Pure Wing Chun, Applied Wing Chun

[YongChun]

I have been to many (maybe all of them) Wing Chun seminars where the great theories of Wing Chun were being discussed. A thought in the minds of some I am sure was “that’s great but what’s that got to do with real modern combat and how does that help me to handle the modern MMA fighter?”

On martial arts forums like this one, there is some animosity between different groups of people because we don’t distinguish clearly where we are coming from. The fighters don't care about the angle of the Tan sau, the circle theory, where you Chi is. The theoreticians don't care about winning in the UFC or kicking a bag 10,000 times.

I think some of the problems would go away if the topics for discussion were clearly categorized as belonging to the realm of Pure Wing Chun or of Applied Wing Chun. Maybe we need two groups? Furthermore, Wing Chun tapes and seminars might be more useful if they were labeled as being Pure Wing Chun, with application in a classroom setting only or of Applied Wing Chun that talks about the real world. For the Applied Wing Chuner or Real Fighter probably most if not all Wing Chun tapes , CD's and DVD's fall short compared to the many MMA media (including much footage of actual combat) that's available to date.

As an analogy, look at mathematics. Pure mathematicians are rarely concerned with how their mathematics applies to the real world. Thus Andrew Wiles spent 7 or 8 years finding a proof to Fermat's famous theorem that two cubes can't make a third cube and so one up the line. This theorem has absolutely no practical use yet the proof employs the most ingenious mathematics ever devised by humans in this Universe. Why did he do that? Because mathematicians have been trying to do that for 350 years and the best of the best failed. The same reason that people climbed Mount Everest. There are other areas of pure mathematics however that do have application in the real world. An example is all the work related to prime numbers (2,3,5,7,11,13 etc.) is useful for keeping our banking information secure. The application of ideas from pure mathematics is applied mathematics.

Likewise in Wing Chun there are many people who are intrigued by the structure and limited application of the Wing Chun system. I would fit the beautiful ideas of Tsui Shan Tin (Chu Shong Tin) in this category where he explains everything in terms of circles and spheres. All his ideas are very good. Yet he doesn't go and fight in UFC or against the Thais or even discusses that subject. I would categorize his discussions as belonging to the area of Pure Wing Chun. In his subject area, he is clearly a Master.

Then there are others who talk about the application of Wing Chun to street combat, to mixed martial arts and to survival in Jail. These people's discussions belong to the area of Applied Wing Chun. In the area of Applied Wing Chun, we have a harder time to agree on who is the master.

If you are a Wing Chun practitioner, then ideas from Pure Wing Chun must necessarily be part of your fighting strategy and tactics. If not then you are not a Wing Chun practitioner but a Mixed Martial Artist with varying degrees of Wing Chun.

I see both groups as having something very relevant and useful to say. Applied arts depend on the pure arts for their methods. Pure arts sometimes come about from problems encountered in the real world. Sometimes pure arts a just mental gymnastic exercises with no perceived purpose yet 100 years later the theory suddenly becomes very applicable to something. In the case of mathematics, Boolean Algebra, which has application in computer design, can be cited as one example of this.

For most of us, computer design is like the pure art. We don't care how or why our computers, TV's, Cell phones etc. work. As long as they work, we are happy. We are in the applied field. Some people in Wing Chun are like that. They could care less about UFC, Pride, and Street combat and yet they are very interested to analyze and talk about Wing Chun. It's rare to see someone at a high level who can be both an expert in the Pure and the applied aspects. At one level down you may find many who can do both. Of course this is not possible to define clearly.


Ray's Blog and Random Thoughts for the Day

[Edmund]

Is it a martial art or not? It's not good to be a pure theorist.
This isn't the maths world.

People CLAIM all sorts of things are pure. i.e. I'm doing stuff the more correct way.
If it has no practical use, how can they justify it?
If it can work only sometimes when the opponent is a piece of crap, then WHY is it more correct? Because theoretically someone else better 100 years later could make it work?

I disagree that the pure art is the one that's less applicable.
It should be the more applicable one.
You strip off the crap, you get the purer art.

As someone IN the computer design & development industry, I care what it's for. 10% of the effort is in the creation of the design. 90% of the effort is making sure it WILL WORK.

[schwarzdragon]

I have studied Wing Chun for 3 years. Now, I'm certified to teach it. Before that, I studied Tae Kwon Do for 9 years and Judo for 2 years. I was also trained in hand-to-hand combat during my 10 years as a US Army officer. Never before in my martial arts training have I seen mathmatics used to illustrate a point.

Furthermore, I have a question for you. Are you familiar with the difference between traditional versus modified wing chun? I have studied what I was told was traditional wing chun in the US. My wing chun master told me that many other styles came from the modified wing chun lineage, that excluded the footwork that is needed to avoid the opponent's attack.

Last summer, I was fortunate to train under my Chinese wife's uncle in Indonesia. He lived in a Shaolin monestary from age 4 to 30, when he left to get married. Now, he is 68 years old and has 9 children! Anyway, he is a master of 5 styles of kung fu including wing chun. He easily defeated me at chi sao. He said that my style of wing chun was the modified version and that he practiced the authentic shaolin wing chun. I have many of the training sessions on video tape. Several times, he used me in his seminars as the attacker. I was amazed how such an older gentleman could disable and disarm me without any effort. Even though he spoke no English, I can understand enough bahasa indonesia to know that he joked often about "American kung fu." Mostly, I can understand the universal Cantonese of Wing Chun terminology.

Confucius said, "There is no shame in falling as long as you try to get back up every time you fall."

[viper]

this is mainly addressed to swzdragon im most interested in ur trainin with a senior shaolin man my question is that many people state the yip mans traditional style differ from the shoalin technique so pherhaps its slightly different to yip man linages i think when it comes to pure or app wing chun they should both be in harmony with each other a agree many get caught up with this is the way it should be but martial arts is situational my sifu says if it works use it he says wing chun should grow many styles now have more em[phasis on completenss and i feel that in order for a chuner to be complete they should look at both sides of the app and pure u need both to be truly masterful and i agree with the statement of to much animosity between wing chun clans wing chun is wing chun people wste there lives talkin and not doin also swazdragon thats awesome u got to train with a man of such caliber really makes a person look twice when lookin at people and thinkn this old lady mite be a wing chun master strange isnt the oldest and weakest muscle wise i assume seem to be the most enlightn as to how to fight wen most think big strong burly men are the only ones i enjoy cn unliky things in martial arts i think its one of it beauties a equalizer.

[YongChun]

I agree Wing Chun is a martial art. This topic was just to get some other discussion going. Perhaps the Pure Wing Chun (nothing to do with modified vs unmodified or traditional vs modified or William Cheung's method vs Yip Man's other students method) is just stage 1 which leads to stage 2 the practical or applied art. That's not to say the purists can't apply it in the same way that you can't say pure mathematicians can't solve real world problems. Thus some pure dojo (excuse the Japanese) students have applied their art in he street for example (unlikely to win in MMA or tournament competition - unless it's trained).

The story of the true Shaolin Wing Chun beating American Wing Chun, what does that mean? A skilled guy always can beat an unskilled guy. The Shaolin guy won because of what? What can't the American Wing Chun man do that the Indonesian Wing Chun man can do? Just curious.

Ray

[YongChun]

Is it a martial art or not? It's not good to be a pure theorist.
This isn't the maths world.

People CLAIM all sorts of things are pure. i.e. I'm doing stuff the more correct way.

I disagree that the pure art is the one that's less applicable.
It should be the more applicable one.

My definition of pure was very different from the one you are talking about. Every lineage in my definition has a pure art as part of their study which later can become an applied art for those so inclined. The pure people can study forms, theory and do heavy duty sparring but it falls short of the definition proposed by Terrence for example as doing real fighting or real swimming as he put it. The applied people take their pure art in the direction that Terrence indicated as being the most useful.

Ray

[Nick Forrer]

I have studied Wing Chun for 3 years...............

Last summer, I was fortunate to train under my Chinese wife's uncle in Indonesia. He lived in a Shaolin monestary from age 4 to 30, when he left to get married. Now, he is 68 years old

If your uncle in law has trained for 64 years in kung fu and you have trained for 3 (other mas not withstanding) its really no surprise that he manhandled you. Trust me, at 3 years you're just starting wing chun.

[Airdrawndagger]

I agree

3 years of wing chun is only the begining of actually learning the art.

This topic is good for discussion because it calls on certain practices within the art ie fighter or theorist.
Terrence only wants to use his art/style in a MMA format to try to prove the styles worthiness, but until you master yourself you will not be able to master a martial art.
Everybody wins, everybody loses. The MMA format is probably the best way to test skills in a live environment with out actually fighting for real, but it is still just a game with rules and anybody who plays games will eventually lose.

Wing Chun is an art specifically designed for FIGHTING. The practitioner needs to become a FIGHTER in order to unveil the true nature of wing chun. This is the reason why I feel that wing chun has taken a downward turn.

Look at all the wing chun FIGHTERS of the 40s and 50s. The sifus of today that learned under GMYIP. Alot of them actually tested wing chun in actual fights. Beimo is the definition of a challenge match. Most of us have heard of these challenge matches taking place on the roof tops of buildings in Hong Kong. Some of the best applied knowledge came from challenge matches if not ALL knowledge.
It was quite common in China and Hong Kong for kung fu schools to challenge each other in a test of skills.
Most of the time they did not wear any equipment which allowed them the freedom of total fluidity without restrictive movements. This way they were able to use the full spectrum of there moves aside from lethal manouvers.

In order for US to carry the KUNG FU torch we need really test each other in Beimo. If we do not then the art will suffer and become stagnet, then eventually phase out of existence with the only thing left to talk about but the HISTORY of Kung fu.

[Hendrik]

Instead of looking at it As pure and applied, fighter and Theorician, Wing Chun or MMA...
I break it down to a common denominator --- Action Realtiy and analysis/synthesis.


Action Reality is Reality, as a punch is a punch. A take down is a Take down. The punch or take down can be Analysis/synthesis is various different focus such as to investigate the support mechanics, force flow, and direction of focus perception....etc.


IMHHO,
Typical issue raise when

1, one confuse Analysis/Synthesis as Action Reality such as a punch has to be punch this and only this way , step 1, 2, 3... ;

or on the other hand, Analysis/Synthesis means nothing to Action Reality such as there is no value is understanding how to develop Zhen Qi and use Zhen Qi as an indicator of the attainment of breathing and body sensitivity.

2, Proposing an "close perception answer " type of Action (Reality, such as street fight.. or UFC fight) or Analysis/Synthesis as the Ultimate which cover all Action Reality. Such as brand X beat all other martial arts, or Wing Chun is created to beat all other martial art....etc.

Since we know everything is growing and expanding in this world, declaing a "Close perception solution" to answer all the questions at anything is a problematic perception by itself. who knows what new invention will shown up the next moment?


3, The common-denominator of Action Reality is incomplete.

Such as if a style has answer or solution and training to a broad range of action common-denominator compoents such as kick, punch, take down, lock... while the other style or a school of that style doesnt have the major common-denominator components.
Then the one with a broad range of common-denominators is dealing with reality closer than the one that lack of major action components.

sometimes, in this case, the lack of common-denominator party will evoke the #2 above using the "close perception" as answer which blinding one even more or #1 using the Analysis/synthesis trying to "talk " or "think" or " blind " or "cut" away the issues they are facing.



4, Inertial physical/psychology state of the practitioner are not bring into picture. as Inertialphysical/psychology state of the practitioner is an Action Realtiy, not bring into the big picture is generating a blind spot while describing the realtiy. Not to mention, without Analysis/Synthesis solution to support or adapt to the innertial physical/psychological state causes un realistics projection which is driven away from the Action reality.




Thus, it is not about WCK or MMA or Pure or Theory or fighter or theorician......
It is do we know what we are doing? do we prepared for the Action Reality via different components ?
Or we just hold on to our view and stuck with it, be it the view is a partial close perception Action Reality believer or Analytical/synthesis idealism?

The questions then is will the individual to grow and expand?

[YongChun]

If your uncle in law has trained for 64 years in kung fu and you have trained for 3 (other mas not withstanding) its really no surprise that he manhandled you. Trust me, at 3 years you're just starting wing chun.

I was going to say the same thing. Three years is just beginning to learn something about Wing Chun.

Ray

[Hendrik]

In order for US to carry the KUNG FU torch we need really test each other in Beimo. If we do not then the art will suffer and become stagnet, then eventually phase out of existence with the only thing left to talk about but the HISTORY of Kung fu.

IMHHHO

Beimo is not equal to Kung Fu.

Beimo is nice but what to Bei? who is more saddistic? more agressive? better skill? Better cultivation is flow? better understanding? clearly on how to produce high quality students?........

Lots of things very broad IMHO. Otherwise, we might stucked in the "close perception"

[Fajing]

[QUOTE=Airdrawndagger]
Terrence only wants to use his art/style in a MMA format to try to prove the styles worthiness, but until you master yourself you will not be able to master a martial art.
Everybody wins, everybody loses. The MMA format is probably the best way to test skills in a live environment with out actually fighting for real, but it is still just a game with rules and anybody who plays games will eventually lose.[QUOTE=Airdrawndagger]

Nicely said!

[Ultimatewingchun]

The opening post of this thread about the difference between "pure" wing chun vs. "applied" wing chun reminds me of what goes on in some BJJ circles these days:

within BJJ-only tournaments wherein only certain techniques are allowed and all other things are banned (ie.- no striking)...and gi's must be worn (because of the "handles" they provide for BJJ moves to be accessed)...and points are given every time you pass a "guard" position, for example - because you're now in a more dominant BJJ position...

(ie.- imagine a wing chun match wherein you gain points every time you force your opponent to use bong sao - since bong is considered to be a "weak" hand - and must be transitioned into something else quickly or you're in danger of getting hit by your wing chun opponent's "better" next move)...

but the guy using the bong sao lost the match on points even though he dropped you twice with a roundhouse kick that's not considered wing chun (in most wing chun circles) and therefore no points were awarded to him for the knockdowns...

and the point to all of this is..................

Successful Fight Application is infinitely more important than "purity"....imo...

unless you no longer look upon the style you do as a MARTIAL ART - and prefer to look upon it as some sort of SPORT...

(ie.- "it doesn't matter whether or not the guy down the street can kick my a55 with his streetfighting strategies and moves - as long as my wing chun is PURE."

P.S. - the two examples given about passing guard or forcing bong sao are "superior" only within a certain limited relative context - but since reality fighting knows no such limits - the importance of these "relatively" superior moves are OVERSTATED AND EXAGGERATED.

[Tom Kagan]

For a Ving Tsun practitioner, there is nothing purer than an optimally leveraged blast down an optimal line at the optimal moment.

Purity is a process, not a state. So is application. They are one continuum.

Pure v. Applied is a false dichotomy.


The real question is what in the world this whole ball of wax is meant for. Could it be one of the following:

- Self-defense/professional use of force
- Tradition/physical art/self-discipline
- Spiritual/health
- Sport/tournament
- Demonstration

Does this style's slant match what you want? That is the question; That is the duality.

Do you even know what you want? Choose wisely.

[schwarzdragon]

Hello again, my brothers:
Last night was my first time posting here. I was surprised that many of you responded. Of course, 3 years is just the beginning of the rest of my life spent in perfecting the art. Unfortunately, I'm already 46 years old. My son was born in 2000, the year of the Golden Dragon. This is the same Chinese zodiac of the late Bruce Lee, who was born in 1940. My only hope is to pass on my knowledge to my half-Chinese son. Maybe, he can be the next Bruce Lee. Selamat malam.