More Vid Clips

[BetaSao]

Here are some vid clips from the San Diego Wing Chun school.... Ho Kam Ming lineage:

http://www.sdwingchun.com/html/pictures.html

[Phil Redmond]

If anyone here has video clips to post I can make a link to them. Just email them to; wcvids@gmail.com
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

You've all heard of Dead Man Walking right? Well, here's old man punching.....:D.
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Sbox1.MPG
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Sbox3.MPG
Phil

[Chief Fox]

You've all heard of Dead Man Walking right? Well, here's old man punching.....:D.
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Sbox1.MPG
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Sbox3.MPG
Phil
Hey, that's pretty cool. A guy working out in a gym lonestar with the music blasting. Pretty inspirational. Thanks for the clip. Is that you? Fast hands.

[Phil Redmond]

Hey, that's pretty cool. A guy working out in a gym lonestar with the music blasting. Pretty inspirational. Thanks for the clip. Is that you? Fast hands.
Yep, that's the young almost "60" me. (They can be lightened up. They're pretty dark)
Phil

[Chief Fox]

Yep, that's the young almost "60" me. (They can be lightened up. They're pretty dark)
Phil

D@MN! Now I'm doubly inspired! Nice work!

[Matrix]

You've all heard of Dead Man Walking right? Yeah, we've got a guy at work who's getting married this weekend. :p

[Phil Redmond]

Yeah, we've got a guy at work who's getting married this weekend. :p
That is wrong is so many ways :D
Phil

[FooFighter]

Redmond Sifu,

Thank you for sharing your clip. Your movements were beautiful. At your age and the way you move was impressive and beautiful. Truth is truth and you can hide ability if you want to with preconviced ideas of others. This is the first time I have seen a TWC sifu move the way you moved. TWC is lucky to have you representing them. What made your movement look different from the other TWC sifus that I have seen is that you had flow, grace, and proper timming. It looked like you didnt force your movements or copying anyone. It looked like you were naturally expressing your own breathing, movement, and structure. Once again, thank you.

Bao

[Don J]

Still looking good for your age, keep up the good work. Another person that moves very fluent like that is my teacher Jerome runs a very tight gym out here in Toronto, i think he said he was at the last Cheung seminar that was held by one of your students so you may of met him. Other than that i haven't seen to many TWC instructors out here that resemble.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"This is the first time I have seen a TWC sifu move the way you moved. TWC is lucky to have you representing them. What made your movement look different from the other TWC sifus that I have seen is that you had flow, grace, and proper timming. It looked like you didnt force your movements or copying anyone. It looked like you were naturally expressing your own breathing, movement, and structure. Once again, thank you." (Bao Tran)


Tran:

You need to pm Phil Redmond and ask him how certain other TWC wing chun sifus "move" (since he knows some of them - and one in particular)...a lot longer than you do; and in fact he spent an entire weekend as recently as this past May and another Sunday in June working out with (and observing) one of them MOVE)...and in this manner you just might come to the conclusion that you have to rethink some of your erroneous conceptions about certain people...

or...

you can keep on deluding yourself and continue to occasionally spread a very subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) erroneous, biased, and self-serving opinion about the abilities of certain people - based upon your own overblown ego problems and your subsequent attempts to belittle other people as a means of trying to erase past memories of mistakes YOU made in your own behavior, assumptions, and judgments during the 9 months you once spent some 5-6 years ago at a certain TWC school.

I'm sure Phil Redmond would give you an honest assessment of someone he knows for close to 30 years - as he has spent many hours of the last 22 years in the same workout room as that particular person and has first-hand knowledge about that person's wing chun (and all-around fighting) skills.

In the meantime, have a nice day. :cool:

[FooFighter]

Victor,

Not this again?!!! Please do not start a fight with me. It is not my intention to play verbal judo. It is not my intention in bring up the past and start throwing mud at you. I have respected your space and do not mess with my space. I do not want any problems with you or anyone in general. I was being honest and was giving props when I see it. You couldn't let Redmond Sifu get his props without added your two cents about me.

I do not need to know how other TWC wing chun sifus "move". Why? Because my opinions doesnt matter. I saw something beautiful (Redmond's movements) and just wanted to express it and compare it to what I remember of younger TWC players. Here are some real FACTS: 1. I rarely post comments on this forum. 2. I am not a WC forum addict. 3. I do not live here and have no interest in trying to prove anything to anyone. Therefore, I have No HIDDEN or passive aggressive intentions, Victor. I am well respected person in many circles and I know myself. Thank you for your asessment about me, but you're wrong. Your mean spirited character attack on me is rude and meaningless. So for the love of God please stop "projecting" your past and feelings to what is. Furthermore, if you want me to tell you what I think of your ability, just ask me and I will give you a direct answer. (I am sure you don't care and wont ask.) I am sure you have improved and yada yada yada. It is not always about YOU, Victor. My comments about REDMOND sifu was about REDMOND sifu and not about YOU. Write about my ego problems???! (LOL) Once again, I have nothing against anyone in TWC or any systems. If you are implying that I should ask Redmond Sifu's opinion about you for example, then I am not particularly interested. All in all, peace out and please dont waste your energies on me. I hate wasting my time and energy explaining things to you in return. Let us go back to our corner and never see each other again.

Peace,
Bao

[Ultimatewingchun]

Not this again is exactly how I feel about your perpetual two-faced attitude of always speaking out of both sides of your mouth to suit the convenience (or the hostile impulses) of the moment.

But I have no intention of going back-and-forth with you on this...

as I suspect that Phil Redmond himself will have the definitive word on this once he reads (right through) your self serving, false-prideful and phoney a55-kissing remarks. ;)

[FooFighter]

Victor,

Seriously, you need help. I am not a phoney and I am not a arse kisser. You are the one who using negative and offensive words. I simply gave a man a nice compliment and you go ape crap expecting that I have double motives and out to **** you off. Enough with this drama. I have no beef with Redmond Sifu and gave an honest opinion. I will go back and delete the comment if Redmond Sifu feel it is offensive and apology to him privately. Here is a friendly suggestion, Victor, if you want people to judge you not from your own past performance, then do the same for others. Sound logically and reasonable? FACT: I have also changed from the last when I was your student, I have matured, and I have also changed my mental outlook since we had our last PM man to man understanding. So please do not be disrespectful to me by attacking my character. I do not apprenicate that and wish you would stop that behavior. If you want to be critical and judgemental about me then judge my present abilities or my opinions which can improve over time, but not my character which is harder to change.

Bao TRan
PS: If history is a judgement of a person, then you can search for all my posts the forums or do a search on me on the net: Bao Tran, CST and see if I have any beef with people. I do not have any enemies, Victor, and not a troll.

[Phil Redmond]

Victor, You've been around for a long time and you know what you're doing. Do like you advised me to do. If you think someone is baiting you or trying to talk trash about you ignore them. I've been following what you and others advised me to do in that matter.

FooFighter, thank you but everyone moves differently. It's the effectivness that really counts. ;) Hopefully your post wasn't a slur against any individual. We've had enough of that mess here.
Phil

[Ultimatewingchun]

Phil:

The problem is that this particular guy is a definite challenge to the advice of "just ignore him"...as he constantly vacillates between being conciliatory and superficially respectful and downright hostile and slanderous (although he does often take pains to disguise EXACTLY what he means and who in particular he's talking about)...

but never FULLY disguises it :rolleyes: ...

so that anyone who has read his posts in the past knows he's talking about me (in fact he used to post 5hit about me under a false name at one time until I outed him) :eek: ...


and the drill he and I usually play is that he occasionally let's loose with some bull5hit about me - I confront him - he huffs and puffs with some slick double talk and denials - I confront him again - and then he backs off with something somewhat conciliatory...

until the next time. :D

[Phil Redmond]

Victor asked me to post these clips. I have a few more but I'm only going to post two at a time and I'll only leave them up for a few days because of the space.
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor1.mov
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor2.mov
Phil

[Chief Fox]

Hey those are cool. I'd like to see some more kicking but still very cool. Thanks for sharing.

[kung fu fighter]

Victor asked me to post these clips. I have a few more but I'm only going to post two at a time and I'll only leave them up for a few days because of the space.
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor1.mov
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor2.mov
Phil

Hey Victor,

Good stuff Man, I see you are using your jab almost like an man sao to feel out the opponent. I wish more people would post their fighting clips. I am a firm beliver is action. It would be nice to see how some of the other members apply their wing chun instead of talking about how authentic their wc is. I would post some of my own footage, but I don't have computer equipment or know how of how to transfer video footage on to the computer.

Kung fu fighter

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yeah...It's accurate to say that my use of the jab is similar to mon sao, since my intention with the jab is often meant not so much to actually hit a body/head target on the opponent...as it is meant to force him to respond with a move that establishes a bridge for me to work with OR give me an opening for a hit/kick that DOES connect to the head/body/legs...

Which is where the boxing/wing chun connection often falls into place - since I JUST MIGHT follow up after the jab with a hit(s) that are meant to hurt without the use of a bridge...including longer-than-usual wing chun strikes such as crosses...

But at a slightly closer range...I would square up completely and use more typical (conventional) wing chun strikes and moves.

It all depends upon the distance.

[KPM]

Victor asked me to post these clips. I have a few more but I'm only going to post two at a time and I'll only leave them up for a few days because of the space.
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor1.mov
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor2.mov
Phil

Thanks for clips! I like the fact that you are using light gloves with additional body protection rather than those huge boxing gloves you see others use. :-) Got a question for you Victor. I was told be Burton Richardson at a seminar that...at least amongst his group of JKD guys....they no longer do much training in the "trapping range." He noted that with the advent of so much grappling, that things just go too quickly from an outside range of punching/kicking to stand-up grappling to ground fighting....essentially skipping any significant trapping ala Wing Chun. As a Wing Chun guy that also does punching/kicking from the outside range and grappling/ground-fighting, how true have you found this to be in your sparring experiences? Is Wing Chun's "specialty" essentially becoming obsolete?

Keith

[kung fu fighter]

Thanks for clips! I like the fact that you are using light gloves with additional body protection rather than those huge boxing gloves you see others use. :-) Got a question for you Victor. I was told be Burton Richardson at a seminar that...at least amongst his group of JKD guys....they no longer do much training in the "trapping range." He noted that with the advent of so much grappling, that things just go too quickly from an outside range of punching/kicking to stand-up grappling to ground fighting....essentially skipping any significant trapping ala Wing Chun. As a Wing Chun guy that also does punching/kicking from the outside range and grappling/ground-fighting, how true have you found this to be in your sparring experiences? Is Wing Chun's "specialty" essentially becoming obsolete?

Hey keith,
I dont agree with Burton Richardson's approach of skipping trapping range. They use the concept of absorbing what is useful and reject what is useless which is cool, but how can they fullly understand what is useful if they don't dont spend enough time to develop the proper attributes which are needed to make trapping work. I personnally feel that alot of JKD guys lack the understanding of high level controlling/sticking skills which are needed to control an opponent at trapping range. They mainly train trapping as some fixed techniques like phon sao drills using the centerline as a reference point. WSL mentioned that Bruce Lee went back to wing chun towards the end of his life.

I train with some of the top grapplers/MMA fighters in the country and they find it extreamely difficult to take me down because most of the time I am in control of their balance in close through bridge contact, the other thing which makes it difficult for them is the angles which I use are constanting changing so it becomes very difficult for them to predict where I am going to be, as oppose to just charging down the centerline with chain punches.

The two most important attributes when fighting MMA or any fighter is learning to read the opponent's intent and control the range, then wing chun seems to come out automatically without thought, wheather the opponent is punching kicking trapping or grappling make no difference.

Just My two cents

[Phil Redmond]

More clips:
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor3.mov
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/Victor4.mov
Phil

[Ultimatewingchun]

Wow, Keith...you just brought up one of my favorite subjects of late:

When to strike/trap/block/deflect at very short wing chun range and when to just grab and grapple...since the "geography" is so similar and therefore virtually all of these things might be possible here at any given moment.

But in answer to your specific question about trapping: IT'S NOT ABOUT TRAPPING!!! :)

It's about Striking and Manuevering in the wing chun mode - and if a trap is available, then fine...but I don't look SPECIFICALLY for traps...I just work the wing chun principles, strategies, and techniques when this close - and if a trap is there, I take it...if a hit is there, I take it...if a knee or elbow strike, I take it...if the opportunity is there for a nice clean wrestling move (like double underhooks, bodylocks leading to takedowns, sweeps, throws, a single or a double leg shoot, etc., I take it)...

I'll do whatever I feel will give me an advantage in the fight at that precise moment.

And I think, contrary to the idea that wing chun's specialty (ie.- trapping) might be on the verge of being obsolete, the TOTAL WING CHUN standup infighting package can bring a great deal to the table in-between striking and clinch fighting.

I also think that one's knowledge and experience with chi sao and it's fighting applications are extremely important in this possible wing chun striking-trapping/grappling-in-the-clinch context as well: You must know when to pressure forward, when to shift and redirect, when to disengage and come back on a different line; it's about the degree of your contact reflex sensitivity so as to do huen or jut sao in the blink of an eye when being taken off the line...the instanteous and appropriate use of tan, bong, po pai, etc...when to suddenly throw a very close range wing chun heel kick (or some other kick), and so on.

But here's the biggest hitch, Keith...imo...Knowledge of wrestling/grappling-in-the-clinch principles, strategies, and techniques are also ESSENTIAL in this context...along with the knowledge of the wing chun very close infighting range...in order to put the pieces together as one coherent and seamless unit - AND WITH LOT'S OF SPONTANEOUS CONTACT SPARRING, CLINCH FIGHTING, AND ROLLING.

[sihing]

Hey keith,
I train with some of the top grapplers/MMA fighters in the country and they find it extreamely difficult to take me down because most of the time I am in control of their balance in close through bridge contact, the other thing which makes it difficult for them is the angles which I use are constanting changing so it becomes very difficult for them to predict where I am going to be, as oppose to just charging down the centerline with chain punches.

The two most important attributes when fighting MMA or any fighter is learning to read the opponent's intent and control the range, then wing chun seems to come out automatically without thought, wheather the opponent is punching kicking trapping or grappling make no difference.
Just My two cents

Good points kung fu fighter, and I agree with your tactics. I wonder if Lawrence read this???(Oh Oh I feel another Ya But coming on..)

James

[martyg]

Thanks for clips! I like the fact that you are using light gloves with additional body protection rather than those huge boxing gloves you see others use. :-) Got a question for you Victor. I was told be Burton Richardson at a seminar that...at least amongst his group of JKD guys....they no longer do much training in the "trapping range." He noted that with the advent of so much grappling, that things just go too quickly from an outside range of punching/kicking to stand-up grappling to ground fighting....essentially skipping any significant trapping ala Wing Chun. As a Wing Chun guy that also does punching/kicking from the outside range and grappling/ground-fighting, how true have you found this to be in your sparring experiences? Is Wing Chun's "specialty" essentially becoming obsolete?

Keith

Hi Keith,

I would submit that Wing Chun's specialty is not "trapping" in the first place. I don't believe in a "trapping range" which is one thing I usually debate with JKD people about. In my opinion (and practice) Wing Chun has two ranges - not in contact and in contact.
We deal with energy and intent, not shape (though I realize some wing chun goes more of that JKD route). I.E., I can be in contact with a persons leg, arm, or body, or whatever - what unifies them all is I'm in contact with their energy and intent. The actual closeness doesn't matter (my own preference and that of my family is face to face or what others may term "grappling range"). When you're not in contact, you can do anything you want within reason. Once you're in contact, you have to work with the opponent's intent/energy.

I see a lot of the JKD categorization and view because (in my experience) they're focusing more on patterns/drills and techniques of wing chun - the surface level stuff, rather than the meat of it. And I can't fault it because a lot of wing chun does that as well. Hence you had them subbing open hand kali for wing chun drills over the years, and now looking to cut more to "grappling" and grappling entries have become more sophisticated (a lot of the bjj and general mma entries use very similar timings to us).

Personally, I'm not worried about those types abandoning wing chun influenced stuff anyways. I don't need them as a billboard for wing chun.

[KPM]

Hi Guys!

Don't worry. I'm not fixated on "trapping." :-) I only used that terminology because I was mentioning what a prominent JKD instructor had told me and that is the terminology that they use. I didn't mean to infer that Wing Chun's specialty was "trapping." I was refering to the fact that Wing Chun's specialty is contact fighting or "in-fighting" which occurs at what the JKD guys call "trapping range." So essentially what the JKD guys (at least Burton Richardson) are saying is that they have discovered that the "trapping range" is less essential than the kicking, punching, and grappling ranges....to use their categorization. So they are spending much less time training at that range than in the past. Now I agree with what all of you have said...Navin, Victor, and Marty. My comments here and observations kind of go along with the prior "thinking out loud" threads I started in the past. What you guys have said makes good sense. But when you look at videos of people sparring with their Wing Chun, more often than not you see very little actual Wing Chun happening. Even in Victor's video clips he goes from "out-fighting" with a boxing structure punching and kicking to "in-fighting" with stand-up grappling techniques until someone is thrown and then continues with ground-fighting. You see very little Wing Chun fighting on the inside. That's why I remembered Richardson's comment. What he had told me in the past fit perfectly with what I saw Victor doing and what I have seen other Wing Chun guys doing in sparring clips in the past. That's why I proposed the question to Victor. We all have limited time to train. We all want to focus on "high yield" material. If it has come to the point that sparring scenarios seem to typically follow this pattern of spending little to no time in the "trapping range"....ie in-fighting with striking techniques rather than standing grappling....then is time better spent working on "out-fighting" with longer range punching/kicking and on grappling? I know, all of us Wing Chun guys are groaning and saying "absolutely not!" :-) But then show me some good sparring clips of people actually doing Wing Chun rather than a version of kickboxing!!!

Keith

[Phil Redmond]

Hi Keith, you said that most sparring clips didn't look like WC. What should WC sparring look like? IMHO WC is principle based and not technique based. To me that means use what you can to win. Isn't that the bottom line of combat?
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

Marty just posted on another thread about WC's eclectic origins. In the beggining there was no Kwan. It was added and accepted as part of WC. ;)
Phil

[sihing]

Hi Keith, you said that most sparring clips didn't look like WC. What should WC sparring look like? IMHO WC is principle based and not technique based. To me that means use what you can to win. Isn't that the bottom line of combat?
Phil


Hi Phil,
I agree that WC is a concept/principal based MA, with the techniques being the physical application of those things, this is what WC sparring should look like IMO (not bouncing around up on the toes, with a narrow stance, flicking jabs at your opponent to try and make him flinch and go for the fake, etc...). Fight like you train, train like you fight. Also I don't believe in just using anything to win in a fight, in most cases, meaning I am open to using anything if needed but prefer to stick to what I have engrained in my body through training in the WC system. There is a reason why we adhere to the concept of using Straight line attacks rather than round attacks, there is a reason why we face squarer on rather than side on to the opponent, and there are reasons why I don't use spinning kicks in 99% of the case. Now I know that adhering to all the combat philosophies that WC has to offer may not be at optimum levels at all times when in combat, and that performing perfect WC movement is not the goal when fighting (more because your opponent has attacked you while in a awkward position rather than you deciding to use methods outside of the WC spectrum), but IMO when a WC man/woman is in a fight you should be able to recognize them by how they move and some of the common tactics they may use, as compared to a TKD exponent or Boxer. If this isn't the case then something is wrong IMO.


James

[Ultimatewingchun]

Keith:

Good analysis, and I would like to respond point-for-point to your comments:

"Even in Victor's video clips he goes from 'out-fighting' with a boxing structure punching and kicking to 'in-fighting' with stand-up grappling techniques until someone is thrown and then continues with ground-fighting. You see very little Wing Chun fighting on the inside." (KPM)


***THE ORIGINAL intent of that first set of videos I posted (there were 5 of them) was to purposely show the MMA approach that I take - so I didn't post any of the more "conventional" wing chun moves that occurred during that sparring session. In fact, I intend to post some other vids from that sparring session and another session that I engaged in with a different student in the NEAR FUTURE that includes some very obvious wing chun moves being used in the appropriate geograhical fighting range.

That said...the fact DOES remain that QUITE OFTEN during the course of a real engagement you WILL go from longer range punching and kicking to a grab & grapple type fight with no "stop" in-between...either because your opponent forced the issue to that point or because you saw the advantage of bypassing the wing chun range.

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


"That's why I remembered Richardson's comment. What he had told me in the past fit perfectly with what I saw Victor doing and what I have seen other Wing Chun guys doing in sparring clips in the past. That's why I proposed the question to Victor. We all have limited time to train. We all want to focus on 'high yield' material. If it has come to the point that sparring scenarios seem to typically follow this pattern of spending little to no time in the 'trapping range'....ie in-fighting with striking techniques rather than standing grappling....then is time better spent working on 'out-fighting' with longer range punching/kicking and on grappling? I know, all of us Wing Chun guys are groaning and saying "absolutely not!" :-) But then show me some good sparring clips of people actually doing Wing Chun rather than a version of kickboxing!!!" (KPM)


***AGAIN, excellent comments and questions raised. But I believe the answer, quite frankly, is to become a Mixed Martial Artist instead of banging one's head against the wall while pursuing the idea that you must somehow make your wing chun fit into (and have an answer to) every fighting range; or worse yet, constantly delude yourself into thinking (as some people do) that "GOOD" wing chun will not allow the opponent to EVER force you to fight in the longer ranges or the very short grappling ranges...THIS IS AN ILLUSION, imo.

[Phil Redmond]

Hey Keith, Have you seen kung fu styles that use sword techniques or chain whips from the floor striking at your ankles or lower leg? What technique/method that you learned in WC would you use? Also, there is a round punch in some WC Chum Kiu forms and a round punch can be as effecient as a stright punch depending on the circumstances. I think I've said this before I'm a martial artist first. I just happen to specialize in WC. In Marine Corps boot camp we trained in NATO (M14- M16) weapons, but we had to be familiar with the AK50 and AK47 just in case we saw one laying on the ground and had to pick it up and fire it to save lives ;) A win is a win regardles of what you use.
Phil

[martyg]

Hi Phil,
I agree that WC is a concept/principal based MA, with the techniques being the physical application of those things,


Actually, techniques are a physical interpretation of those concepts and principles. We all have a tan concept for example and understand (for the most part) what tan energy feels like. Yet there are many many different ways of applying a tan shape (one has only to look at the many versions of "tan" across the board). And that begs the question as to what unifies it.



There is a reason why we adhere to the concept of using Straight line attacks rather than round attacks, there is a reason why we face squarer on rather than side on to the opponent,

These are all relative. straight vs. round is defined by interaction with the opponent. We have plenty of circular motions and spiraling in the art. However, they take on linnear qualities through interaction. And vice versa - many of the "linnear" motions can take on circular qualities as well (i.e. the old arts and crafts class trick of making a circile out of drawing lots of straight lines). Facing is also relative to the interaction as it's two people moving. Side on could be square on at a moment's notice and vice versa.



but IMO when a WC man/woman is in a fight you should be able to recognize them by how they move and some of the common tactics they may use, as compared to a TKD exponent or Boxer. If this isn't the case then something is wrong IMO.

James

I'll recognize them because of their general adherence to WC principles and concepts, not because of the posture they use. Otherwise I'd be to busy saying everyone else out there is not doing WC because they don't pose and posture exactly like me.

[Phil Redmond]

Since I live in Hockey Town I had to post these: :D
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/HockeyFight1.wmv
http://www.sifupr.com/videos/HockeyFight2.wmv
Phil

[martyg]

Hey Keith, Have you seen kung fu styles that use sword techniques or chain whips from the floor striking at your ankles or lower leg? What technique/method that you learned in WC would you use?


If I've got nothing to block it with, the "jump and geth the f*$%! out of the way" technique. ;) But seriously though, that raises a point on the adaptability nature of the art. That even when I do jump I jump like a WC person vs. someone elses "jumping technique". If I do wind up having to jump, duck, etc. etc. I do so with certain qualities engrained that guid that motion to allow me to flow back in to how my body wants to actuall function. If I jump, my body is going to want to get back to what it knows is more stable. So just possibly that jump may be a very "ballanced and neutral" mechanic, one that will allow me to recover. And just maybe that jump might also include certain qualities such as stealing space, adjusting to a more advantageous position, etc. etc.



Also, there is a round punch in some WC chun Kiu forms and a round punce can be as effecient as a stright punch depending on the circumstances. I think I've said this before I'm a martial artist first. I just happen to specialize in WC. In Marine Corps boot camp we trained in NATO (M14- M16) weapons, but we had to be familiar with the AK50 and AK47 just in case we saw one laying on the ground and had to pick it up and fire it to save lives ;) A win is a win regardles of what you use.
Phil

A good principle for training in general. The more you expose yourself to (in understanding as well) the more you understand inherent advantages and weaknesses, and therefore better understand how to destroy it. By understaning your opponent's weapons you understand how to also turn them in to his own weaknesses. Picking up a dead guy's ak-47 and using it against the rest of his troop is a more readily available example. One in openhand might be how we turn an opponent's own punch against them in an almost karmic nature.

[Phil Redmond]

If I've got nothing to block it with, the "jump and geth the f*$%! out of the way" technique. ;) But seriously though, that raises a point on the adaptability nature of the art. That even when I do jump I jump like a WC person vs. someone elses "jumping technique". If I do wind up having to jump, duck, etc. etc. I do so with certain qualities engrained that guid that motion to allow me to flow back in to how my body wants to actuall function. If I jump, my body is going to want to get back to what it knows is more stable. So just possibly that jump may be a very "ballanced and neutral" mechanic, one that will allow me to recover. And just maybe that jump might also include certain qualities such as stealing space, adjusting to a more advantageous position, etc. etc.



A good principle for training in general. The more you expose yourself to (in understanding as well) the more you understand inherent advantages and weaknesses, and therefore better understand how to destroy it. By understaning your opponent's weapons you understand how to also turn them in to his own weaknesses. Picking up a dead guy's ak-47 and using it against the rest of his troop is a more readily available example. One in openhand might be how we turn an opponent's own punch against them in an almost karmic nature.
GOOOOAAAALLLL ! ! ! ! !
(A Soccer/Football exclamation for my Yankee brothers and sisters). :D
Phil

[Death Touch]

Helo, them vid clips are they begginners, me like spar and am very fast kicker.

[Phil Redmond]

Helo, them vid clips are they begginners, me like spar and am very fast kicker.
Have you been reading the thread? Please tell us about yourself. There is nothing in your profile. Who is your WC teacher?
PR

[KPM]

Hey Victor!

Good analysis, and I would like to respond point-for-point to your comments:

---Thanks for taking such a reasoned and rational response instead of resorting to the knee-jerk reaction seen too often here. :rolleyes:


***THE ORIGINAL intent of that first set of videos I posted (there were 5 of them) was to purposely show the MMA approach that I take - so I didn't post any of the more "conventional" wing chun moves that occurred during that sparring session. In fact, I intend to post some other vids from that sparring session and another session that I engaged in with a different student in the NEAR FUTURE that includes some very obvious wing chun moves being used in the appropriate geograhical fighting range.

---OK. Gotcha! Looking forward to seeing those future videos. :)

That said...the fact DOES remain that QUITE OFTEN during the course of a real engagement you WILL go from longer range punching and kicking to a grab & grapple type fight with no "stop" in-between...either because your opponent forced the issue to that point or because you saw the advantage of bypassing the wing chun range.

---Yes. So still playing the devil's advocate and thinking out loud....as "classical" Wing Chun practitioners, are we spending an inordinate amount of time developing an in-fighting skill that is often a very small part of an actual engagement, and neglecting elements that are a very large part of a typical engagement?


***AGAIN, excellent comments and questions raised. But I believe the answer, quite frankly, is to become a Mixed Martial Artist instead of banging one's head against the wall while pursuing the idea that you must somehow make your wing chun fit into and have an answer to every fighting range; or worse yet, constantly delude yourself into thinking (as some people do) that "GOOD" wing chun will not allow the opponent to EVER force you to fight in the longer ranges or the very short grappling ranges...THIS IS AN ILLUSION, imo.

---Thanks for putting it out there in an honest fashion! So now the question becomes this......for those that take a MMA approach but still want to preserve the in-fighting skills and reactions from Wing Chun, what is the best way to do this or preserve this? Is spending lots of time learning all the forms necessary or time efficient? Is doing lots of Chi Sau to develop the in-fighting range the answer? In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the "classical" Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer.

--------

Hey Phil!

Hey Keith, Have you seen kung fu styles that use sword techniques or chain whips from the floor striking at your ankles or lower leg? What technique/method that you learned in WC would you use?

---Point taken! But I'm not one of those that feels the need to try and make Wing Chun fit and function in every scenario. ;)

you said that most sparring clips didn't look like WC. What should WC sparring look like? IMHO WC is principle based and not technique based. To me that means use what you can to win. Isn't that the bottom line of combat?

---I agree that WCK is principle based and not technique based. But there is still a foundational biomechanic that makes it "Wing Chun." If someone is truly utilizing their Wing Chun when sparring then the way they move and generate power in general should be recognizable as Wing Chun. Otherwise, why spend all that time developing good Wing Chun body structure and a good Wing Chun specific power base? Why wouldn't someone just spend that time developing a better boxing biomechanic and power base instead, if that's what they are going to resort to when sparring?

Keith

[Death Touch]

Me learn win chun from video me gettin reel good me gonna be master one day i hope any one learn from video. i live in group home me and my frends practse all day we good at win chun.

[Phil Redmond]

Hi Keith, you wrote:
>>---I agree that WCK is principle based and not technique based. But there is still a foundational biomechanic that makes it "Wing Chun." If someone is truly utilizing their Wing Chun when sparring then the way they move and generate power in general should be recognizable as Wing Chun. Otherwise, why spend all that time developing good Wing Chun body structure and a good Wing Chun specific power base? Why wouldn't someone just spend that time developing a better boxing biomechanic and power base instead, if that's what they are going to resort to when sparring? Keith<<

Good points but everybody's WC looks different. Good WC body structure varies with lineage. Some will say that TWC stances look like western boxing. When WC was invented it was an eclectic style designed to fight people of that era. They only knew the styles in their area. With modern media we are exposed to various styles. We have seen things that the WC "elders" never saw. We are stronger, faster, healthier, therefore WC has to evolve or it will die. No one complained when the Pole was added.
Phil

[Death Touch]

what is pole? who turn video off

[Phil Redmond]

what is pole? who turn video off
The "Pole" is the Wing Chun staff or Kwan in Chinese.
Phil

[Death Touch]

thank you you are nice man

[Death Touch]

AKAJ Form 15-1 (VIDEO CLIP 3)
Karate Sparring VIDEO CLIP 1 (1,895 KB)
me frend put this on for me

[Edmund]

---Yes. So still playing the devil's advocate and thinking out loud....as "classical" Wing Chun practitioners, are we spending an inordinate amount of time developing an in-fighting skill that is often a very small part of an actual engagement, and neglecting elements that are a very large part of a typical engagement?


Yes you are. :)

Actually the larger part of a typical engagement is in close.
Once the range is closed it's not that easy to break.

I'd say fighters try to gravitate towards their strength. If they are good from long range, they try to win from long range. If they are good on the ground they try to bring it there. Can you WIN from the inside? Then you really just need enough skill to get to there.




---Thanks for putting it out there in an honest fashion! So now the question becomes this......for those that take a MMA approach but still want to preserve the in-fighting skills and reactions from Wing Chun, what is the best way to do this or preserve this? Is spending lots of time learning all the forms necessary or time efficient? Is doing lots of Chi Sau to develop the in-fighting range the answer? In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the "classical" Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer.


Right! You answered your own question!

However I kinda question how long it actually takes to learn the classical Wing Chun method. Relative to other arts, the forms are incredibly short and not that complicated.

For a MMA approach, I'd say you'd want to be be particularly good at one range but fairly competent at other ranges so you don't have a glaring hole.



---I agree that WCK is principle based and not technique based. But there is still a foundational biomechanic that makes it "Wing Chun." If someone is truly utilizing their Wing Chun when sparring then the way they move and generate power in general should be recognizable as Wing Chun. Otherwise, why spend all that time developing good Wing Chun body structure and a good Wing Chun specific power base? Why wouldn't someone just spend that time developing a better boxing biomechanic and power base instead, if that's what they are going to resort to when sparring?


Boxing? I don't think so personally but it depends on what sparring method you are talking about. Boxing is better for punching. What about kicking and grappling?

[Ultimatewingchun]

"So still playing the devil's advocate and thinking out loud....as 'classical' Wing Chun practitioners, are we spending an inordinate amount of time developing an in-fighting skill that is often a very small part of an actual engagement, and neglecting elements that are a very large part of a typical engagement?.....

So now the question becomes this......for those that take a MMA approach but still want to preserve the in-fighting skills and reactions from Wing Chun, what is the best way to do this or preserve this? Is spending lots of time learning all the forms necessary or time efficient? Is doing lots of Chi Sau to develop the in-fighting range the answer? In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the 'classical' Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer" (KPM)


***LET'S PUT IT THIS, Keith...by the time the students I teach these days get to bil jee form and wooden dummy...they have already learned a great deal of longer range footwork, striking, and kicking (WHICH INCLUDES BOXING AND OTHER APPROACHES TO LONG RANGE - AS WELL AS WING CHUN)...and quite a bit of wrestling in the clinch and on the ground....ALONG WITH.... the first form (SLT)...and a substantial amount of chi sao and related fighting applications, all related chi sao drills like pak sao and bong sao/lop sao, po pai, etc....and short range wing chun footwork, striking, and kicking...with chum kiu thrown in along the way.

Mondays: SLT, lots of chi sao and related drills, and wooden dummy for those who are up to it.

Wednesdays: Lots of wrestling, both in the clinch, use of takedowns and (wrestling) takedown defenses...and wrestling on the ground (with some striking thrown in when appropriate). And occasionally I teach a wing chun weapons class on Wednesdays as well.

Saturdays: Forms, BOTH long range striking, kicking, and related footwork (similar to boxing)...AND...more wing chun oriented short range footwork, striking, kicking, etc...chi sao and related drills....sparring drills...and geared up spontaneous contact sparring that includes ALL standup ranges.

[martyg]

Me learn win chun from video me gettin reel good me gonna be master one day i hope any one learn from video. i live in group home me and my frends practse all day we good at win chun.


Why are you talking like an indian out of an old hollywood wild west movie? You makem fire with stick that go boom?

[Edmund]

Why are you talking like an indian out of an old hollywood wild west movie? You makem fire with stick that go boom?

I'd say it's another dismal attempt at humour like MegaFist.

[martyg]

In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the "classical" Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer.

Keith


Heya Keith. I guess my question would be "What's the 'classical wing chun method'?" I've never heard of that breed. ;)

You know from my previous posts, I just don't see the art as something static and classical because of it's propensity to lean towards concepts and principles as the center of the wheel so to speak. That's also why I don't see the need to look outside or to "change" things either. How can you change something that's already in a changeless state? I find it very robust, more of method of training and learning than fighting. One that allows adaptability - I guess almost parallel to the situation of the of the U.S.'s Constitution. The founding fathers of the US couldn't forsee many years in to the future to possibly cover everything in the initial draft. So they built in ways for the constitution to grow, evolve and be further defined. All they knew was what they needed it for right then. Much like the eclectic background that Phil speaks about with regards to Wing Chun. All the people on the red boats could forsee was what they had to fight back then, but knew they couldn't possibly forsee every challenge. Hence by focusing on concepts/principles/methods/etc. they created a venue for growth and adaptability to needs as they presented themselves. If anything, I see the JKD "concept" (unwittingly) being an outside attempt to capture what is actually already the core of wing chun.

As a Wing Chun person I don't have to "absorb what is useful", I have to make myself useful.

[Phil Redmond]

Why are you talking like an indian out of an old hollywood wild west movie? You makem fire with stick that go boom?
this may explain it:
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38616
Phil

[Death Touch]

Why are you talking like an indian out of an old hollywood wild west movie? You makem fire with stick that go boom? be carful me know death touch from video by michael kelly me can make you go num with me baby finger. me take video corse by lam kung fu the worlds bestest master me hands are really fast and can brek bone me not indian. what did indian say when dog fell off the cliff ( dog gone)

[KPM]

Hey Victor!

***LET'S PUT IT THIS, Keith...by the time the students I teach these days get to bil jee form and wooden dummy...they have already learned a great deal of longer range footwork, striking, and kicking (WHICH INCLUDES BOXING AND OTHER APPROACHES TO LONG RANGE - AS WELL AS WING CHUN)...and quite a bit of wrestling in the clinch and on the ground....ALONG WITH.... the first form (SLT)...and a substantial amount of chi sao and related fighting applications, all related chi sao drills like pak sao and bong sao/lop sao, po pai, etc....and short range wing chun footwork, striking, and kicking...with chum kiu thrown in along the way.

---Right, but a related question to what I proposed before.....is this overkill if all you are looking for is contact and flow skills at in-fighting range? In other words....does the "Wing Chun oriented" MMA you have proposed need to be all-inclusive of the Wing Chun system? Or can it "borrow" from the Wing Chun system for applications in the "in-fighting" area?

-------

Hey Marty!

Heya Keith. I guess my question would be "What's the 'classical wing chun method'?" I've never heard of that breed.

--I had a feeling you'd say that! :p I was just trying to refer to Wing Chun as typically taught....not the JKD version.....not the altered beyond recognition modernized eclectic version....just Wing Chun as we have come to know it and love it. :) I couldn't say "traditional"....that name is already taken for something more specific!

All the people on the red boats could forsee was what they had to fight back then, but knew they couldn't possibly forsee every challenge. Hence by focusing on concepts/principles/methods/etc. they created a venue for growth and adaptability to needs as they presented themselves. If anything, I see the JKD "concept" (unwittingly) being an outside attempt to capture what is actually already the core of wing chun.

---Good point. But while attempts to adapt Wing Chun to ground-fighting or even "out-fighting" may be possible, I think Victor has pointed out in the past that this may be essentially "reinventing the wheel", when a more efficient approach would be to learn from those that are already good at these things. However, I think one can look at these areas with "Wing Chun eyes" and see how certain things can be done so that they match or draw upon Wing Chun principles. So another questions arises (still playing the devil's advocate here)....do existing grappling methods or boxing/kickboxing methods that are applied thru the "filter" of Wing Chun principles .... become "Wing Chun"?

As a Wing Chun person I don't have to "absorb what is useful", I have to make myself useful.

---Good saying! I like that! :D

Keith

[kung fu fighter]

Hey KPM!


[/QUOTE]All the people on the red boats could forsee was what they had to fight back then, but knew they couldn't possibly forsee every challenge. Hence by focusing on concepts/principles/methods/etc. they created a venue for growth and adaptability to needs as they presented themselves. If anything, I see the JKD "concept" (unwittingly) being an outside attempt to capture what is actually already the core of wing chun.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree with the above!

[Death Touch]

me do chi sow with a manican me have no tran partner me always win me have gost hands me hands real fast. me want wood dumy for train partner do you have one for me to borow or maby you can come over to train me teach you good win chun visit hours are mon and thur 6-9

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Hey Victor!

***LET'S PUT IT THIS, Keith...by the time the students I teach these days get to bil jee form and wooden dummy...they have already learned a great deal of longer range footwork, striking, and kicking (WHICH INCLUDES BOXING AND OTHER APPROACHES TO LONG RANGE - AS WELL AS WING CHUN)...and quite a bit of wrestling in the clinch and on the ground....ALONG WITH.... the first form (SLT)...and a substantial amount of chi sao and related fighting applications, all related chi sao drills like pak sao and bong sao/lop sao, po pai, etc....and short range wing chun footwork, striking, and kicking...with chum kiu thrown in along the way.

---Right, but a related question to what I proposed before.....is this overkill if all you are looking for is contact and flow skills at in-fighting range? In other words....does the 'Wing Chun oriented' MMA you have proposed need to be all-inclusive of the Wing Chun system? Or can it "borrow" from the Wing Chun system for applications in the 'in-fighting' area?" (KPM)

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


***For me, Keith, it's not overkill precisely because I'M NOT JUST LOOKING for contact and flow skills at in-fighting range. And I couldn't "just borrow" from wing chun for applications in the in-fighting area - because I use center (and central) line principles ALL THROUGHOUT my standup striking/kicking game (which includes the longer "boxing/kickboxing" type ranges as well as infighting range)...and I use certain types of Traditional Wing Chun footwork and blindside principles, strategies, and related techniques ALL throughout the standup range as well (not just at close range)...

so that would be an awful lot of "just borrowing" :p .

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


And as to this:

"But while attempts to adapt Wing Chun to ground-fighting or even 'out-fighting' may be possible, I think Victor has pointed out in the past that this may be essentially 'reinventing the wheel', when a more efficient approach would be to learn from those that are already good at these things. However, I think one can look at these areas with 'Wing Chun eyes' and see how certain things can be done so that they match or draw upon Wing Chun principles. So another questions arises (still playing the devil's advocate here)....do existing grappling methods or boxing/kickboxing methods that are applied thru the 'filter' of Wing Chun principles .... become "Wing Chun"?


***CONTRARY to what some people in the wing chun world believe, I don't think that grappling methods could ever be applied thru a Wing Chun "filter" - and therefore become "Wing Chun".

Again, I THINK THIS IS AN ILLUSION.

Yes, there are some similarities between standup wrestling/grappling "hand fighting" (particularly between what is known as pummeling in wrestling/grappling and chi sao's huen sao techniques that are based upon centerline principles and contact reflex sensitivity in the hands/arms)...

but the similarities are just a very small drop in the bucket. There is just so much more to wrestling that doesn't resemble wing chun at all. Once you really tie up - and especially after you hit the ground - IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF FIGHT ALTOGETHER. Yes, it's true that sometimes you can use striking/kicking/kneeing/elbowing while in the midst of wrestling/grappling...but it's a very secondary role. (The one notable exception to this being the now famous "ground and pound" routine, wherein you are in the top saddle (mount) position and are now raining punches down on the opponent). But even getting this position will almost always require wrestling/grappling takedown and control skills which have nothing to do with wing chun.

As to boxing going through a "wing chun" filter - that's much less of a stretch - since they are still both concerned primarily with striking while on the feet.

[KPM]

Hi Victor!

***For me, Keith, it's not overkill precisely because I'M NOT JUST LOOKING for contact and flow skills at in-fighting range. And I couldn't "just borrow" from wing chun for applications in the in-fighting area - because I use center (and central) line principles ALL THROUGHOUT my standup striking/kicking game (which includes the longer "boxing/kickboxing" type ranges as well as infighting range)...and I use certain types of Traditional Wing Chun footwork and blindside principles, strategies, and related techniques ALL throughout the standup range as well (not just at close range)...so that would be an awful lot of "just borrowing" :p .

---Then again....maybe not! :) Do you really need to teach all of the Wing Chun forms and drills to do that?



***CONTRARY to what some people in the wing chun world believe, I don't think that grappling methods could ever be applied thru a Wing Chun "filter" - and therefore become "Wing Chun".
Again, I THINK THIS IS AN ILLUSION.

---I agree with you on that one. Others seem to think differently. ;)


As to boxing going through a "wing chun" filter - that's much less of a stretch - since they are still both concerned primarily with striking while on the feet.

---Yes, and there is one style of boxing that already has many of the "Wing Chun principles" that you mentioned.....the old bare knuckle boxing style. I've posted on this before. You see, when Burton Richardson made that comment about "skipping trapping range" based on experience in different types of sparring/fighting, this wasn't a new revelation at all. This is also how the fight was conducted by the old western pugilists...who, of course, sparred all the time. Before the Marquis of Queensbury Rules came along, things were a bit different in the boxing world. There were no timed rounds....a round only ended when someone hit the dirt. That's why the old matches could go one for dozens of rounds. A given round may have lasted only 20 seconds....long enough to close to the grapple and someone to get thrown. You see, the rules allowed stand up grappling (holding and hitting) as well as throws. One object was to land on top of the opponent to dislocate his shoulder, break some ribs, or just knock all the wind out of him if possible. But there was no extended ground fighting...people came to see a boxing match, not a wrestling match. But some of the old boxing manuals do recommend expanding a fighter's self-defense repertoir by studying wrestling as well. At that time they also did not have nice big gloves to hide behind or cover with. So the style of fight was different compared to modern boxing. They stayed with "out-fighting".....manuevering for openings, probbing with punches from a distance, looking for a good set-up, etc...and used centerline principles to do so that came from fencing theory. When they closed, the "in-fighting" consisted of squaring up more with the opponent in order to throw rapid hard punches from multiple angles....then either someone went down, someone was thrown down, or they jumped back to out-fighting range. In-fighting was very brief unless a standing grapple resulted. There was no flowing, sticking, trapping, redirecting, etc (ala Wing Chun) because things typically went from rapid punching straight to the grapple. Contrast all this to modern boxing where grappling is not allowed and fighters can hide behind nice big gloves. Here it makes sense to stand in close "toe to toe" and "duke it out." Not so with the older method! I can see how the old western pugilism method could be improved upon precisely by adding to its in-fighting game with Wing Chun techniques and principles. But does one have to learn the entire Wing Chun system in order to do this?

Keith

[Death Touch]

The "Pole" is the Wing Chun staff or Kwan in Chinese.
Phil
me like you you cool you from detrot that is scary place me frend say do you use win chun on gangs there me like to know me have to take nap now by

[Ultimatewingchun]

"There is one style of boxing that already has many of the "Wing Chun principles" that you mentioned.....the old bare knuckle boxing style. I've posted on this before. You see, when Burton Richardson made that comment about "skipping trapping range" based on experience in different types of sparring/fighting, this wasn't a new revelation at all. This is also how the fight was conducted by the old western pugilists...who, of course, sparred all the time. Before the Marquis of Queensbury Rules came along, things were a bit different in the boxing world. There were no timed rounds....a round only ended when someone hit the dirt. That's why the old matches could go one for dozens of rounds. A given round may have lasted only 20 seconds....long enough to close to the grapple and someone to get thrown. You see, the rules allowed stand up grappling (holding and hitting) as well as throws. One object was to land on top of the opponent to dislocate his shoulder, break some ribs, or just knock all the wind out of him if possible. But there was no extended ground fighting...people came to see a boxing match, not a wrestling match. But some of the old boxing manuals do recommend expanding a fighter's self-defense repertoir by studying wrestling as well. At that time they also did not have nice big gloves to hide behind or cover with. So the style of fight was different compared to modern boxing. They stayed with "out-fighting".....manuevering for openings, probbing with punches from a distance, looking for a good set-up, etc...and used centerline principles to do so that came from fencing theory. When they closed, the "in-fighting" consisted of squaring up more with the opponent in order to throw rapid hard punches from multiple angles....then either someone went down, someone was thrown down, or they jumped back to out-fighting range. In-fighting was very brief unless a standing grapple resulted. There was no flowing, sticking, trapping, redirecting, etc (ala Wing Chun) because things typically went from rapid punching straight to the grapple. Contrast all this to modern boxing where grappling is not allowed and fighters can hide behind nice big gloves. Here it makes sense to stand in close "toe to toe" and "duke it out." Not so with the older method! I can see how the old western pugilism method could be improved upon precisely by adding to its in-fighting game with Wing Chun techniques and principles. But does one have to learn the entire Wing Chun system in order to do this?" (KPM)


***GREAT POST, Keith. I've got to spend some time looking into bare-knuckled boxing of old.

No....you don't need to learn the entire wing chun system to use it's most vital principles and techs and still be a great fighter. Ever heard of a guy named Bruce Lee? :cool:

[Phil Redmond]

>>Originally Posted by KPM. Thanks for putting it out there in an honest fashion! So now the question becomes this......for those that take a MMA approach but still want to preserve the in-fighting skills and reactions from Wing Chun, what is the best way to do this or preserve this? Is spending lots of time learning all the forms necessary or time efficient? Is doing lots of Chi Sau to develop the in-fighting range the answer? In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the "classical" Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer.<<

Hi Keith, didn't Leung Jan go back to his native village of Gu Lo to teach WC without forms? From my limited understanding he taught fighting drills/sets? based on his fighting experiences. Someone who knows please correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Phil

[KPM]

Hi Keith, didn't Leung Jan go back to his native village of Gu Lo to teach WC without forms? From my limited understanding he taught fighting drills/sets? based on his fighting experiences. Someone who knows please correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Phil


You're absolutely right! Leung Jan taught his Wing Chun in its final form as a series of San Sik. It contained essentially the same material as the "3 form" version, just taught and practiced broken out into individual short "forms" with a direct two-man application and dummy application for each.

Keith

[iceDragon]

i run this site to promote sparring and sparring against different styles. some footage around jax. fl right now, but trying to get uploads from other k-fu brothers.

anyways, enjoy or critique - but email me @ submit@punchofdeath.com to upload footage


punch of death (http://www.punchofdeath.com)

[Phil Redmond]

You're absolutely right! Leung Jan taught his Wing Chun in its final form as a series of San Sik. It contained essentially the same material as the "3 form" version, just taught and practiced broken out into individual short "forms" with a direct two-man application and dummy application for each.
Keith
Thanks Keith, I thought I was close. I would really like to se some of those San Sik.
Phil

[Ultimatewingchun]

>>Originally Posted by KPM. Thanks for putting it out there in an honest fashion! So now the question becomes this......for those that take a MMA approach but still want to preserve the in-fighting skills and reactions from Wing Chun, what is the best way to do this or preserve this? Is spending lots of time learning all the forms necessary or time efficient? Is doing lots of Chi Sau to develop the in-fighting range the answer? In the interest of efficiency and best use of training time, I would not expect that learning the "classical" Wing Chun method (of whatever lineage) in its entirety would be the answer.<<


***I KNOW I've already given you an answer to this, Keith...but I'd like to add a few more thoughts.

Firstly...doing lots of chi sao to develop the infighting range IS NECESSARY, imo; as long as "lots of time" doesn't translate into too much time; and by that I mean spending no more than about a third of your training time doing chi sao....(as opposed to spending about 70-80% of your time - as many wing chun people do).

Okay...that said, I am also a very firm believer in doing "more" than the usual chi sao when you're actually doing chi sao. :rolleyes: In other words, the usual "rules" of chi sao need to be transcended after spending x amount of time in any given session actually following the "rules" (ie.- both bodies are exactly square on to each other, both sets of arms/hands are pretty much always in contact, both parties are using forward pressure, neither party is trying to GRAB the arms of the other while rolling (in effect - stopping the rolling altogether), neither party backs out of arm engagement so as to move back into a kicking range, etc.)...

so that one starts to improvise within a "no rule" structure and chi sao "rounds" become very free form that might entail using all kinds of moves from close range (ie.- elbows, knees, upper body bodylocks - as well as breaking completely apart and throwing some longer range boxing-type hands and footwork, etc.)...

in effect, chi sao starts to resemble sparring (or semi-sparring drills)....in a way that goes BEYOND the more "conventional" long arm chi sao (some call it kiu sao) or the actual san sao wing chun vs. wing chun "sparring" that many wing chun practitioners do engage in once they get past the chi sao stage....

BECAUSE we have established that there is a need to train in order to fight in different ranges other than the one or two that wing chun primarily uses - so that we are using OTHER (non wing chun) longer range attacks, defenses, and footwork to bridge the gap safely and aggressively (ie.- jabs/crosses/roundhouse kicks/broken rhythm using a slightly up-on-the-toes footwork/feints, etc.) - and because there is a need to be proficient in a very close wrestling/grappling range (both standing and on the ground).

[martyg]

me like you you cool you from detrot that is scary place me frend say do you use win chun on gangs there me like to know me have to take nap now by


Knock it off already. What are you trying to be, the anti-Hendrik?


One goes off in tangents of prose and song, and the other in fits of cave man hollywood Indian english.

[KPM]

Hey Victor!


the usual "rules" of chi sao need to be transcended after spending x amount of time in any given session actually following the "rules" (ie.- both bodies are exactly square on to each other, both sets of arms/hands are pretty much always in contact, both parties are using forward pressure, neither party is trying to GRAB the arms of the other while rolling (in effect - stopping the rolling altogether), neither party backs out of arm engagement so as to move back into a kicking range, etc.)...so that one starts to improvise within a "no rule" structure and chi sao "rounds" become very free form that might entail using all kinds of moves from close range (ie.- elbows, knees, upper body bodylocks - as well as breaking completely apart and throwing some longer range boxing-type hands and footwork, etc.)...

---Very good description. This is what we have started to work on as well. I would also include in the "transcending the usual rules" actually breaking off contact to throw a rapid series of close-range punches from multiple angles and then re-engaging the Chi Sao structure when the partner manages to block one or several.

---Now....still playing the devil's advocate and thinking out loud....just how extensively do the Wing Chun forms need to be taught in order for a student to function well at this "Chi Sau game"? That's the question that still keeps coming up in my mind. You've already established that you are doing "non-Wing Chun" things at out-fighting range, standing grappling range, and ground-fighting range. Those slices are 3/4 of the pie. For someone with limited training time, how much should they be spending on that 1/4 slice that is Wing Chun? It sounds like your guys spend quite a bit of time at it.....

Keith

[Ultimatewingchun]

"...still playing the devil's advocate and thinking out loud....just how extensively do the Wing Chun forms need to be taught in order for a student to function well at this "Chi Sau game"? That's the question that still keeps coming up in my mind. You've already established that you are doing "non-Wing Chun" things at out-fighting range, standing grappling range, and ground-fighting range. Those slices are 3/4 of the pie. For someone with limited training time, how much should they be spending on that 1/4 slice that is Wing Chun? It sounds like your guys spend quite a bit of time at it." (KPM)


***WELL KEITH, we spend about 1/3 of our training time on wing chun pure and simple (I'm also taking into account the wing chun infighting that comes out when we do sparring drills and actual sparring)...

and very little of that wing chun time is actually spent on forms.

SLT is done once at 2 different classes each week - with some occasional discussion of the finer points of SLT...and chum kiu and bil jee are done only about 3x each per month (about once every 10 days)...and the wooden dummy is done for about 20-30 minutes at one class per week.

So as I tally it all up - only about 20% of actual "wing chun time" is spent doing forms and wooden dummy.

The great majority of "wing chun time" should be spent, imo, on footwork, punching, kicking, all the various chi sao/kiu sao and related drills...and most important of all - on actual APPLICATIONS of wing chun principles, strategies, and techniques within a sparring/fighting atmosphere.

[Phil Redmond]

Hey Victor! . . . . (ie.- both bodies are exactly square on to each other, both sets of arms/hands are pretty much always in contact, both parties are using forward pressure, neither party is trying to GRAB the arms of the other while rolling (in effect - stopping the rolling altogether), neither party backs out of arm engagement so as to move back into a kicking range, etc.
Keith
Capt. Meyers, with all due respect Sir we do back out of arm engagement into kicking range. ;
Phil

[KPM]

Hey Victor!

---Thanks for the reply!


***WELL KEITH, we spend about 1/3 of our training time on wing chun pure and simple (I'm also taking into account the wing chun infighting that comes out when we do sparring drills and actual sparring)...and very little of that wing chun time is actually spent on forms.

---That's kind of where I'm headed. :) Thanks for the chat!

Keith

[KPM]

Capt. Meyers, with all due respect Sir we do back out of arm engagement into kicking range. ;
Phil

Hey Phil!

Victor said that, not me! :)

Keith

[Phil Redmond]

Hey Phil!

Victor said that, not me! :)

Keith
All I can say is. . . . OOPS ! ! ! :D
Phil

[Taff]

Hi,

What's happened to the video clips that were posted here? The www.sifupr.com site doesn't seem to have anything on it.

[Phil Redmond]

Hi,

What's happened to the video clips that were posted here? The www.sifupr.com site doesn't seem to have anything on it.
I leave them up for two days then I delete them.
Phil

[marcus_pasram]

3 minutes of san jong sau Circle training (http://wingchunnyc.com/techniques/qt_media/quoc.sjs.circle.htm)