Best Wing Chun KO in MMA - Iron Wolves Fighter Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun

[Alan Orr]

Hi Guys

This my fighter Josh 4-0 PRO mma with a big KO!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RekowrObGTI

Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun teacher Alan Orr's student Josh Kaldani lands a knockdown in the first round and the best Wing Chun punch KO in MMA in the second round.

The Iron Wolves Team is lead by Alan Orr and has for many years been putting CSL Wing Chun to test in the Cage and Ring.

Some people will ask where is the Wing Chun as they think you should see basic training drills. In application you see the result of our training - power, structure of movement, timing, positional control, angles of punches. You will see our CSL Chinese Boxing Skills. Wing Chun is Chinese Boxing.

MMA is Mixed Martial Arts so we train the arts we need.

Stand up -
Alan Orr is a Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun 8th Degree Black Belt under his Master Robert Chu

Ground game
Alan Orr is a Black Belt in BJJ under his Master World Champion Leo Negao

Also Alan has a background in Catch Wrestling. plus some training in Sambo and Judo.



SIGN UP to received FREE DVD Training download. Coming soon from -

http://www.alanorrwingchunacademy.com/

http://www.alanorr.com/

[paulcaz]

Nice to see the concepts and attributes of wing chun being applied in MMA. This is something I am exploring in own training at the moment. My fear is that many wing chun people will not appreciate the video because they are constrained with what wing chun should look like in a fight rather than what it can achieve.

I think we have all seen the videos on YouTube of wing chun exponents being made to look silly and their art failing them. Time to move forward whilst embracing the past but not to be defined by it.

[LFJ]

My fear is that many wing chun people will not appreciate the video because they are constrained with what wing chun should look like in a fight rather than what it can achieve.

Well, I can appreciate the theory Alan covers in his clips. He seems to be one of the few who understands the difference between training form and the abstract nature of the application of Wing Chun, as well as how to bridge the two.

That said however, a big overhand thrown by a guy who trains WC doesn't make it a "Wing Chun punch". It's indistinguishable from the same punch any other MMA fighter who's never trained WC would throw, and is not an "angle of punch" in any WC lineage I'm familiar with.

At the end of the day, it got the job done. So whatever. Call it whatever pleases you.

[Ali. R]

,,,, and is not an "angle of punch" in any WC lineage I'm familiar with.


Hummm. Let's see, you have the Hook punch, Tai Kuen, Chap kuen, Doi Gok Kuen, Hoi Faan Kuen, these are punches that works in angles.



Take care,

[LFJ]

Every punch works at an angle.

[Ali. R]

That's true, all eight of them.


Take care,

[KPM]

Nice to see the concepts and attributes of wing chun being applied in MMA. This is something I am exploring in own training at the moment. My fear is that many wing chun people will not appreciate the video because they are constrained with what wing chun should look like in a fight rather than what it can achieve.

.

I like Alan Orr and what he is doing. But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is. You can't do boxing with some Tan Sau's, Bong Sau's and WCK concepts and call it Wing Chun. That's Jeet Kune Do! :);) I certainly appreciate the skill and athleticism shown in the video. But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun!

[tc101]

I like Alan Orr and what he is doing. But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is.


Here's the thing you know what wing chun practiced in unrealistic settings looks like as in chi sau and san sau and so forth, and you think this is what it will look like when things get really hot and heavy when going all out in fighting. That viewpoint is not based on experience really doing that or even seeing it done like that since you cannot point me to anyone who is able to do it like you think it should be done. Why is it do you think that the guys who train wing chun like the Orr team or Obasi or anyone else does not end up looking like how you think they should? Did it ever occur to you that maybe it is because you have unrealistic ideas of what wing chun is and how it works and that maybe guys like Orr simply have a realistic idea that comes from genuine realistic experience? In other words, they are just much more advanced than you?

It is howling funny how guys will say yeah they could beat me silly but they just aren't doing it right!



You can't do boxing with some Tan Sau's, Bong Sau's and WCK concepts and call it Wing Chun. That's Jeet Kune Do! :);) I certainly appreciate the skill and athleticism shown in the video. But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun!

It has absolutely nothing to do with wing chun knowledge and everrything to do with skill that comes from the training. You can't see it because you are not there.

[Firehawk4]

What i would be concerned about is what my Martial Art looked like in the streets or in a war setting . Basics are everything and being able to run the opposite direction from your opponet to .

[Grumblegeezer]

I like Alan Orr and what he is doing. But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun.

KPM, I have to agree. I would not have recognised the WC either. I've watched the clips where Alan explains how what he does is WC, and he makes a lot of sense. So since he's the coach and he can see it, I'll take his word for that. I just wish I could see a bit more WC in the mix, like when Alan himself demonstrates.

Still, the results are impressive. Kudos to Josh Kaldani, his coach Alan Orr, and to the Iron Wolves.

[KPM]

Here's the thing you know what wing chun practiced in unrealistic settings looks like as in chi sau and san sau and so forth, and you think this is what it will look like when things get really hot and heavy when going all out in fighting. That viewpoint is not based on experience really doing

Yep, there it is! There's the mantra again. Thanks Twen!


Why is it do you think that the guys who train wing chun like the Orr team or Obasi or anyone else does not end up looking like how you think they should? Did it ever occur to you that maybe it is because you have unrealistic ideas of what wing chun is and how it works and that maybe guys like Orr simply have a realistic idea that comes from genuine realistic experience? In other words, they are just much more advanced than you?

Did it ever occur to you that it is because they spend a large amount of time training MMA and not straight-up Wing Chun? Why is it that you think the guys that train Wing Chun WOULDN'T be doing any identifiable Wing Chun in a sparring clip? Do you think that the Alan Orr student in that clip is doing anything that you would have recognized as Wing Chun if it hadn't been named in the tag line? I have all of Alan Orr's videos. There is good stuff in those videos. When Alan is teaching and demo'ing it looks like Wing Chun! When he is doing Chi Sao it is obviously Wing Chun. So why is it when they take a step back out of Chi Sao range and into a cage it stops looking anything like what Alan was demo'ing or doing in Chi Sao? Shouldn't it carry over? Why train one way and fight a different way? My answer.........? Because they are doing MMA, not Wing Chun! It may be MMA with a Wing Chun "twist", but it is MMA nonetheless and not Wing Chun. I'm sure you know the old Army adage: "you fight the way you train." If you spend the majority of the time training for MMA, you are just naturally going to fight like any other MMA fighter. If you spend the majority of the time sparring with whatever works, then you are naturally going to fight with whatever things came up for you that worked with the guys you train with. That won't be good Wing Chun basics unless you spend the same amount of time or even more time training specifically those Wing Chun basics and work on bringing them out in your sparring. "Training realistically" is not the answer. Realistically training your Wing Chun is what we want, and sparring is NOT the only way to do that.

Don't get me wrong. Kudos and congrats to Josh and Alan and the rest of the Iron Wolves team! Great job!



It has absolutely nothing to do with wing chun knowledge and everrything to do with skill that comes from the training. You can't see it because you are not there.

No. It has everything to do with WHICH particular skill you are training. And that particular skill should be based on Wing Chun knowledge. Otherwise why in the heck are you bothering with Wing Chun? Why aren't you just training MMA, or boxing, or kickboxing?????? You can't see that....well, I'm not sure why. You seem to have this weird fixation on sparring and telling everyone how terrible their Wing Chun is because they don't "train realistically."

[KPM]

KPM, I have to agree. I would not have recognised the WC either. I've watched the clips where Alan explains how what he does is WC, and he makes a lot of sense. So since he's the coach and he can see it, I'll take his word for that. I just wish I could see a bit more WC in the mix, like when Alan himself demonstrates.

Still, the results are impressive. Kudos to Josh Kaldani, his coach Alan Orr, and to the Iron Wolves.

Thanks Steve! I agree. Kudos to Josh and the Iron Wolves!!

[LFJ]

I would like to understand how the KO punch was a "Wing Chun punch".

To me, it is indistinguishable from the same big overhand any MMA guy who's never done WC would throw.

[KPM]

I would like to understand how the KO punch was a "Wing Chun punch".

To me, it is indistinguishable from the same big overhand any MMA guy who's never done WC would throw.

I agree. Sure, Wing Chun has punches that come from various angles. But they are delivered with Wing Chun mechanics. That punch sure looked like a generic overhand punch that any MMA fighter would be throwing.

[tc101]

I would like to understand how the KO punch was a "Wing Chun punch".

To me, it is indistinguishable from the same big overhand any MMA guy who's never done WC would throw.

I think Orr has explained this before. This is my explanation not his. Wing chun is not in the form or shape but in the substance. Most people are stuck at the form or shape level of training. The form or shapes are what is taught to beginners as a means to learn the substance but they are not the end. Once we catch on to the substance by practicing the form or shapes we no longer are restricted to form or shapes since we can express the substance without them. You become free form in your actions. The wing chun punch for example involves hitting with your structure or your center in a particular way.

[LFJ]

I think Orr has explained this before. This is my explanation not his. Wing chun is not in the form or shape but in the substance. Most people are stuck at the form or shape level of training. The form or shapes are what is taught to beginners as a means to learn the substance but they are not the end. Once we catch on to the substance by practicing the form or shapes we no longer are restricted to form or shapes since we can express the substance without them. You become free form in your actions. The wing chun punch for example involves hitting with your structure or your center in a particular way.

If in the end it is indistinguishable from a simple overhand punch from any other system, the training of Wing Chun form or shape and all that first is a waste of time. Why not just train the overhand straight away like other successful fighters in MMA?

[KPM]

I think Orr has explained this before. This is my explanation not his. Wing chun is not in the form or shape but in the substance. Most people are stuck at the form or shape level of training. The form or shapes are what is taught to beginners as a means to learn the substance but they are not the end. Once we catch on to the substance by practicing the form or shapes we no longer are restricted to form or shapes since we can express the substance without them. You become free form in your actions. The wing chun punch for example involves hitting with your structure or your center in a particular way.

For others checking in the punch happens at about 7:18. Let's see..... "hitting with your structure or your center in a particular way"....that particular way possibly being using Wing Chun mechanics? Leaning forward, ducking your head and swinging from the shoulder are not typical Wing Chun mechanics as far as I know. Sure didn't look to me like his punch was connected to his hips in a Wing Chun fashion. And besides....let's say I work with a friend that is an MMA fighter and simply show him how to throw a hard straight punch down the center that connects to the hip and uses his structure better than the typical rear cross. Is he now "doing Wing Chun" in the ring?

[KPM]

Here's an example of what I was talking about in my last post. Watch this highlight reel of Vitor Belfort:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp7giqxPToo

Notice at the beginning of the clip he throws the very same punch that Josh used in the clip that started this thread. But pay attention at about 53 seconds in. Early in his career Vitor was known for straight direct punching. Watch him charge in and overwhelm his opponent with what is essentially Wing Chun chain punching. To me, THIS looks more like Wing Chun than the clip at the beginning of this thread. Should we claim Vitor as an example of Wing Chun's success in MMA? Is Vitor doing Wing Chun? Or is Vitor doing good MMA that just happens to occasionally incorporate some Wing Chun concepts?

[tc101]

If in the end it is indistinguishable from a simple overhand punch from any other system, the training of Wing Chun form or shape and all that first is a waste of time. Why not just train the overhand straight away like other successful fighters in MMA?

Many arts have similar let me emphasize similar tools. Fighting is in the end going to look like fighting. Wing chun is just a way to train for it and to approach it.

Here's the thing you have guys like the Orr group or Obasi and so forth that are wing chun trained there is no doubt about that. They all know the forms can do the drills and so forth. Yet what we see again and again is these guys who take the next step and don't just keep playing forms and drills but train to fight and do fight end up not looking like the form/drill guys think they should. What we never see is any wing chun people really fighting looking like what the form/drill guys think they should. Why is that? Orr has already explained it. I explained it. I think people do not want to accept that explanation because to admit it would mean that being at the form/drill level is only the first stage of wing chun.

One of the things I find hard to believe about so many in wing chun is that they gauge their wing chun on what they think they know or think they understand and not what they can do. This is why they keep talking about knowledge or understanding and not skill or performance. The form/drill guys know how wing chun should be and they understand it better than anyone it's just that they cannot do any of it.

What you have are guys who cannot do it who would get beaten silly by Orr or Obasi telling us these guys who would destroy them are doing it all wrong. Stop and think about that. Guys who can't do it and can't point to anyone who can do it like they think it should be done think they know - there is that word again - better than they guys really doing it how things should work. Their excuse is well well yeah they can beat me but that's not wing chun. They say that because their perspective is from the form/drill stage where they see wing chun as fixed dance steps. Not wing chun? No it is just they cannot understand that the fixed dance steps cannot be for the most part used or fit into fighting but the movement, the connections, the ability to handle pressure, generate power and so forth what I learned was the substance behind the forms/drills can be used in fighting.

KPM does not see that what forces you to see this is the realistic training. That is why guys who do that training like Orr and Obasi and the other guys really fighting get it and he doesn't.

[Kellen Bassette]

Fighting looks like fighting. Gong Fu is a method of developing a particular skill...all respect to Sifu Orr and his team for bringing their Gong Fu training into a real and live environment. They are a light in a dark and shameful world.

[Alan Orr]

Nice to see the concepts and attributes of wing chun being applied in MMA. This is something I am exploring in own training at the moment. My fear is that many wing chun people will not appreciate the video because they are constrained with what wing chun should look like in a fight rather than what it can achieve.

I think we have all seen the videos on YouTube of wing chun exponents being made to look silly and their art failing them. Time to move forward whilst embracing the past but not to be defined by it.

Many thanks, yes your right. Many have the idea that if it works in MMA it can't be Wing Chun. It's funny. so we can't worry about people like that.

[Alan Orr]

Well, I can appreciate the theory Alan covers in his clips. He seems to be one of the few who understands the difference between training form and the abstract nature of the application of Wing Chun, as well as how to bridge the two.

That said however, a big overhand thrown by a guy who trains WC doesn't make it a "Wing Chun punch". It's indistinguishable from the same punch any other MMA fighter who's never trained WC would throw, and is not an "angle of punch" in any WC lineage I'm familiar with.

At the end of the day, it got the job done. So whatever. Call it whatever pleases you.

We have many punches in the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun system. This is pure application of our structural power and timing. This is our reeling punch. I may put up a clip on my you tube channel showing this punch.

Oh yes we punch from all angles as well.

[Alan Orr]

I like Alan Orr and what he is doing. But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is. You can't do boxing with some Tan Sau's, Bong Sau's and WCK concepts and call it Wing Chun. That's Jeet Kune Do! :);) I certainly appreciate the skill and athleticism shown in the video. But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun!


Going by your post you don't understand Wing Chun or JKD lol or MMA in fact!

MMA = mixed martial arts.

Straight up Wing Chun? WTF is that lol Wing Chun is not a limited style. I know we see lots of basic drill based Wing Chun around. But that;s not Wing Chun.

The training forms, drill, chi sao, sparring. The application is a fight.

In a fight you use the skills you gain from the training. Balance, timing, position control, power and much more.

You say -
But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun

It is a fight its not an instruction tape. If you can't see the weight placement to gain power. The hip and center control then you can't see the deeper layers of Wing Chun skills.

[Alan Orr]

Here's the thing you know what wing chun practiced in unrealistic settings looks like as in chi sau and san sau and so forth, and you think this is what it will look like when things get really hot and heavy when going all out in fighting. That viewpoint is not based on experience really doing that or even seeing it done like that since you cannot point me to anyone who is able to do it like you think it should be done. Why is it do you think that the guys who train wing chun like the Orr team or Obasi or anyone else does not end up looking like how you think they should? Did it ever occur to you that maybe it is because you have unrealistic ideas of what wing chun is and how it works and that maybe guys like Orr simply have a realistic idea that comes from genuine realistic experience? In other words, they are just much more advanced than you?

It is howling funny how guys will say yeah they could beat me silly but they just aren't doing it right!



It has absolutely nothing to do with wing chun knowledge and everrything to do with skill that comes from the training. You can't see it because you are not there.

Good post, thanks

[KPM]

KPM does not see that what forces you to see this is the realistic training. That is why guys who do that training like Orr and Obasi and the other guys really fighting get it and he doesn't.

I find it interesting and bit boring that you just keep repeating your mantra and don't even try to acknowledge or counter the points I have made.

[Alan Orr]

KPM, I have to agree. I would not have recognised the WC either. I've watched the clips where Alan explains how what he does is WC, and he makes a lot of sense. So since he's the coach and he can see it, I'll take his word for that. I just wish I could see a bit more WC in the mix, like when Alan himself demonstrates.

Still, the results are impressive. Kudos to Josh Kaldani, his coach Alan Orr, and to the Iron Wolves.

What is wing chun? training and application look different.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOeFy36W8pw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg_MJyOd2SE


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0


We train skills then we punch and kick people. The skill of when, why and how is in the training. The training is not fighting.

[Alan Orr]

If in the end it is indistinguishable from a simple overhand punch from any other system, the training of Wing Chun form or shape and all that first is a waste of time. Why not just train the overhand straight away like other successful fighters in MMA?

In Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun we train our structure and center so we can punch with power and not lose base. A lot of boxing punches have a higher center of balance, which means they can lose balance. This is one of the many many reason we are punching differently from normal boxing. We train a chinese boxing system. I can't see why people on a wing chun forum are unhappy to see our wing chun working.

[KPM]

Going by your post you don't understand Wing Chun or JKD lol or MMA in fact!

MMA = mixed martial arts.

Straight up Wing Chun? WTF is that lol Wing Chun is not a limited style. I know we see lots of basic drill based Wing Chun around. But that;s not Wing Chun.

The training forms, drill, chi sao, sparring. The application is a fight.

In a fight you use the skills you gain from the training. Balance, timing, position control, power and much more.

You say -
But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun

It is a fight its not an instruction tape. If you can't see the weight placement to gain power. The hip and center control then you can't see the deeper layers of Wing Chun skills.


I never said Wing Chun was limited. Let me ask you this Alan. If you took one your students or of Robert's students that has never done any MMA specific training or even sparred with MMA guys and threw him in the cage for a bout at an event....would he look anything like Josh did in that clip? I still say that was MMA with some Wing Chun concepts included. And there is nothing wrong with that. Was Vitor doing Wing Chun in the clip I posted? I agree that the training develops skills. But then why does it look nothing like the training when expressed in the cage? You fight the way you train. So I maintain that what we are actually seeing in these clips is a result of MMA training more than it is the Wing Chun training. That's what I mean by "straight up" Wing Chun. The average guy training Wing Chun today is NOT going look like your guys if he ever had to fight. That is because your guys do a heck of a lot of MMA training in addition to any Wing Chun training. You fight the way you train. Many Wing Chun people are guilty of not taking their Wing Chun training to a more realistic level. But one doesn't have to train MMA to do that.

And you agree with Twen/tc101 that it has nothing to do with Wing Chun knowledge? Doesn't Wing Chun knowledge equate to Wing Chun training? So you could throw out the "Wing Chun knowledge" that you are imparting to your students and just do the MMA training and they would be just as successful?

[Alan Orr]

Here's an example of what I was talking about in my last post. Watch this highlight reel of Vitor Belfort:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp7giqxPToo

Notice at the beginning of the clip he throws the very same punch that Josh used in the clip that started this thread. But pay attention at about 53 seconds in. Early in his career Vitor was known for straight direct punching. Watch him charge in and overwhelm his opponent with what is essentially Wing Chun chain punching. To me, THIS looks more like Wing Chun than the clip at the beginning of this thread. Should we claim Vitor as an example of Wing Chun's success in MMA? Is Vitor doing Wing Chun? Or is Vitor doing good MMA that just happens to occasionally incorporate some Wing Chun concepts?

I have trained with Vitor as he is a friend of my BJJ teacher. He wasn't doing Wing Chun and has never said anything different - he just fired a one two repeated and charged. So that is a pointless reference. On the other hand Josh does train Wing Chun - Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun and we did train to land that punch. All my MMA fighters train CSL Wing Chun - is that clear for you? I am bored of explaining that just because you have a limited insight to what we do - it does not mean we do.

If, I think, maybe, could be, - all BS. You don't know so what are you adding?

We have a system which is tested in very way. We know what we can do and why we do it. That is why we have such a strong team of fighters. My UK guys have done very well, I have been in NZ a year and already we have a very strong Team. This because I teach a system. It is not lucky concepts or a mix of ideas.

We know what we are doing. Our Wing Chun is very different to others, I know as after 27 years in Wing Chun I have checked out many styles and teachers. I am very very clear on my art.

[tc101]

And you agree with Twen/tc101 that it has nothing to do with Wing Chun knowledge? Doesn't Wing Chun knowledge equate to Wing Chun training? So you could throw out the "Wing Chun knowledge" that you are imparting to your students and just do the MMA training and they would be just as successful?

No no no no not it is not about knowledge it is about learning and developing skills. Skills. Change your thinking to what skills do I have, what skills have I learned, and so on instead of knowledge. You see there is two types of knowledge, unrealistic knowledge and realistic knowledge. Realistic knowledge comes from experience actually doing the skills. Unrealistic knowledge comes from not doing the skills.

[KPM]

What is wing chun? training and application look different.

You fight the way you train. Why waste time with training that has nothing to do with how you will fight?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOeFy36W8pw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg_MJyOd2SE


Good clips!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0


Now without a tag line identifying it, I doubt anyone would recognize this video as Wing Chun.


We train skills then we punch and kick people. The skill of when, why and how is in the training. The training is not fighting.

This is true. But if when you are fighting you are going to look like a boxer (as in the clip above), why not just train boxing? If the delivery system for your punches and kicks when fighting doesn't look much like the delivery system you used when training for punching and kicking, then one has to wonder about the training. You fight the way you train. If you are going to use a boxing structure when sparring and call it Wing Chun, then we should be seeing the same structure when you do your drills or Wing Chun forms. Shouldn't we? Why train one way and fight another?

Now don't get me wrong Alan. There is nothing wrong with what you guys are doing. But I would call it MMA with Wing Chun concepts, not Wing Chun.

[Alan Orr]

I never said Wing Chun was limited. Let me ask you this Alan. If you took one your students or of Robert's students that has never done any MMA specific training or even sparred with MMA guys and threw him in the cage for a bout at an event....would he look anything like Josh did in that clip? I still say that was MMA with some Wing Chun concepts included. And there is nothing wrong with that. Was Vitor doing Wing Chun in the clip I posted? I agree that the training develops skills. But then why does it look nothing like the training when expressed in the cage? You fight the way you train. So I maintain that what we are actually seeing in these clips is a result of MMA training more than it is the Wing Chun training. That's what I mean by "straight up" Wing Chun. The average guy training Wing Chun today is NOT going look like your guys if he ever had to fight. That is because your guys do a heck of a lot of MMA training in addition to any Wing Chun training. You fight the way you train. Many Wing Chun people are guilty of not taking their Wing Chun training to a more realistic level. But one doesn't have to train MMA to do that.

And you agree with Twen/tc101 that it has nothing to do with Wing Chun knowledge? Doesn't Wing Chun knowledge equate to Wing Chun training? So you could throw out the "Wing Chun knowledge" that you are imparting to your students and just do the MMA training and they would be just as successful?


More if and buts. When Josh trained for his fight he was sparring with all my guys. Fighters and just class based guys. Everyone I teach learns and trains the same system. We are not the average wing chun guys as we train as fighters. It doesn't mean you have to fight or do MMA. I have guys that never want to fight and are just as good as Josh, I have guys better than some of my fighters. I have fighters that only what to train wing chun and boxing, wing chun to use in K1.

We train the classical training. Forms, drills Chi Sao, sparring. We apply that to the problem given - the street - mma- boxing K1 etc

Not all wing chun is the same, that is true. Not all wing chun will work in the cage and some not even on the street. That has nothing to do with me.

I don't understand why on this forum some people always what to say - you guys do well but it can't be wing chun lol

My students are successful due to - CHU SAU LEI WING CHUN is that clear for you?

Normal class sparring -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0

Normal Chi Sau to Gor Sau

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YvlLJbC4QE


Normal Chi Sao to Clinch to Ground - This one is old 2008 - I'm now a BJJ Black Belt so my grappling has improved. Oh Neil in The video is my PRO MMA fighter 5-1-0 ( 1 Was to knee injury). He is super tough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyxJIq9UEJY

So Wing Chun is not a simple paint by number art.

[Alan Orr]

What is wing chun? training and application look different.

You fight the way you train. Why waste time with training that has nothing to do with how you will fight?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOeFy36W8pw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg_MJyOd2SE


Good clips!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0


Now without a tag line identifying it, I doubt anyone would recognize this video as Wing Chun.


We train skills then we punch and kick people. The skill of when, why and how is in the training. The training is not fighting.

This is true. But if when you are fighting you are going to look like a boxer (as in the clip above), why not just train boxing? If the delivery system for your punches and kicks when fighting doesn't look much like the delivery system you used when training for punching and kicking, then one has to wonder about the training. You fight the way you train. If you are going to use a boxing structure when sparring and call it Wing Chun, then we should be seeing the same structure when you do your drills or Wing Chun forms. Shouldn't we? Why train one way and fight another?

Now don't get me wrong Alan. There is nothing wrong with what you guys are doing. But I would call it MMA with Wing Chun concepts, not Wing Chun.


I know there is nothing wrong with what we are doing in MMA LOL, But thanks for telling me.


Why not train boxing? - Hello, I have said so many times. We train Chinese Boxing - Wing Chun Kuen. All our skills which you can't seem to see (not my fault or problem) are the reason why we have success in MMA. Of course Wing Chun on the street will be different in terms of use of tools, but core skills are the same. The power develop and structure is the same.

We do not train western boxing as we punch differently as we train Wing Chun. Our fist position, our hip and feet our angles, our timing, our should control. So many things. I have many students that train western boxing before coming to me. The first thing they say is wow this is so different. Is that clear enough for you?

[Alan Orr]

Fighting looks like fighting. Gong Fu is a method of developing a particular skill...all respect to Sifu Orr and his team for bringing their Gong Fu training into a real and live environment. They are a light in a dark and shameful world.

Thank You. Nice to hear

[KPM]

I have trained with Vitor as he is a friend of my BJJ teacher. He wasn't doing Wing Chun and has never said anything different - he just fired a one two repeated and charged. So that is a pointless reference.

No it is not a pointless reference. My point was that Vitor did something that was more recognizable as Wing Chun than what Josh did yet no one claims that he was "doing Wing Chun" in the cage!


On the other hand Josh does train Wing Chun - Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun and we did train to land that punch. All my MMA fighters train CSL Wing Chun - is that clear for you?

Of course its clear to me! Its also very clear to me that they train MMA as well. What we see in the cage is more a result of MMA training than Wing Chun training. Otherwise anyone training Wing Chun WITHOUT the MMA training should be able to step in there and look the same, shouldn't they?

I am bored of explaining that just because you have a limited insight to what we do - it does not mean we do.

I know what you are doing and admire it. I just don't think it is all Wing Chun, that's all. To show one of your guys winning is great! Congrats! To call it a success attributed to Wing Chun when he wins with a punch exactly like Vitor what uses in the clip I posted is just a little off.


If, I think, maybe, could be, - all BS. You don't know so what are you adding?

Adding to what? I'm just expressing my opinion.


We know what we are doing. Our Wing Chun is very different to others.

Could that be because it is Wing Chun adapted to a MMA format? Could that be because you include lots of MMA training? My point is that if you are labeling clips as "Wing Chun" that look nothing like Wing Chun, the non-Wing Chun person is going to think "what's he talking about? That looks just like any other MMA fighter!" That doesn't really help our cause or image to the rest of the martial arts world because they will just think Wing Chun is a joke and trying to pose as MMA. I think it would be better to talk about how Wing Chun concepts and training has enhanced your MMA. And if the average Joe sees your MMA/sparring clips labeled as Wing Chun, and then walks into just about any Wing Chun school in the world other than yours looking for the same thing....he's going to be a bit disappointed.

[KPM]

I know there is nothing wrong with what we are doing in MMA LOL, But thanks for telling me.

Look Alan. I'm not your enemy. I was giving you props. No need for the sarcasm.


Of course Wing Chun on the street will be different in terms of use of tools, but core skills are the same. The power develop and structure is the same.

Well, here is a key point...."Wing Chun on the street"....which I am assuming you mean "as opposed to Wing Chun for MMA." Which could easily be seen as....Wing Chun the way is was originally designed.....as opposed to Wing Chun adapted to MMA. At least that's how I see it. But that's just my opinion.

[BPWT..]

training and application look different.

Playing devil's advocate... would you say the same thing about a boxer or a BJJ practitioner's training? Does their training, in your opinion, look different to their application?

[LFJ]

I can't see why people on a wing chun forum are unhappy to see our wing chun working.

Well, I am not one of those people. I understand the abstract nature of Wing Chun in application. You explain it well in your many clips, all of which I pretty well agree with. Are you aware of any other WC lineage that uses this punch though? I am not, but my experience is not as broad.

[KPM]

Again, just so anyone reading is clear! I admire what Alan and his guys have accomplished in the cage! They are hardcore and a good example to all! But I see what they are doing as either Wing Chun adapted for MMA, or MMA with solid Wing Chun concepts included. And there is nothing wrong with that! Wing Chun is not limited, it is adaptable. What I disagree with is labeling clips as Wing Chun that look nothing like "typical", or "straight up" Wing Chun and look exactly like the typical MMA that everyone else is doing. Overall I don't think this is actually good for Wing Chun's image for the reason I noted above. This would be like an MMA fighter with a TKD background landing a knock out roundhouse kick to the head and labeling the clip as an example of the success of TKD in the cage. Well, don't most other MMA fighters know how to do a roundhouse kick whether they studied TKD or not? Was their something unique about that roundhouse kick that made it instantly recognizable as TKD? Probably not. But if the fighter had landed a knock out capoeira kick to the head that no one other than capoeira fighters were using....THEN one could say that was an example of capoeira's success in the cage!

[Alan Orr]

Playing devil's advocate... would you say the same thing about a boxer or a BJJ practitioner's training? Does their training, in your opinion, look different to their application?


Yes they do. Im boxing you use a speed ball, focus pads etc. You do not take them in the ring. Wing Chun forms and drills are training skills - timing speed positioning.

BJJ - Training has many levels. As it is a sport art it is closer to normal training. But comps add a lot of strength and power. You can train BJJ without that.

[Alan Orr]

I have trained with Vitor as he is a friend of my BJJ teacher. He wasn't doing Wing Chun and has never said anything different - he just fired a one two repeated and charged. So that is a pointless reference.

No it is not a pointless reference. My point was that Vitor did something that was more recognizable as Wing Chun than what Josh did yet no one claims that he was "doing Wing Chun" in the cage!


On the other hand Josh does train Wing Chun - Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun and we did train to land that punch. All my MMA fighters train CSL Wing Chun - is that clear for you?

Of course its clear to me! Its also very clear to me that they train MMA as well. What we see in the cage is more a result of MMA training than Wing Chun training. Otherwise anyone training Wing Chun WITHOUT the MMA training should be able to step in there and look the same, shouldn't they?

I am bored of explaining that just because you have a limited insight to what we do - it does not mean we do.

I know what you are doing and admire it. I just don't think it is all Wing Chun, that's all. To show one of your guys winning is great! Congrats! To call it a success attributed to Wing Chun when he wins with a punch exactly like Vitor what uses in the clip I posted is just a little off.


If, I think, maybe, could be, - all BS. You don't know so what are you adding?

Adding to what? I'm just expressing my opinion.


We know what we are doing. Our Wing Chun is very different to others.

Could that be because it is Wing Chun adapted to a MMA format? Could that be because you include lots of MMA training? My point is that if you are labeling clips as "Wing Chun" that look nothing like Wing Chun, the non-Wing Chun person is going to think "what's he talking about? That looks just like any other MMA fighter!" That doesn't really help our cause or image to the rest of the martial arts world because they will just think Wing Chun is a joke and trying to pose as MMA. I think it would be better to talk about how Wing Chun concepts and training has enhanced your MMA. And if the average Joe sees your MMA/sparring clips labeled as Wing Chun, and then walks into just about any Wing Chun school in the world other than yours looking for the same thing....he's going to be a bit disappointed.

MMA is not a martial art. It means mixed martial arts. So we train Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun for our stand up - which includes our CSL Chinese Boxing ( which is our wing chun with gloves - I have arranged a system of progession within that) We train BJJ and wrestling for takedowns and ground game. On the ground we still use our Wing Chun. in BJJ we still use many wing chun skills.

Look, this is how we train Wing Chun and this is what we do. Like it or not, it is our Wing Chun. So please stop trying to tell me what I should or shouldn't call it. We are proud of our system and that's why we share our clips and experience. If someone see my clips and is disappointed by another school then what has that got to do with me? I traveled the world and still do too train with the system I wanted to learn.

[LFJ]

This is one of the many many reason we are punching differently from normal boxing. We train a chinese boxing system...

...Our Wing Chun is very different to others, I know as after 27 years in Wing Chun I have checked out many styles and teachers. I am very very clear on my art.

Do you think your art has evolved to better suit a sporting environment like Western Boxing, as opposed to street defense?
Or are you of the opinion that there shouldn't be such a distinction?

[Alan Orr]

Again, just so anyone reading is clear! I admire what Alan and his guys have accomplished in the cage! They are hardcore and a good example to all! But I see what they are doing as either Wing Chun adapted for MMA, or MMA with solid Wing Chun concepts included. And there is nothing wrong with that! Wing Chun is not limited, it is adaptable. What I disagree with is labeling clips as Wing Chun that look nothing like "typical", or "straight up" Wing Chun and look exactly like the typical MMA that everyone else is doing. Overall I don't think this is actually good for Wing Chun's image for the reason I noted above. This would be like an MMA fighter with a TKD background landing a knock out roundhouse kick to the head and labeling the clip as an example of the success of TKD in the cage. Well, don't most other MMA fighters know how to do a roundhouse kick whether they studied TKD or not? Was their something unique about that roundhouse kick that made it instantly recognizable as TKD? Probably not. But if the fighter had landed a knock out capoeira kick to the head that no one other than capoeira fighters were using....THEN one could say that was an example of capoeira's success in the cage!


Again. We train CHU SAU LEI WING CHUN under my teacher Robert Chu. So when we post our clips we will continue to honor my teacher and our system, as thats what we train and that is why it works. Please stop trying to tell me about something you clearly do not understand.

[Alan Orr]

Do you think your art has evolved to better suit a sporting environment like Western Boxing, as opposed to street defense?
Or are you of the opinion that there shouldn't be such a distinction?

We only started MMA etc to test our basics. Body structure, power and so on. Our system is excellent for the street even more so from the sport training. Nothing is better for timing than dealing with strong pressure and taking hits and more angles.

My timing is very natural now due to Chi Sao and sparring.

new clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfXKWNdY25Y

[LFJ]

So we train Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun for our stand up - which includes our CSL Chinese Boxing ( which is our wing chun with gloves - I have arranged a system of progession within that)

Sounds like you're saying a part of your WC has evolved a sporting adaptation which is separate from the rest of your WC? If so, perhaps that should be made clear.

[BPWT..]

Yes they do. Im boxing you use a speed ball, focus pads etc. You do not take them in the ring. Wing Chun forms and drills are training skills - timing speed positioning.

BJJ - Training has many levels. As it is a sport art it is closer to normal training. But comps add a lot of strength and power. You can train BJJ without that.

Okay, fair enough. Thanks for responding. :)

I'd agree that Wing Chun forms and drills are about training skills such as timing, speed and positioning. What I meant was, as a boxer do you train a cross one way and use it another way in application, or train a shoulder roll against the cross, but then use it another way in application?

Or as a BJJ guy, do you train a rear naked choke one way but in application use it another way?

This is a good thread, as WCK use in the ring does seem to be 'problematic'. A boxer trains and then when using his art in application, looks like a boxer. A BJJ practitioner trains his art and then in the ring/on the mats, looks like a BBJ guy (even to fairly untrained eyes).

[Alan Orr]

Sounds like you're saying a part of your WC has evolved a sporting adaptation which is separate from the rest of your WC? If so, perhaps that should be made clear.

No they are the same. As the core is all in our body structure system. The only change is you have to understand sparring is training not a fight. So we train skills and ideas just like in Chi Sao. Then for a fight we up the sparring to fight training. But all skills are CSL Wing Chun.

[BPWT..]

new clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfXKWNdY25Y

Thanks for posting it - I like pretty much most of your uploaded video. Lots of the drills you show involve intercepting and bridging. Do you work these purely for timing, or do you think this is something your guys can use (in the ring)?

[LFJ]

I see what they are doing as either Wing Chun adapted for MMA, or MMA with solid Wing Chun concepts included.

What do you think MMA is? As Alan already said, it's not a style. An MMA gym doesn't teach "MMA". It teaches whatever styles the coach chooses by "mixing the martial arts" in any combination. For these guys it's WC+BJJ. So, "MMA with solid Wing Chun concepts" doesn't make sense.

[LFJ]

I think he referred to it as a 'reeling punch' (?).

Don't know what chu sau lei WC is but i can certainly reference that punch in my own forms (Yip Man lineage). Most of what his figher did when he throws that 'reeling punch' seems to me to come from 2nd form, with a little bit of 3rd form. Just my .02 though. Thx.

What YM lineage and where in the forms? Because I'm also YM lineage, which is not specific enough since most are at least a generation or two removed, and I don't recognize this kind of punch.

[KPM]

What do you think MMA is? As Alan already said, it's not a style. An MMA gym doesn't teach "MMA". It teaches whatever styles the coach chooses by "mixing the martial arts" in any combination. For these guys it's WC+BJJ. So, "MMA with solid Wing Chun concepts" doesn't make sense.

Yeah, we know that's how MMA started. But really, it has become its own thing. How many fighters do you see in the cage doing recognizable martial arts styles? Lyoda Machita used to be different in that you could see his classical Karate influence. But even that has faded a bit as he continues to compete. Now they all do a combo of stand up boxing/kickboxing, wrestling, and BJJ/submission wrestling on the ground. The days of a guy stepping into the ring to see how his Kenpo, TKD, or Karate training would fare against someone else went out long before Zuffa came along. What Alan's guys are doing is the stand up portion with "chinese boxing". When do you ever see a trainer "mixing" something other than boxing/kickboxing, wrestling, and BJJ?

[Alan Orr]

Thanks for posting it - I like pretty much most of your uploaded video. Lots of the drills you show involve intercepting and bridging. Do you work these purely for timing, or do you think this is something your guys can use (in the ring)?

Welcome

It is for timing for sure. On the street you will have a higher % of success, as your opponent is not trained and really for a war. Plus you have more tools to use and less rules.

In the cage we test the core basic of our system. A lot of the higher skills close down an opponents game. The opponent Josh was fighting is a BJJ nation champ, but Josh closed him down with our CSL Wing Chun structure.

[Alan Orr]

Okay, fair enough. Thanks for responding. :)

I'd agree that Wing Chun forms and drills are about training skills such as timing, speed and positioning. What I meant was, as a boxer do you train a cross one way and use it another way in application, or train a shoulder roll against the cross, but then use it another way in application?

Or as a BJJ guy, do you train a rear naked choke one way but in application use it another way?

This is a good thread, as WCK use in the ring does seem to be 'problematic'. A boxer trains and then when using his art in application, looks like a boxer. A BJJ practitioner trains his art and then in the ring/on the mats, looks like a BBJ guy (even to fairly untrained eyes).

No we train all our wing chun punches for MMA or boxing as we do in normal class training with Chi Sao and Gor Sao. Our Wing Chun in the cage looks like Wing Chun to me, as that's what we train and that's our goal. We know the difference between skill development and skill application

[KPM]

Again. We train CHU SAU LEI WING CHUN under my teacher Robert Chu. So when we post our clips we will continue to honor my teacher and our system, as thats what we train and that is why it works. Please stop trying to tell me about something you clearly do not understand.

I understand perfectly. Just because I have a different viewpoint doesn't mean I'm stupid and don't understand what you are doing. You just said the you do "CSL Chinese boxing". To me that implies your CSL Wing Chun adapted to a competitive kickboxing environment, doesn't it? And this would be distinct from "straight up" Wing Chun. That's all I've been saying.

[tc101]

What YM lineage and where in the forms? Because I'm also YM lineage, which is not specific enough since most are at least a generation or two removed, and I don't recognize this kind of punch.

The form/drills are there as models not so much for the dance steps in them but to get across more important things behind the dance steps. It was first explained to me using a tennis analogy. When you look in a tennis book on how to hit a forehand or backhand you see it taught a certain way, with you facing side toward the net, standing still, weighted 50-50, racket arm drawing straight back, hitting the ball as you shift your weight to the front leg, and so forth. Now if you look at real tennis matches even with very good players you never hardly see that. Why? Because you cannot play dynamically like that. Your facing will be different, you may be running, your weight will be whereever it is when you get to the ball, and so forth. In other words, it will look nothing like the book or model. The model is a way to teach you those things that go into hitting the ball, the weight transfer, the angle of the racket, the timing, and so forth. The model or the form is a finger pointing to something else and it is that something else that is what is important. The tennis textbook teaches you how to hit the ball with the proper control and with power by putting your body into it a certain way. That is the how you judge the stroke and NOT by how closely it looks to the model.

When I look at that fight, I see the Orr fighter controlling the center, using that control to intercept the opponent's action and timing to land a strike on his center, that strike having the structural integrity and powers transfer that comes from his wing chun training, and then him following up with chain punching to finish the fight. Is that not a great example of wing chun fighting?

[Alan Orr]

Hard to describe via a forum; however in the end it all boils down to how one defines certain terms and tools and concepts. I've posted before how wing chun has, as in politics, both liberals and conservatives. If a WC conservative (someone who interprets the forms literally) were to experience the wing chun of a WC liberal (someone who interprets the forms for what they are and can break them into their pieces and parts etc and apply them in a recombined manner) they would most likely say something like "hey, that's not wing chun" because their two interpretations did not match up to their perceptions.

So, I could answer by saying the waist torque, long bridge shoulder power, rear hand, opposite action power generation, heel placement, etc is all found in the ideas and concepts of 2nd and 3rd form in my wing chun...but most likely folks would disagree, argue, etc etc.

I can sympathize with Alan because there have been times when (dare I say) mainstream wing chun have accused us of not doing wing chun... haha
Oh well.

I'm curious as LFJ is about how Alan or CSL WC defines "reeling punch".
Thx.


Thank you. Yes you are correct. The reeling punch is a more circular punch. It comes from the centered body - not like boxing. and the arm delinks then comes back in and relinks back to the power vector with the knuckles in correct wing chun positioning. Its a bigger punch that our Whipping punch which is smaller and tighter.

[Alan Orr]

I understand perfectly. Just because I have a different viewpoint doesn't mean I'm stupid and don't understand what you are doing. You just said the you do "CSL Chinese boxing". To me that implies your CSL Wing Chun adapted to a competitive kickboxing environment, doesn't it? And this would be distinct from "straight up" Wing Chun. That's all I've been saying.

No we are doing CSL Wing Chun Kuen. Which is Chinese Boxing.

[Alan Orr]

The form/drills are there as models not so much for the dance steps in them but to get across more important things behind the dance steps. It was first explained to me using a tennis analogy. When you look in a tennis book on how to hit a forehand or backhand you see it taught a certain way, with you facing side toward the net, standing still, weighted 50-50, racket arm drawing straight back, hitting the ball as you shift your weight to the front leg, and so forth. Now if you look at real tennis matches even with very good players you never hardly see that. Why? Because you cannot play dynamically like that. Your facing will be different, you may be running, your weight will be whereever it is when you get to the ball, and so forth. In other words, it will look nothing like the book or model. The model is a way to teach you those things that go into hitting the ball, the weight transfer, the angle of the racket, the timing, and so forth. The model or the form is a finger pointing to something else and it is that something else that is what is important. The tennis textbook teaches you how to hit the ball with the proper control and with power by putting your body into it a certain way. That is the how you judge the stroke and NOT by how closely it looks to the model.

When I look at that fight, I see the Orr fighter controlling the center, using that control to intercept the opponent's action and timing to land a strike on his center, that strike having the structural integrity and powers transfer that comes from his wing chun training, and then him following up with chain punching to finish the fight. Is that not a great example of wing chun fighting?


Excellent post! Nice to hear we are on the same page.

[KPM]

I know what you were getting at BPWT, and it has nothing to do with using equipment. Of course you can't take a speed ball or heavy bag into the ring!

I'd agree that Wing Chun forms and drills are about training skills such as timing, speed and positioning. What I meant was, as a boxer do you train a cross one way and use it another way in application, or train a shoulder roll against the cross, but then use it another way in application?

Most boxers I have seen are doing things in training that look exactly like what they do in the ring. They don't use a particular stance or position in training to practice punching or defending, and then abandon that stance when they get into the ring. They don't practice combo's on the pads (kind of their equivalent of forms training) and then do those combo's differently in the ring. Same for BJJ. They don't do their guard or mount or side position one way in training and a different way in the ring. Both Boxing and BJJ train the way they fight and are recognizable in any sparring situation.


This is a good thread, as WCK use in the ring does seem to be 'problematic'. A boxer trains and then when using his art in application, looks like a boxer. A BJJ practitioner trains his art and then in the ring/on the mats, looks like a BBJ guy (even to fairly untrained eyes).

Exactly! Now maybe Alan is onto something. Maybe what he and his guys are doing in the ring is how to make Wing Chun work. Maybe we need to drop all the traditional training we have been doing for generations and focus on how to make Wing Chun work in that MMA-type environment. To do that we probably don't need the forms, the dummy, or most of the rest.

[Alan Orr]

I know what you were getting at BPWT, and it has more to do with using equipment. Of course you can't take a speed ball or heavy bag into the ring!

I'd agree that Wing Chun forms and drills are about training skills such as timing, speed and positioning. What I meant was, as a boxer do you train a cross one way and use it another way in application, or train a shoulder roll against the cross, but then use it another way in application?

Most boxers I have seen are doing things in training that look exactly like what they do in the ring. They don't use a particular stance or position in training to practice punching or defending, and then abandon that stance when they get into the ring. They don't practice combo's on the pads (kind of their equivalent of forms training) and then do those combo's differently in the ring. Same for BJJ. They don't do their guard or mount or side position one way in training and a different way in the ring. Both Boxing and BJJ train the way they fight and are recognizable in any sparring situation.


This is a good thread, as WCK use in the ring does seem to be 'problematic'. A boxer trains and then when using his art in application, looks like a boxer. A BJJ practitioner trains his art and then in the ring/on the mats, looks like a BBJ guy (even to fairly untrained eyes).

Exactly! Now maybe Alan is onto something. Maybe what he and his guys are doing in the ring is how to make Wing Chun work. Maybe we need to drop all the traditional training we have been doing for generations and focus on how to make Wing Chun work in that MMA-type environment. To do that we probably don't need the forms, the dummy, or most of the rest.


No the forms and dummy with correct understanding of body structure are super important. They map our the structure positioning and control. Most wing chun have very poor form understanding therefore the application is weak. Our system we understand the power of the forms so our application under pressure is sound.

[tc101]

I know what you were getting at BPWT, and it has more to do with using equipment. Of course you can't take a speed ball or heavy bag into the ring!

I'd agree that Wing Chun forms and drills are about training skills such as timing, speed and positioning. What I meant was, as a boxer do you train a cross one way and use it another way in application, or train a shoulder roll against the cross, but then use it another way in application?

Most boxers I have seen are doing things in training that look exactly like what they do in the ring. They don't use a particular stance or position in training to practice punching or defending, and then abandon that stance when they get into the ring. They don't practice combo's on the pads (kind of their equivalent of forms training) and then do those combo's differently in the ring. Same for BJJ. They don't do their guard or mount or side position one way in training and a different way in the ring. Both Boxing and BJJ train the way they fight and are recognizable in any sparring situation.


This is a good thread, as WCK use in the ring does seem to be 'problematic'. A boxer trains and then when using his art in application, looks like a boxer. A BJJ practitioner trains his art and then in the ring/on the mats, looks like a BBJ guy (even to fairly untrained eyes).

Exactly! Now maybe Alan is onto something. Maybe what he and his guys are doing in the ring is how to make Wing Chun work. Maybe we need to drop all the traditional training we have been doing for generations and focus on how to make Wing Chun work in that MMA-type environment. To do that we probably don't need the forms, the dummy, or most of the rest.

Western style training is different than the type used in wing chun so you are comparing apples and oranges. The Wing chun method of training is based on the Confucian model of you show a student one corner and it is expected he should figure out the other three himself.

[KPM]

Western style training is different than the type used in wing chun so you are comparing apples and oranges. The Wing chun method of training is based on the Confucian model of you show a student one corner and it is expected he should figure out the other three himself.

Now wait a minute Twen! Isn't fighting just fighting? Aren't you the guy that keeps saying that the knowledge doesn't count, just the skills derived from the training? So are you now saying that the knowledge used to follow a "confucian model" in training IS important?????

[KPM]

No the forms and dummy with correct understanding of body structure are super important. They map our the structure positioning and control. Most wing chun have very poor form understanding therefore the application is weak. Our system we understand the power of the forms so our application under pressure is sound.

So when you do your Siu Lim Tao, you are practicing all of the moves exactly as you are using them in the cage? Because in that footage of Josh, he seemed to me to be using a typical boxing position/structure with the weight on the front leg, the shoulders hunched forward with the chin tucked, the arms held in close to the body with the fists in front of the face. Is that how you train your forms?

I think the bottom line is that no one would expect a boxer, kickboxer, or BJJ guy to look any different in the ring than they look when training. Why would Wing Chun be any different? I know, I know. Some are thinking "because you don't know what real Wing Chun should look like because you don't train realistically!" I think that is a cop-out and BS! That boxer and BJJ guy would say..."how come I don't see the Wing Chun you are training here showing up in your cage fighting?" If you told them it was because they didn't know what they were looking for they would think you are crazy. They'd ask "why should it look any different?"

Again Alan, this is no slight on what you are doing. I just think what you are doing is more of the CSL Chinese Boxing that you mentioned than it is Wing Chun. It looks to me like it is Wing Chun adapted to a boxing format....hence your calling it "CSL Chinese Boxing." And there's nothing wrong with that! That's just my opinion. I just call it as I see it. You're welcome to call it anything you want. But I do think you are at risk of confusing a lot of non-Wing Chun people (and maybe some Wing Chun people!) by calling it "straight up" Wing Chun.

[tc101]

Maybe we need to drop all the traditional training we have been doing for generations and focus on how to make Wing Chun work in that MMA-type environment. To do that we probably don't need the forms, the dummy, or most of the rest.

No hear is the part you keep refusing to hear that the traditional training is unrealistic training and that it ALONE will not give you wing chun fighting skills or let you understand wing chun fighting. Just like in boxing, you NEED the unrealistic training but you also need more. That the next step and this is the same one taken by the fighters in the past also is to start trying to make your training work in fighting. In the old days they just went out and fought and learned the hard way. Today you can go train with a fight trainer and spar and learn that way. When you do this you will begin to see that your unrealistic ideas and skills do not work and then you will begin to think realistically and transform your skills.

[tc101]

Now wait a minute Twen! Isn't fighting just fighting? Aren't you the guy that keeps saying that the knowledge doesn't count, just the skills derived from the training? So are you now saying that the knowledge used to follow a "confucian model" in training IS important?????

I am saying that is the teaching model used in wing chun. That you are shown a corner and then it is left to you to work out the other three. You are stuck in the corner.

[tc101]

So when you do your Siu Lim Tao, you are practicing all of the moves exactly as you are using them in the cage? Because in that footage of Josh, he seemed to me to be using a typical boxing position/structure with the weight on the front leg, the shoulders hunched forward with the chin tucked, the arms held in close to the body with the fists in front of the face. Is that how you train your forms?

The form or model is not application. Go spar and try to use those things in the SLT as you practice them in SLT and see for yourself. You see the form but not the substance behind the form.

[LFJ]

The form/drills are there as models not so much for the dance steps in them but to get across more important things behind the dance steps.

I get that, but nothing we do at any stage in training leads to an overhand thrown like that. CSLWC is the only lineage I've seen do it and say it is their orthodox WC. Granted there are a lot of WC "fundamentalists" who look at the form as-is.

[tc101]

I get that, but nothing we do at any stage in training leads to an overhand thrown like that. CSLWC is the only lineage I've seen do it and say it is their orthodox WC. Granted there are a lot of WC "fundamentalists" who look at the form as-is.

This is a form substance problem.

When you say at any stage of training you mean at no stage of unrealistic classical training. What I am saying is that this is the form stage of training. You can look at that as this gives you the dance steps you can use and you can only use those dance steps or it isn't wing chun. Yes many in wing chun see things that way. They see wing chun as form. The problem with that view is that as soon as people try to do that to fight only using those dance steps they see things don't work like that. That's why we never see anyone doing it.

Another way to look at it is the dance steps are to teach you something more than the dance steps they teach you the substance of dancing. Going back to my tennis analogy the textbook way to hit a forehand is meant to teach you something more than simply to reproduce the model form which you can hardly ever use in a tennis match. You are saying well that type of forehand isn't in my tennis book anywhere. I am saying that of course it isn't that it is application which is what you learn that from getting out on the court and hitting the ball. That forehand will look very very different than the textbook form. You have to look beyond form or shape to substance.

[LFJ]

This is a form substance problem.

When you say at any stage of training you mean at no stage of unrealistic classical training.

Whatever Twenty. You like to repeat the same thing to anyone no matter what they're actually saying.

When I say at any stage, I mean from start to finish, from theory to application, that sort of punch isn't trained, developed, or used in my lineage or any others that I've seen. Has anyone seen it done by any other lineage than CSLWC as orthodox WC?

[Paddington]

I guess I've seen some mma fights where there have been techniques that do look like wing chun to me, such as this one (http://gfycat.com/DazzlingCapitalAtlasmoth). I came across a few other clips a while back where the fighters admitted to having exposure to wing chun and using it in the ring. I'll try to relocate them and post them up. On a more personal note, when I did train at an mma gym last year the most common feedback I got was that they thought I had 'superhuman' strength given how slight I was compared to the fighters who were steroid users. Of course, there is no such thing as superhuman strength and it was the case of my being able to align my bone structure, which can be done in the grappling guard position quite easily. I agree very much with Alan's perspective though think that there is more from 'wing chun' that his fighters could use.

[KPM]

No hear is the part you keep refusing to hear that the traditional training is unrealistic training and that it ALONE will not give you wing chun fighting skills or let you understand wing chun fighting.

No, I hear you and and agree. Absolutely it ALONE will not give you fighting skills. It has to be trained realistically...and I have always agreed with that. Where I disagree with you is in what "realistic training" actually means.


Just like in boxing, you NEED the unrealistic training but you also need more.

What unrealistic training do they do in boxing?

That the next step and this is the same one taken by the fighters in the past also is to start trying to make your training work in fighting. In the old days they just went out and fought and learned the hard way.

The old days? Like, let's say Wong Shun Leung's days? He and his contemparies when out and fought with their Wing Chun. WSL even made changes to what Yip Man taught him based on his fighting experience. But it still looks like Wing Chun. What little Bei Mo footage we have of Wing Chun is recognizable Wing Chun. It doesn't look anything like MMA.

You can look at that as this gives you the dance steps you can use and you can only use those dance steps or it isn't wing chun. Yes many in wing chun see things that way. They see wing chun as form. The problem with that view is that as soon as people try to do that to fight only using those dance steps they see things don't work like that. That's why we never see anyone doing it.

Ah! Dancing is a good analogy! Its not the "dance steps", its the technique and style and form that makes the dance. When someone dances the Waltz, it looks like a Waltz regardless of the steps/specific choreography used. When someone dances the Cha Cha, it looks like the Cha Cha regardless of the steps/specific choreography used.
When someone competes in dancing they are judge by how closely to the "ideal form" for that specific dancing style that they are...whether Samba, Ballroom, Jazz, etc. Yes you have to emulate the style of the dance or its not "right." You can't enter a Samba competition and dance the Cha Cha and expect to win! Each dance is recognizable regardless of any choreography. Wing Chun is not that rigid. Wing Chun is adaptable. But it still has to fit certain parameters to be considered Wing Chun. If you are throwing Jabs and crosses it ain't Wing Chun! Now your Wing Chun training may have contributed to your timing and distance and any number of things and made your jab or cross much better. But that doesn't make a jab and cross Wing Chun. You can't just do any ole thing you want and say its Wing Chun. Simple as that.

[KPM]

GlennR said this in the other thread. I think it is pretty appropriate and a good assessment, so I hope he won't mind me reposting it here:

WC is a self defense style, something happens, you explode, control the centreline and hopefully end the situation quickly and viciously.
My favourite description is that its an ambush style, the assailant just doesnt know what hit him.... very very quickly it is over.

Boxing, as we know it today, is a combat style with the very high chance of the fight going on for round after round. You have time to work your opponent out, create opportunity, set traps, feel him out, change the rhythm of the fight and so on......


The scenarios are VERY different and the styles take this into account.

[Grumblegeezer]

We train a chinese boxing system. I can't see why people on a wing chun forum are unhappy to see our wing chun working.

Well, there's just no understanding some people. Personally, I give you a lot of credit. However it does seem that you and some of your fighters show your WC background more obviously than others when sparring or fighting. I like seeing that so I can show all the skeptics and faultfinders that there are people out there that make WC that looks like WC work in competition.

[KPM]

Though it may appear to some that this is not Wing Chun simply because it doesn't look like the stereotypical version of what many think Wing Chun is, doesn't mean it isn't. Wing Chun is way more than form, it's theory.

Dave, look at what you just wrote. "Wing Chun is way more than form, it's theory." Buy your own comment form is still included and is important. If the form deviates too much, how can it still be Wing Chun? Take Cho Gar for example. They say they are doing the Choy Li Fut portion with more Wing Chun concepts. Does that make it Wing Chun? Is everything they do Wing Chun, or only the Yik Kam SLT part?

If Alan Orr says that what they train is Wing Chun, why can't it be believed? Is it because it doesn't fit ones preconcieved ideology or is it something deeper seated within ones own predjudices?

I'm not prejudiced, I'm a pragmatist. Be honest Dave. If Wing Chun wasn't noted in the tag line and you didn't know Josh was Alan's student, would you have immediately thought this was an example of Wing Chun? Look at the sparring clip Alan posted. If you didn't see Wing Chun in the tag line and know these were Alan's students would you have immediately thought they were doing Wing Chun? CSL Chinese Boxing I think applies! But "straight up" Wing Chun?


You have to look beyond "form" and ask yourself are the principles present.

You find many of Wing Chun's priniciples in Jeet Kune Do. Does that make JKD a style of Wing Chun?

For the individuals that say it wasn't solely Wing Chun, I'll agree, I personally didn't see anything different "form" wise from standard MMA. This doesn't mean that Wing Chun wasn't a vital part

I agree! But Wing Chun is a vital part of JKD for Ted Wong's students. Does that make Ted Wong's JKD a version of Wing Chun?

Bottom line for me is that form and substance count. I can and have taken a lot of Wing Chun concepts and put it into the Panantukan I have learned and can make it work very well. But that doesn't convert my Panantukan into Wing Chun. Rather its Panantukan with some help from Wing Chun concepts.

[GlennR]

IMO yes it does make it partially Wing Chun a great deal of the concepts are straight up out of Wing Chun. To me Wing Chun is more about theory, concept & strategy rather than regulated structure and form. This is why there are so many branches that differ greatly in appearance and function.


Well i think its about what you want to achieve and how you are going to go about it.
In a pure self defense scenario youll drift back to your more "traditional" WC approach, straight punch, control centerline and overwhelm. Quickly shut down the other guy.
That wont work in the ring.
There is no element of surprise, your opponent has time and distance, the two most likely things you wont have in a SD scenario.... so what do you do?
You adopt strategies of successful striking orientated combat sports, boxing being the obvious one.
Is it WC?

For me no.

Sure you may utilise your WC stance and structure, your engine so to speak, but you are blurring the lines between sport and self defense which, in itself, creates a blur between WC and boxing..... its neither one or the other.

From my observations of Alans guys, the more recent the clip, the less i see of the WC structure and more i see of boxing/Mt structure..... i feel like im watching evolution in process to get to a method that already exists.

[GlennR]

In a nutshell that's what it really is, evolution. It's conforming to it's environment. Evolve, assimilate or die off. In this presented scenerio Wing Chun may be nothing more than a springboard, but at least they are paying hommage and saying that it is an integral part of their training.

Yep, my point exactly........ but its evolving into something that already exist which is logical given the same influencing factors

[KPM]

In a nutshell that's what it really is, evolution. It's conforming to it's environment. Evolve, assimilate or die off. In this presented scenerio Wing Chun may be nothing more than a springboard, but at least they are paying hommage and saying that it is an integral part of their training.

No. They are saying that it IS Wing Chun! That was my point! Like I've said over and over....I have no problem with what Alan and his guys are doing in the ring. I think its great and I support them! I just don't think they should be telling people..."this is Wing Chun." Maybe its CSL Chinese Boxing. Maybe its an MMA evolution of Wing Chun or Wing Chun adapted to the ring. I said that earlier. But again, that's NOT what Alan is saying.

Consider that clip of Vitor Belfort again. Vitor does the exact same punch that Josh used in the clip that started this thread. At about the 54 second point Vitor rushes in with chain punches. He actually looks more like Wing Chun than Josh. Alan's response was that Vitor doesn't train Wing Chun so what he is doing is not Wing Chun. But Josh trains Wing Chun so what he is doing IS Wing Chun. So Dave, going with your argument about concepts being present.....Vitor is using some Wing Chun concepts but doesn't study Wing Chun, so it isn't Wing Chun. Josh does the exact same thing and looks like a great MMA fighter and because he trains Wing Chun in addition to his MMA it IS Wing Chun? Tell me how that makes sense!

Absolutely you can use Wing Chun concepts and training methods to supplement another art. But that other art does not immediately become Wing Chun. The concepts are very important, but the form and expression define Wing Chun as well.

[KPM]

Keith, I think your making a mountain out of a molehill.

With my comments to you? Or overall? Because I think what I have been saying through-out this thread is important. You can't just do anything ole thing you want and call it Wing Chun. There has to be some standards of some sort.

As far as Alan's remarks concerning Vitor, if he did say that, then he needs to take a step back and reflect, because I think he has been drinking a little too much of his own Kool-Aid.

I went back to make sure I'm not putting words in Alan's mouth. Here is what he said that I am referring to:

I have trained with Vitor as he is a friend of my BJJ teacher. He wasn't doing Wing Chun and has never said anything different - he just fired a one two repeated and charged. So that is a pointless reference. On the other hand Josh does train Wing Chun - Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun and we did train to land that punch. All my MMA fighters train CSL Wing Chun - is that clear for you? I am bored of explaining that just because you have a limited insight to what we do - it does not mean we do.


As far as Vitor and his chain punching goes, just because it didn't come from Wing Chun doesn't make the principles and concept any less valid than if it did. Wing Chun's theory, principles and concepts are more universal than you are giving them credit for.

No, no! I give them plenty of credit! My point was that just because Vitor is using some Wing Chun principles and concepts (regardless of the source) doesn't qualify him to call his fighting method "Wing Chun." So, should someone doing a fighting method that is nearly indistinguishable from Vitor's but does get similar priniciples and concepts from Wing Chun call what they are doing "Wing Chun"? Or should they say it is MMA with a strong Wing Chun influence? Or should they say "CSL Chinese Boxing?"

It seems to me that you have bound them to "Form & Style" and cannot see them as a separate entity.

No I'm not. I'm just being practical. You watched those clips and didn't see anything that was recognizable as Wing Chun. The typical person looking at those clips won't see Wing Chun. Labeling them as Wing Chun is going to be confusing to people. Alan will be the first one to tell you that he gets criticism from many directions that his cage fighting doesn't look like Wing Chun. I think that is a legitmate criticism and it isn't going to go away regardless of how many explanations he gives about using Wing Chun concepts. Like it or not, Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles. Now that visual signature or "form & style" can vary between lineages and the point at which something stops being Wing Chun can be debated ad nauseum. But the fact remains that if the average person looking in wouldn't recognize it as any different that anyone else's MMA fighting method, then its going to be hard to convince that person that it is "straight up" Wing Chun. Calling it "CSL Chinese Boxing" seems more appropriate to me. That's just my opinion. Alan can do whatever he wants. But I think he would get far less criticism if he just changed his terminology a little bit. But he likely doesn't care.

[Alan Orr]

I just watched the video and thought I'd chime in. Though it may appear to some that this is not Wing Chun simply because it doesn't look like the stereotypical version of what many think Wing Chun is, doesn't mean it isn't. Wing Chun is way more than form, it's theory. This theory when applied under stress will take many forms. Concept and structure will invaribly change according to many factors, including but not limited to, environment, stress, athleticism, skill, comprehension etc. If Alan Orr says that what they train is Wing Chun, why can't it be believed? Is it because it doesn't fit ones preconcieved ideology or is it something deeper seated within ones own predjudices? You have to look beyond "form" and ask yourself are the principles present. Were there things I saw in the video I thought that the participant could have done that were more inline with MY understanding of Wing Chun, absolutely, but who cares. I'm sure his Sifu will address any issues he saw in order to improve his student, in the end he won and did it convincingly and thats all that really matters. For the individuals that say it wasn't solely Wing Chun, I'll agree, I personally didn't see anything different "form" wise from standard MMA. This doesn't mean that Wing Chun wasn't a vital part, besides what "art" is truely "pure" anymore. Bottom line is Wing Chun concepts were present and were used successfully. Kudos to Alan Orr and the Iron Wolves.

Thank you. Nice to hear that my answers to people question are making sense to people with open minds and good understanding.

[paulcaz]

Seriously, who cares what it looks like? If it is functional and works adhering to wing chun principles then it is wing chun. For me it is all about evolution and testing through pressure otherwise what are we doing?

We each need to be certain about why we are doing wing chun. Do we want to imitate and follow or learn and evolve?

[Alan Orr]

Keith, I think your making a mountain out of a molehill.

With my comments to you? Or overall? Because I think what I have been saying through-out this thread is important. You can't just do anything ole thing you want and call it Wing Chun. There has to be some standards of some sort.

As far as Alan's remarks concerning Vitor, if he did say that, then he needs to take a step back and reflect, because I think he has been drinking a little too much of his own Kool-Aid.

I went back to make sure I'm not putting words in Alan's mouth. Here is what he said that I am referring to:

I have trained with Vitor as he is a friend of my BJJ teacher. He wasn't doing Wing Chun and has never said anything different - he just fired a one two repeated and charged. So that is a pointless reference. On the other hand Josh does train Wing Chun - Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun and we did train to land that punch. All my MMA fighters train CSL Wing Chun - is that clear for you? I am bored of explaining that just because you have a limited insight to what we do - it does not mean we do.


As far as Vitor and his chain punching goes, just because it didn't come from Wing Chun doesn't make the principles and concept any less valid than if it did. Wing Chun's theory, principles and concepts are more universal than you are giving them credit for.

No, no! I give them plenty of credit! My point was that just because Vitor is using some Wing Chun principles and concepts (regardless of the source) doesn't qualify him to call his fighting method "Wing Chun." So, should someone doing a fighting method that is nearly indistinguishable from Vitor's but does get similar priniciples and concepts from Wing Chun call what they are doing "Wing Chun"? Or should they say it is MMA with a strong Wing Chun influence? Or should they say "CSL Chinese Boxing?"

It seems to me that you have bound them to "Form & Style" and cannot see them as a separate entity.

No I'm not. I'm just being practical. You watched those clips and didn't see anything that was recognizable as Wing Chun. The typical person looking at those clips won't see Wing Chun. Labeling them as Wing Chun is going to be confusing to people. Alan will be the first one to tell you that he gets criticism from many directions that his cage fighting doesn't look like Wing Chun. I think that is a legitmate criticism and it isn't going to go away regardless of how many explanations he gives about using Wing Chun concepts. Like it or not, Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles. Now that visual signature or "form & style" can vary between lineages and the point at which something stops being Wing Chun can be debated ad nauseum. But the fact remains that if the average person looking in wouldn't recognize it as any different that anyone else's MMA fighting method, then its going to be hard to convince that person that it is "straight up" Wing Chun. Calling it "CSL Chinese Boxing" seems more appropriate to me. That's just my opinion. Alan can do whatever he wants. But I think he would get far less criticism if he just changed his terminology a little bit. But he likely doesn't care.

Thank you for your concern. But your posts are all nonsense. You opinion is based on your point of view about something you can't see or understand.

I have loads of emails from people thanking me for showing Wing Chun being applied. So you points are just not valid at all. You are one of the very few limited thinkers that hold back the development of Wing Chun by trying to label it for how you see it.

Let me make it very clear -

I teach Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen under my teacher Robert Chu Sifu. What my guys train and use in combat sports and normal self defence is Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen.

CSL Chinese Boxing is CSL Wing Chun Kuen!

My point was that Wing Chun is a Chinese Boxing system.

So stop telling me what you think I should or should not all it or do as it has nothing to do with you.

[Alan Orr]

Seriously, who cares what it looks like? If it is functional and works adhering to wing chun principles then it is wing chun. For me it is all about evolution and testing through pressure otherwise what are we doing?

We each need to be certain about why we are doing wing chun. Do we want to imitate and follow or learn and evolve?

Correct. When your in a fight you are not trying to do a drill and look good. You are trying to win. Your training is done. Its time to dig in and get the job done using the skills you have.

[LFJ]

Seriously, who cares what it looks like? If it is functional and works adhering to wing chun principles then it is wing chun.

Therein lies the problem. To some, probably most, that sort of punch doesn't adhere to WC principles.

[KPM]

Seriously, who cares what it looks like? If it is functional and works adhering to wing chun principles then it is wing chun. For me it is all about evolution and testing through pressure otherwise what are we doing?

We each need to be certain about why we are doing wing chun. Do we want to imitate and follow or learn and evolve?

So Jeet Kune Do is Wing Chun? The reason so many lineages have stayed secret for so long is to keep their teachings intact. You can't just do anything you want and call it Wing Chun. There has to be some standards. Otherwise after a few generations there is nothing left of the original. If you just want to learn to fight and be effective in the ring, then just study MMA or BJJ or boxing. Why are you doing Wing Chun?

[KPM]

Thank you for your concern. But your posts are all nonsense. You opinion is based on your point of view about something you can't see or understand.

I see and understand just fine. I just happen to have a different opinion, that's all.

I have loads of emails from people thanking me for showing Wing Chun being applied. So you points are just not valid at all.

So, are you saying that you no longer get people complaining that your MMA doesn't look like Wing Chun? Isn't that why you made several of the videos you have up? Because my point was to explain why people are saying that and what you could do to change it.

You are one of the very few limited thinkers that hold back the development of Wing Chun by trying to label it for how you see it.

Again, I'm just being practical. If you said that your MMA was a further development of Wing Chun adapted for the cage, I'd be right there with you! My simple and direct point has been this: if you label things as Wing Chun with no further qualifiers and the typical person watching the clips is going to see pretty much the same MMA fighting everyone else is doing, then there is going to be some problems arise. You've seen that haven't you? Despite those loads of emails?



So stop telling me what you think I should or should not all it or do as it has nothing to do with you.

You posted a video in a public forum. I commented on what I saw and expressed an opinion. I'm sorry if you don't like what I've said.

[chris bougeard]

Hi, I am a Chu Sau Lei instructor under Alan Orr Sifu. I don't fight in MMA, neither do my students. However, when we apply our art under pressure it looks no different to what Josh or Aaron look like in the clips my teacher has supplied. Does that mean I am not a Wing Chun practitioner? The Chu Sau Lei syllabus is a very comprehensive Wing Chun training model focussing heavily on body structure and a practical approach to the application of the art. To me, Wing Chun is a training method, the drills give you the tools and attributes for fighting.

You then take what you have learnt and refine your skills through pressure testing until hopefully you arrive at a point where you can hold your own against someone who is trying to overwhelm you. At this point of refinement if someone who is watching me says "that doesn't look like Wing Chun" I know they haven't been through the same process and smile. These individuals have a romanticised idea of what the art should look like under pressure , they want to see people fighting using drills , not the attributes gained from them. I consider myself a Wing Chun practitioner and just because my application of the art doesn't fit in with another persons preconceived idea of what Wing Chun should look like doesn't mean I'm not doing Wing Chun...

[Grumblegeezer]

...tell him to keep his elbows in. :)

No, don't! I mean, if what he's doing works, why mess with success?

In my earlier posts, I was just wondering aloud if some of Alan's fighters look more typically "WC like" than Josh. And if so, have they also been successful in competition? Just call it a geezer's curiosity.

Chris, perhaps you could address this. Is there considerable variety in the way different fighters from your CSL/Iron Wolves group look in the ring, or do you all have pretty much the same personal styles?

[BPWT..]

For me, WCK is a bridging art with an emphasis on striking and controlling at the same time. The drills we train help us to do this, based on the art's concepts and principles.

So when I see Alan's recent clips (the instructional ones), he is often showing Chi Sau and Lap Sau and I can see that the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun is teaching this striking and controlling. I like these clips a lot - and I think Alan is a gifted teacher, teaching a comprehensive system. The linking/delinking clip, for example, was extremely good, IMO.


These individuals have a romanticised idea of what the art should look like under pressure, they want to see people fighting using drills, not the attributes gained from them.

Well, I do look to see people using the attributes gained from drills and I also agree that when people fight they won't look like they are using drills as is (no one expects to see someone fight in a MMA contest using Chi Sau and Lap Sau as they are used in a class environment).

However... :) ... as so much Wing Chun training involves bridge work and, for me therefore, the art is a bridging system (an emphasis on fighting using Chi Kiu as a preference to Lei Kiu), I always watch clips of Wing Chun guys entering MMA fights and hope to see this - the use of Chi Kiu.

Don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with people fighting using Lei Kiu methods as a preference - people using western boxing and Muay Thai use this to great effect. All fights, regardless of system, start from Lei Kiu... but in WCK the system looks to implement Chi Kiu as soon as possible, whenever possible - hence the various and numerous drills and training methods that work from contact.

In Yip Man's words, from the interview with New Martial Hero in the early 70s:

loi lau heui sung, lat sau jik chung... "the word sung in the motto is a forward movement. The word chung is also a forward movement. The word lau in the motto is stay and stick to the opponents fist (arm) and not use brute force to push it aside."

Yip Man is talking about bridging in that quoted part, and some Wing Chun lines talk about 14 or 18 or 20 Kiu Sau methods/key words (e.g. press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.) Some lines don't mention these things specifically, but you find them in the training drills.

So for me these are part of the attributes you should see when WCK is applied. However, I think that when WCK guys step into the ring they seem to go with the typical Lei Kiu methods other arts use. Their WCK (in terms of the stand up game they are using) starts looking like western boxing or kickboxing or Muay Thai (arts with a Lei Kiu emphasis), which mirrors what their opponents will be using/giving them.

So I agree with KPM on this point when he said: "Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles."

But maybe I'd go one step further :D. Wing Chun's visual signature is directly tied to its concepts and principles - they are two sides of the same coin - you aren't looking to separate them. The body methods, shapes and motions tie in directly with the concepts and principles, particularly the eight key characters LL, HS, LSJC.

In other words... Wing Chun is a Chi Kiu art, bridging is part of WCK's strategy and tactics, these are all connected to the body methods employed and these in turn all relate to the art's principles and concepts. No one part is more important than any of the others because they are all connected.

If we think of the visual signature and the concepts and principles as being two sides of the same coin, then in application WCK is that coin being flipped in the air, spinning rapidly. When you look at the coin are you looking at the heads or tails side? You're looking at both.

In the fight clip that Alan posted, his student did an awesome job - winning the fight in a convincing fashion. He did it largely using Lei Kiu methods.

Did it work? Absolutely (congrats to the fighter!)
Did it look like Wing Chun? IMO, no.
Was it Wing Chun? IMO, I would say no (and as KPM said, that in no way detracts from the fact that the fighter got in the cage and beat his opponent)
Does it matter either way? For the fighter, no. His aim was to win the fight and he did - so a successful day at the office :) For those reading that the fighter was a Wing Chun guy using Wing Chun, yes it matters in as much as the label is incorrect (which is hardly "matters" in a life or death important way :D). The fighter might train the Wing Chun that Alan shows in his instructional clips, but in application I think he wasn't using it to win.

[Wayfaring]

Hi, I am a Chu Sau Lei instructor under Alan Orr Sifu. I don't fight in MMA, neither do my students. However, when we apply our art under pressure it looks no different to what Josh or Aaron look like in the clips my teacher has supplied. Does that mean I am not a Wing Chun practitioner? The Chu Sau Lei syllabus is a very comprehensive Wing Chun training model focussing heavily on body structure and a practical approach to the application of the art. To me, Wing Chun is a training method, the drills give you the tools and attributes for fighting.

You then take what you have learnt and refine your skills through pressure testing until hopefully you arrive at a point where you can hold your own against someone who is trying to overwhelm you. At this point of refinement if someone who is watching me says "that doesn't look like Wing Chun" I know they haven't been through the same process and smile. These individuals have a romanticised idea of what the art should look like under pressure , they want to see people fighting using drills , not the attributes gained from them. I consider myself a Wing Chun practitioner and just because my application of the art doesn't fit in with another persons preconceived idea of what Wing Chun should look like doesn't mean I'm not doing Wing Chun...

Hey Chris nice to meet you. Of course you're a wing chun practitioner. And your coach does well teaching it adapted to MMA. Out of curiosity, what does your weekly sparring schedule look like? I'm just starting conversation - Alan has posted here plenty - seeing what his clubs are doing.

When I look at live matches with wing chun, like the video clip, what I look for is fundamentals, like is someone holding their angles well? Are they controlling centerline? Are their techniques backed up by a wing chun body structure? Josh checks all the boxes there. wing chun usually doesn't talk about structure inside the BJJ guard, but Josh had that too - caged the hips well, 2 in or 2 out, good hip pressure that opened up GNP. Do I care that his KO punch was not an elbow down punch? No I don't. With his distancing, he needed the extra range on that punch, and he sensed it and executed well. He would not have got the KO with an elbow down punch at that distance in all likelihood.

I would ignore all those over-focused on the tan, bong and fook hand shapes rather than a deeper sense of what those tools accomplish or their aim.

[Wayfaring]

In other words... Wing Chun is a Chi Kiu art, bridging is part of WCK's strategy and tactics, these are all connected to the body methods employed and these in turn all relate to the art's principles and concepts. No one part is more important than any of the others because they are all connected.


First, can you more precisely define Chi Kiu and Lei Kiu for me in your understanding? We have a definition of Chi Kiu in our wing chun art (HFY) that I am very sure is different than what you are talking about.

Bridging is absolutely not part of WCK's strategy. You don't seek to bridge. It is a direct art - you go directly to the target. IF there is a bridge in the way, you sink it.

In this fight, the only form of bridge I saw put up by Josh's opponent was a BJJ guard. (i.e. legs were obstructing the path to striking target). And as a side comment I will observe that 95% of wing chun has inadequate tools to deal with that type of a bridge (BJJ guard). There was no bridge from the feet offered by the hands. Thus the only thing happening from the feet is striking the target on centerline.

[Grumblegeezer]

If we think of the visual signature and the concepts and principles as being two sides of the same coin, then in application WCK is that coin being flipped in the air, spinning rapidly. When you look at the coin are you looking at the heads or tails side? You're looking at both.

In the fight clip that Alan posted, his student did an awesome job - winning the fight in a convincing fashion. He did it largely using Lei Kiu methods.

Did it work? Absolutely (congrats to the fighter!)
Did it look like Wing Chun? IMO, no.

BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage? If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?

[BPWT..]

First, can you more precisely define Chi Kiu and Lei Kiu for me in your understanding? We have a definition of Chi Kiu in our wing chun art (HFY) that I am very sure is different than what you are talking about.

In simple terms, as they are both just two words :), Chi Kiu (contact with the opponent's bridge), Lei Kiu (no bridge).

So within Chi Kiu you'd find the Kiu Sau methods/key words I mentioned when I said: "Yip Man is talking about bridging in that quoted part, and some Wing Chun lines talk about 14 or 18 or 20 Kiu Sau methods/key words (e.g. press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.) Some lines don't mention these things specifically, but you find them in the training drills."

Lei Kiu would be striking without control of the bridge (the bridge usually means hand/wrist to elbow, but can include up to the shoulder). Of course, WCK can utilise Lei Kiu too - if the opponent drops his arms and just stands there - you'd just hit (or raise an eyebrow and ask him if he's done :D).


Bridging is absolutely not part of WCK's strategy. You don't seek to bridge. It is a direct art - you go directly to the target. IF there is a bridge in the way, you sink it.

Yes, you go to the target. What I mean is that the art assumes the opponent won't just drop their arms and let you hit them. But at the same time the art doesn't avoid the opponent's bridge - say going around it - without controlling it. You will face the opportunity to bridge in a fight, but WCK looks to control the bridge, hence no ducking and weaving (at least in the WCK I train we don't duck and weave).

So bridging is, IMO, absolutely a part of the WCK strategy. Yip Man talks about it in the interview I mentioned, and many WCK lineages utilise Kiu Sau methods. IMO the art recognises that it is too risky to just avoid incoming limbs without controlling them - the art wants to turn contact (brief or not) to its advantage.



In this fight, the only form of bridge I saw put up by Josh's opponent was a BJJ guard.

You might be right, as when the punches were thrown both were using Lei Kiu methods. Of course you could argue that BJJ is a Chi Kiu method - or rather a Chi method, as contact and control (of various limbs and body parts) is desired.

[BPWT..]

BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage?

I knew someone would ask this :D

No, I don't have any good clips - and that is the problem :D I don't think any WCK guy (or girl) has stepped into the ring and used the art.


If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?

I really don't know, to be honest.

Do we train unrealistically (as TC101 would put it)?

Or do we train incorrectly (subjective use of the word 'incorrectly'), meaning do we let ourselves be pulled into the 'playing their game, not ours' scenario?

Or does the need to deal with ground work (something WCK doesn't really deal with/train for) mean that we need to train, say, BJJ (I agree it would be important to train this for a MMA fight) but then that somehow changes our emphasis when in stand up?

Or as Glenn suggests, is an art for the street and an art for the ring simply incompatible in terms of what is used, the goal of the fight, the duration (and the possible time expectation) of a fight? I once saw a Wing Tsun guy have to deal with two guys outside of a restaurant (he stepped in to say something as one of the guys was close to hurting a woman) and the WT guy dealt with them very quickly and it looked like Wing Tsun from start to finish. So I know the art can be used and look the way it is trained.

Overall, I dunno. :)

For sure, however, I think Lei Kiu arts are quicker to learn and easier to implement than Chi Kiu arts, they are - in essence - simpler. Not better or worse as systems for fighting, just simpler and easier to put into use (so some might argue that that is indeed "better"). ;)

[paulcaz]

So Jeet Kune Do is Wing Chun? The reason so many lineages have stayed secret for so long is to keep their teachings intact. You can't just do anything you want and call it Wing Chun. There has to be some standards. Otherwise after a few generations there is nothing left of the original. If you just want to learn to fight and be effective in the ring, then just study MMA or BJJ or boxing. Why are you doing Wing Chun?

It is not for me say to say what is and what is not wing chun, on the other hand it is. No one owns it so what gives any of us the right to tell anyone else what they are doing is or is not wing chun? People are creatures of habit and despite their best intentions, very few like change and most like to follow so the original you are worried about disappearing will always be there. What people have to accept is that change and evolution are necessary, nothing stays fixed forever. Language, music, technology, architecture all change so why should the martial arts not. No amount of letters typed on forum board will prevent change.

I assume stuff was kept secret due to insecurity and that it had not been tested otherwise it would evolve. I was initially drawn to wing chun in the mid 90s; adverts in martial arts mags kept repeating the mantra about scientific street fighting and assumed it had the answers to the questions and fears I had then. It did not so I continued my search but that has now come full circle as I am back training wing chun.

20 years ago there was genuine debate about which martial art was the best. Now we know with certainty which are thanks to pressure testing competition - the UFC. You listed yourself what shoulde be used to fight effectively in the ring. I used to be a hopeless martial romantic that all the esoteric systems had the answers, they did not, although there was that kick that Seagal taught Machida...

I have studied BJJ and MMA for 5 years and had no desire to fight in the cage but I had a desire to find about who I am and what I could do in arts that constantly pressure test. Why lie to myself and guess? It was hard and scary, but also bloody good fun. Now I have a better understanding because I have experienced it. No one told me, I did not read it in a book or watch it on youtube. Experiential learning is key.

I now do wing chun because I believe in what my instructor does. His philosophy of wing chun has changed and evolved based on his own experiences in the street and in MMA gyms. He is bold enough to acknowledge the gaps but also the qualities of wing chun and evolve it accordingly. If he did not he would be doing himself and us the students a dis-service. Honesty, integrity and certainty should be guiding principles all teachers have.

Oh and I am on this journey to find out more about myself.

[KPM]

For me, WCK is a bridging art with an emphasis on striking and controlling at the same time. The drills we train help us to do this, based on the art's concepts and principles.

So when I see Alan's recent clips (the instructional ones), he is often showing Chi Sau and Lap Sau and I can see that the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun is teaching this striking and controlling. I like these clips a lot - and I think Alan is a gifted teacher, teaching a comprehensive system. The linking/delinking clip, for example, was extremely good, IMO.



Well, I do look to see people using the attributes gained from drills and I also agree that when people fight they won't look like they are using drills as is (no one expects to see someone fight in a MMA contest using Chi Sau and Lap Sau as they are used in a class environment).

However... :) ... as so much Wing Chun training involves bridge work and, for me therefore, the art is a bridging system (an emphasis on fighting using Chi Kiu as a preference to Lei Kiu), I always watch clips of Wing Chun guys entering MMA fights and hope to see this - the use of Chi Kiu.

Don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with people fighting using Lei Kiu methods as a preference - people using western boxing and Muay Thai use this to great effect. All fights, regardless of system, start from Lei Kiu... but in WCK the system looks to implement Chi Kiu as soon as possible, whenever possible - hence the various and numerous drills and training methods that work from contact.

In Yip Man's words, from the interview with New Martial Hero in the early 70s:

loi lau heui sung, lat sau jik chung... "the word sung in the motto is a forward movement. The word chung is also a forward movement. The word lau in the motto is stay and stick to the opponents fist (arm) and not use brute force to push it aside."

Yip Man is talking about bridging in that quoted part, and some Wing Chun lines talk about 14 or 18 or 20 Kiu Sau methods/key words (e.g. press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.) Some lines don't mention these things specifically, but you find them in the training drills.

So for me these are part of the attributes you should see when WCK is applied. However, I think that when WCK guys step into the ring they seem to go with the typical Lei Kiu methods other arts use. Their WCK (in terms of the stand up game they are using) starts looking like western boxing or kickboxing or Muay Thai (arts with a Lei Kiu emphasis), which mirrors what their opponents will be using/giving them.

So I agree with KPM on this point when he said: "Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles."

But maybe I'd go one step further :D. Wing Chun's visual signature is directly tied to its concepts and principles - they are two sides of the same coin - you aren't looking to separate them. The body methods, shapes and motions tie in directly with the concepts and principles, particularly the eight key characters LL, HS, LSJC.

In other words... Wing Chun is a Chi Kiu art, bridging is part of WCK's strategy and tactics, these are all connected to the body methods employed and these in turn all relate to the art's principles and concepts. No one part is more important than any of the others because they are all connected.

If we think of the visual signature and the concepts and principles as being two sides of the same coin, then in application WCK is that coin being flipped in the air, spinning rapidly. When you look at the coin are you looking at the heads or tails side? You're looking at both.

In the fight clip that Alan posted, his student did an awesome job - winning the fight in a convincing fashion. He did it largely using Lei Kiu methods.

Did it work? Absolutely (congrats to the fighter!)
Did it look like Wing Chun? IMO, no.
Was it Wing Chun? IMO, I would say no (and as KPM said, that in no way detracts from the fact that the fighter got in the cage and beat his opponent)
Does it matter either way? For the fighter, no. His aim was to win the fight and he did - so a successful day at the office :) For those reading that the fighter was a Wing Chun guy using Wing Chun, yes it matters in as much as the label is incorrect (which is hardly "matters" in a life or death important way :D). The fighter might train the Wing Chun that Alan shows in his instructional clips, but in application I think he wasn't using it to win.

Good post! Well stated! ;) This actually is closely related to what Hendrik has been writing on his "1848" thread.

[KPM]

Hey Chris nice to meet you. Of course you're a wing chun practitioner. And your coach does well teaching it adapted to MMA. .

Now hold on WF! "Adapted" is NOT what Alan said! You are going to incite his indignation as I did! ;)

Alan said:

Let me make it very clear -

I teach Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen under my teacher Robert Chu Sifu. What my guys train and use in combat sports and normal self defence is Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen.

CSL Chinese Boxing is CSL Wing Chun Kuen!

No adaptation here. What you saw Josh doing in that clip is "straight up" Wing Chun.

[GlennR]

BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage? If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?

100% correct

[Vajramusti]

100% correct
----------------------------------------------------------------
Could be but:Aint necessarily so.

An issue of the size of most purses.

The average NFL guys make more than the average pro boxer- partly accounts for the decline of American boxing and the rise of East Europeans.

[GlennR]

----------------------------------------------------------------
Could be but:Aint necessarily so.

An issue of the size of most purses.

The average NFL guys make more than the average pro boxer- partly accounts for the decline of American boxing and the rise of East Europeans.

This arguments been going on too long Joy, if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it, worked in the MMA circuit we would have seen it by now.

We havent

Anything that does work has been modified, adapted..... whatever.

[Mutant]

hi, just as a data point here, when i spar hard with mma fighters, sanda fighters, muay thai guys etc, my wing chun probably doesn't look at that much different than alan orr's guys wing chun either. under violent chaos, speed and pressure with threat of knock out strikes and take downs you better not be standing like a static target thinking youre doing your forms or you're gonna get ktfo. at times plenty of signature wc techniques may be visible (to someone who knows what theyre looking at) and the subtle energy generation, angles, footwork and strikes etc are there, just often trans-mutated under pressure and fitting the immediate application. i use only wc in clinch fighting (ive never taken a mt class) and do fine against mt clinch. also use plenty of wc mixed in on the ground. and guys with typical boxing/mt striking backgrounds usually say my fighting style is weird and unorthodox but effective (because it truly is different and is wc based), but you guys would probably just look at it and tell me i was just doing boxing or mt or something like that. would i care or would that matter to me? no. probably doesn't matter to alan and his fighters either, especially if theyre busy ending fights like that (nice work and congrats btw!)

[LFJ]

If the CSLWC guys say this is their orthodox WC style, then it is WC. Simple as that.

My own VT is very different from many others and creates a different type of fighter as well. I understand that and have no problem with CSLWC saying what they do is WC. I don't own the title. Who am I to say it is not?

Sure, that type of punch isn't recognized by other lineages and doesn't seem to adhere to WC principles as many see it. But from my POV, all you "sticky bridge" people don't adhere to the principles as I see it either.

It just means there are different WC lineages with different principles, and these create vastly different fighters.

But no one owns the right to say what is and isn't WC. There is just that which works and that which doesn't. CSLWC works.

[paulcaz]

If the CSLWC guys say this is their orthodox WC style, then it is WC. Simple as that.

My own VT is very different from many others and creates a different type of fighter as well. I understand that and have no problem with CSLWC saying what they do is WC. I don't own the title. Who am I to say it is not?

Sure, that type of punch isn't recognized by other lineages and doesn't seem to adhere to WC principles as many see it. But from my POV, all you "sticky bridge" people don't adhere to the principles as I see it either.

It just means there are different WC lineages with different principles, and these create vastly different fighters.

But no one owns the right to say what is and isn't WC. There is just that which works and that which doesn't. CSLWC works.

Powerful words

[chris bougeard]

If the CSLWC guys say this is their orthodox WC style, then it is WC. Simple as that.

My own VT is very different from many others and creates a different type of fighter as well. I understand that and have no problem with CSLWC saying what they do is WC. I don't own the title. Who am I to say it is not?

Sure, that type of punch isn't recognized by other lineages and doesn't seem to adhere to WC principles as many see it. But from my POV, all you "sticky bridge" people don't adhere to the principles as I see it either.

It just means there are different WC lineages with different principles, and these create vastly different fighters.

But no one owns the right to say what is and isn't WC. There is just that which works and that which doesn't. CSLWC works.

LFJ, that is one of the best posts I've seen on this forum

[Alan Orr]

This arguments been going on too long Joy, if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it, worked in the MMA circuit we would have seen it by now.

We havent

Anything that does work has been modified, adapted..... whatever.


WTF are people stupid? My team has had 100's of MMA K1 and boxing matches using CSL Wing Chun. So that's just not true at all. Our Wing Chun works on the street and in combat sports. If your doesn't not then that is fine. But stop telling me what you don't understand.

[Alan Orr]

hi, just as a data point here, when i spar hard with mma fighters, sanda fighters, muay thai guys etc, my wing chun probably doesn't look at that much different than alan orr's guys wing chun either. under violent chaos, speed and pressure with threat of knock out strikes and take downs you better not be standing like a static target thinking youre doing your forms or you're gonna get ktfo. at times plenty of signature wc techniques may be visible (to someone who knows what theyre looking at) and the subtle energy generation, angles, footwork and strikes etc are there, just often trans-mutated under pressure and fitting the immediate application. i use only wc in clinch fighting (ive never taken a mt class) and do fine against mt clinch. also use plenty of wc mixed in on the ground. and guys with typical boxing/mt striking backgrounds usually say my fighting style is weird and unorthodox but effective (because it truly is different and is wc based), but you guys would probably just look at it and tell me i was just doing boxing or mt or something like that. would i care or would that matter to me? no. probably doesn't matter to alan and his fighters either, especially if theyre busy ending fights like that (nice work and congrats btw!)


Good post. Many thanks

[Alan Orr]

If the CSLWC guys say this is their orthodox WC style, then it is WC. Simple as that.

My own VT is very different from many others and creates a different type of fighter as well. I understand that and have no problem with CSLWC saying what they do is WC. I don't own the title. Who am I to say it is not?

Sure, that type of punch isn't recognized by other lineages and doesn't seem to adhere to WC principles as many see it. But from my POV, all you "sticky bridge" people don't adhere to the principles as I see it either.

It just means there are different WC lineages with different principles, and these create vastly different fighters.

But no one owns the right to say what is and isn't WC. There is just that which works and that which doesn't. CSLWC works.

Balanced post. We have different styles so the eye for what is right can be different. Thank you

[Alan Orr]

Your welcome, but I can also see what KPM is obsessing and making a fuss over, that the visual appeal isn't there. He was correct in saying that if Wing Chun wasn't in the tag line I wouldn't have looked twice.
I get where you're coming from, I've been in the ring, under heavy pressure things look way different than in the classroom. My only criticism, tell him to keep his elbows in. :)

This punch is a combination of levels. First form is all elbows in, Second form we have a structure principle where our elbow fans out. The third form its all about connecting the body to the fist, the elbow can be out if the shoulder is relaxed and the timing on connection is right on impact.

[Alan Orr]

No, don't! I mean, if what he's doing works, why mess with success?

In my earlier posts, I was just wondering aloud if some of Alan's fighters look more typically "WC like" than Josh. And if so, have they also been successful in competition? Just call it a geezer's curiosity.

Chris, perhaps you could address this. Is there considerable variety in the way different fighters from your CSL/Iron Wolves group look in the ring, or do you all have pretty much the same personal styles?

Different fights we focus on principles of our Wing Chun to beat the opponent. So sometimes the goal is different. Also body types. Some movements work well some more that others. The key is our body structure, which is hard to see unless you have trained it our way - is always used by all my fighters. Thats why we KO guys and why my guys look very strong and can more guys around. Also somethings we make mistakes and under pressure it can get messy. Thats the real world. Not a class of drilling.

[Alan Orr]

For me, WCK is a bridging art with an emphasis on striking and controlling at the same time. The drills we train help us to do this, based on the art's concepts and principles.

So when I see Alan's recent clips (the instructional ones), he is often showing Chi Sau and Lap Sau and I can see that the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun is teaching this striking and controlling. I like these clips a lot - and I think Alan is a gifted teacher, teaching a comprehensive system. The linking/delinking clip, for example, was extremely good, IMO.



Well, I do look to see people using the attributes gained from drills and I also agree that when people fight they won't look like they are using drills as is (no one expects to see someone fight in a MMA contest using Chi Sau and Lap Sau as they are used in a class environment).

However... :) ... as so much Wing Chun training involves bridge work and, for me therefore, the art is a bridging system (an emphasis on fighting using Chi Kiu as a preference to Lei Kiu), I always watch clips of Wing Chun guys entering MMA fights and hope to see this - the use of Chi Kiu.

Don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with people fighting using Lei Kiu methods as a preference - people using western boxing and Muay Thai use this to great effect. All fights, regardless of system, start from Lei Kiu... but in WCK the system looks to implement Chi Kiu as soon as possible, whenever possible - hence the various and numerous drills and training methods that work from contact.

In Yip Man's words, from the interview with New Martial Hero in the early 70s:

loi lau heui sung, lat sau jik chung... "the word sung in the motto is a forward movement. The word chung is also a forward movement. The word lau in the motto is stay and stick to the opponents fist (arm) and not use brute force to push it aside."

Yip Man is talking about bridging in that quoted part, and some Wing Chun lines talk about 14 or 18 or 20 Kiu Sau methods/key words (e.g. press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.) Some lines don't mention these things specifically, but you find them in the training drills.

So for me these are part of the attributes you should see when WCK is applied. However, I think that when WCK guys step into the ring they seem to go with the typical Lei Kiu methods other arts use. Their WCK (in terms of the stand up game they are using) starts looking like western boxing or kickboxing or Muay Thai (arts with a Lei Kiu emphasis), which mirrors what their opponents will be using/giving them.

So I agree with KPM on this point when he said: "Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles."

But maybe I'd go one step further :D. Wing Chun's visual signature is directly tied to its concepts and principles - they are two sides of the same coin - you aren't looking to separate them. The body methods, shapes and motions tie in directly with the concepts and principles, particularly the eight key characters LL, HS, LSJC.

In other words... Wing Chun is a Chi Kiu art, bridging is part of WCK's strategy and tactics, these are all connected to the body methods employed and these in turn all relate to the art's principles and concepts. No one part is more important than any of the others because they are all connected.

If we think of the visual signature and the concepts and principles as being two sides of the same coin, then in application WCK is that coin being flipped in the air, spinning rapidly. When you look at the coin are you looking at the heads or tails side? You're looking at both.

In the fight clip that Alan posted, his student did an awesome job - winning the fight in a convincing fashion. He did it largely using Lei Kiu methods.

Did it work? Absolutely (congrats to the fighter!)
Did it look like Wing Chun? IMO, no.
Was it Wing Chun? IMO, I would say no (and as KPM said, that in no way detracts from the fact that the fighter got in the cage and beat his opponent)
Does it matter either way? For the fighter, no. His aim was to win the fight and he did - so a successful day at the office :) For those reading that the fighter was a Wing Chun guy using Wing Chun, yes it matters in as much as the label is incorrect (which is hardly "matters" in a life or death important way :D). The fighter might train the Wing Chun that Alan shows in his instructional clips, but in application I think he wasn't using it to win.



Was it Wing Chun? That is what we train. CSL Wing Chun. So that is what it is.

[Alan Orr]

Well i think its about what you want to achieve and how you are going to go about it.
In a pure self defense scenario youll drift back to your more "traditional" WC approach, straight punch, control centerline and overwhelm. Quickly shut down the other guy.
That wont work in the ring.
There is no element of surprise, your opponent has time and distance, the two most likely things you wont have in a SD scenario.... so what do you do?
You adopt strategies of successful striking orientated combat sports, boxing being the obvious one.
Is it WC?

For me no.

Sure you may utilise your WC stance and structure, your engine so to speak, but you are blurring the lines between sport and self defense which, in itself, creates a blur between WC and boxing..... its neither one or the other.

From my observations of Alans guys, the more recent the clip, the less i see of the WC structure and more i see of boxing/Mt structure..... i feel like im watching evolution in process to get to a method that already exists.


No no no. We are not using a BOXING OR MT structure at all. In fact what I teach is very different from these arts. If you can not see what I am doing thats all cool. But stop trying to overlay you ideas on what I am doing when you have no idea what I am doing. CSL Wing Chun is what we train and what we apply.

[Alan Orr]

Maybe guys need to post videos of their own Wing Chun pressure tested so we can see how clean it looks when facing a trained fighter.

All we can do in CSL Wing Chun is continue to test our system and grow.

My guys all train CSL Wing Chun and we are very proud of that. To be told by a few people that it can't be Wing Chun as Wing Chun doesnt work under combat sports pressure is a joke. Maybe your Wing Chun wouldn't work, that's fine. But don't tell me what works and doesn't. Show your own stuff rather that keyboard warrior your limited mind sets.

Then saying wing chun has never worked in the cage is again a joke and plain stupid. My guys over many years have had 100's of fights. Plus other styles of Wing Chun have also enter MMA as well.

I understand a lot of Wing Chun guys what to grow and learn how to keep their training up to date with current developments. That's what we are all about. I also understand some see that as a stress as that would be getting out of your comfort zone and taking on more pressure that a few drills and chi sao.

Wing Chun is MMA is not going to look like self defence Wing Chun, when your opponent may be unskilled and unfit. So the pressure my fighters take on only adds to their self defence skills.

I ask you would you rather face one of my fighters on the street with your Wing Chun or a guy who trains just drills and chi sao?

[GlennR]

WTF are people stupid? My team has had 100's of MMA K1 and boxing matches using CSL Wing Chun. So that's just not true at all. Our Wing Chun works on the street and in combat sports. If your doesn't not then that is fine. But stop telling me what you don't understand.

Before you lecture me on WC, learn to read a sentence.....

In the middle of what i said was... " if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it".... my point being if you expecting to see a whole lot of tans, bongs and fooks you arent going to see that.

So get off your high horse, read what i said and try to resist "educating" people you think "dont understand"

[BPWT..]

Was it Wing Chun? That is what we train. CSL Wing Chun. So that is what it is.

That's okay, as others have said. You can define CSL how you define it, and then say it is a Wing Chun method. No one is telling you to change the name of your method or school... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

For me, however, your fighter was fighting using Lei Kiu methods - as a boxer would or as a Muay Thai guy would. I'm not saying that makes what he did boxing or Muay Thai, but for me, Lei Kiu range and its methods are not really Wing Chun's emphasis. The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

I thought Robert Chu's system also had an emphasis on Kiu Sau methods (which I was saying go hand in hand - no pun intended - with Chi Kiu but not with Lei Kiu - this is the case by definition). Or perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Robert's system had Kiu Sau methods/key words?


Good post! Well stated! ;) This actually is closely related to what Hendrik has been writing on his "1848" thread.

Yes, Hendrik's posts were about close body work and the methods used when at that range. I agree with what he's saying.

[Alan Orr]

Before you lecture me on WC, learn to read a sentence.....

In the middle of what i said was... " if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it".... my point being if you expecting to see a whole lot of tans, bongs and fooks you arent going to see that.

So get off your high horse, read what i said and try to resist "educating" people you think "dont understand"


You said you couldn't see Wing Chun in our fights, so you have not understanding of our wing chun.

High horse lol I don't need one as I and lucky to have a complete system and and lots of great level guys to teach, train with and learn from. Our system is one of the few that is not hiding behind playing on words.

[Alan Orr]

That's okay, as others have said. You can define CSL how you define it, and then say it is a Wing Chun method. No one is telling you to change the name of your method or school... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

For me, however, your fighter was fighting using Lei Kiu methods - as a boxer would or as a Muay Thai guy would. I'm not saying that makes what he did boxing or Muay Thai, but for me, Lei Kiu range and its methods are not really Wing Chun's emphasis. The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

I thought Robert Chu's system also had an emphasis on Kiu Sau methods (which I was saying go hand in hand - no pun intended - with Chi Kiu but not with Lei Kiu - this is the case by definition). Or perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Robert's system had Kiu Sau methods/key words?

Yes, Hendrik's posts were about close body work and the methods used when at that range. I agree with what he's saying.

Wake up. Wing Chun is a close range style. But it's not limited to just that. Of course we have Key words. You point is what? Yes what you are now saying is fine. It may not be what you do or know. I have no problem with that. On point was don't tell me its not our Wing Chun.

[Alan Orr]

I completely understand. I was just being facetious for all the naysayers. To me it looked like the short hook from Biu Jee or the bouncing cut from Chum Kiu with a little english on it.


Sounds like we are on the same page. Its funny that some others are talking about Wing Chun not having a long range. Of course Wing Chun is best in close, but a fight has all ranges.

[LFJ]

... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.


The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

Speak about your system and try to understand the others.

[Alan Orr]

Hi, I am a Chu Sau Lei instructor under Alan Orr Sifu. I don't fight in MMA, neither do my students. However, when we apply our art under pressure it looks no different to what Josh or Aaron look like in the clips my teacher has supplied. Does that mean I am not a Wing Chun practitioner? The Chu Sau Lei syllabus is a very comprehensive Wing Chun training model focussing heavily on body structure and a practical approach to the application of the art. To me, Wing Chun is a training method, the drills give you the tools and attributes for fighting.

You then take what you have learnt and refine your skills through pressure testing until hopefully you arrive at a point where you can hold your own against someone who is trying to overwhelm you. At this point of refinement if someone who is watching me says "that doesn't look like Wing Chun" I know they haven't been through the same process and smile. These individuals have a romanticised idea of what the art should look like under pressure , they want to see people fighting using drills , not the attributes gained from them. I consider myself a Wing Chun practitioner and just because my application of the art doesn't fit in with another persons preconceived idea of what Wing Chun should look like doesn't mean I'm not doing Wing Chun...

Chris like me trained in other wing chun styles before finding CSL Wing Chun, so he understands full well the difference in our approach.

[Alan Orr]

Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.



You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

Speak about your system and try to understand the others.


Sound wisdom.

[BPWT..]

Wake up. Wing Chun is a close range style. But it's not limited to just that. Of course we have Key words. You point is what? Yes what you are now saying is fine. It may not be what you do or know. I have no problem with that. On point was don't tell me its not our Wing Chun.

Of course I am not telling you it is not your Wing Chun. You say it is your Wing Chun. What I am saying is that for many people they look at that fight clip and they don't see Wing Chun as they understand it. I am one of them. You say it is Wing Chun, for me I say that is not Wing Chun as I understand the system :)

I agree that WCK is not limited to being just a "close range style", but that (close range/close body) is its emphasis. If you have Kiu Sau methods/key words, and you say that Wing Chun is a close range style, then I would expect to see a close range body method that involves Kiu Sau when your guys fight. I don't see it in that particular fight.

Like I said, all I see at the stand up, striking stage, is Lei Kiu. Your fighter's emphasis was, IMO, on using only what I consider to be a method Wing Chun does not place emphasis on.



Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.

Sure, but I did (and do) try to use the qualifier "IMO". So yes, I'm looking at things from the WCK (Wing Tsun) that I learn. So like I said, "for me" I didn't see Wing Chun in the fight clip Alan posted. I see it in abundance in the training clips he posts. In those clips it seems apparent that his art has Kiu Sau methods and works them (naturally, of course) from Chi Kiu. In the fight I didn't see those things; no Kiu Sau via Chi Kiu.

Again, I'm not knocking the fighter - just saying that IMO he didn't use these things - and for me they are essential parts of the WCK system, the core of how the art expresses itself.


You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

Yes. But in other clips Alan posted, I see a lot of things that have similarities to what I learn. Just like I see similarities when I watch a Hawkins Cheung video, or some Sifu Sergio videos, or when I read some of Hendrik's posts.


These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

I understand that, as the WSL lineage (in my opinion) flips things around and itself has a different emphasis - having more Lei Kiu than Chi Kiu. It takes one aspect of the art (which would be an aspect used less in the LTWT line, for example), and gives it much greater emphasis. You can see this very clearly with Philipp Bayer, for example. He has far less focus on bridge work than other Yip Man derived WCK, but what he does he does really, really, really well.


Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

I accept there are different approaches. And I wouldn't outright say that Alan and his people are "not doing it right." Their training is right for them if they think it is right for them. All I would say (again! ;)) is that I see lots of things in their training that fit with the approach I learn, but then when I see them fighting I don't see them using much of that. Why train bridge work and controlling - via the drills they have shown - if you don't use bridge work and control via the bridge, in a fight? Why have Kiu Sau methods in your system if you don't use them?

Of course, there might be times when you really don't need to - you hit the guy, knock him out, and the fight is over - no more required. But if you start issuing punches without the control (here I mean the control seen in Alan's other videos) then the fighter runs a far greater risk of being caught by the opponent's unchecked response.

But like I said earlier - Lei Kiu is far, far easier to train and try to work with, than Chi Kiu methods.

But fair enough - maybe we all just see things differently and we should let it stay that way. To each his own.

[LFJ]

@BPWT

What I'm suggesting is that "Wing Chun" is not singular and shouldn't be spoken about in such a general manner as to say what "it" is or isn't or should be. Qualifying such a statement with "IMO" doesn't change the fact that it's a generalization about very different systems (that of course share similarities, given the common ancestry) from the POV of your own lineage.

It's basically saying; "LTWT should be done this way and I don't see that in your fight". Well, of course not. Because they train the CSL Wing Chun system. Hopefully you can see how pointless it is to make such statements rather than to try to understand CSLWC, particularly where it differs.

[BPWT..]

I see what your saying, LFJ, but I think we all use the words Wing Chun in a generic sense. For ease of use. Maybe we shouldn't, as approaches do differ.

But approaching the topic with the goal of understanding Alan's system from my understanding of a different WCK line, I would ask the following question:

Why does CSL WCK train Kiu Sau/Chi Kiu methods, but utilizes only Lei Kiu methods in application? (or was this just the case in this particular fight?)

[chris bougeard]

@BPWT

"Of course, there might be times when you really don't need to - you hit the guy, knock him out, and the fight is over - no more required. But if you start issuing punches without the control (here I mean the control seen in Alan's other videos) then the fighter runs a far greater risk of being caught by the opponent's unchecked response."

You sound like a seasoned fighter who has a lot of experience of working against un-coperative opponents who are trying to tear your head off. Can you show us any clips of you personally "controlling and hitting" an opponent under these circumstances?
Perhaps after viewing these clips we will be enlightened as to
why our "easier" striking and not sticking method isn't the real Wing Chun you espouse.

And please stop pointing out that our guys don't look like they do when you have viewed our drill clips. I think we have already established that we don't fight people with drills.

IME actively trying to bridge/stick to someone not playing the Wc game has resulted in me eating a lot of punches...

[KPM]

I try to keep an open mind. Honestly I do! I've studied several different martial arts through the years. But I can be wrong, and I'm willing to change my opinion and admit that I was wrong. Alan, I understand what you are saying. I have every one of your videos and have watched them several times each and have learned from them. They are great! So I just went back and watched the original video clip you posted. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it. Josh did a great job. But I invite anyone to just watch his movement in the first 45 seconds or so of that clip. Look at his stance: feet wide, body leaned slight forward, chin tucked and head angled forward, hands up in front of the face with the elbows out. In short...Josh is in what has become a pretty standard "MMA ready position" used by boxers and Muay Thai guys alike. How can anyone call this a Wing Chun stance or position? When he punches he tends to duck his head and swing his shoulders just like any MMA fighter does. Is that Wing Chun? When he closed with his opponent we didn't see any of the structure breaking and controlling things Alan talks about, we see them go straight to a clinch. I really didn't see anything that Alan teaches on his videos. Again this is fighting and not drilling or training, but shouldn't something recognizable show up? This is a very typical MMA bout....MMA style boxing going to a clinch and takedown and submission wrestling on the ground. The punch that wins the fight looks exactly like a punch most MMA fighters throw. So tell me what is distinctive here that separates Josh out and says that he is more than just a great MMA fighter, and that he is actually doing Wing Chun? I know, I know you are going to say I don't understand and I just can't see it. What I see is good MMA. So tell me how your Wing Chun HASN'T been "adapted" for MMA?


BPWT wrote:
I agree that WCK is not limited to being just a "close range style", but that (close range/close body) is its emphasis. If you have Kiu Sau methods/key words, and you say that Wing Chun is a close range style, then I would expect to see a close range body method that involves Kiu Sau when your guys fight. I don't see it in that particular fight.

Like I said, all I see at the stand up, striking stage, is Lei Kiu. Your fighter's emphasis was, IMO, on using only what I consider to be a method Wing Chun does not place emphasis on.

I agree. It sounds like what you are calling Lei Kiu is essentially boxing range. Wing Chun is "Chinese boxing", but the traditional systems were designed to function the best a range closer in than the "arms extended" boxing range. We just don't see that often in MMA bouts or any sparring bouts really. I think it becomes much more important in self-defense situations on the street. That's why I agree with Glenn's assessment of "traditional" Wing Chun as more of an "ambush" system and not a bouting system. When you put gloves on a lot of the close in fighting seems to just go away.


I accept there are different approaches. And I wouldn't outright say that Alan and his people are "not doing it right." Their training is right for them if they think it is right for them. All I would say (again! ;)) is that I see lots of things in their training that fit with the approach I learn, but then when I see them fighting I don't see them using much of that. Why train bridge work and controlling - via the drills they have shown - if you don't use bridge work and control via the bridge, in a fight? Why have Kiu Sau methods in your system if you don't use them?

Again, I agree. Alan is free to do whatever he likes and I wish him and his students the best of luck! I would love to see one of them fighting in the UFC some day. But if that happens, you won't find Joe Rogan eating his words about Wing Chun. Rather you'll hear Joe Rogan telling everyone how these Wing Chun guys are full of it and just doing the same MMA that everyone else is doing.
.

But fair enough - maybe we all just see things differently and we should let it stay that way. To each his own.

Yep! I agree. I'll shut up now. Alan may not have liked what I have said, but that's just the reality of it. Non-Wing Chun people are not going to recognize this clip as Wing Chun. Calling it "straight up" Wing Chun in the tag line is just going to confuse people. That's the reality, like it or not.

[kung fu fighter]

It sounds like what you are calling Lei Kiu is essentially boxing range.

Lei Kiu means fighting without bridge contact, it can be applied in close range fighting. It is a YKSWC term.

[Wayfaring]

@BPWT
And please stop pointing out that our guys don't look like they do when you have viewed our drill clips. I think we have already established that we don't fight people with drills.

IME actively trying to bridge/stick to someone not playing the Wc game has resulted in me eating a lot of punches...

When I see people not understanding the difference in a live chaos scenario in a ring fight and holding form in drills, it simply shows me they probably do not and have not worked with a higher level of contact.

Someone was lecturing me on not saying you guys CSLWCK is modified for MMA. Whatever. If you are going to get into a ring/cage and fight under certain rules, then of course you are adapting your core art to fit the rules you are fighting under. Does that mean "it is not WCK?" Of course not, that's ridiculous. Does it mean you "heavily" adapt the art to fit the ring? Actually, IMO you guys methods probably need LESS adaptation to fit MMA rules than many other families' arts. Most of the adaptation would be adding in a ground game.

And ABSOLUTELY, trying to enact a strategy of bridging or sticking to someone while they are not playing chi sau will get you punched in the grill. And IMO that's a bad habit that develops out of compliantly going to yjkym square stance and sticking both arms out to begin chi sau. Along with not free sparring (from "lei kiu" - you learn a new term everyday).

[LFJ]

IME actively trying to bridge/stick to someone not playing the Wc game has resulted in me eating a lot of punches...

Yup. I've not seen this "Chi Kiu" idea successfully done in the real. It's not part of my VT either.

That's probably why of the other lineages out there, CSLWC is the only one I practically agree on everything with. Very practical because it's not based on theory alone. Everything works in theory.

[BPWT..]

@BPWT. You sound like a seasoned fighter who has a lot of experience of working against un-coperative opponents who are trying to tear your head off. Can you show us any clips of you personally "controlling and hitting" an opponent under these circumstances?

Hi Chris,

No, just like you I also don't compete in MMA competitions. I do of course train against uncooperative opponents, with varying degrees of resistance - some light (no protection used) and some harder (gum shields, gloves and box in place). The training is always to try and control and hit - as that's the system (the system of WCK that I study). We don't record, so no - I don't have video to share with you.


Perhaps after viewing these clips we will be enlightened as to why our "easier" striking and not sticking method isn't the real Wing Chun you espouse.

Regarding 'easier striking', this is just fact, IMO. It is easier to learn to fight with Muay Thai, for example, that it is to fight with, say, Taijiquan.


IME actively trying to bridge/stick to someone not playing the Wc game has resulted in me eating a lot of punches...

I take it this means that you have tried applying the bridging methods of CSL WCK to uncooperative training partners but it didn't work, so now you don't do this and instead use Lei Kiu methods instead?


And please stop pointing out that our guys don't look like they do when you have viewed our drill clips. I think we have already established that we don't fight people with drills.

I understand you don't fight people with drills 'as is'. :roll eyes: I already said as much. But I am talking about the nature of the drills - Kiu Sau drills give bridging attributes, it is what they were designed for. Why train them if you don't use them?

Maybe you are in a good position to answer the question I posed a few posts back:

Why does CSL WCK train Kiu Sau/Chi Kiu methods, but utilizes only Lei Kiu methods in application? (or was this just the case in this particular fight?)


Robert Chu wrote a really good article on Chi Sau, and in that he lists 14 methods from his CSL WCK system. These are often Kiu Sau related - and involve the "bridge/stick" you mentioned when you said it resulted in you "eating a lot of punches."

Robert's article listed the following methods.

"My 14 methods include:

Mun Fa/ Yin Fa - Asking/inquiring and enticing. Asking can be done with the hands, pressure, body, steps, technique. In asking, you pressure the opponent and use 4 ounces to offset his 1000 pounds.
Jou Fa - Running - avoiding pressure or running from pressure, using pressure to give rise to new situations/techniques
Jeet Fa - Methods of intercepting - beating the opponent to the strike, recognizing threat and immediately shutting it off with the hands, body or steps.
Tao/Lou Fa - Methods of leaking and stealing, seeing an opportunity and taking it, or passively finding it
Jiu Fa - common methods of Gor Sao (crossing hands) such as Tan Da, Pak Da, Lop Da, etc. in singular and combination. Typically, it is a technician's level of training.
Sim Fa - Methods of evasion with steps, body displacement, dodging, hand movement, etc., yet close enough to continue through. There are two major methods, using the torso to evade (small evasion) or using steps to evade (large evasion).
Dai Fa - Methods of guiding, leading an opponent to walls, objects, other directions other than they wanted to go (i.e. Opponent wants to attack you, but you guide him while adding on to his power)
Jie Fa - Methods of borrowing an opponent's power and energy, momentum against him, this is closely tied to pressing the opponent and leading him
Fou - methods of floating, unbalancing, uprooting an opponent
Chum - methods of collapsing a person's structure or sinking
Tun - methods of swallowing an opponent's force and dissolving it, also related are methods of storing power with the body, and folding methods to absorb an opponent's power
Tou - methods of expelling force in contact with the opponent, also methods of extending your force through an opponent.
Tuen Fa - methods of breaking and delinking the body connection in an effort to preserve the body structure
Jip Fa - methods of linking up the body connection once the connection is broken. This is the opposite of Tuen Fa."

[BPWT..]

When I see people not understanding the difference in a live chaos scenario in a ring fight and holding form in drills, it simply shows me they probably do not and have not worked with a higher level of contact.

You are entitled to your opinion, and I am the first person to admit that we haven't seen (IMO) any WCK (as I would define it) shown in the ring. But as I said earlier, I have seen someone use the art against two attackers and he dealt with them in a way that looked like Wing Tsun from start to finish. I don't think you can get a "higher level of contact" than that. It was a real fight.


Along with not free sparring (from "lei kiu" - you learn a new term everyday).

Putting aside the fact that HFY has books and books worth of new terms.... :D.... it also has, according to HFY practitioners who visit this forum, comprehensive Kiu Sau teaching. Have I misunderstood this and do you mean that HFY does not engage in bridge work?

[Wayfaring]

So after one more viewing of the clip, I had one other point.

My assessment - viewing the fight from the initial exchange, what I see is an opponent whose primary style is BJJ. He did not seem to have much wrestling at all, and his striking was not as good as his ground game either. From the outset, he rushes in and tries to clinch. There is NO bridge involved in his bull rush in clinch attempts. So Josh punched his target all day long. Because the guy is trying to clinch up he is having to rotate and use round punches. Eventually the opponent gets an overhook and kind of pulls guard (very weak guard pull because he got punched hard). Most of the rest of the 1st round was basically a BJJ guy trying to angle his hips off to get some offense going, and Josh caging the hips preventing him angling off and some good GNP. 2nd round the opponent basically showed he had little striking skill, and not a great wrestling game to get it to the ground - so he gets bound up close in a clinch and then dropped with a clean shot.

To those expecting a WCK bridge - there wasn't one because the opponent didn't have enough skill to approach a clinch through a bridge - he was trying to dive in on a body clinch or over/underhook. He actually does get an overhook and drag the fight to the ground. (Step 1 in his strategy - Step 2 would be obtain a better position and 3 - finish a submission). However, once on the ground, Josh had enough defensive ground game combined with good GNP where his opponent couldn't execute the last 2 steps in the gameplan. And in the next round, he proved unable to get the match back to the ground before getting KO'd. NOTE: I am not saying his opponent was a scrub. I am saying he was a one-dimensional BJJ guy. I'm sure if Josh had less ground defense skills, he easily could have got caught in a triangle or armbar.

So my point is this. Before criticizing a fighter not fighting from a bridge position, look at what his opponent is giving him.

[Wayfaring]

You are entitled to your opinion, and I am the first person to admit that we haven't seen (IMO) any WCK (as I would define it) shown in the ring. But as I said earlier, I have seen someone use the art against two attackers and he dealt with them in a way that looked like Wing Tsun from start to finish. I don't think you can get a "higher level of contact" than that. It was a real fight.

I was kind of getting at the idea that you personally probably have never done much contact sparring. When you get into discussing street scenarios, the main unknown is the skill level of the attackers. It's highly likely that with a vast difference in skills, attackers never push someone out of their comfort zone like would happen in a ring.



Putting aside the fact that HFY has books and books worth of new terms.... :D.... it also has, according to HFY practitioners who visit this forum, comprehensive Kiu Sau teaching. Have I misunderstood this and do you mean that HFY does not engage in bridge work?

Yes HFY has terms too. In fact, Chi Kiu for us is a term that describes a portion of our overall chi sau training platform that incorporates kiu sau, chi kiu, and chi sau as three components of the platform. It of course has much more precise meaning than just bridge contact, has its own drills and challenge tests, etc.

[BPWT..]

So after one more viewing of the clip, I had one other point....

So my point is this. Before criticizing a fighter not fighting from a bridge position, look at what his opponent is giving him.

The first round I agree, there was I think a single punch and Josh was able to quickly get a solid hit and take control from there (his own striking). Regarding the ground work, I defer to you as it's not my game.

But in the second round, it opens with the opponent feeling out with jabs and some sloppy punches, and you can see that Josh is not looking to initiate any entering and bridge work from this - and that really is the domain of Kiu Sau. The same could be said after the initial clinch in the second round, where the opponent threw a looping punch.

You are right in saying "2nd round the opponent basically showed he had little striking skill", but I still think this shouldn't mean you decide to not take advantage of that fact and use a strategy to not enter against those strikes, and control from there.

Ultimately, I can't critique too much the strategy Josh used because he got the job done and won the fight - and that's what he was in the ring for. Like I said, he won convincingly and he looks like a real handful.

[Wayfaring]

But in the second round, it opens with the opponent feeling out with jabs and some sloppy punches, and you can see that Josh is not looking to initiate any entering and bridge work from this - and that really is the domain of Kiu Sau. The same could be said after the initial clinch in the second round, where the opponent threw a looping punch.

You are right in saying "2nd round the opponent basically showed he had little striking skill", but I still think this shouldn't mean you decide to not take advantage of that fact and use a strategy to not enter against those strikes, and control from there.


I don't know, maybe he was waiting to see if the guy would try the bulrush clinch on him again so he could tee off again.



Ultimately, I can't critique too much the strategy Josh used because he got the job done and won the fight - and that's what he was in the ring for. Like I said, he won convincingly and he looks like a real handful.

He looked fine to me.

[BPWT..]

I was kind of getting at the idea that you personally probably have never done much contact sparring.

It is funny how people always assume that is the case when someone disagrees with another's viewpoint. My view/experience is different, so that naturally means I haven't sparred and I am wrong. Of course I have sparred.



When you get into discussing street scenarios, the main unknown is the skill level of the attackers. It's highly likely that with a vast difference in skills, attackers never push someone out of their comfort zone like would happen in a ring.

I agree. All I can say is that the two guys were not midgets with their arms in casts and were not two people who looked like they enjoyed a good game of dominos. How skilled were they? I have no idea! I know they very quickly threw some nasty punches and were very quickly taken care of.

I also agree that in the ring people will be pushed out of their comfort zone. Of course, on the street you are often out of your comfort zone from the very first second, as there is a strong possibility (esp. two against one) that you might end up in hospital with very serious injuries.



Yes HFY has terms too. In fact, Chi Kiu for us is a term that describes a portion of our overall chi sau training platform that incorporates kiu sau, chi kiu, and chi sau as three components of the platform. It of course has much more precise meaning than just bridge contact, has its own drills and challenge tests, etc.

Great. So are you also saying, as Chris did, that you train things (in this case these 3 components of the Chi Kiu platform) but that they are not trained for actual use?

I think most WCK lineages have Kiu Sau drills and exercises, etc. I am saying they are there for a reason, and the reason is that the art looks to use Chi Kiu rather than Lei Kiu whenever it can.

[Wayfaring]

It is funny how people always assume that is the case when someone disagrees with another's viewpoint. My view/experience is different, so that naturally means I haven't sparred and I am wrong. Of course I have sparred.

Actually I think the term I was referring to is "hard contact sparring". You kind of avoided talking about the level of contact. We kind of saw the problems with other types of sparring in all the PB clips and fiasco with Obasi controlling him. Someone can slap fight all day long and never learn the subtle differences that are involved with going harder.



I agree. All I can say is that the two guys were not midgets with their arms in casts and were not two people who looked like they enjoyed a good game of dominos. How skilled were they? I have no idea! I know they very quickly threw some nasty punches and were very quickly taken care of.

I also agree that in the ring people will be pushed out of their comfort zone. Of course, on the street you are often out of your comfort zone from the very first second, as there is a strong possibility (esp. two against one) that you might end up in hospital with very serious injuries.

I'm not doing the "sport vs. street" argument with you.



Great. So are you also saying, as Chris did, that you train things (in this case these 3 components of the Chi Kiu platform) but that they are not trained for actual use?

So are you saying you got dropped on your head a lot as a kid? I mean, since we are paraphrasing questions.



I think most WCK lineages have Kiu Sau drills and exercises, etc. I am saying they are there for a reason, and the reason is that the art looks to use Chi Kiu rather than Lei Kiu whenever it can.

"The art" does not "look to use chi kiu rather than lei kiu whenever it can". What you are describing in the art is a term called "chasing hands".

Or actually, you are a Leung Ting guy. maybe that is what your art looks to do.

[LFJ]

I think most WCK lineages have Kiu Sau drills and exercises, etc. I am saying they are there for a reason,

Alan gave the reason for the drills and why they aren't applied literally. What don't you understand?

[BPWT..]

Actually I think the term I was referring to is "hard contact sparring". You kind of avoided talking about the level of contact. We kind of saw the problems with other types of sparring in all the PB clips and fiasco with Obasi controlling him. Someone can slap fight all day long and never learn the subtle differences that are involved with going harder.

I said earlier that we go light with no protection, and harder with protection (gloves, gum shield and a box). We don't compete in open competitions, so I don't know what you mean and/or are asking me. Semi-contact, full contact? When gloved up we hit hard - full power in the sense we are trying to KO the other guy? No. There's no one with medical training on hand, so we keep things sensible.



I'm not doing the "sport vs. street" argument with you.

Okay. All I am saying is that both take you out of your comfort zone - in my opinion someone using WT against two real attackers is out of everyone's comfort zone.



So are you saying you got dropped on your head a lot as a kid? I mean, since we are paraphrasing questions.

I'm asking a genuine question. You say you train Kiu Sau as part of a three-component platform. I am asking do you train this for use, or are you saying that it doesn't work. What do you train in Kiu Sau, and what is it for?

You could play nice and answer, as I am trying to answer your questions, or you could simply make dumb statements about me being dropped on my head :rolleyes:



"The art" does not "look to use chi kiu rather than lei kiu whenever it can". What you are describing in the art is a term called "chasing hands". Or actually, you are a Leung Ting guy. maybe that is what your art looks to do.

I think I made it pretty clear what the art looks to do, as I have learned it. Strike and control at the same time, as we see the art as focussing on Chi Kiu, something developed by various things, including Kiu Sau.

I don't see how that relates to chasing hands.

You asked earlier what my definition of Kiu Sau was. Why not tell me how you in HFY train Kiu Sau, what it involves and what it develops and tell me how that fits into the general HFY method and its use in application?

You ask a lot, but don't offer much back in return. C'mon, it's a forum and meant for sharing - why not tell us. (note: I haven't made any comments about you being dropped as a child, despite the fact I think you are simply looking for a rise)

[BPWT..]

Alan gave the reason for the drills and why they aren't applied literally. What don't you understand?

Alan said "When your in a fight you are not trying to do a drill and look good. You are trying to win. Your training is done. Its time to dig in and get the job done using the skills you have," and he said that his guys train CSLWC for the street and for the ring and that is the same (I think that is what he said). He also said his guys take the structure from their training into the ring.


I don't train drills to "look good", but I agree that drills are about attributes.

My issue (or what I don't understand), is why a person trains drills that are about control from bridging, stripping down bridges, moving around bridges, linking and delinking from contact, etc, drills that fit into their system's use of Kiu Sau related work... see the list of ideas/training methods from Robert Chu that I posted...

...and then in the ring look to fight (in their stand up game) as though they basing almost all of that actual fighting on Lei Kiu, rather than Chi Kiu (which is the very thing they have been training in those said Kiu Sau drills).

[KPM]

So are you saying you got dropped on your head a lot as a kid? I mean, since we are paraphrasing questions.



"The art" does not "look to use chi kiu rather than lei kiu whenever it can". What you are describing in the art is a term called "chasing hands".

Or actually, you are a Leung Ting guy. maybe that is what your art looks to do.

You don't like what BPWT has to say so you resort to this? :rolleyes: One WCK strategy, and this is only one, and actually one I've seen described by Robert Chu....is this. Engage the opponent and try to knock the heck out of him. If he puts up an obstruction (tries to defend), then use that contact to bridge in and control his arms moving in to disrupt his balance and break his structure so that you can more easily strike him at will. This strategy does not include standing back and exchanging punches in a boxing scenario. You can't control anything in a tit for tat exchange of punches. I think this is what BPWT is talking about. This is a strategy suited for a street encounter, but not necessarily a ring bout or a give and take session of sparring. With this strategy when you engage an opponent you don't stop until he is down, and the goal is to put him down quickly. Granted, if not successful the first time you may have to step back and re-engage and try again. My point is that this is at least one key strategy in WCK that I have seen, and this strategy is not a boxing exchange of punches.

[chris bougeard]

@Bpwt

As you seem to be keen at pointing out what you see is wrong with the Chu Sau Lei clips, can you enlighten me with what controlling/bridging/sticking method the Leung ting "fighter" is using in the clip below. It starts at 7:18

http://youtu.be/czDuH0R73kg

The only bridge contact I see is his chin hitting the other guys fist...

[Grumblegeezer]

@Bpwt
...As you seem to be keen at pointing out what you see is wrong with the Chu Sau Lei clips, can you enlighten me with what controlling/bridging/sticking method the Leung ting "fighter"

Actually, according to the announcer, that guy came from Duncan Leung's group, not Leung Ting, and his problem (like some of LT's guys as well) seemed to be that he didn't have a clue about how to deal with a really strong grappler. We never did get to see how his striking game would have played out.

Anyway, personally I think we all benefit from taking a broad view of what Wing Chun is and looks like. My primary Wing Chun background is with LT. I also have been training with Rene Latosa and also Martin Torres in Escrima for a long time. Now I may not see, but I feel a lot of WC concepts in the Escrima I've trained. And it in competition it looks like MMA too. Now I'm not a competitor. But even from the stands, I like to see our guys win. And as far as looks go, nobody looks good when they're tapping out!

[KPM]

Actually, according to the announcer, that guy came from Duncan Leung's group, not Leung Ting, and his problem (like some of LT's guys as well) seemed to be that he didn't have a clue about how to deal with a really strong grappler. We never did get to see how his striking game would have played out.

Anyway, personally I think we all benefit from taking a broad view of what Wing Chun is and looks like. My primary Wing Chun background is with LT. I also have been training with Rene Latosa and also Martin Torres in Escrima for a long time. Now I may not see, but I feel a lot of WC concepts in the Escrima I've trained. And it in competition it looks like MMA too. Now I'm not a competitor. But even from the stands, I like to see our guys win. And as far as looks go, nobody looks good when they're tapping out!

No Steve, check at 7:18 like Chris mentioned. The clip starts out with Steve Faulkner from Duncan Leung's school, but it is a compilation clip and at the 7:18 mark is the Leung Ting guy. But I'll take this opportunity to point out that Steve Faulkner had some level of success in MMA years ago, and he did recognizable Wing Chun. You can't see it in this clip because he was taken down so quickly and Igor was a beast. But other clips I have seen of him were recognizable as Wing Chun.

[BPWT..]

@Bpwt

As you seem to be keen at pointing out what you see is wrong with the Chu Sau Lei clips, can you enlighten me with what controlling/bridging/sticking method the Leung ting "fighter" is using in the clip below. It starts at 7:18

http://youtu.be/czDuH0R73kg

The only bridge contact I see is his chin hitting the other guys fist...

As I said before, I haven't seen anyone fighting with WCK (from any lineage) in a MMA contest that, to me, looked like good WC/WT/VT. I listed a few things that might contribute to this. Feel free to post more clips like this if you like, but my point remains. Whatever the lineage, we typically see poor WCK.

For the particular person in the clip you reference, there are many things wrong (obvious inexperience and nerves, a low guard inviting the punch, stance and footwork, etc). In most cases we simply see inexperienced WCK guys a) not applying the system the way they train it, b) getting outclassed.

In Alan's clip I see his fighter not using WCK as I see it trained in Alan's training clips (I already explained what I mean by this), but Alan's guy does outclass the other guy regardless, and wins (deservedly). I applaud the win - I just didn't see him using Wing Chun (as I understand it) to get the win.



A minor point, but I add it for clarification so you know where I stand on this; the WT guy eating the fist looks like an EWTO student. Even if he'd done better, I don't regard this as LT Wing Tsun, and I don't train in the EWTO or use their interpretation of Keith Kernspecht's system.

[Grumblegeezer]

No Steve, check at 7:18 like Chris mentioned. The clip starts out with Steve Faulkner from Duncan Leung's school, but it is a compilation clip and at the 7:18 mark is the Leung Ting guy. But I'll take this opportunity to point out that Steve Faulkner had some level of success in MMA years ago, and he did recognizable Wing Chun. You can't see it in this clip because he was taken down so quickly and Igor was a beast. But other clips I have seen of him were recognizable as Wing Chun.

Thanks for the clarification. BTW I looked on youtube for other clips of Falkner fighting and didn't find anything. If you can find any good videos please post them. --Steve

[KPM]

Thanks for the clarification. BTW I looked on youtube for other clips of Falkner fighting and didn't find anything. If you can find any good videos please post them. --Steve

I looked as well and couldn't find the older ones I remember seeing. They must have been taken down. That's been awhile back. But Faulkner made it to that "Extreme Fighting Championship" venue where we see him lose to Igor. So he had to have had some success in MMA in the past or he wouldn't have been invited! His problem was that his ground game sucked and you can't get anywhere in MMA if you can't fight on the ground.

[KPM]

You don't like what BPWT has to say so you resort to this? :rolleyes: One WCK strategy, and this is only one, and actually one I've seen described by Robert Chu....is this. Engage the opponent and try to knock the heck out of him. If he puts up an obstruction (tries to defend), then use that contact to bridge in and control his arms moving in to disrupt his balance and break his structure so that you can more easily strike him at will. This strategy does not include standing back and exchanging punches in a boxing scenario. You can't control anything in a tit for tat exchange of punches. I think this is what BPWT is talking about. This is a strategy suited for a street encounter, but not necessarily a ring bout or a give and take session of sparring. With this strategy when you engage an opponent you don't stop until he is down, and the goal is to put him down quickly. Granted, if not successful the first time you may have to step back and re-engage and try again. My point is that this is at least one key strategy in WCK that I have seen, and this strategy is not a boxing exchange of punches.

Ironically, here is a great clip of Alan talking about exactly what I mention above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM3V4P-5nN0&feature=youtube_gdata

This is what we don't see in the clip of Josh. This is what BPWT has been talking about. Notice that Alan is standing very upright, not leaning forward, not in the MMA stance we see Josh taking in the clip. This is good Wing Chun.

[Grumblegeezer]

Ironically, here is a great clip of Alan talking about exactly what I mention above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM3V4P-5nN0&feature=youtube_gdata

This is what we don't see in the clip of Josh. This is what BPWT has been talking about. Notice that Alan is standing very upright, not leaning forward, not in the MMA stance we see Josh taking in the clip. This is good Wing Chun.

If Alan's guys show some of that in MMA and keep winning, he'll be the biggest "martial hero" in WC since Bruce Lee. Every WC guy I know would recognize that as WC, regardless of lineage. If Alan can get wins with stuff that looks like that, he can go on the seminar circuit and retire young as a rich man.

P.S. I'd be taking that seminar when he came to the states.

[kung fu fighter]

I'll take this opportunity to point out that Steve Faulkner had some level of success in MMA years ago, and he did recognizable Wing Chun. You can't see it in this clip because he was taken down so quickly and Igor was a beast. But other clips I have seen of him were recognizable as Wing Chun.

Keith,
Can you please post the other clips of Steve Faulkner's fights, I know that he had some other fights before extreme fighting but I never seen them or known them to exists on the net.

where did you seen them was it on Youtube or some other video hosting site? and what key words did you enter for them to come up?

[KPM]

Keith,
Can you please post the other clips of Steve Faulkner's fights, I know that he had some other fights before extreme fighting but I never seen them or known them to exists on the net.

where did you seen them was it on Youtube or some other video hosting site? and what key words did you enter for them to come up?

Like I said above, I looked but couldn't find them again. It could be it was on Duncan Leung's old website.

[Wayfaring]

I said earlier that we go light with no protection, and harder with protection (gloves, gum shield and a box). We don't compete in open competitions, so I don't know what you mean and/or are asking me. Semi-contact, full contact? When gloved up we hit hard - full power in the sense we are trying to KO the other guy? No. There's no one with medical training on hand, so we keep things sensible.

So when you go harder you don't notice any difference in levels of chaos, holding form, scrambling, etc? It all looks exactly like lighter drills?



I'm asking a genuine question. You say you train Kiu Sau as part of a three-component platform. I am asking do you train this for use, or are you saying that it doesn't work. What do you train in Kiu Sau, and what is it for?

It didn't sound to me like you were asking a genuine question. It sounded to me like you were twisting what I said around a bit and baiting me. Yes, trained as a 3 part platform. Savi explains it in intricate detail in another thread. Trained for use. Yes it works. Kiu sau as trained protects your upper gate and provides structural integrity among other things. Again Savi has much more detail in his writeup about the 3 platforms of HFY chi sau.



You could play nice and answer, as I am trying to answer your questions, or you could simply make dumb statements about me being dropped on my head :rolleyes:

And you can keep playing the victim here and pretending like you are not baiting people. I see you doing it to others too. Perhaps that is a result of being dropped on your head, perhaps not. The evidence remains to be seen.



I think I made it pretty clear what the art looks to do, as I have learned it. Strike and control at the same time, as we see the art as focussing on Chi Kiu, something developed by various things, including Kiu Sau.

How do you train kiu sau? I know I've asked this before.



I don't see how that relates to chasing hands.

If your strategy is to seek a bridge to control it first, then your opponent can present you a false bridge to bait you. Then let it collapse and attack from another front. What you control is centerline.



You asked earlier what my definition of Kiu Sau was. Why not tell me how you in HFY train Kiu Sau, what it involves and what it develops and tell me how that fits into the general HFY method and its use in application?

See Savi's post on the HFY history thread. that explains more detail.



You ask a lot, but don't offer much back in return. C'mon, it's a forum and meant for sharing - why not tell us. (note: I haven't made any comments about you being dropped as a child, despite the fact I think you are simply looking for a rise)

What do you want from me? I mean its no skin off my nose if you don't want to explain Leung Ting's Kiu sau methods. I don't know anywhere else there's a writeup on them either, do you? And the only reason they are being discussed is due to your criticism of the fighter not "looking like wing chun" right? Because he didn't seek to bridge before punching?

[Frost]

As I said before, I haven't seen anyone fighting with WCK (from any lineage) in a MMA contest that, to me, looked like good WC/WT/VT. I listed a few things that might contribute to this. Feel free to post more clips like this if you like, but my point remains. Whatever the lineage, we typically see poor WCK.

For the particular person in the clip you reference, there are many things wrong (obvious inexperience and nerves, a low guard inviting the punch, stance and footwork, etc). In most cases we simply see inexperienced WCK guys a) not applying the system the way they train it, b) getting outclassed.

In Alan's clip I see his fighter not using WCK as I see it trained in Alan's training clips (I already explained what I mean by this), but Alan's guy does outclass the other guy regardless, and wins (deservedly). I applaud the win - I just didn't see him using Wing Chun (as I understand it) to get the win.



A minor point, but I add it for clarification so you know where I stand on this; the WT guy eating the fist looks like an EWTO student. Even if he'd done better, I don't regard this as LT Wing Tsun, and I don't train in the EWTO or use their interpretation of Keith Kernspecht's system.

is there a clip anywhere that you feel represents good wing chun in a full contact environment, be it MMA, the street, a roof top match or heavy class sparring?

[BPWT..]

So when you go harder you don't notice any difference in levels of chaos, holding form, scrambling, etc? It all looks exactly like lighter drills?

I notice a great difference between the two, and feel the difference :D But I train to try and make sure that I am retaining what was easier to do when going lighter. I often don't care if the sparring results in my being dominated, as long as I am playing my own game and using the system the way I am taught to use it - and most importantly, as long as I can see a progression (that from one week, or one month to the next, I am slowly doing better and improving).

If I can utilise a Kiu Sau method, for example, in simple training, and then utilise it when sparring light, I want to be able to learn to use it when going harder. It isn't easy. I often get my butt kicked. So long as I improve little by little, I don't give a cr@p.

That's why I said that Chi Kiu methods are harder to use then Lei Kiu methods, that you can learn to fight easier with Muay Thai than with Taiji.


It didn't sound to me like you were asking a genuine question. It sounded to me like you were twisting what I said around a bit and baiting me. Yes, trained as a 3 part platform. Savi explains it in intricate detail in another thread. Trained for use. Yes it works. Kiu sau as trained protects your upper gate and provides structural integrity among other things. Again Savi has much more detail in his writeup about the 3 platforms of HFY chi sau.

Not trying to bait, but trying to get to the bottom of why people train a particular thing and then perhaps don't use it. If someone "trains for use", I of course don't mean that it is "used in training", but used when you actually need it.


And you can keep playing the victim here and pretending like you are not baiting people.

You wrote an insult, I didn't insult you. I asked you a question.


Perhaps that is a result of being dropped on your head, perhaps not. The evidence remains to be seen.

See, there you go again. :rolleyes:


How do you train kiu sau? I know I've asked this before.

If you asked before and I didn't reply, sorry - I have no reason to not discuss it (as I see it). I responded on the other thread with Savi, but here it is:

What is Kiu Sao and the nature of Kiu Sao?

The basic definition for us would be ‘bridge arm’, usually meaning from the hand to the elbow (but sometimes also including up to the shoulder). The nature of Kiu Sau in our system, however, would be how we use this to control – either the opponent’s bridge, or their body (via their bridge or independent of it), rather like was seen in the Alan Orr video that was posted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM3V4P-5nN0&feature=youtube_gdata

In the latter, we would maybe just talk about Kiu methods, though how you get to them would be via Kiu Sau (ummm.. does that make sense?) I mean you might control someone’s center via their bridge, or you might not do so via their bridge arm but instead via their body (perhaps more like in Hendrik’s recent video on the dummy, where he has body contact).

But from a WT perspective, this is where things get tricky. And it is why I asked the CSL WC people (Alan and Chris), and yourself and Wayfaring from HFY, about the Kiu Sau methods in your respective systems, and how you use them.

I say tricky, because in the Wing Tsun system there are Kiu Sau methods, but they are not formalized in an obvious sense. Wayfaring said, “I mean its no skin off my nose if you don't want to explain Leung Ting's Kiu sau methods. I don't know anywhere else there's a writeup on them either, do you?”

Well, I’m happy to talk about them, but I can say he won’t find a write-up on them elsewhere – because like I say they are not listed directly.

There is no list of Kiu Methods of Key Words within the curriculum. So no syllabus that directly references things like press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.

The Kiu Sau methods in Leung Ting’s Wing Tsun system are found within the Chi Sau sections, and then also trained in the Hong Kong Lat Sau teachings (following the progression of forms, Chi Sau, Lat Sau, Sparring).

There are many ways of training and looking at the Wing Tsun Chi Sau sections (and the various cycles that make up each individual section), but from a Kiu Sau perspective I would describe it in the following way:

All of the sections start with Poon Sau (rolling with Bong, Tan and Fook), and their ‘starting’ bridge positioning is different depending on the particular section you train (e.g. via Bong, Tan and Fook, I either have my arms, or an arm, in inside or outside bridge positions, and with an ‘on top’ or ‘under bridge position’).

From these various positions, depending on what you’ve given from your training partner (e.g. the type of attack that comes in, its direction, its pressure/amount of force, its range in relation to how far in the other person moved or how you have moved), there will different bridging responses.

The responses are typically looking off load force, or redirect, or jam, or free up, etc.

These responses are not necessarily set in stone (there’s more than one way to skin a cat), but certain some methods work better than others in certain circumstances. The key, for us, is that the positioning you have and the force you receive, the angle of the attack that comes, and the distancing involved, etc, will determine your response.

You could say it determines your ‘Kiu Sau’ response. The response might be, to borrow terms from other lineages, to press, swallow, slice; or lead, leak, float; or fold, sheer, pull, and so on.

You can mix up the various cycles within the Chi Sau sections to make things a bit more free flowing and to challenge how you deal with the bridge work, and then you can train Gor Sau to be totally free – but in either case you’ll be using the above methods (or you should be). The same applies to the Lat Sau work – you should be taking and using these key lessons learned.

If you learn the sections you can see/find the Kiu Sau Methods and Key words that over lineages use. The question people might ask is why did Leung Ting not list them directly within his syllabus? I don’t know, but maybe he thought it was easier to create the Chi Sections that have these things embedded in them. The more I study and train, the more I find embedded within the system’s forms, drills, etc.

In HFY do you have a similar way of teaching Chi Sau, Kiu Sau, etc (sections or programs) or do you have, like Robert Chu, a list of the various methods? Or both? ☺



If your strategy is to seek a bridge to control it first, then your opponent can present you a false bridge to bait you. Then let it collapse and attack from another front. What you control is centerline.

The strategy is simply to strike and control at the same time. LLHS, LSJC. The rest is how we get there (Chi Kiu, Kiu Sau, etc).


And the only reason they are being discussed is due to your criticism of the fighter not "looking like wing chun" right? Because he didn't seek to bridge before punching?

My criticism is that the training methods Alan shows (which I think are great), were not evident in the fight clip, despite the CSL WC guys saying that how they train is how they fight. That's all.

Regarding bridging, someone could meet a bridge before striking, or during striking or after striking. The timing and the distance affects the Kiu Sau method used... the point I am making (and Alan made exactly the same point himself in the video I just linked to), is that Wing Chun (IMO) is about striking and controlling, close body work, bridge work, playing a Chi Kiu strategy and in the range that requires, etc.

[BPWT..]

is there a clip anywhere that you feel represents good wing chun in a full contact environment, be it MMA, the street, a roof top match or heavy class sparring?

Like I said, I haven't seen a good clip from a competition, and the Wing Tsun I saw applied (very well) on the street wasn't caught on video - it just happened, like things do.

[LFJ]

My criticism is that the training methods Alan shows (which I think are great), were not evident in the fight clip, despite the CSL WC guys saying that how they train is how they fight. That's all.

He already explained they don't use drills in fighting, then showed video of their sparring which is the next level of training and looks like how they fight. So why would you still look for drills in their fights?

[BPWT..]

@LFJ

I know that you're an intelligent guy, so this must be a case of me not explaining myself well - though God knows I have been trying to be as clear as possible. :)

I am not expecting Alan to post video of fights, and in those fights to see his guys using the exact drills he shows in his instruction videos. I am not expecting to see a fighter Chi Sau'ing from Poon Sau, or for the other guy to allow him to work off a sequence or training method.

What I said was missing from the fight, is the training attributes that Alan shows. Alan might say that the structure, etc, is carried over. Though as KPM pointed out, that is debatable as the general body structure we see from Alan was different in his fighter.

Regardless... specifically in the instructional clip from Alan that I linked to above, Alan is showing striking and controlling, close body work, bridge work, playing a Chi Kiu strategy and in the range that requires, etc. Those attributes were not evident in the fight clip.

A fight won't look like a drill. A drill is a drill. I understand that. But if you train the above skills and say they are used in the way your guys fight... we should see those skills in their fights.

[chris bougeard]

"A minor point, but I add it for clarification so you know where I stand on this; the WT guy eating the fist looks like an EWTO student. Even if he'd done better, I don't regard this as LT Wing Tsun, and I don't train in the EWTO or use their interpretation of Keith Kernspecht's system."

I bet if the WT guy had won this bout you'd be saying quite the opposite...

[BPWT..]

"A minor point, but I add it for clarification so you know where I stand on this; the WT guy eating the fist looks like an EWTO student. Even if he'd done better, I don't regard this as LT Wing Tsun, and I don't train in the EWTO or use their interpretation of Keith Kernspecht's system."

I bet if the WT guy had won this bout you'd be saying quite the opposite...

No, I specifically said that "even if he'd done better, I don't regard this as LT Wing Tsun."

[KPM]

@LFJ

I know that you're an intelligent guy, so this must be a case of me not explaining myself well - though God knows I have been trying to be as clear as possible. :)

.

No, I think both you and I have explained things pretty well! This is just a case of someone needing to go back and read a bit more closely. ;)

[Frost]

Like I said, I haven't seen a good clip from a competition, and the Wing Tsun I saw applied (very well) on the street wasn't caught on video - it just happened, like things do.

and are all the cameras also missing when the good hard sparring also happen? You know if you nor anyone else can not post a single clip of wing chun in action looking as you say it should but all you can do is say what is isn't...then maybe there's either something wrong with the art or with how you see it?

[BPWT..]

and are all the cameras also missing when the good hard sparring also happen?

I can't answer for anyone else who spars, but I know that myself and the guys I train with have no desire to record and upload it to youtube. We get the feedback we need in the act itself. And like I said, in my case I'm happy to get my ass handed to me if it means that bit by bit, I slowly make the progress I want, in the way that I want.

If I recorded that and posted it, what response would it get? More than likely people would say that yes, they could see, sometimes, that I was able to use Wing Tsun a little, but that by and large the Muay Thai guy beat me from here to Sunday. :D The only way to valid things in the eyes of others, like yourself, would be for me to regularly post clips to show the slow improvement over time. And they are slow improvements. And I don't spar hard all the time. Probably I should do so more - but it's all about goals. And I don't really feel the need to go to the effort of documenting it.

As you've probably guessed, I have no desire to enter a competition - of any description. I'm not training with the goal of entering, for example, a MMA event. If I wanted to, I fully admit I'd get faster results training, say, boxing and BJJ, or heading to a MMA gym. But that's not what I want to learn, and my goal is not to step into a ring/cage.


You know if you nor anyone else can not post a single clip of wing chun in action looking as you say it should but all you can do is say what is isn't...then maybe there's either something wrong with the art or with how you see it?

Yes, maybe you're right. But IMO, I don't think so. I've never seen any Chinese internal arts used effectively in the ring either. But years ago I met Alex Kozma (who trains Xingyi, Bagua and Taiji), and his skill level was very, very high. His speed and power were scary, as was his ability to use it to just rip right through you. I've never seen him compete. Not his focus either. Does that mean he's no good? Does it mean those arts have something wrong with them?

In your book, maybe the answer is yes - in my book, no.

At the end of the day it makes no difference to how you or I train. We do what we want to do. If people look at the clip of Alan's guy getting a good, well deserved win, and agree that the fighter was clearly using the Wing Chun seen in Alan's training/teaching clips... fair enough, I guess. I don't see it, but that's that.

[KPM]

You know if you nor anyone else can not post a single clip of wing chun in action looking as you say it should but all you can do is say what is isn't...then maybe there's either something wrong with the art or with how you see it?

I take it you mean in a kickboxing or MMA ring/environment? Then what you said would apply to a lot of martial arts...like....Hung Gar, Hsing I, Ba Gua, Classical Jiu Jitsu, Classical Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Southern Mantis, etc.

[KPM]

At the end of the day it makes no difference to how you or I train. We do what we want to do. If people look at the clip of Alan's guy getting a good, well deserved win, and agree that the fighter was clearly using the Wing Chun seen in Alan's training/teaching clips... fair enough, I guess. I don't see it, but that's that.

That's the bottom-line right there! And I don't think BPWT and I are the only ones that don't see it. Otherwise Alan wouldn't have felt the need to post several clips explaining why it really is Wing Chun even if it doesn't look like Wing Chun! But "to each his own" and "eye of the beholder" and all that! I'm sure its because "we just don't understand!" ;)

[Wayfaring]

You don't like what BPWT has to say so you resort to this? :rolleyes:

Well, kind of. It's not that I don't like what BPWT has to say it is the fact that he is twisting my words and trying to indicate I am saying something I am not. To me that type of behavior does not earn one respect.



One WCK strategy, and this is only one, and actually one I've seen described by Robert Chu....is this. Engage the opponent and try to knock the heck out of him. If he puts up an obstruction (tries to defend), then use that contact to bridge in and control his arms moving in to disrupt his balance and break his structure so that you can more easily strike him at will. This strategy does not include standing back and exchanging punches in a boxing scenario. You can't control anything in a tit for tat exchange of punches. I think this is what BPWT is talking about. This is a strategy suited for a street encounter, but not necessarily a ring bout or a give and take session of sparring. With this strategy when you engage an opponent you don't stop until he is down, and the goal is to put him down quickly. Granted, if not successful the first time you may have to step back and re-engage and try again. My point is that this is at least one key strategy in WCK that I have seen, and this strategy is not a boxing exchange of punches.

Your point is that you've seen a WCK strategy different from boxing? OK. :rolleyes:

[Wayfaring]

As I said before, I haven't seen anyone fighting with WCK (from any lineage) in a MMA contest that, to me, looked like good WC/WT/VT. I listed a few things that might contribute to this. Feel free to post more clips like this if you like, but my point remains. Whatever the lineage, we typically see poor WCK.


Perhaps "looking like good WC/WT/VT" is not high on the priority list in a fight? Or self defense scenario?

"Sifu, I got mugged tonight." "Well, did your self defense look like good WCK?"

[Wayfaring]

That's the bottom-line right there! And I don't think BPWT and I are the only ones that don't see it. Otherwise Alan wouldn't have felt the need to post several clips explaining why it really is Wing Chun even if it doesn't look like Wing Chun! But "to each his own" and "eye of the beholder" and all that! I'm sure its because "we just don't understand!" ;)

Well, kind of. None of the dissenters has ever been in a cage match, pretty sure. And most don't spar like they are going to have a cage match. So that's the main difference - lack of experience there.

[Wayfaring]

@LFJ
Regardless... specifically in the instructional clip from Alan that I linked to above, Alan is showing striking and controlling, close body work, bridge work, playing a Chi Kiu strategy and in the range that requires, etc. Those attributes were not evident in the fight clip.

A fight won't look like a drill. A drill is a drill. I understand that. But if you train the above skills and say they are used in the way your guys fight... we should see those skills in their fights.

And a fight won't look like "a Chi Kiu strategy".

[BPWT..]

And a fight won't look like "a Chi Kiu strategy".

In my opinion, if you say you do Wing Chun then the fight should look like you are trying to employ that strategy. Things might not go as planned, but that's not the issue.

"Looking good" is also not the issue; if I apply the system but it looks messy, who cares. But you have to apply the system.

When have you seen a BJJ guy fight and you couldn't determine his art from the watching? Or a Muay Thai guy?

[LFJ]

In my opinion, if you say you do Wing Chun then the fight should look like you are trying to employ that strategy.

"Wing Chun" is not a singular strategy. I'd only recognize LTWT as Wing Tsun because I'm familiar with what it looks like. But from the perspective of WSLVT, it would be unrecognizable to me as the same strategy. Because it's not.

Now we have a case with a system of Wing Chun which uses a strategy in the ring that you aren't familiar with. So you can't recognize it. Doesn't mean it isn't in fact Wing Chun strategy.


When have you seen a BJJ guy fight and you couldn't determine his art from the watching? Or a Muay Thai guy?

You obviously aren't familiar with how the art of CSLWC is applied. So of course you can't determine it. You're looking for the wrong indicators. You can watch Alan's clips discussing drills and application, but it can't be shown in a clip exactly what it'll look like in the heat of unchoreographed battle. Plus if all that is needed to finish the fight is that "reeling punch" they use, then you won't see all the things discussed in his clips. Doesn't mean the guy didn't apply their orthodox Wing Chun. You just don't understand what you're watching. Maybe if you went to train with them you'd get it.

[BPWT..]

"Wing Chun" is not a singular strategy. I'd only recognize LTWT as Wing Tsun because I'm familiar with what it looks like. But from the perspective of WSLVT, it would be unrecognizable to me as the same strategy. Because it's not.

That true, but it doesn't really contradict what I am saying. For sure, WSL WCK has differences to LTWT. If, for the sake of discussion, you said that the WSL method doesn't look to bridge and control from the bridge, for example, and you show me WSL WCK training that indeed doesn't do this... and then you show me a WSL guy fighting and he does what the training showed, and it indeed doesn't include the things you said it wouldn't (bridging and controlling), then great.

While our methods might be different, I would concede that you fight the way you train. The only difference is that your WCK method and/or strategy might be a little different to mine. No big deal.

But that isn't the case with Alan's training clips and the fight clip, IMO.

Here's some quotes taken from the first 4 minutes of the training clip we've been discussing. Again, I have no problem with this clip - I actually like it. Pretty much everything Alan says fits in what I have been learning. I see many similarities, and I also think it fits in with what others (e.g. Hawkins Cheung) have been saying too. And to be clear, I say again that Alan looks both knowledgeable and to be a good teacher - hands on and able to show what he's saying.

In the clip, everything Alan shows works from a bridge, and it's easy to understand why when you see that the focus is on control.

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

“Wing Chun is a short bridge system [Alan then indicates elbow to the wrist - typical Kiu Sau definition]. When he comes in, I want to get into a short bridge position. I’m getting my body in close to strike. The short bridge position is where you have your inch power and where you’re making it hard for him to hit you back.”

“The idea of the skill in Wing Chun is to make it so he can’t hit me. Some people will angle out and punch, but to me it puts you back into a striking range, where he has full power. I really want to get as close as I can and disrupt his center [Alan shows this by getting body-to-body, and pressing the guy’s shoulder].”

“Chi Sau should help you progress to take you from what you’re training to what you’re trying to achieve. What I want to achieve is to strike him and get in to take his balance. I want to eat the space up and get in close.”

[Alan controls the guys arm – bridge – and then says] “That’s my control point, if he tries to punch here, I can control his balance by controlling his spine, through his arm.”

“The key thing is not about striking [in relation to the arm control he’s showing], the key thing is that when he goes to strike me, he can’t. I’ve eaten his space up and controlled his horse.”

"For us, the short bridge training is the key to Wing Chun. If we’re going to play out here and do Chi Sau here [shows lap da, etc, from too far out], then you’re not doing anything. A fighter is going to have their hands up and then strike at you [steps in and unloads punches]. Learning Chi Sau from that range [referring to being too far away from the opponent] is not going to give you anything [in relation to the person coming at you with boxing]. I want to be able to control the position [he shows this by bridging] and then get in tight and strike.”

Alan then talks about feeling comfortable at the correct position, and shows it not from Poon Sau this time, but with the other guy just throwing a punch. Alan deals with this by stepping in and bridging with that incoming punch, and then using the closer range coupled with the bridge control to take the other guy’s balance.

“Chi Sau should always be trying to progress, as opposed to where it’s going as a drill, it’s fighting.” [Alan is not meaning, I think, that Chi Sau is fighting, but that what you learn in Chi Sau – what it trains, and thus the things he's been showing us – is what you should focus on with the end goal in mind: the fight].

So what should you focus on with the end goal in mind? From the instructional clip I've highlighted above (bolded) the attributes. These include bridging and bridge control (Kiu Sau work), eating up space and getting in close (IMO, something tied in with Chi Kiu and Kiu Sau), affecting the other person's structure and positioning (to prevent them from being able to hit you back).

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


Now we have a case with a system of Wing Chun which uses a strategy in the ring that you aren't familiar with. So you can't recognize it. Doesn't mean it isn't in fact Wing Chun strategy.

Yes, if a Wing Chun strategy is used that I am not familiar with, it doesn't mean it is not Wing Chun. I agree. My point is that from the training clip and the quotes I just showed, the strategy shown there is not the same as the strategy used in the fight. Yet Alan's indicating that the skills you get from the drills and training he shows, is indeed what you should use in a fight.



You're looking for the wrong indicators.

The indicators I'm looking for are the ones Alan has shown us :confused:


Maybe if you went to train with them you'd get it.

Yes, maybe. That said, I already have no problem with their training - it isn't completely alien to my own.

But you and I had a similar disagreement over the Kevin Gledhill/Shawn Obasi clip. Kevin spoke about the training he does, but then didn't apply that training's attributes in their exchange, and that wasn't an actual fight with the intensity Josh faced.

If you watch Alan's training clip and then fight clip, and you see the same attributes being used, then okay - let's just say you are seeing something I am not.

[Frost]

You know if you nor anyone else can not post a single clip of wing chun in action looking as you say it should but all you can do is say what is isn't...then maybe there's either something wrong with the art or with how you see it?

I take it you mean in a kickboxing or MMA ring/environment? Then what you said would apply to a lot of martial arts...like....Hung Gar, Hsing I, Ba Gua, Classical Jiu Jitsu, Classical Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Southern Mantis, etc.

I mean in any environment, vale tudo with out gloves, MMA with gloves, steet fights, roof top fights etc
The difference between wing chun and say hung gar or southern mantis is that wing chun is by far the largest chinese martial art out there, practised in nearly every city in the uk for example, heck its in nearly every town, the number of hung gar and bak mei sifu I know within a 50 mile radius of me is 1, the number of wing chun sifu within a 15 mile radius is something like 10, so the odds of finding at least one good clip must me much better than with a minority art like hung gar, yet we cant find a single one, although having said that in the southern forum we have a poster who does hung gar who competed in the early ufcs, we also have guys who post sparring clips. Southern mantis posters have put up clips of themselves sparring full contact as well…..

We also have guys competing in MMA who have a background in karate, TKD and even classical JJ, yes they cross train, but occasionally there arts come through in the cage, and all those arts have their OWN full contact competitions, TKD has Olympic fighting, (no matter what we think of it) karate has several different full contact events they compete in, classical JJ also has sport comps they compete in, and when they compete they look exactly how they train…wing chun…. well where does it compete and actually look like wing chun?

[LFJ]

@BPWT

Don't forget this part:


You can watch Alan's clips discussing drills and application, but it can't be shown in a clip exactly what it'll look like in the heat of unchoreographed battle. Plus if all that is needed to finish the fight is that "reeling punch" they use, then you won't see all the things discussed in his clips.

It seems they don't try to apply all those methods if there isn't a need for it. They don't go out of their way to fight in a certain manner. They do what needs to be done and what can be done in the given situation. But what was applied in this fight was still their orthodox Wing Chun.

Alan said they've had 100's of fights. So maybe he can post a video that shows the things he describes in the cage.

[BPWT..]

@BPWT. Don't forget this part:

"You can watch Alan's clips discussing drills and application, but it can't be shown in a clip exactly what it'll look like in the heat of unchoreographed battle. Plus if all that is needed to finish the fight is that "reeling punch" they use, then you won't see all the things discussed in his clips."

It seems they don't try to apply all those methods if there isn't a need for it. They don't go out of their way to fight in a certain manner. They do what needs to be done and what can be done in the given situation. But what was applied in this fight was still their orthodox Wing Chun.

I agree, things will look messier - much messier, and sometimes just won't have the desired result, despite the trying. I'm not expecting to see picture-perfect application. But I think we should see the attributes present, at least attempted, when needed (the things I highlighted in my previous post).

And sure, if all that's needed to win the fight is one good strike, then I don't expect to see them knock the other guy out and then try to establish some bridge contact with him as he's sprawled out on the floor :D. But the fight wasn't ended with the first punch thrown.

But it doesn't matter - no need for us to continue this - we see things differently, is all. I have nothing against Alan Orr or his fighters (Alan looks much better than I am, and his fighters look fit, strong and dedicated). Everyone's having fun. :)

Ps. They just aren't using Wing Chun! (kidding!!!!! :-D)

[KPM]

Perhaps "looking like good WC/WT/VT" is not high on the priority list in a fight? Or self defense scenario?

"Sifu, I got mugged tonight." "Well, did your self defense look like good WCK?"

That is not the point! Look, if you found yourself in a "real" fight, would you expect to just drop all your years of WCK training and resort to using a boxer's stance with jabs and crosses? Wouldn't you expect your "natural second nature" responses to reflect all the hours and hours you have spent training WCK? If all that goes out the window under pressure and you end up looking like sloppy kickboxing in a real fight, then you might as well just be studying kickboxing! :eek:

[KPM]

Well, kind of. None of the dissenters has ever been in a cage match, pretty sure. And most don't spar like they are going to have a cage match. So that's the main difference - lack of experience there.

Well, kind of. The "difference" you are talking about is the difference between the way most WCK people train and actually training for MMA. My point has been that when you are doing a lot of MMA training then your WCK is naturally going to adapt to the MMA environment and start looking like anyone else's MMA. So at what point can you still call it WCK and not just "MMA" if it adapts to the point that it no longer looks like identifiable WCK?

[Frost]

I can't answer for anyone else who spars, but I know that myself and the guys I train with have no desire to record and upload it to youtube. We get the feedback we need in the act itself. And like I said, in my case I'm happy to get my ass handed to me if it means that bit by bit, I slowly make the progress I want, in the way that I want.

If I recorded that and posted it, what response would it get? More than likely people would say that yes, they could see, sometimes, that I was able to use Wing Tsun a little, but that by and large the Muay Thai guy beat me from here to Sunday. :D The only way to valid things in the eyes of others, like yourself, would be for me to regularly post clips to show the slow improvement over time. And they are slow improvements. And I don't spar hard all the time. Probably I should do so more - but it's all about goals. And I don't really feel the need to go to the effort of documenting it.

As you've probably guessed, I have no desire to enter a competition - of any description. I'm not training with the goal of entering, for example, a MMA event. If I wanted to, I fully admit I'd get faster results training, say, boxing and BJJ, or heading to a MMA gym. But that's not what I want to learn, and my goal is not to step into a ring/cage.



Yes, maybe you're right. But IMO, I don't think so. I've never seen any Chinese internal arts used effectively in the ring either. But years ago I met Alex Kozma (who trains Xingyi, Bagua and Taiji), and his skill level was very, very high. His speed and power were scary, as was his ability to use it to just rip right through you. I've never seen him compete. Not his focus either. Does that mean he's no good? Does it mean those arts have something wrong with them?

In your book, maybe the answer is yes - in my book, no.

At the end of the day it makes no difference to how you or I train. We do what we want to do. If people look at the clip of Alan's guy getting a good, well deserved win, and agree that the fighter was clearly using the Wing Chun seen in Alan's training/teaching clips... fair enough, I guess. I don't see it, but that's that.

Iim not on about you specifically posting a clip, although lets be honest if you feel that strongly about something that you are still posting on this thread after 12 pages a video might help clarify things lol
But im talking about the whole of wing chun in general, wing chun sifu the world over are happy to post clips of forms, applications and waffle on about endless theories but not one of them will post a clip of what wing chun looks like in fighting by actually sparring another style or fighting in an open competition …..and when a sifu with close to 30 years of wing chun training does this and has his students actually compete he is told it doesn’t look like wing chun…..doesn’t anyone else see the funny side of this?

As I said above to keith I wouldn’t expect many hung gar, or southern mantis sparring clips because they arts are a minority art in the west, and several like southern mantis are closed door and secretive…yet there are clips out there of these arts sparring and even competing if you look hard enough…..but wing chun, …I mean come on its wing chun the leading TCMA in the west and the most commercialised and wide spread Chinese art form there is, every sifu and his brother is happy to post clips of them and their students training forms, chi sau, doing applications but none of them want to film a sparring session, what secrets do they think it will give away that they haven’t already shown?

[Frost]

That is not the point! Look, if you found yourself in a "real" fight, would you expect to just drop all your years of WCK training and resort to using a boxer's stance with jabs and crosses? Wouldn't you expect your "natural second nature" responses to reflect all the hours and hours you have spent training WCK? If all that goes out the window under pressure and you end up looking like sloppy kickboxing in a real fight, then you might as well just be studying kickboxing! :eek:

well since no one can post a clip of a wing chun student under such pressure actually looking like how people say wing chun should look (in the cage, on the street or even in class), then maybe you have a good idea

[Alan Orr]

He already explained they don't use drills in fighting, then showed video of their sparring which is the next level of training and looks like how they fight. So why would you still look for drills in their fights?


Thanks LFJ and also the others that can understand the the difference between training and application.

I think I have wasted enough time saying the same answers on this post and every other post I feel I need to correct. I say correct as people with no understanding I what I am doing are telling what I am and am not doing. Funny but it seems to be the case.

So I will say one more time - We train CSL Wing Chun and that's what we use for the Gym for the street for all our combat sports. Clear I hope!

You may not see what we do that is fine. Kung Fu has Obvious Skill and Hidden Skill.

Obvious are big movements or movements that are easy to see - applications and drills

Hidden Skills are internal movements of weight control, pressure, timing, and many other things.

If very clear that people with deeper layers of skill will be more aware of Hidden skills and people with less understand will look for the more Obvious skills - this is why people with lower levels always what to see a drill or basic training application work a fight. Its a lack of the understand in the levels of the system that brings these questions about.

Bridging lol Yes I show on my clips bridging training in Chi Sao and how it teaching one to control the bridge. Now a 5 min clip is not the limit of my teaching - I hope. I am showing one small detail in one small area. There is so much more to understand to learn.

You do not need contact to have bridge control at high levels of application.

Your fist connects that becomes a bridge.

And many more ...

Josh loaded his weight with perfect timing and beat the opponents strike, connect his fist making bridge contact before his opponent. You can even see Josh's weight moving forward as he lands the punch. He is not reaching a punch as in boxing. He is pressing his stand and loading the punch. That's why we knock people out. Correct WING CHUN power in the CSL system.

I will post a New clip this week on long bridging and also I elbow positioning in real combat when facing a trained or ready opponent. Which is very different that dealing with a untrained attack.

Also a lot of talk but no body answered my question -

Do you think your Wing Chun would stand up when facing Josh? Do you think you would even hold your own?

Would be interesting to hear. Also maybe people need to start posting examples of what they talk about - them showing - what would be Wing Chun. As its easy to talk but often when you see what people are doing it shows more that words can say.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lets look at this in simple terms:
Alan teaches His version of WC, called Chu Sau Lei, to his fighters.
His fighters have proven to be effective in full contact, limited rules fighting VS other trained fighters.
That means that Alan's version of WC is clearly effective in fighting against a trained fighter in a limited rules environment.

What other systems of WC can lay claim to that?

[BPWT..]

Also a lot of talk but no body answered my question - Do you think your Wing Chun would stand up when facing Josh? Do you think you would even hold your own?

Josh looks better conditioned than I am, he looks stronger too - and he trains for MMA fights, which I don't (so surely he also has a ground game - BJJ - which I don't have). So I am sure I would seriously struggle against someone like that. No question, he would kick my arse. Of course, so too would many other MMA guys who don't study Wing Chun. I would probably also find myself in deep sh!t if I faced off against a trainee sumo wrestler.

I'm not sure how that makes Josh's fight an example of him using the Wing Chun in your other clips. :confused: Weird logic, IMO. Or is the suggestion that because I don't enter MMA events, I shouldn't comment on one?

Playing Devil's Advocate... how would Robert Chu do if he stepped into the ring with one of your top fighters?

[BPWT..]

... and when a sifu with close to 30 years of wing chun training does this and has his students actually compete he is told it doesn’t look like wing chun… doesn’t anyone else see the funny side of this?

I think that if people watch a clip and many comment that if they hadn't been told it was Wing Chun, they wouldn't have known it was... and then those people don't comment about that on a Wing Chun forum, that would funny/strange.

I'm not looking to insult Alan - I've said numerous times that I like the teachings he puts up on Youtube, and I appreciate that he does it - but I can't help the fact that I don't see what he says I should see (and I'm not the only one saying this).

Ho-Hum! :rolleyes:

[Frost]

I think that if people watch a clip and many comment that if they hadn't been told it was Wing Chun, they wouldn't have known it was... and then those people don't comment about that on a Wing Chun forum, that would funny/strange.

I'm not looking to insult Alan - I've said numerous times that I like the teachings he puts up on Youtube, and I appreciate that he does it - but I can't help the fact that I don't see what he says I should see (and I'm not the only one saying this).

Ho-Hum! :rolleyes:

but no one can post a clip of what wing chun should look like in a fight, all people can do is say what it should be....dont you think there is a serious issue right there /

[LFJ]

I think that if people watch a clip and many comment that if they hadn't been told it was Wing Chun, they wouldn't have known it was... and then those people don't comment about that on a Wing Chun forum, that would funny/strange.

I'm not looking to insult Alan - I've said numerous times that I like the teachings he puts up on Youtube, and I appreciate that he does it - but I can't help the fact that I don't see what he says I should see (and I'm not the only one saying this).

It's true what Alan said in his last post about Obvious Skill vs Hidden Skill and what it takes to recognize it, and that is the crux of the situation. Who'd've guessed it'd be you and KPM having trouble with this... :D

Sure, I wouldn't have recognized that "reeling punch" as WC either, because it's not a part of my system or other WC systems I'm familiar with, but Alan has done a fine job of explaining how it differs and its place in their system. I didn't have a problem with the rest of the fight, and can't see what the problem is now.

[chris bougeard]

BPWT, what exactly would you have liked Josh to have done differently in the fight posted?
Are you unhappy that he wasn't holding his hands in a classical wu Sao/man Sao configuration? Is it because he's not leaning back on one leg?

Or is it because he didn't chain punch the guy into oblivion?

From my standpoint he held his structure well and dominated the centre, constant aggressive forward pressure and great strikes. You don't train in our system, if you did you would be happy that Josh used his Wing Chun skills well.

[KPM]

I think that if people watch a clip and many comment that if they hadn't been told it was Wing Chun, they wouldn't have known it was... and then those people don't comment about that on a Wing Chun forum, that would funny/strange.

I'm not looking to insult Alan - I've said numerous times that I like the teachings he puts up on Youtube, and I appreciate that he does it - but I can't help the fact that I don't see what he says I should see (and I'm not the only one saying this).

Ho-Hum! :rolleyes:

My thoughts exactly! No one is trying to take away from what Alan and his guys have accomplished.

Alan wrote:
If very clear that people with deeper layers of skill will be more aware of Hidden skills and people with less understand will look for the more Obvious skills - this is why people with lower levels always what to see a drill or basic training application work a fight. Its a lack of the understand in the levels of the system that brings these questions about.

Ok. I find it more than a little insulting to be told that I am "lower level" just because I don't agree with you, and just because I pointed out the obvious fact that without being told it was Wing Chun NO ONE would have recognized it as Wing Chun. Clear enough? And NO ONE here has said that they expect to see drills show up in a fighting scenario. I think both BPWT and I have made our points very clear. If you don't want to acknowledge or address them that is fine. But we haven't been anything but polite on this thread and have given you many kudos for what you are doing. Its too bad you don't see fit to treat us with the same level of respect.

[Wayfaring]

Do you think your Wing Chun would stand up when facing Josh? Do you think you would even hold your own?


Sure man - would love to train with him and mix it up with your guys system. That would be fun. If I'm ever around any of your guys I'll look them up. You've got some interesting stuff and I'd love to see your blend of WCK, takedowns and ground for MMA. I spar with some Bellator and WSOF pros so I might be OK. But yeah I'm sure going after Josh would make for a long afternoon :D

[Wayfaring]

Ok. I find it more than a little insulting to be told that I am "lower level" just because I don't agree with you, and just because I pointed out the obvious fact that without being told it was Wing Chun NO ONE would have recognized it as Wing Chun. Clear enough? And NO ONE here has said that they expect to see drills show up in a fighting scenario. I think both BPWT and I have made our points very clear. If you don't want to acknowledge or address them that is fine. But we haven't been anything but polite on this thread and have given you many kudos for what you are doing. Its too bad you don't see fit to treat us with the same level of respect.

Well from the other perspective it sounds a little insulting to put all that work into preparing for a cage match with your WCK, dominate and do well, only to be told by the little dogs on the porch that "you are not doing WCK" because "it doesn't look like WCK".

[BPWT..]

but no one can post a clip of what wing chun should look like in a fight, all people can do is say what it should be....dont you think there is a serious issue right there /

It's a serious issue, I guess, if people really want to see it in MMA. I know that sounds flippant, but I don't mean it as such. I mean that because I have no interest in competing, I can honestly say that I have never wondered why we don't see it in competition. In terms of a real fight, they hardly ever get recorded (actual martial artists fighting, I mean, as opposed to four drunk dudes outside of Tesco, arguing about who is next in line at the taxi rank, being monitored by CCTV).


It's true what Alan said in his last post about Obvious Skill vs Hidden Skill and what it takes to recognize it, and that is the crux of the situation. Who'd've guessed it'd be you and KPM having trouble with this...

I had to laugh out loud at that... I mean... who can 'see' hidden skill? :D You know, it being hidden and all. And it is funny that the implication, therefore, is that you have to have "deeper layers of skill" to recognise what is hidden. ;) Which is great, as it means if people agree with Alan then they can quite conveniently lump themselves into that category.

On the other hand, BPWT doesn't "see it" because he is low level. :D

To be sure there are body mechanics that can't easily be seen - but seriously, this is a funny case to argue, IMO. I can't see the Wing Chun because it is "hidden skill" as opposed to all the clearly "obvious skills" and drill attributes demonstrated by Alan, which then seem to themselves become hidden (as most people who watch the clip can't see them).


Sure, I wouldn't have recognized that "reeling punch" as WC either, because it's not a part of my system or other WC systems I'm familiar with, but Alan has done a fine job of explaining how it differs and its place in their system.

Well, regarding the rest of the fight, if the video title had not said "Wing Chun" in it, are you honestly saying that you would have said, "That was a great example of someone applying Wing Chun," because you would have identified Wing Chun from what you saw?


I didn't have a problem with the rest of the fight, and can't see what the problem is now.

I must have said it a hundred times, but I also don't have a problem with Josh winning the fight. He beat the other guy. That's the aim. I just don't agree with the comments around how he won it.

There is no problem now - I've said that I didn't see what looked like Wing Chun based on Alan's other, and various, videos. He disagrees. Okay, so we disagree. People keep asking me questions (like "how would you do against Josh?" etc,) so I've been answering them, and posed a similar question back.


BPWT, what exactly would you have liked Josh to have done differently in the fight posted?

Chris, I think I have repeated what I don't see in the video, maybe 5 times already. Just go back and read the posts. I even quoted from Alan's 'distance and range' video clip so it would be very clear where I see the contradiction between the aims and the result. Just have a read.

I think Alan said he had wasted enough time on this thread, so maybe you, Chris, can answer my question:

How would Robert Chu do if he stepped into the ring with one of Alan's top fighters? (Obviously Robert's skill in Wing Chun - "hidden" or otherwise - is far greater than Josh's, right?)

[KPM]

Well from the other perspective it sounds a little insulting to put all that work into preparing for a cage match with your WCK, dominate and do well, only to be told by the little dogs on the porch that "you are not doing WCK" because "it doesn't look like WCK".

Again, we "little dogs" here haven't been the only ones that have said that. That's why Alan has posted more than one clip explaining why it was Wing Chun even if it didn't look like Wing Chun. I'll bet the "big dogs" in the MMA world have said the same thing. Alan posted a clip in a public forum. I made a simple observation that was not unique or unexpected. Look at the hubbub on this thread that resulted. If there wasn't truth in what I said, I would have just been dismissed as a crackpot and ignored. As a "little dog" no one would have paid me any attention at all! ;)


This was my original comment way back on page 1:
I like Alan Orr and what he is doing. But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is. You can't do boxing with some Tan Sau's, Bong Sau's and WCK concepts and call it Wing Chun. That's Jeet Kune Do! I certainly appreciate the skill and athleticism shown in the video. But it gives me no idea of what his Wing Chun knowledge might be, or if he even does Wing Chun!

I still stand by that comment, regardless of the fact that I have been told that I "just don't know what I'm looking for" that I "don't understand" and that I am "low level" .....all because I expressed that simple opinion above!

[chris bougeard]

Sure man - would love to train with him and mix it up with your guys system. That would be fun. If I'm ever around any of your guys I'll look them up. You've got some interesting stuff and I'd love to see your blend of WCK, takedowns and ground for MMA. I spar with some Bellator and WSOF pros so I might be OK. But yeah I'm sure going after Josh would make for a long afternoon :D

Wayfaring, my teacher arranged a "treat" for me a while back. The treat was doing stand up and clinch sparring with Josh, he is a handful...

[BPWT..]

Well from the other perspective it sounds a little insulting to put all that work into preparing for a cage match with your WCK, dominate and do well, only to be told by the little dogs on the porch that "you are not doing WCK" because "it doesn't look like WCK".

To be fair, everyone who questioned whether they could see WCK in the fight, also congratulated Josh and Alan for the win. Everyone has, in that sense, been respectful and applauded the obvious (not hidden) hard work that goes into being ready for such a fight (the hard training, the fitness and stamina work, the strength building, the diet changes, etc).

This was a MMA fight, and in my opinion it was won with MMA from a guy who deserved the win. But I can't say I see Wing Chun when I don't. And I can't believe that Josh and Alan really give a sh!t what some guy on the internetz says, so... :confused:

[chris bougeard]

BPWT, you have mentioned bridging and quoted some of our methods regarding what you expect to see.
Have you actually ever sparred hard? I'm not talking about wearing full face guards and just chain punching each other. I train very hard all of our system and when we spar it never looks like a wing chun demo. I try to apply what I can, when I can. When intent is there to hit hard and overwhelm you can't just pick and mix strategies that may be recognisable to others as classical wing chun. Rather you are an opportunist who uses whatever the opponent presents.

If that means I simply eat the opponents space and use striking to control him, then that's what I'm going to do. If I get jammed up and need to strip an obstruction to carry on hitting, well I will do that also. Based on what I see in the clip he used what the opponent gave him, if a lap da had been appropriate he might have done that, but it wasn't.

It doesn't matter how much you want to use/see a particular strategy/technique in a violent exhange, if the opportunity ain't there you can't do it. Otoh, trying to shoe horn wing chun strategies/techniques into an exchange when the other guy isn't playing the wing chun game will get you into trouble fast. My views aren't theoretical, they're based on experience.

[BPWT..]

@ Chris.

Yes, I have and I do. Again, see my earlier posts.

And I agree you use what the opponent presents. Not sure I totally agree with the idea that if you "shoe horn wing chun strategies/techniques into an exchange when the other guy isn't playing the wing chun game that will get you into trouble fast."

I mean it can get you in trouble, but I try and work through that via the system. The way I approach sparring, regardless of the style or method the other guy is using, is to try and always play my own game. So I try to only use Wing Tsun strategies and methods. Things can get messy, but I'm trying to stick to the system. At times it might be easier to break away from the WT method and try to duck a punch, or throw a big haymaker :D but I work hard to not do this. I'd rather get knocked on my arse. I don't want to mix boxing with WT, or Muay Thai with WT, etc.

Where it gets me in trouble is when the other guy, simply, is better than me. (and that is often the case - like I said earlier) But that's the case with any person fighting someone who outclasses them with either skill or experience.

[Wayfaring]

@ Chris.

Yes, I have and I do. Again, see my earlier posts.

And I agree you use what the opponent presents. Not sure I totally agree with the idea that if you "shoe horn wing chun strategies/techniques into an exchange when the other guy isn't playing the wing chun game that will get you into trouble fast."

I mean it can get you in trouble, but I try and work through that via the system. The way I approach sparring, regardless of the style or method the other guy is using, is to try and always play my own game. So I try to only use Wing Tsun strategies and methods. Things can get messy, but I'm trying to stick to the system. At times it might be easier to break away from the WT method and try to duck a punch, or throw a big haymaker :D but I work hard to not do this. I'd rather get knocked on my arse. I don't want to mix boxing with WT, or Muay Thai with WT, etc.

Where it gets me in trouble is when the other guy, simply, is better than me. (and that is often the case - like I said earlier) But that's the case with any person fighting someone who outclasses them with either skill or experience.

I have no problem with this. If someone is disciplining themselves to hold their lines and form while sparring, and they do spar realistically, that's a good thing. I'm not 100% sure of the Chi Kiu strategy of seeking a bridge, but I don't train that family lineage and terms can easily be confused.

I still think it's a bit obtuse that you can't see any WCK in that fight clip. I sure see Robert Chu's hip in body methods reeling punches all over it, structure, linking and delinking, etc.. Maybe if you made a list of WCK elements outside of the hand shapes (tan, bong, fook) and started to list out the less obvious elements of WCK it might give you a different perspective. Or maybe not. No big deal. As far as an opening stance, if you have a back weighted WCK stance with a man sau / wu sau then like Asbel Cancio in the UFC you will probably get taken down as you have to move forward before even initiating a defense.

[KPM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ywqKAnDJXE&feature=youtu.be

Has Lyota Machida ever had to explain why his MMA is Shotokan but doesn't look like Shotokan? Has Lyota Machida told people "you just don't understand what I am doing" or "you are just a low level guy and can't see it"? Has Lyota Machida ever said that he was using "hidden techniques" that aren't apparent to the uninitiated? Has anyone ever doubted that Machida is using Shotokan in his MMA? I can see the Shotokan in this clip and I've never even practiced Karate. I've practiced Wing Chun for several decades. Yet when me or BPWT point out that we don't see the Wing Chun in the clip that started this thread we fall under heavy criticism and get treated somewhat rudely? Really? Are we really the only ones that see a problem with that scenario?

[Alan Orr]

It's a serious issue, I guess, if people really want to see it in MMA. I know that sounds flippant, but I don't mean it as such. I mean that because I have no interest in competing, I can honestly say that I have never wondered why we don't see it in competition. In terms of a real fight, they hardly ever get recorded (actual martial artists fighting, I mean, as opposed to four drunk dudes outside of Tesco, arguing about who is next in line at the taxi rank, being monitored by CCTV).



I had to laugh out loud at that... I mean... who can 'see' hidden skill? :D You know, it being hidden and all. And it is funny that the implication, therefore, is that you have to have "deeper layers of skill" to recognise what is hidden. ;) Which is great, as it means if people agree with Alan then they can quite conveniently lump themselves into that category.

On the other hand, BPWT doesn't "see it" because he is low level. :D

To be sure there are body mechanics that can't easily be seen - but seriously, this is a funny case to argue, IMO. I can't see the Wing Chun because it is "hidden skill" as opposed to all the clearly "obvious skills" and drill attributes demonstrated by Alan, which then seem to themselves become hidden (as most people who watch the clip can't see them).



Well, regarding the rest of the fight, if the video title had not said "Wing Chun" in it, are you honestly saying that you would have said, "That was a great example of someone applying Wing Chun," because you would have identified Wing Chun from what you saw?



I must have said it a hundred times, but I also don't have a problem with Josh winning the fight. He beat the other guy. That's the aim. I just don't agree with the comments around how he won it.

There is no problem now - I've said that I didn't see what looked like Wing Chun based on Alan's other, and various, videos. He disagrees. Okay, so we disagree. People keep asking me questions (like "how would you do against Josh?" etc,) so I've been answering them, and posed a similar question back.



Chris, I think I have repeated what I don't see in the video, maybe 5 times already. Just go back and read the posts. I even quoted from Alan's 'distance and range' video clip so it would be very clear where I see the contradiction between the aims and the result. Just have a read.

I think Alan said he had wasted enough time on this thread, so maybe you, Chris, can answer my question:

How would Robert Chu do if he stepped into the ring with one of Alan's top fighters? (Obviously Robert's skill in Wing Chun - "hidden" or otherwise - is far greater than Josh's, right?)


And I laughed out loud when I read your post.

Hidden skill is standard kung fu. It means hidden as the movement is hard to see, but if you understand it you can see it's being used

Anyway. My teacher trained my guys and me. We have all been on the end of his skills for many years.

It's always a shock lol

Plus my question was not about getting in the ring it was on your terms - in the street - would you be able to hang with that level of attack. In the end that's what your training for self defence

[Alan Orr]

I have no problem with this. If someone is disciplining themselves to hold their lines and form while sparring, and they do spar realistically, that's a good thing. I'm not 100% sure of the Chi Kiu strategy of seeking a bridge, but I don't train that family lineage and terms can easily be confused.

I still think it's a bit obtuse that you can't see any WCK in that fight clip. I sure see Robert Chu's hip in body methods reeling punches all over it, structure, linking and delinking, etc.. Maybe if you made a list of WCK elements outside of the hand shapes (tan, bong, fook) and started to list out the less obvious elements of WCK it might give you a different perspective. Or maybe not. No big deal. As far as an opening stance, if you have a back weighted WCK stance with a man sau / wu sau then like Asbel Cancio in the UFC you will probably get taken down as you have to move forward before even initiating a defense.


Good post.

[Alan Orr]

Lets look at this in simple terms:
Alan teaches His version of WC, called Chu Sau Lei, to his fighters.
His fighters have proven to be effective in full contact, limited rules fighting VS other trained fighters.
That means that Alan's version of WC is clearly effective in fighting against a trained fighter in a limited rules environment.

What other systems of WC can lay claim to that?

Thank you
common sense as won

[Alan Orr]

Sure man - would love to train with him and mix it up with your guys system. That would be fun. If I'm ever around any of your guys I'll look them up. You've got some interesting stuff and I'd love to see your blend of WCK, takedowns and ground for MMA. I spar with some Bellator and WSOF pros so I might be OK. But yeah I'm sure going after Josh would make for a long afternoon :D

You would be very welcome. I have a really cool team

[Alan Orr]

Well from the other perspective it sounds a little insulting to put all that work into preparing for a cage match with your WCK, dominate and do well, only to be told by the little dogs on the porch that "you are not doing WCK" because "it doesn't look like WCK".

Yes agree. We train very hard and we rep Wing Chun!

So it is a disrespect to my teachers work to tell us it's not wing chun lol

Thanks

[LFJ]

Hidden skill is standard kung fu. It means hidden as the movement is hard to see, but if you understand it you can see it's being used

BPWT has a habit of taking things to literally. He thinks "hidden" means no one can see it, rather than it just being unapparent to those who haven't trained to that level of understanding.


Well, regarding the rest of the fight, if the video title had not said "Wing Chun" in it, are you honestly saying that you would have said, "That was a great example of someone applying Wing Chun," because you would have identified Wing Chun from what you saw?

Without looking for taan-da, chi-sau and such, there were many recognizable WC elements in his performance. While my system differs, I think CSLWC is the only other lineage with which I agree and have no complaints on.

[KPM]

Without looking for taan-da, chi-sau and such, there were many recognizable WC elements in his performance. While my system differs, I think CSLWC is the only other lineage with which I agree and have no complaints on.

"Recognizable WC elements"? This is what I said that drew so much criticism:

But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is.

"Recognizable WCK elements" seems to me like it would certainly fit with "MMA with some WCK concepts included." So are you saying that in the end you actually agree with me or not?

[Alan Orr]

"Recognizable WC elements"? This is what I said that drew so much criticism:

But watching this clip I would not have thought this was Wing Chun if it wasn't in the tag line. To me, this is MMA with some WCK concepts included. This is not straight up Wing Chun. Wing Chun looks like Wing Chun because that is what it is.

"Recognizable WCK elements" seems to me like it would certainly fit with "MMA with some WCK concepts included." So are you saying that in the end you actually agree with me or not?

Twisting words again. Lol

Look it's been said hundred times now. This is CSL Wing Chun!

Just because you can't see it, means nothing.

[Alan Orr]

BPWT has a habit of taking things to literally. He thinks "hidden" means no one can see it, rather than it just being unapparent to those who haven't trained to that level of understanding.



Without looking for taan-da, chi-sau and such, there were many recognizable WC elements in his performance. While my system differs, I think CSLWC is the only other lineage with which I agree and have no complaints on.

I think we are taking to the walking dead! They just can't see and understand that my guys train CSL Wing Chun. It's becoming funny and quite sad! Lol

[KPM]

I think we are taking to the walking dead! They just can't see and understand that my guys train CSL Wing Chun. It's becoming funny and quite sad! Lol

Talking to the "walking dead" indeed! But just which side is twisting words and refusing to see points! NO ONE has questioned that your guys train CSL Wing Chun. That is a given. Just like NO ONE said that they expected to see drills showing up in sparring as you stated previously. Two other sparring clips have gone up here on the forum in the past 24 hours. BOTH of them show some good sparring with very recognizable Wing Chun technique and structure. All anyone has said here is that the same CANNOT be said for that original clip that you posted. The question is how much of Josh's success can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his WCK training, and how much can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his MMA training. Now I can anticipate your next response, because I HAVE actually been paying attention to what you have been saying even if you haven't been paying attention to what I have been saying. You will say that your guys are training exactly the same thing whether they are fighting in the cage or not. And I believe you. But just as Lyota Machida's classical Shotokan has undergone some adaptations for MMA that are seen in the clip I posted, I've only been saying that clearly your Wing Chun has also undergone adaptations for MMA. So I'm not sure why you so strongly object to seeing it as MMA with a Wing Chun base or MMA with Wing Chun concepts. I'll bet that Lyota Machida doesn't claim that his MMA is "straight up" Shotokan!

I find it quite sad that you continue to address us in such a dismissive and somewhat rude fashion when we have been nothing but polite and respectful towards you.

[Alan Orr]

Talking to the "walking dead" indeed! But just which side is twisting words and refusing to see points! NO ONE has questioned that your guys train CSL Wing Chun. That is a given. Just like NO ONE said that they expected to see drills showing up in sparring as you stated previously. Two other sparring clips have gone up here on the forum in the past 24 hours. BOTH of them show some good sparring with very recognizable Wing Chun technique and structure. All anyone has said here is that the same CANNOT be said for that original clip that you posted. The question is how much of Josh's success can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his WCK training, and how much can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his MMA training. Now I can anticipate your next response, because I HAVE actually been paying attention to what you have been saying even if you haven't been paying attention to what I have been saying. You will say that your guys are training exactly the same thing whether they are fighting in the cage or not. And I believe you. But just as Lyota Machida's classical Shotokan has undergone some adaptations for MMA that are seen in the clip I posted, I've only been saying that clearly your Wing Chun has also undergone adaptations for MMA. So I'm not sure why you so strongly object to seeing it as MMA with a Wing Chun base or MMA with Wing Chun concepts. I'll bet that Lyota Machida doesn't claim that his MMA is "straight up" Shotokan!

I find it quite sad that you continue to address us in such a dismissive and somewhat rude fashion when we have been nothing but polite and respectful towards you.

I find it disrespectfully that you can not accept this us our wing chun. We are proud of our system and hard work. So to have to listen to people try to tell us it must be due to other things is rude and stupid.


Mma means mixed martial arts. We train in CSL Wing chun for our stand up and Bjj and wrestling etc for our grappling. We in fact use more CSL wing chun skills in our grappling that the other way around !

Wing chun is a principle and concept based art. That means our wing Chun is in the principles we follow and the application deals with the problem with concepts from our basics

Please stop limiting Wing Chun to your view.

[Sean66]

Man, bottom line is that Alan trains professional fighters, and his training gives them the tools they need to succeed in the MMA environment.
Hats off to that!

[Alan Orr]

Man, bottom line is that Alan trains professional fighters, and his training gives them the tools they need to succeed in the MMA environment.
Hats off to that!

Thanks bro. Nice and clear as wise words should be.

[Alan Orr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfYmNhg4f9c

New clip on Wing Chun punching development.

[BPWT..]

The only thing good coming from this thread at the moment, is the happiness... it seems everyone is laughing at everyone else.

Imagine this conversation from two other martial artists:

Bob: Hey, check out this clip of my Aikido student winning a MMA fight with Aikido!
Larry: Wow, congratulations! Good punch and KO. But I can't see the Aikido so much, it seems to me that...
Bob: Look, check out his hip position.
Larry: Yeah, okay. But still, in Aikido don't we train to...
Bob: Man, it's "hidden" skill - if you can't see that you are too low level. You don't know what you're talking about.
Larry: Really, congrats on the win - I mean it. I'm just saying that in Aikido I think we train to...
Bob: (Shakes head) Listen, the system is concept based - you don't expect us actually throw and use joint manipulations, right?
Larry: To be honest, I do. The concepts actually support the method.
Bob: LOL. You are the Walking Dead.
Larry: What? C'mon man, I'm just expressing the opinion that I...
Bob: We train very hard and we represent Aikido! It is a disrespect to my teacher's work to tell us it's not Aikido.

[BPWT..]

Man, bottom line is that Alan trains professional fighters, and his training gives them the tools they need to succeed in the MMA environment. Hats off to that!

Yes. And no one has disagreed with that.

[KPM]

Man, bottom line is that Alan trains professional fighters, and his training gives them the tools they need to succeed in the MMA environment.
Hats off to that!

And we have all said that....repeatedly! No one has disagreed with that at all!

[KPM]

The only thing good coming from this thread at the moment, is the happiness... it seems everyone is laughing at everyone else.

Imagine this conversation from two other martial artists:

Bob: Hey, check out this clip of my Aikido student winning a MMA fight with Aikido!
Larry: Wow, congratulations! Good punch and KO. But I can't see the Aikido so much, it seems to me that...
Bob: Look, check out his hip position.
Larry: Yeah, okay. But still, in Aikido don't we train to...
Bob: Man, it's "hidden" skill - if you can't see that you are too low level. You don't know what you're talking about.
Larry: Really, congrats on the win - I mean it. I'm just saying that in Aikido I think we train to...
Bob: (Shakes head) Listen, the system is concept based - you don't expect us actually throw and use joint manipulations, right?
Larry: To be honest, I do. The concepts actually support the method.
Bob: LOL. You are the Walking Dead.
Larry: What? C'mon man, I'm just expressing the opinion that I...
Bob: We train very hard and we represent Aikido! It is a disrespect to my teacher's work to tell us it's not Aikido.

Larry: No, don't misunderstand me. No disrepect is intended! You guys do a great job! I just didn't see anything in that recent clip that looked like something other than good MMA that lots of fighters are using.
Bob: That's because you are low-level in Aikido and just don't know what to look for. The real Aikido is conceptual and uses "hidden" mechanics. Why would you expect to see us actually throwing someone? Please stop limiting Aikido to your view! You are obviously rude and stupid!


And I guess BPWT and I are the only ones that see this? Everyone just defers to Alan like he is some kind of Wing Chun God or something? Oh well!

I WILL SAY AGAIN SINCE IT SEEMS TO GET MISSED OVER AND OVER ....... I THINK ALAN AND HIS GUYS ARE DOING GREAT THINGS AND I WISH THEM THE BEST. I SIMPLY DID NOT SEE ANY OBVIOUS WING CHUN IN THE RECENT CLIP THAT WAS LABELED AS "BEST WING CHUN KO IN MMA". WHY THAT BRINGS INSULTS AND DERISION UPON ME IS STILL UNCLEAR, AS IT SHOULD BE TO ANY FAIR-MINDED PERSON READING ALONG.

[BPWT..]

Crouching Tiger 'Hidden' Iron Wolves.

:)

I don't think it matters what we say. The compliments we give get ignored but the questions we ask, or disagreement we voice, get pegged as "you don't know what you're talking about."

Just another day on the Kung Fu Magazine forums. :D

Sean posted a nice clip on another thread - he's posted a few sparring clips over the last few months and they are consistently good, and consistently it is easy to see the Ving Tsun. He even took a few still shots from a previous clip to show the use of Ving Tsun's Tan and Pak in play, in a live environment.

I guess that means it is 'low level' because nothing was 'hidden'?

[LFJ]

"Recognizable WCK elements" seems to me like it would certainly fit with "MMA with some WCK concepts included." So are you saying that in the end you actually agree with me or not?

What I meant by "recognizable Wing Chun elements" is that while some of it was unrecognizable to me because I train a different system, much of the delivery was how good Wing Chun is applied for real. Anyone doing realistic training can see that.

I have no idea what you mean by "MMA with some WCK concepts included".

MMA means Mixed Martial Arts (as you've been told repeatedly). The martial arts they mix are CSL Wing Chun and BJJ. Do you think their standup skills come from the BJJ and just have "some WCK concepts included"? They don't mix any other striking art for their standup.


The question is how much of Josh's success can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his WCK training, and how much can be attributed SPECIFICALLY to his MMA training.

CSLWC + BJJ = Their MMA.

Are you wanting to attribute Josh's standup specifically to the BJJ then, if it's not WC? That's bizarre and just wrong, but otherwise I don't know what you're saying.

[LFJ]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfYmNhg4f9c

New clip on Wing Chun punching development.

Right. It's definitely not a simple overhand as I at first thought. I wasn't observant enough the first time 'round. It's not what Vitor Belfort threw in the clip KPM posted. Even worse people in the Youtube comments on the fight were calling it a classical Boxing jab or hook! Hopefully they watch this clip and then watch the fight more carefully. Although in my system we prefer tighter lines, we also use Cham-kiu for punching with power. Good explanation of a strong KO punch!

[Wayfaring]

I WILL SAY AGAIN SINCE IT SEEMS TO GET MISSED OVER AND OVER ....... I THINK ALAN AND HIS GUYS ARE DOING GREAT THINGS AND I WISH THEM THE BEST. I SIMPLY DID NOT SEE ANY OBVIOUS WING CHUN IN THE RECENT CLIP THAT WAS LABELED AS "BEST WING CHUN KO IN MMA". WHY THAT BRINGS INSULTS AND DERISION UPON ME IS STILL UNCLEAR, AS IT SHOULD BE TO ANY FAIR-MINDED PERSON READING ALONG.

Keith a little feedback from me - I think you're getting a little bit of a hard time because of 2 things:

1) You're kind of playing the victim - if 3 people answer your post in a row they are not ganging up on you it's an illusion.
2) In spite of people laying out specifics of things to look for in WCK, you are avoiding talking about those specifics and seem to be doggedly hanging on to your "I didn't see any obvious wing chun" line. To me the key word there is OBVIOUS. You seem to carry an expectation that it should look obvious. Others don't.

To me "obvious" is less desired than "hidden". The why is that if it is hidden that means there is a hard wired WCK identity built in that comes out in natural movements. This is much different than someone struggling through daan chi sau or trying to tan sau a charging MMA fighter while getting dropped by a hook.

But hey, to each their own.

[LFJ]

To me "obvious" is less desired than "hidden". The why is that if it is hidden that means there is a hard wired WCK identity built in that comes out in natural movements.

Yes, this is what is seen in the way Josh fights and the "recognizable WC elements" I referred to in the way he moves. Certainly not as obvious as laap-da and other techniques beginners might be looking for.

[BPWT..]

Yes, this is what is seen in the way Josh fights and the "recognizable WC elements" I referred to in the way he moves. Certainly not as obvious as laap-da and other techniques beginners might be looking for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0

Two very fit, strong looking guys for sure. I'm sure they'd make mince-meat of me. From a fitness point alone, I'd probably be toast. :)

Here I see covering with the gloves, ducking and weaving, weight sometimes forward with some lunging stepping, heads down, some jabs and crosses, etc.

As someone who trains Wing Tsun, I would not look to do many of those things - but okay, putting aside what I wouldn't want to do in such training...

What do you see here (hidden or obvious) that would make you think this is Wing Chun, rather than, say, two boxers (western) training some light sparring?

[Alan Orr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJsOf4p96Lk&feature=youtu.be


A quick new clip of basic Bridging skills

[Alan Orr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0

Two very fit, strong looking guys for sure. I'm sure they'd make mince-meat of me. From a fitness point alone, I'd probably be toast. :)

Here I see covering with the gloves, ducking and weaving, weight sometimes forward with some lunging stepping, heads down, some jabs and crosses, etc.

As someone who trains Wing Tsun, I would not look to do many of those things - but okay, putting aside what I wouldn't want to do in such training...

What do you see here (hidden or obvious) that would make you think this is Wing Chun, rather than, say, two boxers (western) training some light sparring?

Do I need to say it again? We use Wing Chun punches, Wing Chun elbow, Wing Chun power, Wing Chun positioning control, Wing Chun Fist position, Wing Chun weight control,Wing Chun structure and much more.

[BPWT..]

Do I need to say it again? We use Wing Chun punches, Wing Chun elbow, Wing Chun power, Wing Chun positioning control, Wing Chun Fist position, Wing Chun weight control,Wing Chun structure and much more.

On the one hand that's good, because the things you've just listed are "obvious", rather than "hidden."

On the other hand... I think Wayfaring is right and I must have been dropped on my head as a child... because I'm still struggling to tally this. It seems to me that CSL WC features jabs and crosses much the way a western boxer might use them, hands up in a parallel guard often by the side of the head, hands/gloves used to cover and absorb hits, ducking and weaving, head down and body leaning forward when punching, centreline open when issuing strikes, etc.

If that's how you train, okay. If it wins you fights, okay - that's the point of being in the ring, all said. I just haven't seen anyone's Wing Chun look like this.

On the second page of this thread you said: "Our Wing Chun is very different to others."

Agreed!

[Grumblegeezer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJsOf4p96Lk&feature=youtu.be


A quick new clip of basic Bridging skills

Good clip, ...what you say and show here makes good sense.

@BPWT l agree that Alan's CSL stuff doesn't look a lot like LT's WT. But it does look a lot like the DTE Eskrima I train with Martin Torres. Martin and I originally studied PMAS Escrima under Rene Latosa and Martin studied WT from me and also took some seminars with LT back in the 80s. We still get together with Rene when possible.

Martin was also a boxer. And he has been training fighters since the 90s. He says he still uses WC conceptually, and with good results. To a traditional guy like me, it's hard to see, but when they show it to you, or use it on you, it's absolutely there. I think I'm seeing the same thing with Alan's guys. You just have to open your mind about how the essence of WC (or WT) can be applied. You know it was actually LT himself, back in the early days, who first told me this. He said that if you really understand WT, you could fight looking like a Hung Gar guy, a Choi Lay Fut guy, or a Western Boxer and you could make it work like WC.

[KPM]

Do I need to say it again? We use Wing Chun punches, Wing Chun elbow, Wing Chun power, Wing Chun positioning control, Wing Chun Fist position, Wing Chun weight control,Wing Chun structure and much more.

Post that clip on the general forum or the MMA forum and say that this is Wing Chun and see what kind of reaction you get.

[chris bougeard]

Post that clip on the general forum or the MMA forum and say that this is Wing Chun and see what kind of reaction you get.

I'd like to see a clip of what your "straight up" Wing Chun looks like when the pressure is on, maybe we can learn where we are going wrong...

[BPWT..]

Hey Grumblegeezer. Actually, for me, I see many things in Alan's instructional clips that resonate with the WT method.

So with this new bridging clip, much of it makes sense.

That said, I don't like the example given at 2.12, however... as this is not a good example of bridging (IMO), so it does of course lead to being hit by the second punch.

It was a rough demo, of course, so I get it was only to illustrate an idea (but the bridging hand was more horizontal than forward, the body not behind it, etc, and a Pak Sau motion shouldn't be done as a single motion without a strike - but before anyone jumps all over this post from me, it's all cool... I get that it was just a quick example from Alan).


Post that clip on the general forum or the MMA forum and say that this is Wing Chun and see what kind of reaction you get.

A better test would be to post it on a boxing forum and say it's a clip of two boxers you're training... and then see how many people pipe up to say, "Actually, that looks more like Wing Chun Kung Fu to me."

[Alan Orr]

Hey Grumblegeezer. Actually, for me, I see many things in Alan's instructional clips that resonate with the WT method.

So with this new bridging clip, much of it makes sense.

That said, I don't like the example given at 2.12, however... as this is not a good example of bridging (IMO), so it does of course lead to being hit by the second punch.

It was a rough demo, of course, so I get it was only to illustrate an idea (but the bridging hand was more horizontal than forward, the body not behind it, etc, and a Pak Sau motion shouldn't be done as a single motion without a strike - but before anyone jumps all over this post from me, it's all cool... I get that it was just a quick example from Alan).


A better test would be to post it on a boxing forum and say it's a clip of two boxers you're training... and then see how many people pipe up to say, "Actually, that looks more like Wing Chun Kung Fu to me."


The example is not good bridging of course. I showed that as if you look on you tube you will see many clips of wing chun where this is what they are doing. Anyway most boxers do not understand wing chun so posting the clip to them means nothing. Also I'm sharing the clip with the wing Chun world who on the whole are very happy to see wing chun working under pressure. You think that would be a good thing.

Already I have add hundreds of emails saying it's great to see my team using wing chun and doing well as they have done for 10 years now in combat sports. Including chi sao events.

Wing chun is a Chinese boxing system to me and close to western boxing but but the same in principles of use. If you can't see that then not much I can say about it. As I keep saying if you know what your looking for then it's clear what is wing chun.

Post your sparring so we can see if we see wing chun in the same way.

What is your name? Which style do you train ?

[KPM]

Do I need to say it again? We use Wing Chun punches, Wing Chun elbow, Wing Chun power, Wing Chun positioning control, Wing Chun Fist position, Wing Chun weight control,Wing Chun structure and much more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0

Ok. So let me make sure I am clear on this. You are saying that:

---standing in a wide stance with the body inclined forward the chin tucked down and the hands up in front of the face with the centerline unoccupied
---doing high covers with the gloves to defend against head shots
---bobbing and weaving and generally "bouncing around" with footwork
---bending forward at the waist and leaning in with punches
---dropping the head and upper body forward and to the left while throwing a looping overhand right punch
---dropping the chin to the chest and "wading in" to a barrage of punches
---no defensive hand techniques except possibly an occasional Pak Sao

This is all CSL Wing Chun structure, power and technique as taught by Robert Chu?

Chris wrote:
I'd like to see a clip of what your "straight up" Wing Chun looks like when the pressure is on, maybe we can learn where we are going wrong...

That was a "light sparring session" as described. There wasn't a lot of pressure here. They even had a few laughs. Perfect time to make sure good WCK technique is being used. Just take a look at the other two recent sparring clips posted in the forum. Much more "pressure" being on and yet they still looked like Wing Chun.

But Ok. This is CSL Wing Chun if you guys say it is. No need to call anyone stupid or low-level or anything like that just because we stated the obvious.

[BPWT..]

The example is not good bridging of course. I showed that as if you look on you tube you will see many clips of wing chun where this is what they are doing.

Fair enough.


Anyway most boxers do not understand wing chun so posting the clip to them means nothing. Also I'm sharing the clip with the wing Chun world who on the whole are very happy to see wing chun working under pressure. You think that would be a good thing.

If people are, on the whole, happy with this, then again... fair enough.


Already I have add hundreds of emails saying it's great to see my team using wing chun and doing well as they have done for 10 years now in combat sports. Including chi sao events.

Okay.


As I keep saying if you know what your looking for then it's clear what is wing chun.

I know you keep saying this, and I know the implication is that if I don't agree with you then it means I am low level and basically cr@p. I also know that by continuing to reply to these posts, I'm beginning to look like an arsehole. :) However, for me and any other low level Wing Chun guys who don't see what you're saying, please help explain a little more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMpcM2Rywv0

What are the Wing Chun concepts/principles or hidden skills that I am missing when I see students:

* Cover to take a punch on the gloves/hands (0.12) (0.23)
* Step forward with weight on the lead leg, and bend the head forward as they punch (0.18) (0.28) (0.38)
* Guard position with both hands/gloves held up by the side of the face (0.30)
* Body moves right with a step as punch targets to the left (0.38)

To me the above might fit with a boxer's training, but I genuinely don't see, or know, how this fits into Wing Chun. So I am asking. Robert Chu, if I'm not mistaken, was exposed to Wing Chun from Yuen Kay San lineage, Yip Man lineage (Hawkins Cheung) and also Gulao Wing Chun. Which of these lineages employ these methods?

If these lineages do employ these methods, then it would be great if I could see it performed elsewhere. If you're right, and they do, then I admit that this is outside of the system I train and you're right - I just don't understand Wing Chun well enough to comment.


Post your sparring so we can see if we see wing chun in the same way.

I explained to Chris that the sparring I do I don't record. What you would see is that I try, as best as I can, to use the system without modifications. Varying degrees of success. My biggest problem is not from boxing but from Muay Thai; I have real trouble reading their kicks. I don't have time to train ground fighting - work commitments - so I only spar stand up. My sparring doesn't look like your sparring clip - so you would probably say we don't see Wing Chun in the same way.


What is your name?

Really? Witchhunt or crazy email spamming coming my way? :D No thank you.


Which style do you train?

Leung Ting Wing Tsun. Not the EWTO.

[BPWT..]

Jesus! KPM, we've posted really similar responses. To anyone still reading this rather long and drawn out 'discussion' we are... not the same person.

:D

[chris bougeard]

KPM, I was talking about Josh's fight clip. BPWT, it's not unreasonable to ask someone's name. I use my name and if someone feels the need to check me out on the web etc so be it.

Where are you based? In the UK? If so, why don't you see where the closest CSL school is to you, the guys are always friendly and am sure would be able to show you hands on how our method works.

[BPWT..]

It's unreasonable to expect someone's name if a) they choose not to give it on a public forum that doesn't require it, b) it serves no relevance to a discussion.

I know the fighter's name is Josh and the instructor is Alan - because it was said. I don't need to know their names to watch the clips and not understand them.

I don't teach or compete - so the only web presence that might interest you is my professional one - but seeing as my work is in no way connected to Wing Chun, I can't see how that helps you.

Unless, of course, Alan wants to forward to me hundreds of emails from people supporting what he does. My inbox has enough for me to read without it. I am happy to take him at his word on that matter.

[KPM]

Jesus! KPM, we've posted really similar responses. To anyone still reading this rather long and drawn out 'discussion' we are... not the same person.

:D

True! We don't even live on the same continent! ;)

[LFJ]

Post that clip on the general forum or the MMA forum and say that this is Wing Chun and see what kind of reaction you get.

You Wing Chun guys can't even get it. Posting it on a general or MMA forum where people are far less likely to get it than you will surely prove your point!

[LFJ]

@BPWT & KPM,

Barring firsthand experience, Alan does have several DVDs detailing their system. Perhaps seeing them will help you understand what they're doing and how it is Wing Chun. It'd probably open your eyes quite a bit and help improve your game if you took some of the ideas on board.

[BPWT..]

Yes, firsthand experience is always best. But I spend half my life in airports these days... so before I book another flight, or pull out my credit card to order Alan's DVDs, it would be good if he or Chris could take the time to answer the Qs from the previous page:

----

What are the Wing Chun concepts/principles or hidden skills that I am missing when I see students:

* Cover to take a punch on the gloves/hands (0.12) (0.23)
* Step forward with weight on the lead leg, and bend the head forward as they punch (0.18) (0.28) (0.38)
* Guard position with both hands/gloves held up by the side of the face (0.30)
* Body moves right with a step as punch targets to the left (0.38)

To me the above might fit with a boxer's training, but I genuinely don't see, or know, how this fits into Wing Chun. So I am asking.

Robert Chu, if I'm not mistaken, was exposed to Wing Chun from Yuen Kay San lineage, Yip Man lineage (Hawkins Cheung) and also Gulao Wing Chun. Which of these lineages employ these methods?

----

If CSL Wing Chun is Robert Chu's method, mixed with BJJ for groundwork and also some western boxing for stand up, that's okay (they can train however they like) - but why not just call it that? If that's not true, and CSL Wing Chun's stand up game includes the above mentioned methods and no western boxing, then maybe someone from those lineages (YKS, HC and Gulao) could step in and confirm it - and then maybe explain how the said methods fit into their system's general framework.

If I'm wrong, then hands-up from me, I'm wrong.

[LFJ]

Alan already explained how what they do differs from Western Boxing. They use WC elbow, WC fist position, WC weight control, WC body structure, etc.. Almost every aspect of it is different from LTWT as well. So you really have to understand the basics of their system, or share those ideas to be able to see it. It's understandably very difficult from a LTWT perspective, but from WSLVT, we share basically the same concepts just with a preference for tighter lines. So I get what he's saying.

[chris bougeard]

Yes, firsthand experience is always best. But I spend half my life in airports these days... so before I book another flight, or pull out my credit card to order Alan's DVDs, it would be good if he or Chris could take the time to answer the Qs from the previous page:

----

What are the Wing Chun concepts/principles or hidden skills that I am missing when I see students:

* Cover to take a punch on the gloves/hands (0.12) (0.23)
* Step forward with weight on the lead leg, and bend the head forward as they punch (0.18) (0.28) (0.38)
* Guard position with both hands/gloves held up by the side of the face (0.30)
* Body moves right with a step as punch targets to the left (0.38)

To me the above might fit with a boxer's training, but I genuinely don't see, or know, how this fits into Wing Chun. So I am asking.

Robert Chu, if I'm not mistaken, was exposed to Wing Chun from Yuen Kay San lineage, Yip Man lineage (Hawkins Cheung) and also Gulao Wing Chun. Which of these lineages employ these methods?

----

If CSL Wing Chun is Robert Chu's method, mixed with BJJ for groundwork and also some western boxing for stand up, that's okay (they can train however they like) - but why not just call it that? If that's not true, and CSL Wing Chun's stand up game includes the above mentioned methods and no western boxing, then maybe someone from those lineages (YKS, HC and Gulao) could step in and confirm it - and then maybe explain how the said methods fit into their system's general framework.

If I'm wrong, then hands-up from me, I'm wrong.

My teacher has answered your questions many times already, if you can't see or understand our method by now, short of hands on experience...

You never answered my question regarding where you live, I'm based in the Channel Islands. If you are in my locale I would be happy to explain hands on how our method works.

You seem trapped in this "if you don't do it my way it's wrong/not proper wing chun". This is evident from many of your comments, including your generous observation that "pak sau should always be done with a strike" when trying to find something wrong with my teachers clip. Are you kidding me? How long have you been training? Wing Chun is an art of self expression, are you telling me there is only ONE way it can be applied? Pak Sao means to clap/slap hand not slap hand but always make sure you accompany it with a strike.

I suppose you also think the concept of simultaneous attack and defence has to manifest itself under this dogma.

At the end of the day you might be happy to be straight jacketed by the constraints of your system. I trained in your system some time ago, trained chi Sao sections did lots of lat Sao etc. At the time I liked it but I could never go back to that method now.

[BPWT..]

@ LFJ

Yes, Alan said that his guys use WC elbow, WC fist position, WC weight control, WC body structure, etc. But I was asking for a little more info on this, to make things clearer.

For example:

Leaning forward with weight placed over the COG in a lunging punch doesn't seem to conform to WC weight control in any Wing Chun I have seen.
(is this present from YKS, HC and Gulao Wing Chun?)

Tucking the chin and leaning forward when striking - almost with the head angled down, doesn't seem to conform to WC body structure in any Wing Chun I have seen.
(is this present from YKS, HC and Gulao Wing Chun?)

Keeping the hands by the side of head as way of covering/absorbing a strike doesn't seem to conform to WC fist position in any Wing Chun I have seen.
(is this present from YKS, HC and Gulao Wing Chun?)

This is what I am trying to get to the bottom of, if I am to think, "Okay, I was wrong - this is indeed clearly Wing Chun body method, structure and strategy."

For sure, there are some differences between lineages (e.g. WSLVT and LTWT), but would you say that your method does indeed include the above? If so, how does that fit within the WSLVT system? I don't see anyone from WSLVT doing things like this.

Indeed, the sparring clips that Sean has shared (good clips indeed) don't look like Alan's and there is a clear correlation between Sean's clips of drills and clips of sparring. In both, the VT looks the same (method, structure, strategy, etc).

Despite some differences in use and interpretation between various Wing Chun lines, there are commonalities too. So while I can watch Alan's instructional clips and see some of those differences, I can also see things that make sense and relate to what I learn - there are commonalities there. But what I see in the light sparring clip from Alan, for example, really is like nothing I've seen from any Wing Chun lineage.

[BPWT..]

My teacher has answered your questions many times already, if you can't see or understand our method by now, short of hands on experience...

As I just posted, Alan is saying that what they do follows, for example, Wing Chun structure, or fist positioning, etc. Can you see my questions above and explain it to me in more detail?


You never answered my question regarding where you live, I'm based in the Channel Islands. If you are in my locale I would be happy to explain hands on how our method works.

Thanks for the offer. If I am in your neck of the woods then yes, I would enjoy meeting. I am based in Budapest, Hungary, but I actually spend more time travelling with work than I do in the city. I travel in the CEE region, throughout Europe and sometimes further afield. As a result, I train with numerous people who have been connected to the LT system. Most of them no longer officially (if you've been in the WT system, you might understand the implication behind this ;)).


You seem trapped in this "if you don't do it my way it's wrong/not proper wing chun".

Not at all! Sean's VT from PB has differences to my system (some quite stark), but I don't see it as wrong - just different. At their core, both arts are clearly connected, despite the differences.


This is evident from many of your comments, including your generous observation that "pak sau should always be done with a strike" when trying to find something wrong with my teachers clip. Are you kidding me? How long have you been training? Wing Chun is an art of self expression, are you telling me there is only ONE way it can be applied? Pak Sao means to clap/slap hand not slap hand but always make sure you accompany it with a strike.

I'm not sure where to start on this - so probably it is best for me to not start on it. I'll just say that Alan explained that yes, he was showing a 'bad way' of bridging at that point of his clip. He was showing the problem. Part of the problem was the way the Pak Sau was used.


At the end of the day you might be happy to be straight jacketed by the constraints of your system.

All systems have some constraints - it is the nature of any system. This is why Alan's guys train BJJ, after all.


I trained in your system some time ago, trained chi Sao sections did lots of lat Sao etc. At the time I liked it but I could never go back to that method now.

You trained in the EWTO, or you learned from someone who had learned the Hong Kong Wing Tsun system? If the latter, I would love to hear more as it might be another HK LTWT person it would be good for me to meet.

[LFJ]

@BPWT

To answer your question simply, we (CSLWC & WSLVT) share the same or very similar basic concepts, but have different expressions in application. What I've seen from Alan explaining those things, e.g. elbow, fist position, weight control, body structure, etc., are all ideas shared in WSLVT. I suspect you have a very different definition of these in LTWT.

[BPWT..]

@BPWT

To answer your question simply, we (CSLWC & WSLVT) share the same or very similar basic concepts, but have different expressions in application. What I've seen from Alan explaining those things, e.g. elbow, fist position, weight control, body structure, etc., are all ideas shared in WSLVT. I suspect you have a very different definition of these in LTWT.

So can you explain those three bolded bits of text above from a WSLVT perspective?

[LFJ]

So can you explain those three bolded bits of text above from a WSLVT perspective?

No. As I just told you, while we share the same basic concepts we have different expressions in application, yet any good WSLVT practitioner who watches Alan's explanations should be able to know exactly what he's talking about and how it is expressed in our system. I suggest you get to know more about the basics of his system before commenting on and discussing it's application.

[KPM]

@BPWT & KPM,

Barring firsthand experience, Alan does have several DVDs detailing their system. Perhaps seeing them will help you understand what they're doing and how it is Wing Chun. It'd probably open your eyes quite a bit and help improve your game if you took some of the ideas on board.


Man, you really do need to go back and do some closer reading LFJ! :rolleyes:

[BPWT..]

No.

Okay. (Edit: would you say, at least, that when you spar it also looks like the method seen in Alan's light sparring clip - specifically the things I mentioned in bold?)

Chris, can you help explain those points I highlighted?

[KPM]

@BPWT

To answer your question simply, we (CSLWC & WSLVT) share the same or very similar basic concepts, but have different expressions in application. What I've seen from Alan explaining those things, e.g. elbow, fist position, weight control, body structure, etc., are all ideas shared in WSLVT. I suspect you have a very different definition of these in LTWT.

Oh I agree! What I've seen from Alan explaining things like elbow, fist position, weight control, body structure, etc. makes perfect sense and are all ideas that I share as well. In fact, I would be willing to bet that what I have trained has more in common with CSL WCK than your WSLVT has with CSL WCK. And my comment in my previous post was due to the fact that I have already stated on this thread that I have all of Alan's DVDs, have watched them several times and have learned from them. In fact, I remember one of the DVDs explaining how the more upright Wing Chun stance is superior to a boxer's stance. Yet in both clips posted we don't see that upright Wing Chun stance. We see an angled forward, chin tucked, hands by the face boxing stance. We've just been asking "why is that?"

[chris bougeard]

Okay.

Chris, can you help explain them?

I don't believe any further explanation is necessary. Clips explaining the rationale behind the reeling punch and the way we see bridging have been supplied. My teacher has explained the logic behind how our wing chun works. The offer for hands on explanation has been made and you have been invited to post a clip of your method in application to show us how we should be using/expressing the art under pressure, which you declined to do. You seem to have a problem with our expression of the art because it doesn't fit your paradigm and no amount of forum tennis is going to change that.

[KPM]

Alan already explained how what they do differs from Western Boxing. They use WC elbow, WC fist position, WC weight control, WC body structure, etc.. .

Yet it looks more like western boxing than it looks like Wing Chun. But it is not Wing Chun "adapted" to a boxing scenario/format. I guess that's what BPWT and I are having a problem with. Again, if Alan had said "this is CSL chinese boxing based upon our CSL Wing Chun" I would not be having this mental problem. ;) But he denied that. He said "this IS Wing Chun" not "adapted" in any way. To me, that just seems to fly in the face of common sense for all of the biomechanical reasons that BPWT and I have pointed out from that sparring clip. But maybe I'm just weird that way. To each his own! He can call it anything he wants. But as I predicted before, BPWT and I won't be the only ones that will be questioning that terminology as time goes on. And no need to call us stupid or low-level for pointing out the obvious.

[BPWT..]

Chris, that is just evasion. There has been no real explanation at all. You can't simply say, "It is a Wing Chun body method."

How is it?

You can explain what I highlighted in bold, or you can't.

[LFJ]

Okay. (Edit: would you say, at least, that when you spar it also looks like the method seen in Alan's light sparring clip - specifically the things I mentioned in bold?)

How many times do you want me to say we have different expressions in the application of our systems?

[LFJ]

Chris, that is just evasion. There has been no real explanation at all. You can't simply say, "It is a Wing Chun body method."

How is it?

You can explain what I highlighted in bold, or you can't.

What sort of explanation would satisfy you? Apparently not something that sounds like CSL Wing Chun...