Good article on Wing Chun and MMA

[thedreamer7]

What you think?
http://deathserenade.blogspot.com/2011/10/is-wing-chun-really-effective-in-ring.html

[LaRoux]

He makes a good point about wing chun lacking reach.

He also makes a great point about relaxation being the result of experience in pressure situations over and over again and not something you can just tell yourself to do.

Also, great points about set-ups, and follow-ups.

One thing he leaves out is the inability of wing chun to develop maximum power.

[GlennR]

What you think?
http://deathserenade.blogspot.com/2011/10/is-wing-chun-really-effective-in-ring.html

I tout it was very ordinary.

His whole premise was that if a WC guy just relaxed then everything would work out just fine!

I thought it w nonsense

[YouKnowWho]

Is Wing Chun (TCMA) really effective in the cage?

Just had this discussion in the class this morning. If you want your style to be able to use in the cage, you have to learn how to take advantage on the cage wall such as how to jame your opponent's body against the wall. How to use the cage wall to your advantage and to your opponent's disadvantage. Until you have trained that, your style has not fully adapted into the cage environment yet. The cage fight is a "3 dimension limited space fight". It's not just a fight on a flat open stage.

[Robinhood]

Ya, I agree that relaxed is good for somethings, but is only part of the equation.

He is totally missing the part about finding the other guy and delivering when needed.

[Vajramusti]

One thing he leaves out is the inability of wing chun to develop maximum power.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your opinion on this is limited by what you are exposed to.

[thedreamer7]

I thought it w nonsense

A bit harsh this guy was someone who competed in Muy Thai professionally for 7 years. His points must be worth something...

[LaRoux]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your opinion on this is limited by what you are exposed to.


My opinion is informed by a knowledge of how power is produced. Producing maximum power in a horizontal plane requires full body rotation.

Watch Mike Tyson in his early years for one of the best examples of how to do this to produce maximum power. Compare this to the centerline punching of wing chun and you will see the difference.

[Robinhood]

A bit harsh this guy was someone who competed in Muy Thai professionally for 7 years. His points must be worth something...

He probably would be more credible as Muy Thai opinion , like one the of the lads said, you can't talk about things you don't know about.

If he knew anything about wc he would know why it does not work good for sport fighting. Sport fighting is all about the rule set, and training within that rule set.

[YouKnowWho]

When you can generate

- 100% power into the thin air, that's the "fake you".
- 50% power and hit your opponent, that's the "true you".

It's better to be able to deliever 50% force and hit the target than to deliever 100% force and miss the target. TCMA is more than just power generation. There are timing, opportunity, angle, and balance as well.

[thedreamer7]

He probably would be more credible as Muy Thai opinion , like one the of the lads said, you can't talk about things you don't know about.

If he knew anything about wc he would know why it does not work good for sport fighting. Sport fighting is all about the rule set, and training within that rule set.

WC is a martial art and like other martial arts can be adapted for the ring. As an experienced fighter and not someone who claim's street experience, his opinions on how to adapt WC to the ring or street is useful.

Point here is to learn from each other and no be insulting otherwise we won't build up a good knowledge base on this forum.

Also it seems he has been learning WC from some solid leanage, so I believe he must know a thing about WC...

[LaRoux]

When you can generate

- 100% power into the thin air, that's the "fake you".
- 50% power and hit your opponent, that's the "true you".

It's better to be able to deliever 50% force and hit the target than to deliever 100% force and miss the target. TCMA is more than just power generation. There are timing, opportunity, angle, and balance as well.

Of course there are many other things besides power generation. However, when it comes to unarmed striking (grappling is a slightly different matter), power generation is huge.

That's one reason you see so many inexperienced fighters begin to flail when they first fight or spar full contact. They quickly realize they need a lot more power and revert to the natural instinct (flailing) to produce that power.

That's the same reason so many people who try to fight with wing chun end up fighting "without wing chun."

[LaRoux]

If he knew anything about wc he would know why it does not work good for sport fighting. Sport fighting is all about the rule set, and training within that rule set.

If one is not training for sport, but he is also not training (by training, I mean including the actual scenario) for the street by fighting/sparring full-contact unprotected, with weapons, against multiple opponents, on concrete, in different environments (and anything else that might happen on th3 stre3tz), then he's not really training to be able to do anything at all.

Doing nothing but pretend, light contact street scenarios is not training for the street.

[Vajramusti]

And, the stream of opinions meanders on.

[Robinhood]

WC is a martial art and like other martial arts can be adapted for the ring. As an experienced fighter and not someone who claim's street experience, his opinions on how to adapt WC to the ring or street is useful.

Point here is to learn from each other and no be insulting otherwise we won't build up a good knowledge base on this forum.

Also it seems he has been learning WC from some solid leanage, so I believe he must know a thing about WC...

Well you can believe him if you want, based on your experience, I will believe based on my experience, we can all read his claims, but what he says will show his real knowledge.

[wingchunIan]

Of course there are many other things besides power generation. However, when it comes to unarmed striking (grappling is a slightly different matter), power generation is huge.

That's one reason you see so many inexperienced fighters begin to flail when they first fight or spar full contact. They quickly realize they need a lot more power and revert to the natural instinct (flailing) to produce that power.

That's the same reason so many people who try to fight with wing chun end up fighting "without wing chun."

Absolute nonsense. The reason for the phenomenon you describe is nothing to do with power generation, it is to do with length of time training, how ingrained the shapes etc are and how often you have exposed your training to pressure. People grow up learning to punch via movies, watching sport and milling in school playgrounds. When pressure is applied you resort to instinct unless you have replaced it with other automatic responses. The same thing happens in MT, boxing and mma when novices fight, all of their technique goes out of the window and they brawl.

[LaRoux]

Absolute nonsense. The reason for the phenomenon you describe is nothing to do with power generation, it is to do with length of time training, how ingrained the shapes etc are and how often you have exposed your training to pressure. People grow up learning to punch via movies, watching sport and milling in school playgrounds. When pressure is applied you resort to instinct unless you have replaced it with other automatic responses. The same thing happens in MT, boxing and mma when novices fight, all of their technique goes out of the window and they brawl.

They "brawl" because they have not yet master the mechanics of body rotation to develop power. The "brawling" is the instinctual way to attempt to develop this power.

That's exactly why the wing chun people do this. You can see it over and over again in a variety of full contact settings in which the wing chun guy started out sticking to his straight line punches and then switched into more of a rotational "brawling" method because the original punches weren't having any effect.

[GlennR]

A bit harsh this guy was someone who competed in Muy Thai professionally for 7 years. His points must be worth something...

I stand by what I said regarding his take on WC, honestly, what advice does he offer?

Relax

That's it?

I've read it again and think the post is worse the second time around

[GlennR]

My opinion is informed by a knowledge of how power is produced. Producing maximum power in a horizontal plane requires full body rotation.

Watch Mike Tyson in his early years for one of the best examples of how to do this to produce maximum power. Compare this to the centerline punching of wing chun and you will see the difference.

Watch joe Louis who is another murderous hitter

Full turn?

Not so sure about that... Louis was renowned for his short power, particularly his cross and he certainly didn't over turn if you could call it that....

[LaRoux]

Watch joe Louis who is another murderous hitter

Full turn?

Not so sure about that... Louis was renowned for his short power, particularly his cross and he certainly didn't over turn if you could call it that....

I never said anything about a full turn. I said full body rotation. By this I mean the whole body must rotate. Boxing generally produces force by rotating the entire body, but it by no means uses a full turn.

Full turns are used for producing even more power. You can see this in things like a tennis forehand, a baseball swing, or a shotput. Full turns are generally not conducive to fighting because they make it difficult to maintain defense and put one out of position for follow-up strikes.

Boxing uses full body rotation to develop maximum power, as well as to extend reach, in a fighting situation. These are its strengths. By doing this, it gives up a little bit of ability to follow up quickly with other punches as well as a little bit of defensive ability.

Wing chun doesn't use this full body rotation. This allows for quick successions of punches and a little bit better ability to maintain defensive positions. These are its strengths. It achieves this at the expense of power generation and length of reach.

[k gledhill]

Cr*p article.
Our force in VT is similar to fall away punch with body weight driven by leg muscles/quadriceps. Now add this same concept with hip rotation to face a moving target AND hit it and you are in my world...but not for long ;)

http://youtu.be/cqieQiJD608 fall away is driven by our rear heel into the ground for equal and opposite force back through , wait for it, structure ...

Another clip of Danijel a Croation student who posted a simple bag work out...yes a PB guy. I do routines similar to this daily in the gym.

https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150431433184129
Notice angling turning to hit, fac sao, bong before striking...body weight moving into hits...AND MOST IMPORTANT NO CHAIN PUNCH EGG BEATER CR*P, an common error committed by 1000's , I blame Leung Ting ;)

WSL PB VT strikes a bag like this, I cant vouch for other lineages.

[YouKnowWho]

If one can use his WC chain punches like Vitor Belfort did at 5.05 (39 second in the fight) in the following clip, he should have no problem to handle any fighters from any styles.

http://www.videosmma.com.br/ufc/wanderlei-silva-vs-vitor-belfor-i-ufc-brasil/

[LaRoux]

Cr*p article.
Our force in VT is similar to fall away punch with body weight driven by leg muscles/quadriceps. Now add this same concept with hip rotation to face a moving target AND hit it and you are in my world...but not for long ;)

http://youtu.be/cqieQiJD608 fall away is driven by our rear heel into the ground for equal and opposite force back through , wait for it, structure ...

The jab is not a power punch, at least when compared to the more rotational punches such as the cross and hook. The power generation of the "fall away" will never be able to match the power generation of full body rotation.




Another clip of Danijel a Croation student who posted a simple bag work out...yes a PB guy. I do routines similar to this daily in the gym.

https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150431433184129
Notice angling turning to hit, fac sao, bong before striking...body weight moving into hits...AND MOST IMPORTANT NO CHAIN PUNCH EGG BEATER CR*P, an common error committed by 1000's , I blame Leung Ting ;)

That would be a good example of full body rotation. Very dissimilar to what is normally displayed as wing chun.

[k gledhill]

If one can use his WC chain punches like Vitor Belfort did at 39 second in the following clip, he should have no problem to handle any fighters from any styles.

http://www.videosmma.com.br/ufc/wanderlei-silva-vs-vitor-belfor-i-ufc-brasil/

Similar concepts but his elbows are giving away the fact he does not do VT.

[k gledhill]

LaRoux;1212110]The jab is not a power punch, at least when compared to the more rotational punches such as the cross and hook. The power generation of the "fall away" will never be able to match the power generation of full body rotation.


Of course....but take one or two fast, in the teeth, nose, throat....not fun, and leads to heavier strikes if required.



That would be a good example of full body rotation. Very dissimilar to what is normally displayed as wing chun.

We do this always because we 'cut the way' iow, across the face to turn an opponent as we strike them. Lot of power....most VT I have seen don't know this way. The majority do a very basic chain step ??? We consider stepping into the 'pocket' an error.

[YouKnowWho]

Similar concepts but his elbows are giving away the fact he does not do VT.

Different "flavor" but the same "principle".

When I was 11, my brother in law forced me to train "1 step 3 punches (2 steps 6 punches, 3 steps 9 punches, ...)" for 3 years. In those 3 years, I had no idea what style that I was training.

[LaRoux]

If one can use his WC chain punches like Vitor Belfort did at 5.05 (39 second in the fight) in the following clip, he should have no problem to handle any fighters from any styles.

http://www.videosmma.com.br/ufc/wanderlei-silva-vs-vitor-belfor-i-ufc-brasil/

I would agree. That was a great example of someone utilizing the speed that is available to overwhelm an opponent when one does not use the full body rotation. Of course, it also helped that Vitor had humungous strength as a base behind it.

Unfortunately, that seemed to be a one-off occurrence, as it never happened after that one time.

[LaRoux]

Similar concepts but his elbows are giving away the fact he does not do VT.


Kind of ironic that the only guy to show evidence of using this is a non-wing chun guy.

[LaRoux]

BTW, what elbow positioning would that be?

[k gledhill]

Kind of ironic that the only guy to show evidence of using this is a non-wing chun guy.

;)....just charging forwards with punches isn't VT, but it seems the uniformed assume so.

[k gledhill]

BTW, what elbow positioning would that be?

We use low centered, elbow angles to give power of the body behind the punch and defensive arm angles developed from SLT. Like a boxer uses elbows tucked in to protect his body, we use them as we strike out of counters, angling....raised elbows wont allow this simultaneous strike/defense idea to work.

[Robinhood]

Similar concepts but his elbows are giving away the fact he does not do VT.


Lol.....ya, right, natural elbow has most power, light up another one.

[LaRoux]

;)....just charging forwards with punches isn't VT, but it seems the uniformed assume so.

Vitor landed his first two punches without moving forward. After the second punch, Silva was stunned and falling and moving backwards. Belfort followed, landing additional punches until Silva went down.

What would have been the VT method to follow up once two punches had been landed and the opponent was hurt and falling and moving backwards?

[k gledhill]

Lol.....ya, right, natural elbow has most power, light up another one.

Oh no, QI man is back....:D

[LaRoux]

We use low centered, elbow angles to give power of the body behind the punch and defensive arm angles developed from SLT. Like a boxer uses elbows tucked in to protect his body, we use them as we strike out of counters, angling....raised elbows wont allow this simultaneous strike/defense idea to work.

I guess the guy you gave in the example of the VT guy hitting the bag wasn't a VT guy either, considering the fact that there were several instances in which he raised his elbows when delivering punches. :rolleyes:

[k gledhill]

Vitor landed his first two punches without moving forward. After the second punch, Silva was stunned and falling and moving backwards. Belfort followed, landing additional punches until Silva went down.

What would have been the VT method to follow up once two punches had been landed and the opponent was hurt and falling and moving backwards?

A kick in the nuts :D 1-2 kick thankyou.

[k gledhill]

I guess the guy you gave in the example of the VT guy hitting the bag wasn't a VT guy either, considering the fact that there were several instances in which he raised his elbows when delivering punches. :rolleyes:

What ! oh dear lets send him a message and cast shame on him :rolleyes: Of course elbows have to raise to punch, its where they all start from that we concentrate on. And nobody's perfect.

[LaRoux]

A kick in the nuts :D 1-2 kick thankyou.

So, instead of capitalizing by continuing forward with the pressure, the PB VT response would have been to attempt a couple of kicks to the nutz?

Seems like a wasted opportunity to me, but to each his own, I guess.

Interesting also that I've never seen any of the PB clips where they are doing training with kicks to the groin.

[k gledhill]

So, instead of capitalizing by continuing forward with the pressure, the PB VT response would have been to attempt a couple of kicks to the nutz?

To each his own, I guess.

Interesting also that I've never seen any of the PB clips where they are doing training with kicks to the groin.

I am on a forum not in a gym explaining a host of ways to end a person...it depends on your goals, win a decision in a match, stop a guy in a bar fight...you cant expect one answer, can you ?

We make kicks to body, groin, hips, legs, knees, shins, stomps to feet, sweeps, etc...we also kick stomp heads, necks, joints, groins of guys on floor.

[LaRoux]

I am on a forum not in a gym explaining a host of ways to end a person...it depends on your goals, win a decision in a match, stop a guy in a bar fight...you cant expect one answer, can you ?

We make kicks to body, groin, hips, legs, knees, shins, stomps to feet, sweeps, etc...we also kick stomp heads, necks, joints, of guys on floor.

According to you, what Belfort did in capitalizing on the situation by moving forward with pressure and delivering more blows was not the VT way. I was trying to clarify what this VT way would be if this was not it.

Based on your latest answer it seems as if the VT way would have been to do anything except to continue to move forward with pressure and deliver more strikes until he was down.

Like I said, seems kind of inefficient to me, but to each his own, I guess.

[k gledhill]

According to you, what Belfort did in capitalizing on the situation by moving forward with pressure and delivering more blows was not the VT way. I was trying to clarify what this VT way would be if this was not it.

Based on your latest answer it seems as if the VT way would have been to do anything except to continue to move forward with pressure and deliver more strikes until he was down.

Like I said, seems kind of inefficient to me, but to each his own, I guess.

You got ALL that from one response of mine ? :rolleyes:

[Kellen Bassette]

Boxing uses full body rotation to develop maximum power, as well as to extend reach, in a fighting situation. These are its strengths. By doing this, it gives up a little bit of ability to follow up quickly with other punches as well as a little bit of defensive ability.

Wing chun doesn't use this full body rotation. This allows for quick successions of punches and a little bit better ability to maintain defensive positions. These are its strengths. It achieves this at the expense of power generation and length of reach.

This is a recurring theme in martial arts. Everything is a trade off, speed or power, closed and defensive or open and offensive. Always a trade off.

Jab is faster than cross. Cross is stronger than jab.
Lead hand backfist is quicker and easier to land than a heavy punch, but not as powerful. Spinning backfist can be very powerful but it requires you to "give up" your back, its' a risky move.
TKD roundhouse is faster and less open than a Thai roundhouse, but Thai roundhouse is stronger.
A fighter needs to understand when to use which technique.

[Sihing73]

LaRoux,

You seem to have a derisive opinion of most others approaches.
Seems to me that you should then be able to post your own videos showing how you would apply WC and make it work against a resisting opponent.

I am also curious as to what Law Enforcement experience you may have, I believe you made mention of having such.

Your views on Chin Na also seem to be of someone less informed with little real world applicable experience. Just my opinion but it is based on my experience.

Just to give you an idea of my background I have worked as a Correctional Officer and even taught defensive tactics at the prison. After that I worked as a Philadelphia Housing Police Officer in the projects of Philly and then as a PA State Police Trooper. While I will not claim to be some sort of tuff/tough guy, I can assure you that I have had opportunity to utilize WC and Chin Na in real life situations. Oh, most of the people that I arrested did not wish to go to jail willingly. In all of these situations I can tell you that most situations did not entail me going to the ground,

So, rather than keep giving your view on how others are wrong, how about you step up and explain how to do things the right way???

Eagerly awaiting some videos of you showing application against resisting opponents as well as some detail of any real world experience or LEO background.

[GlennR]

If one can use his WC chain punches like Vitor Belfort did at 5.05 (39 second in the fight) in the following clip, he should have no problem to handle any fighters from any styles.

http://www.videosmma.com.br/ufc/wanderlei-silva-vs-vitor-belfor-i-ufc-brasil/

They aren't WC punches

[GlennR]

I never said anything about a full turn. I said full body rotation. By this I mean the whole body must rotate. Boxing generally produces force by rotating the entire body, but it by no means uses a full turn.

Full turns are used for producing even more power. You can see this in things like a tennis forehand, a baseball swing, or a shotput. Full turns are generally not conducive to fighting because they make it difficult to maintain defense and put one out of position for follow-up strikes.

Boxing uses full body rotation to develop maximum power, as well as to extend reach, in a fighting situation. These are its strengths. By doing this, it gives up a little bit of ability to follow up quickly with other punches as well as a little bit of defensive ability.

Wing chun doesn't use this full body rotation. This allows for quick successions of punches and a little bit better ability to maintain defensive positions. These are its strengths. It achieves this at the expense of power generation and length of reach.

Tll me what part body rotation would be?

[LaRoux]

LaRoux,You seem to have a derisive opinion of most others approaches.

My only negative attitude is towards things of which there is no evidence.

As far as being derisive of other approaches, how is stating that the strength of WC is its quickness and ability to maintain defense derisive? How is stating that the WC guy hitting the heavy bag being a good demo of body rotation being derisive. How is posting a clip showing a WC guy dominating a Muay Thai guy being derisive?



Seems to me that you should then be able to post your own videos showing how you would apply WC and make it work against a resisting opponent.

I'm not claiming to be able to use WC against a resisting opponent. I think that should be up to the WC proponents.



Your views on Chin Na also seem to be of someone less informed with little real world applicable experience. Just my opinion but it is based on my experience.

I have some experience here. Again, all I'm asking for is some evidence that the "other" stuff works. There's plenty of evidence for what I am saying will work in this realm.


Just to give you an idea of my background I have worked as a Correctional Officer and even taught defensive tactics at the prison. After that I worked as a Philadelphia Housing Police Officer in the projects of Philly and then as a PA State Police Trooper. While I will not claim to be some sort of tuff/tough guy, I can assure you that I have had opportunity to utilize WC and Chin Na in real life situations. Oh, most of the people that I arrested did not wish to go to jail willingly. In all of these situations I can tell you that most situations did not entail me going to the ground,

Again, there doesn't seem to be evidence for this in the real world. Maybe you were some kind of law enforcement super-hero, but almost all arrests against truly resisting suspects for which there is evidence shows going to the ground and/or multiple officers doing the controlling.

Having a one-off for which there is zero evidence hardly counts for much.


So, rather than keep giving your view on how others are wrong, how about you step up and explain how to do things the right way???

Which specific things would you like to know how to do correctly? I'd be glad to explain them.

[Vajramusti]

Laroux does not know much about wing chun but he seems to be interested in arguing- a waste of time- mine anyway.

[LaRoux]

Tll me what part body rotation would be?

All power generation in this plane in which force is transferred through the arms follows the same basic principles.

Full body rotation with increased power:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp4J45kF-mI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-5O49K0gF8



Not full body rotation with minimized power:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7shrxYLCFOM

See the difference?

[LaRoux]

Laroux does not know much about wing chun but he seems to be interested in arguing- a waste of time- mine anyway.

All I'm asking for is evidence. So far, I've given a thumbs up to all the evidence of wing chun working in live, resisting settings that has been presented so far.

The wing chun guys are the ones who have put down the evidence and claimed either that it was not wing chun or the other guy wasn't very good. Ironically (and not surprisingly) they haven't been able to provide any evidence for their opinions.

[Vajramusti]

All I'm asking for is evidence. So far, I've given a thumbs up to all the evidence of wing chun working in live, resisting settings that has been presented so far.

The wing chun guys are the ones who have put down the evidence and claimed either that it was not wing chun or the other guy wasn't very good. Ironically (and not surprisingly) they haven't been able to provide any evidence for their opinions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are your credentials as a judge of wing chun--you seem to be following the not uncommon pattern of sitting back and expecting evidence to come to you and then deciding what is acceptable and what is not. That is a poor research model.

[LaRoux]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What are your credentials as a judge of wing chun--you seem to be following the not uncommon pattern of sitting back and expecting evidence to come to you and then deciding what is acceptable and what is not. That is a poor research model.

I analyze the evidence of what works in a one time setting, look for evidence of it being reproducible and not just a one-off occurrence, break the evidence down into why it works and then attempt to apply those principles into later applications.

Like all logical and fact based research, you need some kind of hard evidence to begin with.

Without hard evidence, you are a simply a blind man who follows a cult and believes whatever the cult leaders tell you.

[LaRoux]

They aren't WC punches

They seemed to work pretty well, at least in that one instance. Maybe the wing chun powers that be should think about incorporating them into the system.

If something works, why wouldn't you want to incorporate that into the system?

[Vajramusti]

I analyze the evidence of what works in a one time setting, look for evidence of it being reproducible and not just a one-off occurrence, break the evidence down into why it works and then attempt to apply those principles into later applications.

Like all logical and fact based research, you need some kind of hard evidence to begin with.

Without hard evidence, you are a simply a blind man who follows a cult and believes whatever the cult leaders tell you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A soft piece on the nature of " research"-when the objective remains quite subjective.
At least for me my interest in wing chun is sufficiently evidence based and not based on a cult..but I don't need to prove that to you.

Your "evidence" could be fu;ll of sampling errors and is not exactly survey research.
Your posts seem fairly close to baiting

[LaRoux]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A soft piece on the nature of " research"-when the objective remains quite subjective.
At least for me my interest in wing chun is sufficiently evidence based and not based on a cult..but I don't need to prove that to you.

Most people in cults don't think their cult is a cult. It doesn't mean they aren't involved with one.


Your "evidence" could be fu;ll of sampling errors and is not exactly survey research.

Of course this could be always be true. However when the evidence points 99% one way, generally you can figure that it's probably statistically significant.

[GlennR]

They seemed to work pretty well, at least in that one instance. Maybe the wing chun powers that be should think about incorporating them into the system.

If something works, why wouldn't you want to incorporate that into the system?

You're missing the point, and my point regarding short power in reference to power.

The WC punch is built around the fact that the WC guy is looking for contact.

That is, he wants contact with his opponent, otherwise it's boxing.
His first goal is to hit the guy, failing that he should be moving into his WC range which is that 'trapping range" for want of a better description.
Because of that range, and WC always looking for the straight punch, the elbows are kept down to utilize tan, bong and fuk if required. The stance is different to support this as a conventional boxing stance just doesn't work with the WC hands.

That clip is not WC punching. It's a guy throwing fairly conventional punches, at range, having stunned the guy with the initial couple. He's a fighter, he used the by tool for the occasion which he does well.

You could argue that he ha used WC principals but this s where the arguments start.
But hey...... Welcome to the WC forum!

[anerlich]

A bit harsh this guy was someone who competed in Muy Thai professionally for 7 years. His points must be worth something...

I read that he had trained and competed in Muay Thai for 7 years, not that he had been a pro fighter for 7 years.

[LaRoux]

You're missing the point, and my point regarding short power in reference to power.

By short power, I'm assuming you are meaning not using much or any body rotation, is that correct?


That is, he wants contact with his opponent, otherwise it's boxing.

And the problem with using boxing when he doesn't have contact would be what?




His first goal is to hit the guy, failing that he should be moving into his WC range which is that 'trapping range" for want of a better description.

I'm confused. I thought you just said this would be boxing if he hit the guy without making contact first.




That clip is not WC punching. It's a guy throwing fairly conventional punches, at range, having stunned the guy with the initial couple. He's a fighter, he used the by tool for the occasion which he does well.

So, where would an example of a WC guy throwing WC punches be? Would this be it?
Wing Chun guy attempting to use wing chun punches in fight. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU8B6eNm2zs)

[anerlich]

If one can use his WC chain punches like Vitor Belfort did at 5.05 (39 second in the fight) in the following clip, he should have no problem to handle any fighters from any styles.

http://www.videosmma.com.br/ufc/wanderlei-silva-vs-vitor-belfor-i-ufc-brasil/

Belfort, Wing Chun chain punches, BULLSh!T! Belfort never had a Wing Chun lesson in his life.

So many WC guys want Belfort and Lyoto Machida to be WC poster boys, but in reality neither of them have spent ANY time doing WC.

The only people who seem to be able to use WC principles in MMA are no-WC fighters. Hooey!

[anerlich]

LaRoux,

You seem to have a derisive opinion of most others approaches.

Oh, and I guess that makes him Robinson Crusoe .... on this forum :p

[Robinhood]

They aren't WC punches

Close enough to get my vote, when the shoulders stay square, and the fists are vertical, elbows in natural position, structure is plenty good enough for good wc arm punches.

[GlennR]

By short power, I'm assuming you are meaning not using much or any body rotation, is that correct?



And the problem with using boxing when he doesn't have contact would be what?





I'm confused. I thought you just said this would be boxing if he hit the guy without making contact first.





So, where would an example of a WC guy throwing WC punches be? Would this be it?
Wing Chun guy attempting to use wing chun punches in fight. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU8B6eNm2zs)

Yes, to the short power thing.

The problem with using boxing with WC is the stance. One advocates turning and weight transfer from leg to leg (here's a tip, that's where the power comes from) and the other (WC) uses a different method based starting at SLT .
Have you boxed and done MT? Though they use the same punches, the stance is a bit different as one throws kicks and knees. See the point, depending on what you use and how you are going to use it dictates what will and won't fit the style.

Nothing wrong with hitting the guy at range initially, but if it goes on the WC should get into his range.

The difference between Belford and the WC guy is that the WC guy has WC options. From my view I can see he has maintained his stance, maintained his range and could still defend and attack using all his WC tools.

With the belford clip I se a guy hitting a guy who runs backwards and he chases throwing punches. At no stage could he cleanly kick for example, looking at the WC guy I think he could due to him maintaining his stance... Belford looks like he is almost leaning.

Hope that helps

[GlennR]

Close enough to get my vote, when the shoulders stay square, and the fists are vertical, elbows in natural position, structure is plenty good enough for good wc arm punches.

Could he throw. Kick while he is doing them?

[LaRoux]

Yes, to the short power thing.

OK, got it. Of course, "short power" will never be able to produce the same force as a more rotational type of mechanics.




The difference between Belford and the WC guy is that the WC guy has WC options. From my view I can see he has maintained his stance, maintained his range and could still defend and attack using all his WC tools.

So those punches are a good representation of what WC punching should be like, is that correct? I just want to get that straight in case someone asks me to show what WC punching should look like.

[LaRoux]

Could he throw. Kick while he is doing them?

So, it's not a WC punch if you can't throw a kick at the same time?

[anerlich]

Another clip of Danijel a Croation student who posted a simple bag work out...yes a PB guy.

Great, a bagwork clip to go with all the chi sao clips.

[LaRoux]

Great, a bagwork clip to go with all the chi sao clips.

At least those are a bit more realistic than the chi sao chest slaps.

Of course, they don't seem to be real WC punches because it doesn't look as if he can kick at the same time he is punching.

[anerlich]

The guy is IMO basically saying you need to be relaxed under pressure to win ring fights.

And for that you need to do lots of contact sparring and perhaps a few earlier ring fights, and have familiarity with and practise counters to your MMA opponent's likely arsenal of attacks.

Not exactly revelatory or unique to WC, but something many WC people don't do. Much easier to boast about streetfights and trash other lineages on the internet.

[anerlich]

At least those are a bit more realistic than the chi sao chest slaps.

Of course, they don't seem to be real WC punches because it doesn't look as if he can kick at the same time he is punching.

I didn't bother watching the vid, I have a huge backlog of PB guy vids from this forum.

I think Glenn is questioning whether the guy can throw kick/punch combinations, rather than whether he can perform an effective simultaneous kick and punch.

[LaRoux]

I think Glenn is questioning whether the guy can throw kick/punch combinations, rather than whether he can perform an effective simultaneous kick and punch.

In that case, they must have been WC punches then because there were many points in that sequence that he could have thrown kicks.

[LaRoux]

I have to add that it sure seems weird to me that a WC punch is based upon whether or not you can kick somewhere in there.

I guess I'm going to have to add this to my list of reasons of why it is so rare for people to be able to use wing chun in realistic situations.

[anerlich]

Belford looks like he is almost leaning.

Leaning forward is actually not a bad strategy in an MMA fight, as it makes it easier to sprawl and the fighter thus less vulnerable to leg shoots.

The WC stance used by many WC practitioners who never work takedown defense is almost ideal for an opponent skilled at leg shoots.

Once takedowns enter the game, lots of things change.

If you want to win an MMA fight, go train at an MMA gym. Trying to prove "Wing Chun works in MMA" or "Wing Chun is better than MMA" is a fool's errand. Fighters win fights, not styles and you need to train with coaches and partners experienced in that particular arena.

[anerlich]

I have to add that it sure seems weird to me that a WC punch is based upon whether or not you can kick somewhere in there.


The subject of the thread is performing effectively in MMA.

WC is allegedly superior in its "interruptability", i.e. whether you can modify your attacks based on the other person's reactions.

If you're throwing those chain punches and can't stop them to knee, or more likely, sprawl, when the other guy shoots, to cite one example, you are not going to have a good night. Being able to set up punches or takedowns with kicks might be a useful skill to have, too.


In that case, they must have been WC punches then because there were many points in that sequence that he could have thrown kicks.

If you say so, I can't see a bagwork vid revealing the fine points of how to deal with an Anderson Silva or Big Nog, so I've not bothered looking.


I guess I'm going to have to add this to my list of reasons of why it is so rare for people to be able to use wing chun in realistic situations.

We await the publishing of this list on a blog as a counter to the original article with bated breath *yawn*

[GlennR]

I didn't bother watching the vid, I have a huge backlog of PB guy vids from this forum.

I think Glenn is questioning whether the guy can throw kick/punch combinations, rather than whether he can perform an effective simultaneous kick and punch.

Exactly Andrew, WC should have the options of both without having to adjust the stance, I don't see that in the Belford clip

[GlennR]

In that case, they must have been WC punches then because there were many points in that sequence that he could have thrown kicks.

I don't see that at all, he would have to re adjust to throw a kick, the WC guy in the clip doesn't have that same problem

[GlennR]

I have to add that it sure seems weird to me that a WC punch is based upon whether or not you can kick somewhere in there.

I guess I'm going to have to add this to my list of reasons of why it is so rare for people to be able to use wing chun in realistic situations.

Now you're taking the pi55

And if you're on here just to create a "list" I'll leave it to you.

[YouKnowWho]

Belford looks like he is almost leaning.
You can't have speed if your body is vertical. The leaning can let the ground to pull your body. The ground pulling can give your the momentum. You can use your momentum to run your opponent down. To be able to run your opponent down is the highest level of MA skill which has no "style boundary".

When your opponent is moving back, you want to pull him back. You don't want to kick him away.

[GlennR]

You can't have speed if your body is vertical. The leaning can let the ground to pull your body. The ground pulling can give your the momentum. You can use your momentum to run your opponent down. When your opponent is moving back, you don't want to use kick.

Rubbish.

You're not trying to run down usain bolt, you're ( in the clip) trying to hit a guy running backwards.

And why don't you ant to use the kick?

Why would you want to limit your options?

Why would you want to commit your balance forward in a striking art? Unless you like eating uppercuts.

What is thre not to get about the effin clip, he gets hit, runs backwards, Belford chases him, hits him and wins.

How is this supposed to represent an entire style of martial art in the eyes of some?!?!?


Honestly, it's like the iq level here has dropped 40 points

[YouKnowWho]

And why don't you ant to use the kick?

How much can your kick be able to hurt your opponent when his body is moving back? Most of your kicking force will be cancelled out by his backward body movement. The "head on collision" is good for the striking art. The "rear end collision" is not.

IMO, the spirit of the "chain punch" (or 1 step 3 punch, 2 steps 6 punches, ... whatever you want to call it), the moment that you can land the 1st punch, you want to land as many punches as you can until his is down.

[LaRoux]

You can't have speed if your body is vertical. .

Somebody forgot to tell the best sprinter in the world this fact:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/08/06/article-2184089-1466AFB9000005DC-137_964x611.jpg

[LaRoux]

The leaning can let the ground to pull your body. The ground pulling can give your the momentum. .

Umm... no. The force of gravity is downward, not forward.

[YouKnowWho]

Umm... no. The force of gravity is downward, not forward.
If you don't move your feet, the moment that your center of gravity is outside of your base, you will fall.

http://imageshack.us/a/img714/2850/balancebase.jpg

The following loop will give you the "momentum".

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7104/crosscountryski.jpg

1. If you move your foot forward,
2. the area of your base is redefined.
3. Your center of gravity will be back inside of your base again and you will not fall.
4. If you body is still leaning,
5. your center of gravity will be outside of your base again.
6. Goto step 1.

[LaRoux]

If you don't move your feet, the moment that your center of gravity is outside of your base, you will fall.

http://imageshack.us/a/img714/2850/balancebase.jpg

The following loop will give you the "momentum".

1. If you move your foot forward,
2. the area of your base is redefined.
3. Your center of gravity will be back inside of your base again and you will not fall.
4. If you body is still leaning,
5. your center of gravity will be outside of your base again.
6. Goto step 1.

Leaning has nothing to do with it. Look at the image of the sprinters I posted above.

[YouKnowWho]

Leaning has nothing to do with it. Look at the image of the sprinters I posted above.

Look at the image of the cross country ski I posted above.

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7104/crosscountryski.jpg

[LaRoux]

Look at the image of the cross country ski I posted above.

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7104/crosscountryski.jpg

The cross country skeir leans forward to be able to generate the force into the ground with the poles. Cross country skiing with poles is totally and completely different than simply running.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1212193]You can't have speed if your body is vertical.

--------------------------------------------------------------------That is nonsense.Lots of good runners
have a fairly straight structure while the feet are churning.

And, when the distance is short- close quarters- a wing chun person who understands structure
and quickly shoot forward to close distance and attack with bik ma shooting stance.

[Graham H]

Try reading the bit on courtesy.
http://ipmankungfu.wordpress.com/2010/09/11/ip-mans-code-of-conduct-teaches-values-and-ethics/

What nonsense!

I don't think Ip Man himself even abided by some of those rules if the truth be known! :D

[Vajramusti]

What nonsense!

I don't think Ip Man himself even abided by some of those rules if the truth be known! :D
----------------------------------------------------------------

Ethics deals with goals and standards.
There are usually gaps between goals and achievements.

[Graham H]

----------------------------------------------------------------

Ethics deals with goals and standards.
There are usually gaps between goals and achievements.

Ethics vary from person to person, culture to culture, coast to coast. You cannot umbrella the whole kung fu community worldwide with such nonsense as "Ip Man's code of ethics"

Maybe it would be better like this....


TRY to be disciplined

PRACTICE courtesy and righteousness to those that deserve it.

RESPECT your fellow students or classmates up until a point they act like d**ks

INDULGE your desires and pursuit of bodily pleasures but don't overdo it – you only live once

TRAIN diligently and make it a habit – maintain your skills. (I agree with this one lol)

LEARN not to provoke arguments and fights but get stuck in if needs be.

BE yourself and do not lie to yourself

HELP yourself and only help others if no harm should come to yourself first. You could die in the process.

PASS on what you have learnt from your teacher, try to evolve and don't be scared to step outside the box now and then as times change.


There you go Joy. Translate that into Chinese writing, put a fancy frame around it, hang it above your Dummy and in 50 years time it will need updating again:D:D:D:D

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Graham H;1212223]Ethics vary from person to person, culture to culture, coast to coast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow- great thinkers are deeply indebted to you on the nature of ethics.

If relativism is a principle and principles are relative to individual, culture and region-there are some apparent fallacies in that line of reasoning.

[Robinhood]

Gravity is the best ally , if you can't figure out how to use it, you only have your strength, YKW is right, victor never let the guy gain his balance which is why it worked and victor used gravity..

The only thing maybe off in the punches was coming from centerline, but did not need that, he can be sitting and punches could be wc, nothing to do with stance. Lol , shoulders only and balance side to side , not swinging shoulders and punches hitting centerline.

[anerlich]

Running (and walking, for that matter) is on one level continuously falling forward while using your feet to stop you landing flat on your face.

Read up on chi or POSE running, which have exactly that as a fundamental part of the technique.

Bolt's torso may be vertical (well actually he IS leaning slightly forward, sorry), but his COG is well ahead of his driving foot - as is the same for one of the other runners.

You should not bend at the waist, but definitely have a slight forward lean, the degree dependent on how fast you are running.

wikipedia:

Elements of good running technique

Upright posture and a slight forward lean
Leaning forward places a runner's center of mass on the front part of the foot, which avoids landing on the heel and facilitates the use of the spring mechanism of the foot. It also makes it easier for the runner to avoid landing the foot in front of the center of mass and the resultant braking effect. While upright posture is essential, a runner should maintain a relaxed frame and use his/her core to keep posture upright and stable. This helps prevent injury as long as the body is neither rigid nor tense. The most common running mistakes are tilting the chin up and scrunching shoulders.[14]

Lean comes from the ankles, not the waist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx6x2cD6Y8Q


Can we get back to arguing about WC and MMA, rather than how to run? No one on the thread has any apparent expertise in the latter (and it is probable that the same is true of the former)

[LaRoux]

Running (and walking, for that matter) is on one level continuously falling forward while using your feet to stop you landing flat on your face.

Read up on chi or POSE running, which have exactly that as a fundamental part of the technique.

Bolt's torso may be vertical (well actually he IS leaning slightly forward, sorry), but his COG is well ahead of his driving foot - as is the same for one of the other runners.

You should not bend at the waist, but definitely have a slight forward lean, the degree dependent on how fast you are running.

wikipedia:

Elements of good running technique

Upright posture and a slight forward lean
Leaning forward places a runner's center of mass on the front part of the foot, which avoids landing on the heel and facilitates the use of the spring mechanism of the foot. It also makes it easier for the runner to avoid landing the foot in front of the center of mass and the resultant braking effect. While upright posture is essential, a runner should maintain a relaxed frame and use his/her core to keep posture upright and stable. This helps prevent injury as long as the body is neither rigid nor tense. The most common running mistakes are tilting the chin up and scrunching shoulders.[14]

Lean comes from the ankles, not the waist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx6x2cD6Y8Q


Can we get back to arguing about WC and MMA, rather than how to run? No one on the thread has any apparent expertise in the latter (and it is probable that the same is true of the former)



Technically, you are "leaning" any time you move forward.

[CRCAUSA]

In WC one can clearly move forward without leaning forward, it's in the CK form.

[LaRoux]

In WC one can clearly move forward without leaning forward, it's in the CK form.

I guess you are going to have to define lean here. Without defining what you mean by lean, it's a pretty useless discussion.

A better terminology would be to flex at certain joints. You can move forward without flexing at the hip joint or knee, but you can't move forward without flexing at the ankle joint.

Something has to get you to move your center of gravity past your toes, otherwise you won't move in a forward direction.

[CRCAUSA]

If you knew a little more about WC you would know what I mean not to lean.:)

[LaRoux]

If you knew a little more about WC you would know what I mean not to lean.:)

You are right about that. Maybe you could enlighten me. Can you point me to a clip that shows an example of that?

Thanks.

[CRCAUSA]

No need, I'm not here to enlighten anyone. If you really want to know I would suggest enrolling in a good WC school. :)

[LaRoux]

No need, I'm not here to enlighten anyone. If you really want to know I would suggest enrolling in a good WC school. :)

Yeah, that's what I thought.

[YouKnowWho]

Technically, you are "leaning" any time you move forward.

LaRoux, You just contradict to yourself big time. You posted a sprinters pictire and told me that they all run without leaning. Here was the picture that you posted.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/08/06/article-2184089-1466AFB9000005DC-137_964x611.jpg

Here was your posts.


Leaning has nothing to do with it. Look at the image of the sprinters I posted above.

Umm... no. The force of gravity is downward, not forward.

Now you use the opposite argument to agrue with anerlich. This futher prove that you just want to argue for the sake of argument.

[k gledhill]

What !! Laroux a sh&t stirrer (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=****%20stirrer) , never !!:rolleyes: