Question for Alan Orr

[LSWCTN1]

hi

can i ask if you teach the dummy, pole, and knife forms to your mma students?

just curious as to your curiculum and what is deemed to be suitable for the mma arena - for example i presume (for the most part) that lap sau is out?

not trying to troll, just genuinly interested - if you would prefer to pm a reply I would be just as appreciative

kind regards

David

[Alan Orr]

hi

can i ask if you teach the dummy, pole, and knife forms to your mma students?

just curious as to your curiculum and what is deemed to be suitable for the mma arena - for example i presume (for the most part) that lap sau is out?

not trying to troll, just genuinly interested - if you would prefer to pm a reply I would be just as appreciative

kind regards

David


Hi David

Interesting question. I have just finished an article that will cover some of these points which I will post soon.

I could also right a new article just on your question. I will give you the short answer, but I will write an article on this area very soon as well.

It really depends a lot of what you think wing chun is.

Many people think if they do the forms and chi sao then thats wing chun, its not in my mind.

The frame of the system is within the correct forms, if done with the understanding of body structure. So the forms are a way of training. Wing Chun is a way of training. Chi Sao is a method of training and developing skills. Its not fighting, its fight training. Hitting a bag is not fighting its training.

So in my mind a lot of people just train. But the problem is it ends up nothing like the fight.

Thats why people often cant see the wing chun in our fights. It because their level of understanding is low and limited. Limited to just looking at form movements.

So to bring you to your answer. My guys all train the forms, chi sao etc. But we also condition, sparr etc. Your training is tested with pressure.

Lap Sao does happen in fighting all the time, but not in the way most wing chun people view it. If you can pull or push the person then that is lap pak energy.

So if I hit two punches and cut the line and drive (pak) my punch or draw (lap) my second punch then I have used the line of attack and energy of movement of the training in pak and lap as such. This may or may not mean anything unless you see it, I know. I have also used the training of chi sao to set my timing and feel the pressure of my opponent. That is trapping. In BJJ or wrestling I am also pressing, trapping, pinning etc same as wing chun. The armbar is the application, knowing when, how, why etc and which pressure, timing and so on are all skills developed via time doing it over and over and gaining feedback. Wing Chun is a system with a frame of movement and a great feedback method (chi sao). But most people are just doing wing chun without thinking of the end game.

We train the chinese boxing element of the system with pads, drills, sparring etc.

My guys of one year can hit hard and move well. 3-4 years and they have very good timing and better speed control etc.

The forms help you learn to hit, move and use the right angles. The forms are not fighting. Fighting is fighting.

As the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun is based on body struture, I can teach someone to hit harder very quickly, but the higher skill is still within the total system.

I hope that helps

best

Alan

[punchdrunk]

**** thats a good post! I hope people who say that doesnt "look" like Wing Chun will read that. I look forward to your article.

[Tensei85]

Awesome post! i definitely agree with everything you said! i cant wait to read your article either.

[Wu Wei Wu]

Good post from Alan.

I'm sure he won't mind me posting this, which I think, sets out the same message (worth reading in full by clicking the link below);

"The fact is, a number of martial artists and self-protection experts talk a good fight, and some even present what appears to be a valid method by which to train to fight. But all too often it's just talk. Even when the drilling methods are sound, the training programs don't include fighting. On the basis of this, everything else these experts say and do is academic." Steve Morris

http://stevemorris.livejournal.com/21547.html

Suki

[Alan Orr]

Good post from Alan.

I'm sure he won't mind me posting this, which I think, sets out the same message (worth reading in full by clicking the link below);

"The fact is, a number of martial artists and self-protection experts talk a good fight, and some even present what appears to be a valid method by which to train to fight. But all too often it's just talk. Even when the drilling methods are sound, the training programs don't include fighting. On the basis of this, everything else these experts say and do is academic." Steve Morris

http://stevemorris.livejournal.com/21547.html

Suki


Thanks guys for your feedback. Very kind.

RE Steve Morris quote - of course I don't mind. Steve is a top martial arts teacher. I had him up for a seminar last year. Very nice guy. Excellent training methods. His method has a different platform to my system, but we share many common ideas.

He is one of the best guys around for sure.

My best

Alan