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.Quote:
Originally Posted by KPM
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?????Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Orr
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by KPM
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by KPM
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by KPM
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by tc101
This is a form substance problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by LFJ
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.
Whatever Twenty. You like to repeat the same thing to anyone no matter what they're actually saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by tc101
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?
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. 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.
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Orr
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.
Quote:
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.