WCK not for sport?

[t_niehoff]

One sentiment I repeatedly hear by the theoretician/nonfighters is "WCK is not for sport" or "WCK is only for street." OK - why isn't it for sport? When it comes down to it, there can only be one reason: "I can't do in sport what I normally would do in a fight." That makes sense if the rules of the sport or contest in some way prevent you from doing what you would normally do; for example, if you are a wrestler in a kickboxing tournament you just can't use any of your wrestling skills. The rules of the contest put you at a great disadvantage. So, can't a WCK fighter use their tan, bong, fook, punch, steps, kicks, etc. in a NHB/vale tudo type contest? Sure. So what can't we do that we normally would do in a fight? What do the "rules" prevent us from doing? And is that a disadvantage?

Well, it always comes down to the so-called "dangerous techniques" or "foul tactics" -- eye gouges, groin kicks, crushing the throat, breaking joints, etc. What else can it be? Everything else you can do in a NHB fight! So what these folks are really saying is that they just can't fight, or fight particularly well, without resorting to gouging eyes, kicking the groin, breaking joints, etc. Take those things away from them, and they just can't fight. If they could fight well without the "dangerous technqiues", then eliminating those things wouldn't adversely effect their performance and they could use WCK for sport. And this is why I call them nonfighter/theoreticians: because they never do these things or train them realistically because they can't -- so they are just theory. In theory, they'll try to do those things and they believe (hope) they will be able to pull them off, and they believe (hope) they will work.

In reality, however, even "streetfights" rarely involve these "foul tactics" -- and for several reasons: 1) the overwhelming majority of "streetfights" aren't life-or-death affairs and so don't warrant or legally permit such behavior (so if your fighting method relies on these things, you'll either get your ass kicked unless it turns into a fight to the death because you can't use your weapons or you'll end up in prison for maiming or seriously injuring someone that took a swing at you - assuming those things actually worked for you), and 2) because you're never able to actually train those things realistically, they just don't work that well, and you'll have real difficulty pulling them off when pressed. And, in fact, when you talk to WCK practitioners that have had "streetfights" and ask them what they did, you find that they didn't use those "foul tactics", instead they used their punch, kick, elbow, pak sao, etc. -- the very things they could use in sport. And that's because those things that you will be able to pull off are the things that you train realistically and everyday against genuinely resisting opponents, and those will be independent of the venue.

So while our skills and weapons will remain the same regardless of the venue, it's our tactics that will depend on our situation. On the street, in some situations (but not all), our tactic may be to escape (which wouldn't be a tactic used in the ring). But we can't just depend on that one, or any one, tactic; there may be situations in the street where escape isn't feasible or even advisable (maybe you need to defend someone, for example). On the street, our situation may be such that going to the ground isn't advisable. But there are situations where we may not have the choice or the situation may be that it is a sound choice to go to the ground. Tactics are what adjust to the situation, not our root skills.

So when folks say "WCK is not for sport", I'm left thinking that if they can't they make their WCK work in NHB/vale tudo, then they just can't make their WCK work period.

[Ultimatewingchun]

AMEN to that.

[CFT]

As a self confessed armchair technician hobbyist, I would like to offer some comments. Even if a WCK practitioner had the technical skills and "real life" experience against resisting opponents, I would still hazard a guess that their cardiovascular conditioning would not be up to the demands of a multi-round NHB-type fight. Of course there must be individuals out there that have such conditioning as part of their training regimen.

[t_niehoff]

CFT wrote:

Even if a WCK practitioner had the technical skills and "real life" experience against resisting opponents, I would still hazard a guess that their cardiovascular conditioning would not be up to the demands of a multi-round NHB-type fight. Of course there must be individuals out there that have such conditioning as part of their training regimen.

**I'm not sure what you are saying. My point is that WCK is just as much for sports like NHB-type fights as for "street". You seem to be saying that NHB's demand greater cardio. OK, if for the sake of argument we assume that is true (which it isn't), doesn't that merely mean that WCK will work in sport provided the WCK fighter develops his cardio sufficiently? The flaw in your view is that it isn't the sport (NHB) that forces folks to have good cardio, it's the level of competition (the skill your opponent relative to yours). Some NHB fights only go for a minute because of difference in skill levels; cardio isn't a factor in those fights. It becomes a factor when the two fighters are evenly matched. If a WCK fighter or a NHB fihgter who is not very skilled gets into a fight on the street with someone equally not very skilled, cardio will be a factor too. You don't think that the "dangerous techniques" will compensate for lack of cardio, do you?

[Hendrik]

what is a moon light sonata?


before that, lets label there are musician, there are piano players, there are music students, there are music theoricians, there are concert company members...........



well, what is a moon light sonata?

[azwingchun]

Though I will agree there may be schools out there that don't possibly train very realistically, but it isn't up to me to judge them and call them out on it. As mentioned, what a real fight is, is based upon many factors as well as perceptions. You seemed to base your idea of reality fighting to N.H.B., I as many others don't. I will admit they are as close as you can possibly get without going out and starting a fight with someone out in the street. But reality it's not!

Well, it always comes down to the so-called "dangerous techniques" or "foul tactics" -- eye gouges, groin kicks, crushing the throat, breaking joints, etc.

Not sure what kinda of situations you have been in, but these were very common in the situations I have encountered. In fact in situations where possibly I had found myself in trouble, these have worked for me. Again, perception is based on experiences, yours aren't mine.

Take those things away from them, and they just can't fight.

This quote is ridiculous, it's like saying if you take away locks and chokes the Gracies can't fight. I look at these types of attacks as just more tools for the tool box, I may not completely rely on these so-called "foul tactic" but they are there for the use if needed. And trust me, if I have an opening to your eyes in a knock down drag out fight....better believe I will take it to end the situation quickly.

Take those things away from them, and they just can't fight. If they could fight well without the "dangerous technqiues", then eliminating those things wouldn't adversely effect their performance and they could use WCK for sport.

Read the above statement I made about the Gracies. I realize the statement about the Gracies is somewhat sarcastic, but think about what you are saying, if someone learns a system that uses these targets to end a fight safely and quickly, then these are every bit as much of fighting tools as someone who uses an armbar to end a fight. Very different, but both very effective in their own ways.

And this is why I call them nonfighter/theoreticians: because they never do these things or train them realistically because they can't -- so they are just theory.

Glad you can speak for all Wing Chun practitioners in the world....I nominate you the Grand Pooba with your great knowledge of all.

In reality, however, even "streetfights" rarely involve these "foul tactics"

Again, not sure the type of fights you have been in, but these were very common in my experiences, whether personally or from the sidelines.

the overwhelming majority of "streetfights" aren't life-or-death affairs and so don't warrant or legally permit such behavior

Again within my experiences, the law was my last concern.....not getting taken out was my first and only concern, regardless of what it took to save my butt. Again, perception is a very real thing.

you'll either get your ass kicked unless it turns into a fight to the death because you can't use your weapons or you'll end up in prison for maiming or seriously injuring someone that took a swing at you

Not true, again, personally these "foul tactics" can be used in any fight. When is
a street encounter not serious enough to use "foul tactics"? To me any street fight is serious enough, maybe that is just me?!?!?!

2) because you're never able to actually train those things realistically, they just don't work that well, and you'll have real difficulty pulling them off when pressed.

Hmmmmn, they work well enough that the N.H.B. associations have banned them. They don't train for them either, do they?!?!?!? Actually, in any ground position for the most part the eyes are readily available. And often times even in the N.H.B. the eyes are actually grabbed, poked or raked acrossed (accidently/intentionally on purpose). I would also beg to differ that these "foul tricks" aren't trained. This would depend on the school, and since neither you nor I have visited all the Wing Chun schools out there...neither of us are qualified to make this judgement on all Wing Chun schools.

But we can't just depend on that one, or any one, tactic;

YEAH.....WE AGREE ON SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On the street, our situation may be such that going to the ground isn't advisable.

In my opinion, very seldom is, unless you are in absolute control.

Tactics are what adjust to the situation, not our root skills.

I can see your point, but I think you would agree, skill is needed.

So when folks say "WCK is not for sport", I'm left thinking that if they can't they make their WCK work in NHB/vale tudo, then they just can't make their WCK work period.

This is completely false in my opinion. Again, what is my training focus....if I focus to get in and out, whether through an eye gouge or small joint manipulation (another no-no in the N.H.B.), then I may be limited in these type events. Just as any one who competes in any certain events which doesn't allow for their tools trained. Another more clear expample would be to say that a Judo practitioner can't fight because he can't hold his own in a purely striking event. Anytime there are rules that take away your tools, you are walking in less than what you are. By the way, no matter how rediculous you or someone else finds someone's fighting tools of choice, whether they be armbars, chokes, eye gouges, kicking to the groin etc, doesn't mean they don't work and in any of those situations.....it may only take one.

[CFT]

The flaw in your view is that it isn't the sport (NHB) that forces folks to have good cardio, it's the level of competition (the skill your opponent relative to yours).

I didn't realise that you were differentiating between the NHB skillset and the actual sporting competition itself - in my mind they are just synonymous, i.e. people who practice MMA/NHB seem to do so for competition. That's just my perception, could be totally wrong.

I think I would agree with you that the "basics" of WCK should serve just as well in an NHB-type environment, leaving out the thorn-y issue of grappling and groundfighting. I definitely don't think that the "dangerous techniques" can make up for insufficient cardio.

So basically you're saying it's a pure skills gap then? I can see your point because I just find it hard to believe that WCK is so fundamentally flawed. The modern practitioners need to put in the hard work like their predecessors.

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I think that there is a very viable argument that some techniques, which will work quite well on the street, are not suitable for the ring or competition. No matter how much you want to deny it competition by its very nature includes rules designed to insure the safety of its participants.

As to the specific techniques of eye gouges and such; I think that you are missing a simple point. The ability to apply such a brutal technique does not dictate that is the only thing you can do. I agree that one should be able to fight with punches and other “traditional” methods and not rely only on “brutal” techniques. However, I think that if someone attacks you on the street they kind of deserve whatever you give them.

I teach and stress using “dirty” tactics to all of my students. We regularly use the Nasal Septum as a control point as it is one of my favorites. It is quite easy to apply and the results are usually consistent regardless of the opponent’s size or strength. It is one of the more simple methods to teach someone to use to apply in a real fight, which has a high degree of success. I am basing this on more than a few years as a Police Officer and also from working and teaching defensive tactics in a prison. In addition, several of my students have worked in hospitals with mental wards where they found that strikes did little to the “patient” while the types of techniques we use worked quite well. One of the things I like is that you still have the option to strike; as a matter of fact it is actually easier to strike someone than to try and apply a control. Still, if you sidestep a punch and sweep the nasal septum you may be quite happy with the result as you can take a person down very easily or you can hold him in an unstable position while still upright. Not sure if this is being explained properly but it works great.

I think that WC by its very nature has to give something up to be applied to the ring. There is a brutality, which should, IMHO, be present when the art is applied properly in a real fight. The ring does not allow such a carry over. Now I have no problem with people taking WC to the ring and, modifying their approach to compete. That is there desire and it is fine. However, to turn around and say that those people who don’t adhere to your line of thinking must be wrong or can not fight is a bit shortsighted, IMO.

Each and every one of us brings something to the table. Some may have a bit of real life experience while others have a good deal of ring experience. Each is viable and deserves respect. But each is a different animal. A real street fight, despite some people’s musings, is not a game and the likelihood of injury is quite real. Thus the attacker deserves to be broken up and severely injured!!

As I have said before on this forum; there are many people who are much better at WC than I, but I am still quite confident in my ability to survive on the street and this is what I try to pass on to my students. My Sifu thinks that I am a bit too extreme in my methods. We have affectionately termed the Philly approach as Thug Wing Chun. At the last seminar, which we hosted for Sifu everyone joked about, how getting across the parking lot could be an adventure. Suffice it to say I teach people how to fight and survive. The approach I use is based on Wing Chun with all of its dirty tricks and brutal methods. It is also geared towards the average person who does not have the luxury of spending hours in the gym to get into the best shape possible. Our approach also turns away more people than will join as many of our visitors and prospective students do not want the brutality of our approach. But, I do not run a “commercial” school for profit so I kind of could care less. I have seen several of my students with less than 7 months of training take down several supposed experienced martial artists, both Wing Chun and other styles, with very simple quick efficient and brutal techniques. However, in none of these instances did the use of such brutal or dirty tactics necessitate the harming of the opponent. The control we practice allows us to take it to that level if needed but it is not a requirement that you hurt someone, if your only option is to punch and kick you may have less options if hurting someone is not your goal.

I admire everyone who practices and I truly do admit to the many benefits of being in better physical shape. However, I believe that one of the beauties of Wing Chun is that it is effective for not just the great athlete but also the out of shape average Joe too.

Peace,

Dave

[Vajramusti]

Good post Dave.

Joy

[t_niehoff]

Hi Dave,

Dave wrote:

I think that there is a very viable argument that some techniques, which will work quite well on the street, are not suitable for the ring or competition. No matter how much you want to deny it competition by its very nature includes rules designed to insure the safety of its participants.

**Yes, that's true but the advantage is that then we can practice full-out. Although it is counter-intuitive, the limitations actually make one better. This was the paradigm shift that Kano realized.

As to the specific techniques of eye gouges and such; I think that you are missing a simple point. The ability to apply such a brutal technique does not dictate that is the only thing you can do. I agree that one should be able to fight with punches and other “traditional” methods and not rely only on “brutal” techniques. However, I think that if someone attacks you on the street they kind of deserve whatever you give them.

**But it works both ways -- if you can eye gouge, so can they; if you can groin kick, so can they. What makes you think you are better dealing with these situations than they are? What it comes down to is that they are things you never really practice, never really practice against, and you hope they'll work.

I teach and stress using “dirty” tactics to all of my students. We regularly use the Nasal Septum as a control point as it is one of my favorites. It is quite easy to apply and the results are usually consistent regardless of the opponent’s size or strength. It is one of the more simple methods to teach someone to use to apply in a real fight, which has a high degree of success.

**This is a great point -- no it doesn't work. It's pure nonsense. This is the kind of stuff folks who don't fight teach, and they believe it because it works in cooperative settings or someone has made it work against some stiff. But try it against anyone with any level of skill and it will fail miserably.

I am basing this on more than a few years as a Police Officer and also from working and teaching defensive tactics in a prison. In addition, several of my students have worked in hospitals with mental wards where they found that strikes did little to the “patient” while the types of techniques we use worked quite well.

**Why do you think NHB fighters, BJJ fighters, etc. don't use the "Nasal Septum Control"? Because they've never seen it?

One of the things I like is that you still have the option to strike; as a matter of fact it is actually easier to strike someone than to try and apply a control. Still, if you sidestep a punch and sweep the nasal septum you may be quite happy with the result as you can take a person down very easily or you can hold him in an unstable position while still upright. Not sure if this is being explained properly but it works great.

**Go to a NHB gym and try it. When you regain consciousness, you may reevaluate that.

I think that WC by its very nature has to give something up to be applied to the ring. There is a brutality, which should, IMHO, be present when the art is applied properly in a real fight. The ring does not allow such a carry over.

**I see, WCK is too brutal for the ring. Gotcha. Yeah, those NHB/MMA fighter are awfully lucky that don't have to tangle with a crowd like us with out nasal septum controls.

Now I have no problem with people taking WC to the ring and, modifying their approach to compete. That is there desire and it is fine. However, to turn around and say that those people who don’t adhere to your line of thinking must be wrong or can not fight is a bit shortsighted, IMO.

**If you nasal septum control works so well, why can't that work in the ring? So far, you haven't told me anything that you do that won't work in a ring.

Each and every one of us brings something to the table. Some may have a bit of real life experience while others have a good deal of ring experience. Each is viable and deserves respect. But each is a different animal. A real street fight, despite some people’s musings, is not a game and the likelihood of injury is quite real. Thus the attacker deserves to be broken up and severely injured!!

**I've been in streetfights and never injured. I've been severely injured in training (sparring). Fighting involves a risk, regardless of the venue.

As I have said before on this forum; there are many people who are much better at WC than I, but I am still quite confident in my ability to survive on the street and this is what I try to pass on to my students. My Sifu thinks that I am a bit too extreme in my methods. We have affectionately termed the Philly approach as Thug Wing Chun. At the last seminar, which we hosted for Sifu everyone joked about, how getting across the parking lot could be an adventure. Suffice it to say I teach people how to fight and survive. The approach I use is based on Wing Chun with all of its dirty tricks and brutal methods.

**Once again, it comes down to "dangerous techniques" . . .

It is also geared towards the average person who does not have the luxury of spending hours in the gym to get into the best shape possible. Our approach also turns away more people than will join as many of our visitors and prospective students do not want the brutality of our approach. But, I do not run a “commercial” school for profit so I kind of could care less. I have seen several of my students with less than 7 months of training take down several supposed experienced martial artists, both Wing Chun and other styles, with very simple quick efficient and brutal techniques. However, in none of these instances did the use of such brutal or dirty tactics necessitate the harming of the opponent.

**If that's true, then why can't these "brutal techniques and dirty tactics" work in the ring?

The control we practice allows us to take it to that level if needed but it is not a requirement that you hurt someone, if your only option is to punch and kick you may have less options if hurting someone is not your goal.

I admire everyone who practices and I truly do admit to the many benefits of being in better physical shape. However, I believe that one of the beauties of Wing Chun is that it is effective for not just the great athlete but also the out of shape average Joe too.

**An out-of-shape boxer can beat a chump too.

[anerlich]

I see WC as a traditional TCMA for self-development and actualisation.

Sports require sports-specific training. Strictly adhering to WC or any other TMA, for the sake of it will IMHO hinder rather than improve your chances of sporting success.

For citizen's self defense, martial skill is arguably the least important attribute to develop. As discussed in "Gift of Fear" and "Strong on Defense".

Those of you with an aversion to cardio should realise that you are several lthousand times more likely to die from lifestyle related heart disease than as a result of a violent assault. If you want to train for "survival", do the math and determine what's actually important.

Regarding "sport" and "street", it's all been said so much better before:

http://www.straightblastgym.com/problem.htm

[Sihing73]

Hi Terrence,

I am glad you think that the nasal septum is not a realisitc technique and will not work against a resisting opponent. I guess all the times I used it, for example while making an arrest the other guy just went ahead and cooperated out of the goodness of his heart. I am sure he was happy to be on his way to jail

I guess we will have to disagree as you are an advocate of the "ring" and NHB type of events and seem to feel that is the standard to be measured against. I am glad you have been in real street fights and not been hurt, I am not so sure that this is the result of skill or luck. I hope you never get involved in a real fight where you are hurt.

I have no desire to enter any type of NHB events and I fully admit to not being in shape to do so even if I wanted to. I do however leave my door open to ANYONE who wishes to visit and see if things like a nasal septum would work for real. I also fully admit to cheating to insure that I win

Peace,

Dave

[kj]

In reality, however, even "streetfights" rarely involve these "foul tactics" -- and for several reasons: 1) the overwhelming majority of "streetfights" aren't life-or-death affairs and so don't warrant or legally permit such behavior (so if your fighting method relies on these things, you'll either get your ass kicked unless it turns into a fight to the death because you can't use your weapons or you'll end up in prison for maiming or seriously injuring someone that took a swing at you - assuming those things actually worked for you). <deletia>

A brief observation on the above theoretical and generalized premise.

I don't presume to know or make assertions on the nature of Terence's or others' "streetfights"; given different circumstances, motivations and individual natures there is a legitimate possibility that the overwhelming "majority" are indeed not life-or-death affairs. In my case however, (for example purposes only), "streetfights" involving me would have a considerable potential of being or becoming life-or-death affairs. All probabilities (or risk exposures) are not equal, and generalizations have inherent limitations.

Offered at face value without concern of making any other point, nor with intention to derail in-progress or future arguments. Please carry on.

Regards,
- kj

[YungChun]

Sports require sports-specific training. Strictly adhering to WC or any other TMA, for the sake of it will IMHO hinder rather than improve your chances of sporting success.

So does that apply to Muay Thai or BJJ?

How about Muay Thai AND BJJ?

How about Wing Chun AND BJJ?

If Ving Tsun Kuen can’t handle itself as a fighting style along side the likes of Muay Thai, Kickboxing, Boxing, etc, then Ving Tsun Kuen is but a relic; Like a beloved antique teapot, now cracked and fragile, it sits displayed on a shelf as a testament to its one time functionality and usefulness.

[Vajramusti]

In reality, however, even "streetfights" rarely involve these "foul tactics" -- and for several reasons: 1) the overwhelming majority of "streetfights" aren't life-or-death affairs and so don't warrant or legally permit such behavior (so if your fighting method relies on these things, you'll either get your ass kicked unless it turns into a fight to the death because you can't use your weapons or you'll end up in prison for maiming or seriously injuring someone that took a swing at you - assuming those things actually worked for you). <deletia>

((Difficult to generaize about all street fights. And "the law" is not always on the mind of participants))



In my case however, (for example purposes only), "streetfights" involving me would have a considerable potential of being or becoming life-or-death affairs.

((KJ is correct. Street events are not always two machos going at each other))







If Ving Tsun Kuen can’t handle itself as a fighting style along side the likes of Muay Thai, Kickboxing, Boxing, etc, then Ving Tsun Kuen is but a relic;


((WC is not a relic. It can be functional. Dont care to post another long story)) Joy