions, unless the competitions are lethal and hurtful in nature with no rules. Like I have said before both competitions and/or a need to prove something to others is a form of Ego gratification, and when one is truly trained in the Martial Arts there is little to no Ego to be found in them, or at least that is the goal.

James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Firstly Crusher welcome to the forum. Second, many people are making excuses !

Starting with the poster who immediately preceded this post.

Your remarks and suggestions are well founded and make sense. What style(s) do you do, and for how long?

[Crusher]

Its good to see some guys do not have blinders on when it comes to fighting or are hidden behind excuses, you asked what styles and how long I have been involved with Martial arts off and on for twenty years. I have studied BJJ, Tae Kwon Do full contact, Tang soo do Full contact , Boxing, Wing Chun and the Russian system. I have found over the years that many people not just Wing Chun Guys make excuses about full contact fighting it's not for everybody, but most say oh I am in it for the art or health ect... ect.... some are truthful but most are scared
I believe if you are scared to fight with gloves on than you better pray you never get into a real fight with no rules bare knuckle. Many Wing Chun guys have a false sence of reality and really believe they could handle their selves in a fight. I f you ever felt a adrenaline rush by a stranger walking up to you asking you what time it is and grabbing you slammining you to the concrete while you think this can't be happening to me it has to be reflex not a thought process. It does help you become a better martial artis to train realistically a good hit in the face with gloves will help you understand your system and reaction time. Train hard fellas oh I do have a family and do work 50 hours a week also.

[fa_jing]

andrew, the "UFC" and "Contender" are both "reality" shows. The contestants live in a house together with no books, magazine, tv etc. Though they did get alcohol at first. :D In both cases the winners will get some kind of promotion, in the case to the UFC show they will fight in the real deal. I was just commenting that the boxers looked significantly more formidable than the MMA guys, with some notable exceptions.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"If you ever felt a adrenaline rush by a stranger walking up to you asking you what time it is and grabbing you slammining you to the concrete while you think this can't be happening to me it has to be reflex not a thought process. It does help you become a better martial artist to train realistically a good hit in the face with gloves will help you understand your system and reaction time." (Crusher)

WELL SAID. Pain is a great teacher.

[Phil Redmond]

"You use GM Cheung all the time, and it's fair to say he has nothing on my Instructor when it comes to actual real knowledge in regards to streetfights and kung fu knowledge. Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did..." (James Roller)

Come on James? Your Sifu said once that he learned the whole
system in 10 months. Which one is it? You're saying that your sifu has had more street fights and knows more about kung fu than his teacher. Based on what facts? There have been many circumstances in Cheung Sifu's career where in he past he's had to be careful of how TWC info was disseminated. Cheung Sifu is now teaching things that he didn;t in the old day. Sifu's older now and is more open. He doesn't feel the need to protect his rice bowl anymore. There are things about TWC that your sifu never learned. How do I know? Because Sifu has shown some of us the differences in what he taught and what he learned from Yip Man. I have seen the video of your Sifu at the Colorado seminar. He looked OK. Nothing to write home about. I normally woudn't write anything like this about someome's sifu but you said that your sifu had nothing on Cheung Sifu. I really have to laugh at that statement. I can understand you respecting your sifu, but you're way off track here. In fact you're even downright disrespecful of your Si Gung. Also, Cheung Sifu disputes the fact that Brian Lewandy learned the WHOLE TWC system. Period
PR

[Gangsterfist]

ok, putting this thread back on track.

Lets compile of list of past fights, and upcoming fights where the fighters use and train some wing chun concepts in their fighting. I am not saying that they fully train wing chun, but their fighting uses centerline theories, it uses angling foot work, it crowds the space and gets out of the kill zones. Someone who uses hand and elbow techniques similiar to wing chun.

Then lets compare it to the other fighters that use the circling techniques and such. So, someone who is more up to date on their fighters wana maybe help compile a list, then maybe we can all watch them and discuss why they did or didn't use wing chun concepts in the ring.

That is of course if you guys are up for a civil conversation for once. :D

[sihing]

"You use GM Cheung all the time, and it's fair to say he has nothing on my Instructor when it comes to actual real knowledge in regards to streetfights and kung fu knowledge. Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did..." (James Roller)

Come on James? Your Sifu said once that he learned the whole
system in 10 months. Which one is it? You're saying that your sifu has had more street fights and knows more about kung fu than his teacher. Based on what facts? There have been many circumstances in Cheung Sifu's career where in he past he's had to be careful of how TWC info was disseminated. Cheung Sifu is now teaching things that he didn;t in the old day. Sifu's older now and is more open. He doesn't feel the need to protect his rice bowl anymore. There are things about TWC that your sifu never learned. How do I know? Because Sifu has shown some of us the differences in what he taught and what he learned from Yip Man. I have seen the video of your Sifu at the Colorado seminar. He looked OK. Nothing to write home about. I normally woudn't write anything like this about someome's sifu but you said that your sifu had nothing on Cheung Sifu. I really have to laugh at that statement. I can understand you respecting your sifu, but you're way off track here. In fact you're even downright disrespecful of your Si Gung. Also, Cheung Sifu disputes the fact that Brian Lewandy learned the WHOLE TWC system. Period
PR

Phil,
I'm only going to address a few issues with your post here, so as to not get some sort of verbal war going. Firstly Like the quote said, IMO GM Cheung has nothing on my Sifu's Knowledge concerning streetfights and kung-fu knowledge. Both have had their share of real life situations, one on one and multiple opponents. As far as Kung-fu knowledge, by the time Sifu traveled to Australia, he had almost 20 years of kung-fu training behind him. Now allot of people on this forum say it's not the amount of time one's trains but the quality of that training. Well if 12 to 14 hrs a day of training for years upon years of time, as well as in-depth study of various Martial Arts on a personal level and investigative level is not quality then I do not know what is. Put it this way, the man lived and breathed MA and training for very long periods of time. The fact of the matter is there are individuals in this world that have exceptional abilities in particular areas of study and life, Bruce Lee is the best one to point to as an example for the Martial Arts, he investigated everything available at the time and trained hard. You could teach him something and he would be doing it better than you then next day. Sifu is like this. Otherwise how would it be possible for him to have completed his training and get his certificate from GM Cheung as fast as he did in 86'-87'? How was it possible for him to get accepted into the TWC family at the same time? As a matter of fact after 87' people from around the world were calling him and writing letters trying to get him to either grade their students in TWC or to start up a association with him. Listen I can say anything I want about the man, but quality speaks for itself, and if anyone is really interested come meet him for yourself and you will see it then.

As for footage of him in Colorado, if you are talking about those professionally done tapes, there is only footage of him throwing some attacks for GM Cheung at his request to help him demonstrate the technique he was teaching at that time, not a demonstration of my Sifu's skills and abilities, lol. Let's just say your two top guys in the USA at that time were thoroughly impressed and leave it at that. Speaking about Colorado back in 90', if you review those tapes well, when the banquet was on and people were receiving their awards and such, when Blaine Collins presented my Sifu with a present for attending the event, GM Cheung himself rose from his seat at the head table and took a picture of this presentation, something he did not do for anyone else, and also while Sifu was thanking the US chapter for allowing us Canadians to attend, GM Cheung yelled out in the background "You are a part of the family", with a big smile on his face.

Of course GM Cheung will deny Sifu's abilities and skills, we are no longer with him so why would he acknowledge them now? Again, the past actions of GM Cheung cannot be denied when it comes to his thoughts and true feelings towards my Sifu, otherwise the promotions Sifu received would not have been given to him as they were (remember there is video, photo, eye witness & Newspaper proof to verify this).

Enough said....

James

[sihing]

ok, putting this thread back on track.

Lets compile of list of past fights, and upcoming fights where the fighters use and train some wing chun concepts in their fighting. I am not saying that they fully train wing chun, but their fighting uses centerline theories, it uses angling foot work, it crowds the space and gets out of the kill zones. Someone who uses hand and elbow techniques similiar to wing chun.

Then lets compare it to the other fighters that use the circling techniques and such. So, someone who is more up to date on their fighters wana maybe help compile a list, then maybe we can all watch them and discuss why they did or didn't use wing chun concepts in the ring.

That is of course if you guys are up for a civil conversation for once. :D

I'm all for civil conversations. :)

JR

[Ultimatewingchun]

Congratulations Phil...you took James Roller's bait.

Yet another thread becomes a "why my sifu is the greatest - and I'm one of his prize students - and according to him you don't have to do hardly any strengthening, conditioning, cardio, hard sparring, or crosstraining to be great like us".......routine.

The fact is, Phil...that anybody who writes something like this:

"You use GM Cheung all the time, and it's fair to say he has nothing on my Instructor when it comes to actual real knowledge in regards to streetfights and kung fu knowledge. Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did..." (James Roller)


CAN'T BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.

He's trolling with this kind of talk - and won't (can't?) back up anything he says...so why bother allowing him to hijack so many threads by responding to his fantasy world ???

.................................................. ....

So Gangsterfist...besides Vitor Belfort, who did you have in mind? Who else is using Wing Chun principles, techniques, what have you, in their pro fights?

[Gangsterfist]

victor,

Sadly I was asking for help here :( lol...


I havent really watched UFC since the tank abbot days. I do watch some boxing and some MMA stuff, but I am not up to date on all the fighters. So I was asking the wing chun community to compile a list of fighters who use some concepts and hand/foot techniques similiar to wing chun.

Muay Thai and BJJ have been used a lot in ring fights, their concepts seem to be proven. I would like to constructively compare and contrast other concepts of other systems with some similiar to wing chun. I know wing chun is not the only answer, there are TONS of good systems out there. Choy Lay Fut, some karate, TKD, shaolin arts, taiji, so on and so forth.

I have been watching some ring fights lately, but I just started getting back into it. So I am not familiar with all the fighters backgrounds. I did watch that Wing Chun guy that got pummeled in 30 seconds or whatever, and well I didn't see much of anything other than the wing chun guy getting his butt whooped. However, I still give him props for at least going out and trying to take his art into the ring. Even though it was short and illdisplayed of our art, at least he tried I suppose :confused:

I once heard Phil say that he knows wing chun can be used in the ring, and I do not doubt his claims one bit. If ring fighting is the closest thing we have to compare to real fighting then why not compare it as a model.

I looked up some fighters and this guys name came up, Kazushi Sakuraba, any info on him?

[anerlich]

is phenomenal.

See the "UFC/MMA fighter?" thread.

[Kevin Bell]

Also Did Cheung learn the system in 7 months? Nope. My instructor did,
James

James

It is statements such as this that makes Wing Chun and the people within it a laughing stock. I urge you to consider the ramifications before making these kind of statements as it totally undermines you're constructed responses to Victor and Terence. Sounds like you buy the "suits, slippers and B#lls#it" and thats a dangerous trap to fall into. This kind of Wing Chun can defeat all attitude simply opens the door for people to ask you to put your money where your mouth is and go and fight and prove your theories.

Its quite strange but even after nearly ten years of intense training i dont even consider myself no where near an expert. Also, im the first to say despite being in what i consider conditioned shape that if i ever entered a "UFC" style fight i'd get cained in the first fight. I dont mind being wrong. The amount of times i've been put down at my Boxing Club working off fighters as a Wing Chun guy is ridiculous. There are some guys who cant go with me in a ring as a Boxer but if im working on applying my WC concepts knock me around like a ten pin. Its taken until this last couple of years to have made a break through and have any "sucess". The same applies to working off of two of my Thai buddies. I suppose the important thing what im trying to put accross is that im not gonna listen anyone say "this works that works" cause i say so, may be true for him but what about me? Gotta find out for myself.

[Askari Hodari]

victor,

Sadly I was asking for help here :( lol...


...So I was asking the wing chun community to compile a list of fighters who use some concepts and hand/foot techniques similiar to wing chun...

Cung Le comes to mind as a kung fu fighter involved in full contact fighting (although not via Wing Chun).

[Ultimatewingchun]

Gangsterfist:

Kazushi Sakuraba is a great fighter; but sadly, his best days are probably behind him...he's beaten four different Gracie's (breaking the arm of two of them)....but he does nothing that's wing chun based.

..................................................

Kevin Bell:

Refreshing and insightful post, Kevin...So what adjustments have you made over the years so that your wing chun is now serving you better than before against boxers and Thai-boxers?

[SevenStar]

Cung Le comes to mind as a kung fu fighter involved in full contact fighting (although not via Wing Chun).

If I'm not mistaken, cung le's primary bases are TKD and greco roman wrestling. An example of a san shou guy who trains only in kung fu is william chen's son, max.

[SevenStar]

ok, putting this thread back on track.

Lets compile of list of past fights, and upcoming fights where the fighters use and train some wing chun concepts in their fighting. I am not saying that they fully train wing chun, but their fighting uses centerline theories, it uses angling foot work, it crowds the space and gets out of the kill zones. Someone who uses hand and elbow techniques similiar to wing chun.

Then lets compare it to the other fighters that use the circling techniques and such. So, someone who is more up to date on their fighters wana maybe help compile a list, then maybe we can all watch them and discuss why they did or didn't use wing chun concepts in the ring.

That is of course if you guys are up for a civil conversation for once. :D

thai boxing angles and crowds space... can some of you start by making a list of concepts and defining them, so we non-wc guys have something to compare to?

[Gangsterfist]

Sevenstar,

Sure thing, here goes a simple list of basic wing chun concepts and theories. I will try to keep it simple and broad so that we can look at how other systems use the same concepts that wing chun does.

Centerline theory - We protect our center and attack from the centerline. Imagine a human being with a line down their center, equally splitting the left and right sides. that is the center line. Since this is the case, you do not see lots of boxing jabs or hooks. Instead you see more vertical stremline attacks which are more linear.

crowding the space - If our opponets expand out towards us, we expand as well, if they contract we expand. Always going in and crowding the opponets space, and by crowding I mean dominating their space as well. Lots of entry techniques can be used, usually by establishing a bridge, riding a bridge, or sinking a bridge. This is also a part of controlling the opponet. In this range its pretty much the same as clinch range. Instead of bobbing and weaving at a puch or kicks distance (the kill zone) WC strives to be close to the opponet, crowding their space, and destorying their structure with yours.

A few examples of what I see sometimes that is not done is when a circle kick comes in, especially one from the rear leg (when someone is squared off at you in a side stance or an angled stance), wing chun would say to rush right in and control the leg at the hip area and attack the opponet. However, I usually see people just back off or jump back to block it.

Trapping - I have heard that the second hand is the killing hand in wing chun. Meaning that once you establish control over your opponet is when you strike to end them. You should look for a fighter that is trapping their opponets arm against their body for control and for offensive purposes. This can be done with striking even. You can punch over or inside your opponets punch and then after you hit trap and strike again. Its simuletanious.

angling - Entery is done and angles, always angling around your opponet and not circling. Sometimes you angle to stay inside your opponet and other times the outside, depending on the situation. There is no bobbing, or weaving, or circle stepping. Its mostly done at fine archs or angling.

Hand techniques are also there. Look for open hand techniques, like chops, palms, ridge hands, etc. There are a lot of open hand techniques in wing chun.

Now, there are obviously lots of systems that probably use some of this stuff, or have things that are very similiar to it. So, if we can maybe list some fights here and we can all watch them then we can see if there really is wing chun concept in ring fighting.

Also feel free to add to this list of basic concepts and ideas, and lets try to keep it basic since there is lots of differences between lineages.

[fa_jing]

Well I think some boxers are more WC-like than others. For instance, a guy like David Tua who is strong like a bull, puts his head down and throws looping haymakers and hooks is not very WC-like, although a great fighter. Guys who are more WC-like to me have powerful straight shots, seem to magically control the distance and don't resort to herky-jerky movement - just barely slip a shot so that they are in range for a counter. JMO

[SevenStar]

crowding the space - If our opponets expand out towards us, we expand as well, if they contract we expand. Always going in and crowding the opponets space, and by crowding I mean dominating their space as well. Lots of entry techniques can be used, usually by establishing a bridge, riding a bridge, or sinking a bridge. This is also a part of controlling the opponet. In this range its pretty much the same as clinch range. Instead of bobbing and weaving at a puch or kicks distance (the kill zone) WC strives to be close to the opponet, crowding their space, and destorying their structure with yours.

A few examples of what I see sometimes that is not done is when a circle kick comes in, especially one from the rear leg (when someone is squared off at you in a side stance or an angled stance), wing chun would say to rush right in and control the leg at the hip area and attack the opponet. However, I usually see people just back off or jump back to block it.




this is taught in thai boxing. It's not a set in stone principle, but a concept that some people use - it depends on the type of fighter you are. Someone who prefers to fight from the outside - a runner, for example - wouldn't utilize crowding of the space. One who is an infighter or slugger uses it religiously. There are 4 categories of fighters people are placed into, and what they are can be determined by which techniques they tend to prefer:

elusive
counter fighter
tricky
aggressive

In boxing, they are referred to as boxer, slugger, runner and fighter. I've gotta run, but I'll add more later.

[Knifefighter]

Your lineage is basically a quality control measurement tool. To deny this is to make all those pro boxers that hire a well known
trainer look like idiots. Why would a pro boxer on the rise hire a well known trainer? Reputation, to which means history and track record, just like
lineage.

There is a huge difference between a WC teacher and a boxing trainer. Both have reputations, but the boxing trainer has to continuously turn out good fighters that have to prove themselves against other good fighters in order to maintain his reputation. The WC teacher, in most cases, just lives on his, or his teacher’s, or his teacher’s teacher’s reputation. He never needs to turn out even one good fighter.

[Knifefighter]

but please do not tell me
that the best competiton fighters in the world today are trying to kill one another in their training sessions, because they aren't. They train hard yes, and
as realistically as they can, but they do not fight/spar on a daily or weekly basis with the exact same intensity and energy levels it takes to compete in one
fight at that pro level.

One can almost never train as hard in practice as one will fight in a competition. That is what makes competitions so valuable in creating good fighters. Competition forces one to go harder than in practice. That is also the one place where you know you can go all out and not worry about killing or hurting your opponent because you can stop as soon as your opponent submits or the ref pulls you off. Even on the street, a smart person has got to make subjective judgements in terms of how hard to go if he wants to save himself legal hassles and stay out of jail.



Swimming laps is different
from fighting, so that comparison doesn't work either.

Swimming laps is no different. Competition makes you swim (or run, or jump, etc) harder than in practice. That’s why the best athletes in the world always have a long history of competition experience.

[Knifefighter]

If it all boils down to strength, speed and athletic ability then the art offers no advantage to those of us who will never be the strongest, fastest or most
athletic person in a given situation.

I believe that WC actually takes more athletic ability, or size, or strength to pull off than does boxing, or Muay Thai. That’s why so many people can’t make it work. The only people I have seen successfully use "WC techniques" have significantly outsized their opponents.

If I were to teach my eight-year-old daughter a striking method for fighting or self-defense that would allow her to be effective with minimal power or conditioning, it would be boxing, way before WC.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I believe that WC actually takes more athletic ability, or size, or strength to pull off than does boxing, or Muay Thai. That’s why so many people can’t make it work. The only people I have seen successfully use "WC techniques" have significantly outsized their opponents.

If I were to teach my eight-year-old daughter a striking method for fighting or self-defense that would allow her to be effective with minimal power or conditioning, it would be boxing, way before WC."

THIS POST by Dale reminds me of some stuff that hasn't been discussed in a while...A very specific reason why Wing Chun NEEDS to be updated by more mobile, up-on-your-toes footwork, longer range striking and kicking patterns ala JKD, boxing, kickboxing, etc.

WING CHUN IS A VERY CLOSE STANDING INFIGHT...and it PRESUMES that the opponent is coming in with COMMITTED strikes and kicks.

So the wing chun emphasis on "forward energy"...on "moving in"...on "taking his space away"...assumes that he's NOT dancing around while up on his toes, moving in and out, feinting, bobbing & weaving, ducking, backing out immediately after a strike or kick, etc.

In other words, it was designed to fight against systems that are DIFFERENT than many fighting systems that are prevalent today.

Against today's fighters...this statement:

"I believe that WC actually takes more athletic ability, or size, or strength to pull off than does boxing, or Muay Thai. That’s why so many people can’t make it work..."

IS VALID...because in order to GAIN the inside position that the Wing Chun fighter is looking for - and to be able to MAINTAIN it long enough to knock out the opponent...REQUIRES an enormous amount of work in today's world.

But using longer range strategies, moves, footwork, and techniques to BRIDGE THE GAP - as Bruce Lee used to call it - is one such way to make Wing Chun work very effectively.

And then there's the issue of longer range fighters of today who switch gears and immediately go from the kinds of outside moves I described into a deep clinch and/or takedown attempt - again some things that Wing Chun was not originally designed to handle.

Lots of work to do, imo.

[Gangsterfist]

knifefighter,

Just curious on a side note what lineage of wing chun did you train and for how long?. I had almost 4 years of karate before I took wing chun, 1 year of TKD, and 1 year of judo (approx). So far, I find the wing chun approach being the most effecient with the least conditioning. Not saying conditioning isnt needed, but I am saying that wing chun can give the bigger reward for the less effort kind of thing.

In my karate lineage Sensei's sensei was tough old school okinawan guy, who hurt his students. Put them through really tough training, and yes they were all good fighters, but now I am sure a lot of them sustain permanent injuries.

You seem to be very opinionated and determined to debunk wing chun from reading some of your prior posts and watching you argue with victor and others on this forum.

[Knifefighter]

GF:
It’s no secret that I am not a big fan of WC as a combative system. And the more I debate the merits or lack thereof of WC, the more problems I find with it, both from a practical and theoretical POV.

However, I like and respect the people from whom I learned it. Since they are still alive and teaching, I prefer not to name specific names. I have also received instruction in other styles that did not impress me. I would not name those people either.

Debating and arguing the lack of a martial art style’s effectiveness is one thing. Linking that opinion to specific names of people who have taught that art to me is stepping over a line of integrity I do not wish to cross.

[Gangsterfist]

GF:
It’s no secret that I am not a big fan of WC as a combative system. And the more I debate the merits or lack thereof of WC, the more problems I find with it, both from a practical and theoretical POV.

However, I like and respect the people from whom I learned it. Since they are still alive and teaching, I prefer not to name specific names. I have also received instruction in other styles that did not impress me. I would not name those people either.

Debating and arguing the lack of a martial art style’s effectiveness is one thing. Linking that opinion to specific names of people who have taught that art to me is stepping over a line of integrity I do not wish to cross.


Thats fine, I don't want any disrespect to anyone, especially people I don't even know. However, how long did you train in the system and what lineage was it? Yip man? Yuen Kay san? HFY? TWC?

I know people who go from system to system and if they are not getting instant results, they move on to something that gives that feeling. I know wing chun is not for everyone, thats why there are different styles of martial arts. I also train other styles of MA besides wing chun, but my goal is not to be a ring fighter. I am 24yrs old and work in the IT field, if I were going to train to be a ring fighter I think I missed my window of opportunity to seriously train to be one.

The thing is wing chun is so diverse too, I read articles from time to time by wing chun people and I don't even know what they are talking about, and I train wing chun. So, sometimes its hard to find a common ground with other wing chun people even.

Kung fu, means skill dirived from hard work. Which means no such thing as instant kung fu. You must work hard, and I mean work. Train, and be in shape to be really good at it. I was once told this by one of my teachers:


Training Kung Fu is like pushing a giant bolder upstream a river, if you take one day off and leave the boulder, it will get pushed back 3 days from where u were

I have had a few reality checks before, sparring with some friends of mine who do a different system. Some of my wing chun tools did not work as well as the concept seems, but I changed my approach and was able to at least even the game when I was losing at times, and sometimes gain the advantage.

[t_niehoff]

Victor wrote:

THIS POST by Dale reminds me of some stuff that hasn't been discussed in a while...A very specific reason why Wing Chun NEEDS to be updated by more mobile, up-on-your-toes footwork, longer range striking and kicking patterns ala JKD, boxing, kickboxing, etc.

WING CHUN IS A VERY CLOSE STANDING INFIGHT...and it PRESUMES that the opponent is coming in with COMMITTED strikes and kicks.

**In my view, WCK's method doesn't make any presumptions that someone is coming in or coming in with committed strikes (though that certainly helps in application) but does involve joining with an opponent to be effective. That aspect (joining) is critical to our success.

So the wing chun emphasis on "forward energy"...on "moving in"...on "taking his space away"...assumes that he's NOT dancing around while up on his toes, moving in and out, feinting, bobbing & weaving, ducking, backing out immediately after a strike or kick, etc.

**I don't agree with the whole assumption part -- what you're really saying is that WCK assumes the opponent will be a sitting duck. This may be an assumption that many teaching or practicing WCK have, but I don't see it "built into" the method.

In other words, it was designed to fight against systems that are DIFFERENT than many fighting systems that are prevalent today.

**IME and IMO, WCK as see it is a specific approach to fighting, a clinch-fighting method (not body-to-body clinch, but arm-to-arm clinch). Getting that clinch is essential to WCK being effective. As we face different fightign approaches, we need to adapt our strategies and tactics to deal with them. This is just part of our growth.

Against today's fighters...this statement:

"I believe that WC actually takes more athletic ability, or size, or strength to pull off than does boxing, or Muay Thai. That’s why so many people can’t make it work..."

IS VALID...because in order to GAIN the inside position that the Wing Chun fighter is looking for - and to be able to MAINTAIN it long enough to knock out the opponent...REQUIRES an enormous amount of work in today's world.

**That's because today's fighters are better -- they have more knowledge, more skill, better conditioning, etc. As their skill level increases, so must ours.

But using longer range strategies, moves, footwork, and techniques to BRIDGE THE GAP - as Bruce Lee used to call it - is one such way to make Wing Chun work very effectively.

**Using different strategies and tactics to achieve our objectives is part of WCK's method IMO.

And then there's the issue of longer range fighters of today who switch gears and immediately go from the kinds of outside moves I described into a deep clinch and/or takedown attempt - again some things that Wing Chun was not originally designed to handle.

Lots of work to do, imo.

**There are times when we can't use our method, so to be well-rounded fighters, we need to be prepared. On the ground, on the outside, we need other approaches to effectively deal with those situations.

[Kevin Bell]

..................................................

Kevin Bell:

Refreshing and insightful post, Kevin...So what adjustments have you made over the years so that your wing chun is now serving you better than before against boxers and Thai-boxers?[/QUOTE]


Well first off that the guys i trained with are NOT the animals your gonna face in the street. We can talk Vunak, Boztepe and Gracies et al etc but we not gonna face these guys, at least not in my neck of the woods.

Guys who ive served up in a Boxing ring have also handed me my arse on a plate when i first tried to "work" my Wing Chun. Sitting rooted to middle earth whilst someone moves in and out laughing popping jabs. The real keys are working Speed, timing and adaptability. In Boxing really you have to watch out for Jabs, moving in we are suceptible to a Double jab, a hook off of the same hand thats jabing and crosses and uppercuts from reverese hand. Its not so much that i use this or that technique except maybe Paak Sau's. Obviously Boxing is a sport as soon as you go to Clinch your seperated unless the ref is lazy which gives you opportunity to rest your body weight on the guy and sapp his strength. Focus and intent are also a big thing to think about. You chase hands you get hurt. You will get hit but once in you do NOT come out until person is incapacitated. Easier said than done but all i can really say is that its good to go and try it. What works for me may not work for someone else. Again to reiterate chances of meeting a conditioned boxer is IMO remote but it is vital to work your WC against a range or type of fighting thats not going to do the hard of bridging the gap (like an aggressor wanting to rip your face would) for you.

Well hope that kind of answers your question Victor. Its difficult to sit here behind a keyboard and try to put a point of view accross, but hey if you ever make it to the UK maybe we can jump in a ring and have a blast :D :D

Kev

[Gangsterfist]

I think there are many tools in WCK training that help you guage ranges, and use different foot work for different ranges. The long pole teaches some of this.

So, some people fight MMA and boxer guys and can't handle it, and other wing chun people fight them and can handle it. Is it then flawed? Is it wing chuns fault? If a crappy MMA fighter loses all his fights, is it the MMA's fault?

When there is form, strike the form, when there is no form strike the shadow.

So, if you are fighting a fast moving non commital boxer, then that boxer is probably use wing chun concept, especially the non commital part.

If wing chun is a conceptual art, then you should see wing chun in just about everything. Somethings will have more wing chunesque flavor to them over others, but for the most part every type of fighting style should have a few similiar concepts.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
because in order to GAIN the inside position that the Wing Chun fighter is looking for - and to be able to MAINTAIN it long enough to knock out the opponent...

"Wrong. The Wing Chun fighter is not looking for the inside position, and does not care to maintain it. The same is true for the outside position." (crimsonking)

ANYBODY who thinks that wing chun is not seeking an inside position - and by that I don't mean as opposed to the "outside/blindside" position that TWC talks about..but rather I mean VERY CLOSE to the opponent...

anybody who thinks this knows NOTHING about the real essence of wing chun; so I won't even bother going any further to rebutt crimsonking's criticism of my knowledge of wing chun.

As to Terence's remarks that my assumptions are wrong about wing chun EXPECTING to fight on the inside because it was designed during a period of history wherein bouncing in and out of short range was not part of the strategy of the other styles that existed at that time - TERENCE IS JUST PLAIN WRONG.

The whole wing chun design to "come in and take space away with constant forward movement and energy" is predicated on the idea that the broken rhythms, feints, bobs, weaves, and up-on-your-toes footwork of today used to deliver both long and short range striking, kicking, and clinching techniques DO NOT EXIST.

And this is precisely the reason why so many people (who are honest) within wing chun constantly talk about the problems with jabs...hooks off the jab...rear crosses as you "come in", uppercuts, etc. (The latest example being found in Kevin's post).

It is precisely because these other styles keep changing the DISTANCE (and the angles) very quickly that creates the problem for the wing chun fighter; one of the many reasons why Bruce Lee was so GREAT a fighter - because he understood this and worked harder (and against more quality non-wing chun opponents/sparring partners) than ANYBODY within wing chun over the last decades.

WING CHUN IS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY AN INFIGHT...build in a time when other styles of fighting were very different than they are today.

That's just a fact.

[SevenStar]

I think there are many tools in WCK training that help you guage ranges, and use different foot work for different ranges. The long pole teaches some of this.

So, some people fight MMA and boxer guys and can't handle it, and other wing chun people fight them and can handle it. Is it then flawed? Is it wing chuns fault? If a crappy MMA fighter loses all his fights, is it the MMA's fault?.


In both cases, it's the fault of the training that they received. Where the actual style comes in is when you compare the number of fighters in a particular style with the win/loss records of its fighters. Then you begin to question the training methods of the style as a whole.

[t_niehoff]

crimsonking wrote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by t_niehoff
IME and IMO, WCK as see it is a specific approach to fighting, a clinch-fighting method (not body-to-body clinch, but arm-to-arm clinch). Getting that clinch is essential to WCK being effective.

That's ridiculous. Arm-to-arm clinching, as you put it, may be a central element of Wing Chun - but how do we get there? What happens if the range closes? Sports like boxing may be limited to something like 'punching', but wing chun is not just 'arm clinching'. If 'getting that clinch' is essential - how come it's not in your wing chun? What if we don't need it?

**BJJ is a groundfighting method -- how do they get there? What happens if the opponent gets up? Like WCK, they have the tools to get to the ground and the tools to deal with someone if they get up. We have the tools to get the clinch and to regain it. But if we fight on the outside then like the BJJ fighter, we'll eat a lot of strikes.

This is the sort of idea that leads to the JKD approach to wing chun, people who just want to 'learn the chi sao'. Or, bad wing chun - thinking that we step in 'to chi sao' with our opponent.

**This isn't JKD, this is WCK's method (dap, jett, chum, biu, chi) -- this is why we have YJKYM, why our strikes don't use hip rotation as a basis for power, why we have the drills we do, etc.


Originally Posted by t_niehoff
There are times when we can't use our method, so to be well-rounded fighters, we need to be prepared. On the ground, on the outside, we need other approaches to effectively deal with those situations.

If your understanding of our method is so limited, then you are correct. See my previous point, or any TWC instructor, about working on the outside.

**Sure, lots of people claim WCK is a "complete art", will work anywhere, etc. Those folks conveniently never fight. Come to Victor's get-together and show us. I'll show you that I can make what I do work.

[Knifefighter]

So, some people fight MMA and boxer guys and can't handle it, and other wing chun people fight them and can handle it. Is it
then flawed? Is it wing chuns fault? If a crappy MMA fighter loses all his fights, is it the MMA's fault?Big difference. A MMA fighter might fight and lose, but there is ton of evidence showing other MMA fighters demonstrating high skill. ANYONE with a computer or a video store rental can see of examples of this evidence. So far, there is not one shred of evidence of anyone using WC at a high skill level in a fight.

[Matrix]

**This isn't JKD, this is WCK's method (dap, jett, chum, biu, chi) -- this is why we have YJKYM, why our strikes don't use hip rotation as a basis for power, why we have the drills we do, etc. Terence,
Sorry, you've lost me here. We don't use the hip for power? Say what???
And YJKYM is just a training stance. In application there is no YJKYM.

Did I make a wrong turn somewhere? :confused:

[Edmund]

Big difference. A MMA fighter might fight and lose, but there is ton of evidence showing other MMA fighters demonstrating high skill. ANYONE with a computer or a video store rental can see of examples of this evidence. So far, there is not one shred of evidence of anyone using WC at a high skill level in a fight.

Didn't Andrew N post here last week that some of his WC mates just won 3 medals at a MMA tournament?

Guess they weren't "at a high skill level"...

[Edmund]

Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
because in order to GAIN the inside position that the Wing Chun fighter is looking for - and to be able to MAINTAIN it long enough to knock out the opponent...
..
..
..
WING CHUN IS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY AN INFIGHT...build in a time when other styles of fighting were very different than they are today.

That's just a fact.

To be honest, I'd say that WC pretty much has the right idea with that strategy.

If you look at other striking styles, other than Muay Thai, most don't deal with clinching. Muay Thai does and if you look at a lot of matches from Thailand you can see that after the first couple of rounds it's mainly clinch fighting.

And clinching is eventually going to happen because once you get close enough to do it, it's hard to break.

However having a strategy that can work doesn't mean that it will all the time because there's a lot of other factors that can go against you.

There's a level of sporting professionalism in boxing, KB, MT, MMA etc. that just doesn't exist in the WC world. Comparing WC to that standard, it will fail.

[anerlich]

Didn't Andrew N post here last week that some of his WC mates just won 3 medals at a MMA tournament?

That's right. Two gold two silver, won nine fights out of 12.

This was a middle tier amateur tournament, but the wins here earned invites to the Spartan tourney in Qld, which is top tier national MMA. Most of the matches went to ground, and there it was not WC but BJJ and Vale Tudo all the way. Our free-movement standup is WC influenced kickboxing, but ring effectiveness is emphasised far more than "staying true to WC principles".

I am not keen on posting any of what video exists of it on the web for armchair critics to pick over. Anyone who thinks I am making this up is welcome to discuss it with my Sifu via the Academy link in my .sig.

[sihing]

That's right. Two gold two silver, won nine fights out of 12.

This was a middle tier amateur tournament, but the wins here earned invites to the Spartan tourney in Qld, which is top tier national MMA. Most of the matches went to ground, and there it was not WC but BJJ and Vale Tudo all the way. Our free-movement standup is WC influenced kickboxing, but ring effectiveness is emphasised far more than "staying true to WC principles".

I am not keen on posting any of what video exists of it on the web for armchair critics to pick over. Anyone who thinks I am making this up is welcome to discuss it with my Sifu via the Academy link in my .sig.

It's a sad day when someone with something to share won't due to possible criticism. Since you have stated above that the stand up fighting for the ring is WC "influenced" but not strictly sticking to WC principals then the criticism, if there is any, should be non existent because you forewarned of the reasons why something things that may be seen in the video are not pure WC strategies and techniques.

James

[Gangsterfist]

Interesting Anerlich, care to exptrapolate on some of the influences you used?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Would love to see the vids, Andrew.

Some purists might post that they didn't see enough Wing Chun - but who cares?

You guys won 9 out of 12...that says enough right there.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Wing Chun has man sao etc and associated footwork. I thought you were of the opinion that 'squaring up' was ineffective?"

IT'S VERY EFFECTIVE...when very close...and mon sao is not as threatening to the opponent as a stiff jab.

"Wing Chun has rear cross, hook, uppercut, and all ranges. Yawn!"

ERRR...NO IT DOESN'T. If you want to use those boxing punches - then learn them as they are taught in boxing. (I really gotta crack up when people talk about the wing chun hook or uppercut - it's like a shotokan guy talking about his system's lop sao...okie, dokey).

"You should make it clear what you are talking about - you are a TWC man. You are correct - the rest of my criticism is therefore irrelevant. As for getting inside range - use wing chun training."

SIMPLE FOR YOU TO SAY...but as someone who has sparred on a regular basis for many, many years - against people who were REALLY trying to hit or kick me with power - and who were trained in systems designed NOT to let the other guy into the close infight range - I KNOW (ie.- not theory) that it OFTEN takes MORE than playing within the wing chun "rules" to get to the inside (close) position and stay there long enough to knock the man out.

"I absolutely disagree. The design you describe is an excellent approach to deal with broken rhythms, feints, footwork etc..."

ERR...NO AGAIN. Reread that post one more time.

"Train to deal with it. It's not impossible, but, nobody said it was easy, or that wing chun was a magic pill."

OBVIOUSLY YOU THINK SO, crimsonking.

[Gangsterfist]

I know of one wing chun upper cut and one wing chun hook and we do them in our forms. However, they are different from western boxing uppercuts and hooks.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Why do boxers use the jab? Why does wing chun teach mon sao?" (crimsonking)

YOU WANT to say that there are similarities between why a boxer uses a stiff jab and why wing chun uses mon sao...OKAY...superficially perhaps...but one (the stiff jab) is much more effective at putting the opponent on the defensive than the other (mon sao)...and then there's the FOOTWORK...ah yes...the footwork...attached to the jab - and the footwork attached to the mon sao...Again, like night and day as regards effectiveness when coming in from long range.

"See CK for the uppercut and BJ for the hook."

YEAH...I've seen them and done them - AND THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. You want to throw effective and damaging hooks and uppercuts - throw them like a boxer.

"Agreed it's simple to say, harder to do, but apparently you're the only person here who's adamant that wing chun doesn't teach successful bridging."

APPARENTLY you haven't been reading the posts of a whole bunch of people around here about that - and apparently you haven't studied the path that Bruce Lee took in his life (regarding bridging) and why he took it - starting with how many people with high quality fighting skills he actually got to work with (and against)...and apparently you haven't noticed that NOBODY within the last several decades (or longer) has made this bridging...and mon sao...and pure wing chun and nothing but wing chun actually WORK SUCCESSFULLY against any KNOWN high quality Boxer, Thai Boxer, Kickboxer, Kyokushin, BJJ, Wrestler, or MMA fighter.

Where have you been, crimsonking?

"I read your post. My experience is that wing chun strategy is an excellent solution to the problems of broken rhythm, feits, elusive footwork etc. "

Does your experience include sparring/fighting a quality boxer who stands at least six foot tall and weighs at least 200 lbs...?

"This is beginner stuff. Why don't you stop calling what you do wing chun, and stop preaching on the subject of wing chun? Enjoy your twc-boxing-catch fusion, i'm sure its an effective approach to combat and your students benefit from your teaching. The subject of this forum, and this discussion, is wing chun."

YOUR ATTITUDE about real hard sparring/fighting, and what that means in terms of adjustments to "pure" wing chun that have to be made - is beginner stuff, crimsonking...and the fact that I fuse Wing Chun with Boxing, (and with Catch Wrestling too for that matter)...is something you're just gonna have to live with - because I'm not going anywhere.

[Gangsterfist]

Here are the hooks I know, they may not be pure wing chun, but in certain aspects wing chun principles still apply.

Circle hook
tight hook
scraping hook
torque hook
overpower or haymaker hook (the idea is to crush through the opponets bridges with an overpowering attack)


Uppercuts:

Well its been there the whole time, uppercuts can be based off the 7 wing chun elbow postures I know, as well as from the form. They can also be modified vertical punches depending on range, and situation. Like if you lop someone and bend their structure, sometimes and uppercut into their center while you are lopping them, kind of like a plucking energy.


I once was talking with one of my teachers who I train with outside the kwoon (one of sifu's senior students) and we were talking about attacking the limbs. About striking your opponets forearm and fists. I said, well yeah but thats not necessarily wing chun (we were talking wing chun theory is why I said this). My teacher said, well actually thats debateable. Closest weapon, closest target, recive what comes, send what goes can all apply into this situation, its just not really 100% of the wing chun mindset but the concepts can be applied here.

So, after that little discussion we had, I started thinking about concepts and not fixed positions. Wing Chun can be found in lots of things IMO.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"I once was talking with one of my teachers who I train with outside the kwoon (one of sifu's senior students) and we were talking about attacking the limbs. About striking your opponets forearm and fists. I said, well yeah but thats not necessarily wing chun (we were talking wing chun theory is why I said this). My teacher said, well actually thats debateable. Closest weapon, closest target, recive what comes, send what goes can all apply into this situation, its just not really 100% of the wing chun mindset but the concepts can be applied here." (G)

I ALSO advocate attacking the opponent's limbs when fighting/sparring...especially if he has long arms that he likes to extend...Also remember that the Butterfly Sword (and the Dragon Pole) techniques also teach the same strategy in various situations.

[Gangsterfist]

Victor,

I am not neccessarily and advocate of it, but I see where it can be useful, and have/will do it if the opportunity presents itself to me. However, I would like to point out that it takes a bit higher level of skill and control do this this properly. To pheonix eye someones fist on the top side takes skills (not really conditioning). You have to time it perfectly, especially if they are a fast attacker, it leaves you less time to attack the limb.

Really one of the better limb attacks in wing chun is the double pak sao imo. Its fast and can break/hyperextend an arm easily if done right.

So when I teach a junior student some of these concepts I always remind them that the body is an easier target because its harder for the body to move out of the way, its larger, and it ends fights easier. Someone can still fight you with a broken arm, or busted up hand. Someone with broken ribs, or who is knocked out cannot fight you as easily. I have had my ribs broken once when sparring, and man it dropped me pretty fast, and it hurt to move my whole left side. If you damage an orgaon or something they will have a hard time getting up and fighting you as well.

however, I digress, I do not condone fighting, and unless its for training or in a professional enviroment, I am against fighting (or if its for self defense).

[sihing]

Defanging the Snake, Destroying the Limbs, almost always associated with Filipino Martial Arts are within the Wing Chun system also and can be easily applied by one skilled in WC without much adaption, you just have to be aware of it. Like your Sifu said Gangsterfist, closest weapon to the nearest target regardless if its a forearm, shoulder or main target area(head, neck, chest, etc.). I wouldn't recommend using a phoenix fist against a incoming punch attack to his fist, but a elbow to the fist would work, combined with a lop sao grabbing technique.

In our kwoon we use the BGD movements of the sword for stick fighting with 8 basic angles used, and stick disarm, stick chi-sao drills. Even knife fighting can be easy for a WC player, as you only have to use your already fast WC hands and have the knife in your gripped fist to apply the same movements.

James

[anerlich]

Even knife fighting can be easy for a WC player, as you only have to use your already fast WC hands and have the knife in your gripped fist to apply the same movements.

I don't disagree with the thrust (no pun intended) of the statement, but you defnitely do not want to use the same techniques against a knife (with or without one yourself) that you do with WC against empty hands.

Techniques like garn, bil and tan present an unacceptably high risk of your forearms getting sliced to ribbons if attempted against someone with any skill with the knife. Cutting the blocking arm is about the second partner drill you practice at knifefighting school.

[Kevin Bell]

Personally i like to look at the concepts here instead of saying WC has this or that type punch. If your working the concept of nearest weapon nearest target etc or out of the SNT CK forms WC can have any kind of punch. Im not gonna slave myself to my elbow etc all im interested in is hitting a someone as hard as possible and neutralising someone whos been foolish enough to want to mess with me... I feel if we look to the concepts, applying the concepts in the realms of fighting we're on the right course, not argue over the semantics, lineages etc etc

Victor was it you who mentioned 6 foot plus two hundred pounds? thats me. But a good point here is that despite that i still got dumped down on my arse last night, walked into a straight cross from a 10 stoner, dude had speed like a freak, i just sat there laughing caught out like an amateur, pathetic!!!!!

HD is down at the mo, sat in Internet Cafe so forgive me if i cant reply to any questions directed my way for a few days :) :)

Regards
Kev

[Crusher]

I have been reading some of the statements about the UFC fight and I have to say I disagree with some of the statements posted about the flailing of the punches, yes there are some wild round punches but they are the most effective punches for a knockout. If you watch the fights from the beginning you will see that when they attack they for the most part come with a center attack front punch, jab cross ect,, theses are stun punches opening the door so to speak so that they may land the full power round punches which as you will see are more devastating to get hit with. Yes you can Bui sau, if you can but chances are after recieving stun strikes and then a flury of punches you might block one or two then lights out for most people. If you ever have experienced a street fight or full contact fight then you understand fighting. ( no Scientific replies please only sounds good on paper)

[andreww]

Techniques like garn, bil and tan present an unacceptably high risk of your forearms getting sliced to ribbons if attempted against someone with any skill with the knife. Cutting the blocking arm is about the second partner drill you practice at knifefighting school.

***this is true, after visiting some schools in S.E.A. where live blades were used it was very evident that (and these people trained for real) the hands and forearms of a blocking limb were targets, particularly as the knife was being withdrawn after enticing a blocking/parry (type) movement.

[sihing]

Yes, the adaption from empty hands to knife fighting using just WC is cutting the knife hand first, not blocking it with a tan/bil or anything else. Similar to FMA but using WC motions and entry techniques, stepping and angulation.

James

[Gangsterfist]

I concur, attacking limbs is a more advanced, higher skill move. With maybe the exception of wing chun kicks. They tend to attack the leg and scrape down once they penetrate through. However, I can see where attacking the limb can be wing chun minded. The butterfly knives come into mind, since a lot of chopping seems to be just cutting through whatever is in its way, or defanging the snake like mentioned earlier.

For the record, commenting on the sloppy circling punches, is that they were not educated hooks. At the begining of the fight they were okay. Both fighters seemed to look good. However, once they got tired it started looking sloppy. I know that would happen to anyone once they get tired. However, one of my points was, if they used wing chun concepts of effeciency and more straight line attacks, perhaps they would not have gotten as tired as quickly. Or perhaps, their strikes may not as been as sloppy.

You can still throw a good hook and remian connected to the body. I am not saying hooks are bad, or should not be used.

To get back on track here, what other concepts can be adapted from wing chun and put into the ring. We already touched the closest weapon closest target. What else can transfer?

[Ultimatewingchun]

"My point is that 'sparring' or sport fighting is not the wing chun training paradigm, and that by making it so - you have to make adjustments, as you said and done yourself. The prime example is the jab - its the ultimate ring tool. In a street fight, it is not necessary, or necessarily optimal. The reason boxers use the jab is not because its a good technique in itself, but because it's a consequence of good boxing ring strategy. Wing Chun strategy for the street is different - hence mon sao is different, although equivalent. The end result of sparring-based wing chun, with all those adjustments, is not the same thing as the traditional wing chun training. Sparring\sports fighting is not part of the wing chun training. IME,O, and almost by definition, traditional wing chun is more effective in a real fight than 'sports adjusted' (non)wing chun." (crimsonking)

USING A STIFF JAB (or a short series of them)...as a means to come into an inside (close) position is an excellent way to fight/spar - whether it be in the school or on the street (have done both)...with footwork (and facing) not "usually" associated with "conventional" wing chun.

While I agree that the strategy connected to it and the amount of jabs (fewer) one would throw on the street (as a bridge into close infight wing chun territory) is different than what boxers typically do in the ring...nonetheless...it's a better strategy than mon sao - as a means of bridging - because mon sao does not threaten the opponent the way a stiff jab(s) would do, and the footwork and the angles connected to the stiff jab make it quicker, more deceptive, and easier to interrupt and redirect than mon sao.

Now obviously this also depends upon the geography of the fight as well - ie.- a fight in a crowded bar would not be conducive to the jab/footwork strategy; whereas in a parking lot it could work just fine.

As for your comments about Bruce Lee - to the effect that he was just okay for a guy who didn't learn "enough" wing chun...LOL.

The guy was an AWESOME fighter.

Get a clue, crimsonking.

[Gangsterfist]

We are fortunate enough to have a TV in our break room and I was watching that burce lee documentary today at lunch since it was on. Jeet kune do, the way of the intercepting fist. Its basic concepts are very similiar to wing chun. In the documentary lee says I attack with my closest weapon to your closest target. I think lee was heavily influenced by wing chun, and in return he also influenced wing chun.

From my understanding the inside pak da, was not traditionally used at all, and bruce lee was a big advocate of it. Now you see it in wing chun all over.

His concepts of intercepting the attack with an attack of his own is a good concept, and one that I think can work with wing chun.

A comment about the jab....

You ever watch tiger boxing, or even two house cats play fight? Cats will jab with one paw 4 or 5 times in a row and try to get that opening, then you will watch them cross with the other paw. Western boxing was not the first system to ever do this, tiger boxing does it too (since tiger boxing is imitating a tiger). So, yes it is effective. However, things like feigns imo, are not really what wing chun is about. You can add them to your arsenal, and you can use them in the ring, but in the streets feigning is just a waste of time and energy.

Nice post victor about the street vs the ring. I got me thinking, however I am gonna think this one over a bit and post some more on it later.

[SevenStar]

I concur, attacking limbs is a more advanced, higher skill move. With maybe the exception of wing chun kicks. They tend to attack the leg and scrape down once they penetrate through. However, I can see where attacking the limb can be wing chun minded. The butterfly knives come into mind, since a lot of chopping seems to be just cutting through whatever is in its way, or defanging the snake like mentioned earlier.

For the record, commenting on the sloppy circling punches, is that they were not educated hooks.

muay thai attacks limbs as well, traditionally. the diagonal elbow can be used to attack the bicep of an arm outstretched. Matter of factly, we worked several of these applications last night. When sidestepping a teep, you can put a forearm or elbow into the side of their thigh.

As far as hook punches, there is a difference between a hook and a haymaker. A hook punch is a very tight motion, not a wide arc. your arm and forearm should be at a 90 degree angle, and your fist just barely crosses your centerline. that is a proper hook.

[SevenStar]

A comment about the jab....

You ever watch tiger boxing, or even two house cats play fight? Cats will jab with one paw 4 or 5 times in a row and try to get that opening, then you will watch them cross with the other paw. Western boxing was not the first system to ever do this, tiger boxing does it too (since tiger boxing is imitating a tiger). So, yes it is effective. However, things like feigns imo, are not really what wing chun is about. You can add them to your arsenal, and you can use them in the ring, but in the streets feigning is just a waste of time and energy.

Nice post victor about the street vs the ring. I got me thinking, however I am gonna think this one over a bit and post some more on it later.

there's more to a jab than that. A jab is a probing technique. it allows me to gauge the distance between myself and my opponent. At the same time, it makes the opponent aware that when he moves in, SOMETHING is coming at him. The jab is a setup technique - the jab sets up your power shots - creates openings. jabs are good counter techniques, do to their speed. From a WC perspective, I'd imagine that the jab would be the ideal technique for initiating a bridge.

[SevenStar]

Defanging the Snake, Destroying the Limbs, almost always associated with Filipino Martial Arts are within the Wing Chun system also and can be easily applied by one skilled in WC without much adaption, you just have to be aware of it. Like your Sifu said Gangsterfist, closest weapon to the nearest target regardless if its a forearm, shoulder or main target area(head, neck, chest, etc.). I wouldn't recommend using a phoenix fist against a incoming punch attack to his fist, but a elbow to the fist would work, combined with a lop sao grabbing technique.


this is in thai boxing also.

[anerlich]

Cats will jab with one paw 4 or 5 times in a row and try to get that opening, then you will watch them cross with the other paw.

My two Siamese cats have more of an NHB approach. They don't so much jab as swipe, but generally only with one paw as you suggest. Then one shoots on the other, they clinch using front paws and jaws, then try to kick each other in the stomach with their back legs. The male cat sometimes gets his sister's back (both are desexed) and bites the loose skin behind the neck, also. Only play fighting, though they go pretty hard, but no injuries. Sort of like WC should be.

[Gangsterfist]

I have got a few years in a karate system that has tons of joint locks and limb destruction in it. So, i know it can be effective.

[sihing]

there's more to a jab than that. A jab is a probing technique. it allows me to gauge the distance between myself and my opponent. At the same time, it makes the opponent aware that when he moves in, SOMETHING is coming at him. The jab is a setup technique - the jab sets up your power shots - creates openings. jabs are good counter techniques, do to their speed. From a WC perspective, I'd imagine that the jab would be the ideal technique for initiating a bridge.

This is interesting, as just today in the afternoon class I was scolding some of the newer students on how to throw boxing type punches. We have two drills that we like to use to work on perception skill. The 1st one is just you standing in stance and hands behind your back, and your partner throws out all kinds of punches towards your face/body and you just observe the punches(at the elbow point) to learn what it looks like. The 2nd drill is 1 hand vs. 2, where you as the WC guy use 1 hand (lead Man Sao) to defend against your partners 2 hands boxing style punches at random. As I had the class go through the drills, I noticed the beginners had no idea on how to throw proper boxing style punches, all they did was just use their arms and extend them to punch. So I stopped them in their tracks and started to explain how to throw the punch, when it came to the boxing jab I basically said the same as Sevenstar above did. At least for once we agree on something, lol. Good post Seven...


James

[SevenStar]

This is interesting, as just today in the afternoon class I was scolding some of the newer students on how to throw boxing type punches. We have two drills that we like to use to work on perception skill. The 1st one is just you standing in stance and hands behind your back, and your partner throws out all kinds of punches towards your face/body and you just observe the punches(at the elbow point) to learn what it looks like. The 2nd drill is 1 hand vs. 2, where you as the WC guy use 1 hand (lead Man Sao) to defend against your partners 2 hands boxing style punches at random. As I had the class go through the drills, I noticed the beginners had no idea on how to throw proper boxing style punches, all they did was just use their arms and extend them to punch. So I stopped them in their tracks and started to explain how to throw the punch, when it came to the boxing jab I basically said the same as Sevenstar above did. At least for once we agree on something, lol. Good post Seven...


James


LOL, I guess he11 finally froze over!

[Gangsterfist]

From my understanding even western boxing says that power comes for the ground up. It comes from a strong stance against the earth, up through the legs, transmitted by the hips to the shoulders then out the arm into the target. Being connected with the body.

Wing chun (at least how I train it) teaches to transmit power from the elbow, with out having larger motions of movement. There are attacks that put larger movements in it (see CK) but for the most part its short range burst power.

So, what can we say about boxing hand techs vs wing chun hand techs? They are both educated, and they both can work, so you need to train them properly.

Just curious, who here on this forum does chain punches daily? I do, and I do several hundred a day at the very least, and in the past I have done over 1000 in a day. If you do not train the basic punch, how do you expect to do it effectively?

So, how does wing chun compact what western boxing does? How does wing chun generate power with out plant the feet first, then transmitting the power through the body and into the target?

All you non wing chun people I would like you guys to try something out when you get a chance. use foot work where your weight is in the middle of your foot, not on your toes and not on your heels, but in the center of your foot. Move with your tailbone sinked, not forcefully (by tension) tucked, but naturally tucked to unify the top and bottom of your body. Focus on elbow placement and elbow movement. When you strike your opponet, do not even think about your forearm of fists, you should practice as if your arm stops at your elbows. Adjust your foot work as need be, and keep the spine erect and striaght. Imagine there is a giant thread connected to your spine and it goes up your spine out the top of your head. Now imagine someone gently pulling up on that causing your spine to be straight and erect. Now, use what you know, whatever it may be: MT, TKD, Boxing, WC, MMA, whatever. Can you notice any differences? Explain what you like and dislike and what you noticed if anything.

All you MMA guys give me some ideas to try and I will try those, to see how wing chun and MMA mix, match, differ, and are the same.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
it's a better strategy than mon sao - as a means of bridging - because mon sao does not threaten the opponent the way a stiff jab(s) would do, and the footwork and the angles connected to the stiff jab make it quicker, more deceptive, and easier to interrupt and redirect than mon sao.

"Bridging and 'threatening' are two different things. Agreed, the jab pressures and threatens an opponent, especially in the ring. The wing chun equivalent, mon sao, is for bridging. It is much more flexible, interruptible and redirectable than the jab. Mon sao can decieve too." (crimsonking)

YOU SIMPLY repeated back to me what I said to you - but without EXPLAINING WHY mon sao is more this and that than the jab is...LOL.

Because of the way it's thrown, mon sao is much slower and much harder to interrupt or redirect than the jab is - besides being less threatening...which you seem to think is less important than "bridging"...LOL again.

You have to be threatening a good boxer with hitting him BEFORE you can realistically expect to attain a bridge...so you have the process BACKWARDS, crimsonking.

And as for this:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
As for your comments about Bruce Lee - to the effect that he was just okay for a guy who didn't learn "enough" wing chun...LOL.

The guy was an AWESOME fighter.

"I give him credit where credit is due. His athleticism was inspiring, and his importance in the history of modern martial arts is unquestionable, and he may have been a great fighter, but...

Don't ride the coat tails of a dead legend." (crimsonking)

NO ONE IS TRYING to ride his coat tails; on the contrary, I am TRULY giving credit where credit is due - as opposed to just paying his abilities lip service....because I'm willing to work with some of what he did in my own laboratory (which I've done for many years now)...since much of his stuff (and not just his athleticism) makes so much sense.

[SevenStar]

From my understanding even western boxing says that power comes for the ground up. It comes from a strong stance against the earth, up through the legs, transmitted by the hips to the shoulders then out the arm into the target. Being connected with the body.

Wing chun (at least how I train it) teaches to transmit power from the elbow, with out having larger motions of movement. There are attacks that put larger movements in it (see CK) but for the most part its short range burst power.

So, what can we say about boxing hand techs vs wing chun hand techs? They are both educated, and they both can work, so you need to train them properly.

Just curious, who here on this forum does chain punches daily? I do, and I do several hundred a day at the very least, and in the past I have done over 1000 in a day. If you do not train the basic punch, how do you expect to do it effectively?

So, how does wing chun compact what western boxing does? How does wing chun generate power with out plant the feet first, then transmitting the power through the body and into the target?

All you non wing chun people I would like you guys to try something out when you get a chance. use foot work where your weight is in the middle of your foot, not on your toes and not on your heels, but in the center of your foot. Move with your tailbone sinked, not forcefully (by tension) tucked, but naturally tucked to unify the top and bottom of your body. Focus on elbow placement and elbow movement. When you strike your opponet, do not even think about your forearm of fists, you should practice as if your arm stops at your elbows. Adjust your foot work as need be, and keep the spine erect and striaght. Imagine there is a giant thread connected to your spine and it goes up your spine out the top of your head. Now imagine someone gently pulling up on that causing your spine to be straight and erect. Now, use what you know, whatever it may be: MT, TKD, Boxing, WC, MMA, whatever. Can you notice any differences? Explain what you like and dislike and what you noticed if anything.

All you MMA guys give me some ideas to try and I will try those, to see how wing chun and MMA mix, match, differ, and are the same.

When I tried it, I dind't feel very mobile at all... it seemed more awkward than a boxing stance, however, I am not used to that stance at all, which accounts for alot. Hos do your techniques feel, when done from a boxing stance?

[Ultimatewingchun]

What you described, Gangsterfist, is a good way to deliver the very straight, elbow in, vertical fist wing chun punch - which goes straight to the target like an arrow...

but the various types of punches thrown in boxing, kickboxing, and Muay Thai will naturally use different mechanics because the elbows are not held so close to the center of the body and the strikes are more rounded (even the straight boxing strikes are slightly more rounded) than the wing chun punch...so hip and shoulder rotation (torgue) is usually more pronounced than when throwing the wing chun punch - and the spine alignment will often be different for the same reasons...

so SevenStar's assessment after trying your suggestions sounds correct - because he was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

The answer is simple: when throwing a wing chun punch, because that's what fits into the context of the fight at that moment - then throw it the way you described...

but when throwing a boxing punch (for the same reason just given)...then throw it like a boxer.

They are apples and oranges.

[Gangsterfist]

Sevenstar-

Thanks for trying it out, maybe we can come to some educated conclusions here. I did some light sparring this weekend, and I noticed that when I box around (stick and move) that my elbows tend to move a bit off my center and more outside my body, just naturally.

One thing about keeping your weight 50/50 and on the middle of your foot is to be in the most optimal position. You can move to your heels or your toes, to whatever needs be. I will send you a PM about WC foot work, since its highly debated and differs from lineage to lineage.

I did notice that when I do go into a boxing like foot work style centerline theory is harder to accomplish, or it could be I am not used to it. I find circling foot work (tai chi) more effecient. I also noticed that when in boxing foot work mode my kicks seemed to be more telegraphed, but some wing chun techs and mechanics still work well.

I found that mixing the foot work, also worked as well too. When my opponet was out of range from me, there was no need to bob and weave.

Anyways, Seven, check your msg inbox and see what you think about that.

[SevenStar]

How were you circling?


I read your PM - I'm in a rush now, but I'll try it out tonight and comment on it.

[Gangsterfist]

Instead of angling in I would circle around more, more of a side step. Then once I had the flank I would move in. I noticed it was easier to do it that way then go straight in when constantly moving, like a boxer does.

However, I was also able to transition foot work from strictly wing chun principle, to ali foot work in different ranges by always keeping my weight and feet 50/50. It probably look really sloppy since I normally do not practice that way, but I think in time and with enough training you could easily intregrate the two. Then again my foot work has always varied since I have taken kempo, played soccer, taiji, wing chun, TKD, etc.

However, the triangling wing chun foot work can work in the ring I think, you just can't be dogmatic about it.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"However, I was also able to transition foot work from strictly wing chun principle, to ali foot work in different ranges by always keeping my weight and feet 50/50. It probably look really sloppy since I normally do not practice that way, but I think in time and with enough training you could easily intregrate the two." (G)


50/50 is definitely the way to go...when using it - it's easier to transition to various other angles, footwork, striking, and kicks from the rear foot.

[SevenStar]

Instead of angling in I would circle around more, more of a side step. Then once I had the flank I would move in. I noticed it was easier to do it that way then go straight in when constantly moving, like a boxer does.



the way I was taught to circle was to step at an angle in the direction I wish to go, then pivot around that foot - to circle left, anyway. to circle right it's pretty much the same, but feels more awkward, like you are going into a cat stance.

[Gangsterfist]

the way I was taught to circle was to step at an angle in the direction I wish to go, then pivot around that foot - to circle left, anyway. to circle right it's pretty much the same, but feels more awkward, like you are going into a cat stance.


If you were refering to my PM, you must maintain the 50/50 weight distribution otherwise you might find yourself back weighted, like in a cat stance.

Off topic a bit, I started cross training and their stances are back weighted and forward weighted, and usually never 50/50.

[Gangsterfist]

Wow,

I found a kung fu guy fighting in MMA tournaments. His main style is taiji, and he has a strong background in wing chun.

http://www.cagerage.tv/interviews/berrik.htm

http://www.samiberik.com/hunsite.html

I read a review of his last cage fight which he won by decision. The judges said he was in control of the whole fight, and his stand up was superior to his opponets stand up. He also controlled the most when they were on the ground.

Interesting to see where this Sami Berik guy goes.

[SevenStar]

there have have been a few posts about him on the main forum. with the latest win, his record is like 4 - 4. a poster on kfm - shooter, also has taiji guys who compete mma.

[DrunkenUnicorn]

The website is soon finished so there would be all info on Sam
including video clips of fights also training clips, also latest news
on he future fights.

Sami was featured in "Fighters Only" Mag, April issue also going to be
in MMA Universe mag soon this month.

His fights in Ultimate Combat 6,8,9,10 & 11 are available on dvd
also Cage Rage 9 & 10. Search online you can find them. I think they
have them in the states too.

Sami has a big fight in june 18th http://www.freestylefightingfederation.com/Samivdaley.htm

Also soon he might be fighting in King of the Cage in uk.

Huseyin Berik

[Gangsterfist]

Cool, thanks for the updated information. However, I am curious to what exactly is Delta Wing Chun? Is that a Lineage?

Anyways, I look forward to seeing some of his fights, and other TCMAist in the ring.

[Phil Redmond]

Sami Berik is the TCC/WC guy who has fought in NHB events and won. I wrote him and asked for videos of his fights. At present he only has clips of old amateur San Shou fights so he directed me to this link:
http://www.fightingtaichi.com/videos.htm
For those who say that TCC guys can't fight you should take a look at the fighting applications at the top pf the page then look at the fights on the same page showing fighting applications used effectivley against "resisting" opponents.
http://www.cagerage.tv/fighters.htm
PR

[Samson]

Well doe's not look like Wing Chun, maby he will be the savior of the Wing Chun art

[Samson]

http://www.bullshido.com/videos/wvk.asx
Here is a man using only his Wing Chun to fight

[Phil Redmond]

Here's what he wrote me:
"Phil,
Cool, thanks for the email. Yeah Wing chun has been stereo typed by alot.
It works for me and im still only at the beginning of where i want to be and
hoping to improve much more to be able to pull of some more of what i want
to do whilst under pressure.
Good luck with your teaching
Enjoy your day
Regards
Sami Berik

PR

[Samson]

Wing Chun should not ride on the coat tail of one man that has adapted other systems to fight

[Samson]

Hey Phil, I see you are a Sifu lets keep it real do you have any video's of your students just using Wing Chun to fight. We need to stop looking for people to uplift our system and start doing it ourselves.

[Phil Redmond]

Hey Phil, I see you are a Sifu lets keep it real do you have any video's of your students just using Wing Chun to fight. We need to stop looking for people to uplift our system and start doing it ourselves. Yes, I do of my NY students. If You'd like to see WC in a tournament there are clips of Victor Palati's student using WC to fight in a tournament right here on the forum. BTW, I think I know who you are by your questions and your writing style. Have a nice day.
PR

[DrunkenUnicorn]

Hi to all,
Sami here, just using bro's username.
Just like to say aswell that i take my hat of to wingchun. Even though in many of my fights you might not see anything resembling it, i say the sensitivity drills, and all the moves helped my hands learn to think for themselves. Any other techniques that were explained to me from other styles i as able to get a better understanding of the angles and momentum.
I was able to enter Fights with grappling involved with no grappling backround. It taught me improv,lol

by the way as for the delta lineage. My sifu had a number of different teachers and made some mods. to it.
Not to say classical or any other is more or less, or that anystyle is better than another. I would say that each serves different people in different ways.
Enjoy training,
BGOOD! :cool:

[Samson]

No co-sign there fella's

[Gangsterfist]

Sami-

Thx for the update just now got around to reading it. Your wing chun training interests me. Its good to see someone with your attitude and background in the ring. A lot of TCMA guys get talked smack on because they cannot fight (or according to the general public they cannot fight), and MMA is the new apparent way to go.