How Much Wing Chun Do You Need To Fight?

[cerebus]

I'm asking this of the Ving/Wing Chun/Tsun crowd, but it could reasonably be asked about any art. How much of what you practice do you REALLY need to be able to fight effectively? I trained in WC many years ago. I learned only the basic stances & footwork, basic hand techniques, some bong sau drills, centerline theory, front & side kicks and lots of practice putting together basic combinations and free sparring (lots of sparring). This was done on a fairly intensive 6 months of regular training. To this day I still feel comfortable fighting (both in the ring and in the real world) with WC, and have never found myself to need more than that.

Do you really need all the other stuff you do (forms, mook yan jong, chi sau, weapons, etc), or do you just take it for granted that you can't gain greater skill without it?

Currently I train in Hsing-I & Bagua. Though I truly enjoy all the forms and training methods we do, if my primary interest was ONLY combat effectiveness, I could easily develop a VERY small core of techniques and training method that would bring faster results as far as fighting ability is concerned (without sacrificing the traditional principles which the arts are based on).

I have a good deal of experience in full-contact fighting and in real fighting and having a basic core of methods and techniques that I've specialized in always seems to be more effective than having too wide a variety of things which are trained to a lesser degree.

What are your thoughts on this?

[sihing]

IMO, WC is overkill, big time, and is really meant to fight others already highly skilled in other MA. With what I teach a prospect looking to join the school ( a simple Biu Sao side step and front kick) would be enough for most people in a realiy situation on the street with enough practice and mastery.

James

[kungfu cowboy]

It seems to me that each part of wing chun trains a specific concept that is really only part of an integrated whole, although I guess you can just learn parts and use them, but without the integration of each component into a functional unit, it seems to me that you are only using, to some degree, a less effective extraction of the intended mechanism.

[cerebus]

Kungfu cowboy, you say "a less effective extraction", why so? Actual combat is not very complex, simplicity rules for the most part. A punch to the nose or a finger jab to the eye is just as effective on it's own as it is if used within a more complex matrix.

[kungfu cowboy]

Yeah, I agree with the simplicity thing, and getting hit is getting hit; even an untrained Richard Simmons could land a deadly blow while in the midst of a Disco Frenzy. I guess I am thinking that there is "something else" that manifests only after learning and truly incorporating the principles behind the movements of each of the forms, drill, etc. into a method of body usage that is more completely developed and most effective through this integration.

Each part teaches a function that becomes a responsive, organic whole to the incoming stimulus. Or at least that's where I am at now in terms of trying to understand how this kung fu stuff might work. Ultimately, it should be expressed simply, but the machine is built to deliver it in a specific manner. A palm strike is delivered more effectively using correct mechanics such as alignment, weight movement, where the intent is, etc. Outwardly, it may not look particularly fancy, but it is substantially different "internally".

[cerebus]

KF Cowboy, I certainly agree that proper alignments and body mechanics greatly improve any technique, but I feel that these should be intrinsic aspects of learning each technique and it's usage.

I feel that with only a handful of techniques, principles and concepts, someone can develop to a very high level of skill (and do so much more quickly than someone using the whole array of techniques and training methods).

I do certainly agree, however, that if one's interest lies in preserving the traditional art, or in fully developing the artistic aspects, then yes, they will need to learn everything their instructors can teach them. However, most martial arts have strayed away from the "martial" and more towards the "art". This is fine for those whose interest lies in that direction, but it hinders those who are interested primarily in being able to handle themselves in a violent assault.

[cerebus]

PS: I would avoid Richard Simmons anyway, "disco frenzy" or not! :D

[kungfu cowboy]

Yeah, I heard he's a real b*tch! :D I do agree that you can most definitley use any move out of any part, and make it effective. But I think it might be missing subtle overlying constructs allowing it to be even better, and more complete.

[ghost5]

I heard a good explaination once about learning to fight from Tex Cobb, if anyone remembers him. He told somebody interviewing him that anyone can learn to fight. "Just go into a bar and find the biggest guy in there. Walk up to him and spit in his beer. When you get out of the hospital do it again. Keep doing it and eventually you will learn to fight."

A few techniques are all you NEED but that is not a system obviously. Those could come from any system out there. Find 8 or 10 techniques that suit you and train them till you never think about what you throw when in a fight and you will probably do ok. Why? Because you did keep it simple and most fights are simple.

That would not make it WC or any other system, for that matter, just a few techniques that are probably common to most systems.

As for training with weapons. It might be useful if you have time to get your hands on something to improvise but our school doesn't train with them other than forms except for sticks and short knives.

But you have a good point on using what works for each person. I think we all do that no matter what we train. We will go back to the ones that work and throw in the extra techniques when needed.

[YungChun]

"a less effective extraction", why so?

A part of the whole, a very small part.

This is Sun Sao... A disconnected fragment...

The system imparts all kinds of sensitivity to various stimuli. Not just feeling, but tactile and visual sensitivity to motion, energy and position, all things gleaned from training the big picture the system presents.

Learning or training a few movements or techniques may indeed be a simpler but cannot impart the wide array of attributes the system intended for it's practitioners to develop and use.

[cerebus]

Take into account, however, all of the elements I mentioned in my first post (principles, concepts and usage training, etc). I never said "technique alone". It would not be WC without the other aspects I mentioned, but do you really need to learn all the forms, etc?

[anerlich]

Tex Cobb had probably the best lines in boxing next to Ali himself.

Geoff Thompson would have you using a single attack off the "fence" 99% of the time. All that other stuff is for when your principal tactic doesn't work.

[Edmund]

Take into account, however, all of the elements I mentioned in my first post (principles, concepts and usage training, etc). I never said "technique alone". It would not be WC without the other aspects I mentioned, but do you really need to learn all the forms, etc?

No you don't.
The forms are *a* way of learning and passing on the style.

For those interested in the fighting aspects, they could learn just basic techniques.

[viper]

martial arts is far more then just a means of defense and i highlight that point because goin to find a fight and having to defend ones self is not self defense. Though all systems teach physical defence in the end most martial artists that i know will walk away which in most situations can be done. But they all train for the time they have no choice and that is is every technique because you never know what situation youll find yourself in one can only genralise so i think the system yes you might only need two techniques but what if you needed different ones you didnt know them so train in the whole system and youll get far more benefits then just combat skills.

[SevenStar]

IMO, WC is overkill, big time, and is really meant to fight others already highly skilled in other MA. With what I teach a prospect looking to join the school ( a simple Biu Sao side step and front kick) would be enough for most people in a realiy situation on the street with enough practice and mastery.

James


that's an assumption that you realistically cannot make.

[chisauking]

You need very little wing chun in order to fight.... but the problem is being truly able to apply that little wing chun

[lawrenceofidaho]

It seems to me that each part of wing chun trains a specific concept that is really only part of an integrated whole, although I guess you can just learn parts and use them, but without the integration of each component into a functional unit, it seems to me that you are only using, to some degree, a less effective extraction of the intended mechanism.
Cowboy,
the statement you made is, in itself, logical, but it seems to assume that the "integrated whole" of wing chun is inherently the highest conceivable ideal, and that WCK only stands to lose quality by being altered or mixed with other arts (a viewpoint which my personal experience does not support.) -Although I am sure there are many WCK "masters" out there (trying to protect their rice bowls) that would like everyone to believe that this is the case, there are many who could offer convincing evidence that fighting performance is significantly enhanced by blending wing chun skills with skills from other arts.


you can most definitley use any move out of any part, and make it effective. But I think it might be missing subtle overlying constructs allowing it to be even better, and more complete.

That's possible, -but it's also possible that by breaking with the way that it's always been done (traditionally, the way Master ______ does it, etc.) may yield better results as well.

-Lawrence

[NeedsPractice]

HOw much wing chun you need to fight :
HOw much from any "style or system" do you need?
How much do you really need to know
1- Try not to get hit ( evasion, footwork if possible)
2- Hit hard, fast in combos preferably.

You dont need any wing chun to learn that. The teacher could show you these things within the first couple of weeks, but unless you had previous training or maybe were very athletic it takes a while before you become coordinated or moderately effective.
Everyone here has seen how beginers move not matter what style it is.
Everyone here also knows that stuff you learn in the very beginning is the foundation of everything else.

For the average person staying in a martial arts school for more than a year exceeds their interest or purposes anyway.( which is why they leave)

[kungfu cowboy]

post by laurenceofidaho:

the statement you made is, in itself, logical, but it seems to assume that the "integrated whole" of wing chun is inherently the highest conceivable ideal, and that WCK only stands to lose quality by being altered or mixed with other arts (a viewpoint which my personal experience does not support.)

I think that the integrated whole of wing chun is the highest concieveable ideal. For the approach of wing chun. What it stands to lose is what makes it wing chun. While there is always room for improvement, I think it's got to be fowwolwing and refining the priciples that give it it's identity.

original post by lauence of idaho:That's possible, -but it's also possible that by breaking with the way that it's always been done (traditionally, the way Master ______ does it, etc.) may yield better results as well.

True dat! Again, I think as long as it follows those defining priciples. Of course, rapid, radical change has also played a role in evolution. I think you need to explore the options, and see what works for you.

[FooFighter]

How much of what you practice do you REALLY need to be able to fight effectively? Do you really need all the other stuff you do (forms, mook yan jong, chi sau, weapons, etc), or do you just take it for granted that you can't gain greater skill without it? What are your thoughts on this?

Cerebus,

When I examine my own martial or sport performance or develop my training program I use two basic models founded by Coach Scott Sonnon. The First model is called "The Performance Diagnostic Trinity" which is based on Practice (Skills), Training (attritubes), and Competition (Toughness). To assess your performance I perceive it is best to analzye this model. For example, if you can watch your own fight or have a talented, experienced, and qualified martial arts coach examine your performance, then these are some important questions that might come up for that person: How are my skills? Do I need technical improvement? How can I gain my flow? How are my attritubes? Does my attritubes prepare me for the dangers and challenges ahead? Do I need to develop X,Y, and Z attritubes? Do I need to spend more time conditioning? Can I apply my skills in a dynamic situation? Do I need to compete or "spar" more often? How can I develop mental toughness? What or where is my fear reactivity when I fight? In general wing chun academies, across in the US from my own observations, most sifus do not generally cover all three individually in a holistic manner nor take the time to examine, coach, and teach "The Performance Diagnostic Trinity" to all their students. This is not saying that these sifus are bad, but this means that the educational delivery system needs to be upgraded FIRST instead of changing the martial system in itself. The day that I see one wing chun sifu who is more concern with radically upgrading the educational system and treating all his or her students as equal partners in development then inventing some new style, trying to make clones, and/or politicking in the name of wing chun, then I know there be more masterful and happy wing chun students in the future.

The Second model is called "Training Hiearchy Pyramid" developed bv Coach Sonnon however based on the works of Dr. Bompa Tudor. The foundation is called General Physical Prepareness, then Specific Physical Prepareness, then Physical Skills, and finally the Mental and Emotional Skills (FLOW). The flaw in wing chun conditioning program design in most academies is the cookie cutter method. Sifusr do not really spend enough time developing GPP and most student do not train outside their kwoon, and the academies rarely do not have a very effective SPP phase for its general students, but most tend to focus more on PS phase WITHOUT a proper complete assessment of each student's physcial and mental strengths or weaknesses. (Would you let a doctor open you up without asking what is wrong with You? Can someone say malpractice, please? Is this the same as the first person who "open your fist" in wing chun? Did this person assess your
strengths and weakness before opening your fists in wing chun?) Forget about the final stage, flow. To some wing chun sifus, this is suspose to come with time and no one can teach it; it is natural talent, or it comes from hours and hours and hours and hours and hours technical drilling. I disagree but I can go on about this, but it does not take a long time to become an effective fighter in wing chun if you have proper training and coaching. However, there is something to be said for being efficently effective. People forget the efficent attritube for the hardcore effective aspects. More about this another time. I have yum cha with some friends, enjoy your Sunday.

Your friend,
Bao

[Jam_master]

Technique wise you should train as much as possible and obsorb as much as you can even if you use only one technique to finish of your opponent. It's good to have versitily. Concept wise you should use wing chun principles 200% all the way from the onstart, only because wing chun IS a system of perpetual simplicity, and doesn't matter what other techniques you know from other style, Wing chun principles will apply to any circumstance or technique.

Work on the principles, not the techniques that carry them.

:rolleyes: