Attention All Fighters !!!

[Jeff Bussey]

Hi

Hello people,

I haven't posted in a while, but I just have a quick question for all of the fighters out there, why can't you make your WCK work?

There's a lot of guys here that bag on people for sticking too closely to the defined shapes of wing chun (which I for the most part agree that they shouldn't), but then if that's the case, what's wrong with the wing chun principles?

When you first start training, you do start with shapes to get the ideas of what you're supposed to be doing, but as you progress, the shapes blur and you rely more on concepts and principles.

I believe that's what the core of wing chun is about - principles.

So if you agree with me, then what is it that you can't make work and if you don't agree then why not?

J

[Ultimatewingchun]

My take:

Most people don't understand that you've got to be very close to make wing chun work - where it can definitely shine. It's getting there (without being tied up in a clinch or taken down) that most people don't get.

Once you solve that riddle - the shapes, principles, and techniques take care of themselves. The centerline theory of and by itself can only be used successfully when very close to the guy (ie.- inside of two feet).

[jesper]

Uhm why do you assume we cant make it work ?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Because there is no leading shoulder when punching your way in - you need to have your shoulders squared so that the centerline is facing the opponent...which makes for shorter range punches...

and if your opponent is at least as tall as you - and certainly if he is taller (and therefore a longer arm reach than you)....he can punch around your arms as you come in - thereby nullifying the supposed wing chun advantage of using the straightest line possible - and therefore the fastest...and therefore you punch him before he can punch you.

Great theory - but only works consistently from within about 2 feet of the guy.

And there's another reason....footwork...or the lack thereof....within most wing chun systems...makes one vulnerable to all sorts of things (ie.- in addition to what I described above)...there is also longer range kicks (especially round ones) to worry about.

[Knifefighter]

My belief is that WC is a better defensive than offensive system and that most WC fighters don't utilize the system in this defensive manner. Instead, they attempt to be offensive and have trouble making the principles work in a realistic manner.

Additional reasons- too much chi sao, Mook Jong, forms, "tag" sparring and not enough hard, full-contact sparring.

[ittokaos]

Good Morning,

I think I have an answer to your question.

The reason Wing Chun doesn't work is due to the fact that the practitioner doesn't know how to effectively use it.

This is probably for one(or all)of 2 reasons.

1) Training

You go to your once a week lesson and expect to be the next Yip (Ip) Man. For on e to be good and effective with any art you have to practice diligently. Sure you're awesome when you spar with your fellow students and your sifu is always saying how good you're getting, but if you only train in class you are using the art for the sake of using an art and not for fighting. The greatest wing chun artists were not born overnight, it takes years of diligent training. Look at black belts. When I was young I thought that black belts were the pinnacle(spelled wrong I think) of what a martial artist can achieve and I suppose the ones that train dilligently are actually pretty good. Unfortunately, as we all know, the majority of black belts today(the ones that I know anyway) don't know how to use their art effectively for fighting due to training methods or due to their poor instructor. Which brings us to the next reason...

2)Sifu/sensei/guru not up to par.(teaching wise)

Let's say that your sifu learned from the greatest wing chun master in the world(yip/ip man, pan nam, bruce lee, william cheung, vulgar the clown,slappy the squirrel, yoda, whoever,etc...) and has many,many duels throught their long and battle filled life. They have been in countless hong kong action films and have been honored by China for their fighting prowess. Even after all that: they can still suck at teaching. True that a good sifu should be good at the art but he/she/it should still be able to fully transfer the art to another individual. Once again, it is not the fault of the art but of the sifu who is trying but can't fully transfer the art. Without the proper guidance a practitioner of any art would most likely fail in using it in a fight. Moving on...

My point is: the fault is on the practioner and not the art itself. True certain schools put less emphasis on footwork but all the lineages i've studied use proper footwork and make sure to emphasize the unbalanced opponent aspect of a fight. Without paying the proper amount of attention to each element of the style no progress can be made. Kung Fu is a sophisticated fighting art that has worked for thousands(maybe not for wing chun)of years.

What's the big difference from then to noweople. People would rather see fast results then to constantly train and train until they get it right. That's the reason why people that do taebo actually believe that they can fight. They see fast results and feel that they are learning how to fight and exercise at the same time. Quick and efficient. No(true)fighting art can be mastered in a year's time. It can be learned but not perfected. Ancient and current masters have spent their whole life trying to unlock the mysteries of their arts. So, don't be discouraged if it takes a while. Good things take time. Don't blame the art. It isn't the fault of the creators of wing chun that you can't make it work for you.

If you don't like the art and you feel that it's not working, then stop doing it. Why waste your time, right? But if you know that you can do better and you want to keep working at it then do so. Train harder! Learn as much about your art as possible. Buy books on it. VCDs. DVDs. Whatever you can get your hands on. Just remember that everyone learns at a different pace so don't get discouraged.

I hope this helps. If you have any further questions for me, send me a message.

Thanks

WF

[t_niehoff]

Hi

Hello people,

I haven't posted in a while, but I just have a quick question for all of the fighters out there, why can't you make your WCK work?

There's a lot of guys here that bag on people for sticking too closely to the defined shapes of wing chun (which I for the most part agree that they shouldn't), but then if that's the case, what's wrong with the wing chun principles?

When you first start training, you do start with shapes to get the ideas of what you're supposed to be doing, but as you progress, the shapes blur and you rely more on concepts and principles.

I believe that's what the core of wing chun is about - principles.

So if you agree with me, then what is it that you can't make work and if you don't agree then why not?

J

In my view, it is helpful to look at WCK as an activity, just like grappling is an activity. WCK is playing the game (fighting using a particular approach). Skill in any activity/game primarily comes from doing that activity, from the experience playing the game. Skilled people are guided by their experience and good instructors pass on their experience. Concepts and principles are IME "generalized rules" for beginners, for those practitioners who have no experience to draw from for guidance (on how to play the game). These are replaced by experience.

What is the "core" of basketball? Principles? No. Basketball is a game, an activity with certain fundamental elements (i.e., ball control) and skills (dribbling, passing, etc.) that we need to play the game. The "core" of WCK, like that of any sport/game/activity, will be those elements/skills necessary to playing the game.

[jesper]

You know ultimatewingchun. If you feel you lack a leading punch, why not start using one, I have never heard any fighters say I couldnt be using a workable technich because it didnt look WT. Any fighters I have met have used a variaty of weapons picked up through hard sparring with different styles. that includes hooks, low roundhouse kicks you name it. Using anything but the best respons in a given situation because its not "WT" would be lame.

Oh and your right, footwork sucks for many practicioners. dunno maybe its not fancy enough spending countless hours finetuning your footwork, but my experience do suggest that most people who has fought some hard sparring matches tend to pay more notice to it. Wonder why

[JPinAZ]

"Because there is no leading shoulder when punching your way in - you need to have your shoulders squared so that the centerline is facing the opponent...which makes for shorter range punches..."

I see this as one difficulty - why punch your way in? I think about controlling a bridge and having correct space/distance and proper position in regards to my opponent before I'd even consider throwing a punch. IMO, punching your way in is like crossing your fingers and hoping you get lucky.
(unless I mistake what you wrote)

-----------
As far as concepts and principles, I think these are the underlying backbone of WC. Without these, you are more-or-less left with is a bag of techniques and not much reference on how to put them together. Not saying it can't be done, nor am I saying it can't be effective - but I feel it takes many more hours trying different things and seeing what works/what doesn't work (trail/error) to become effective. I feel that with understanding 'WC Principles/concepts' from the start (and all through fighting/training), the learning time for effectiveness is decreased - the techniques then are results of the principles (if that makes sense).

I think there can be many obvious reasons someone might not be able to 'make WC work': instructor, non-realistic training, focus, time, etc. And it varies case by case. For me, if I get the feeling I am not making something work, I have to go back and see if I am understanding the principles/concepts I am trying to express. (and yes, having a good, resistive opponent/partner during training helps)

Jonathan

[Liddel]

I dont know about you guys but VT has saved me from getting smashed over several times, once i was able to avoid getting bottled when two guys attacked me.

So for some to say "it doesnt work" i say... sux for you

I dont know if others out there are trying to "hammer in a nail with a screw driver" but in its range it works Well for me.

Im certainly not going to win any MMA events but it HAS served me in defending myself.

[Jeff Bussey]

Uhm why do you assume we cant make it work ?

Hey Jesper
The only thing I'm asking is why you can't make it work. If you can or don't feel that way then great.

J

[Jeff Bussey]

My belief is that WC is a better defensive than offensive system and that most WC fighters don't utilize the system in this defensive manner. Instead, they attempt to be offensive and have trouble making the principles work in a realistic manner.

Additional reasons- too much chi sao, Mook Jong, forms, "tag" sparring and not enough hard, full-contact sparring.

Hey Knifefighter

what do you mean by it's a better defensive than offensive system?

J

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey ittokaos

I agree that most people who train once a week are clueless if they think they're going to be the second coming.
I also agree that it's the practitioner and not the system to blame.

I've found that wing chun does take longer than other arts to start to get. That could just be me but that's been my experience.

J

[Jeff Bussey]

In my view, it is helpful to look at WCK as an activity, just like grappling is an activity. WCK is playing the game (fighting using a particular approach). Skill in any activity/game primarily comes from doing that activity, from the experience playing the game. Skilled people are guided by their experience and good instructors pass on their experience. Concepts and principles are IME "generalized rules" for beginners, for those practitioners who have no experience to draw from for guidance (on how to play the game). These are replaced by experience.

What is the "core" of basketball? Principles? No. Basketball is a game, an activity with certain fundamental elements (i.e., ball control) and skills (dribbling, passing, etc.) that we need to play the game. The "core" of WCK, like that of any sport/game/activity, will be those elements/skills necessary to playing the game.

Hi Terence,
agree and disagree

So what's the core of BJJ? (First I'd like to say that I have no experience with it so bare with me a little.) Wouldn't it be positioning ? Like if you're in the right position, you can pull off whatever it is that you need to. At least that's how I view ving tsun, always look for the right position (sometimes that right position is leaving and going home) But anyways, if that's right, to get the right position, then you're using certain principles to get there. Like if you know that when he has an arm out, you can do x and move your hips y and bingo bango you've submitted him. (like I said bare with me) Now that comes from experience, like you said above, but it's still based on a principle of how you shift your weight or whatever.

Make sense?

[Jeff Bussey]

"

As far as concepts and principles, I think these are the underlying backbone of WC. Without these, you are more-or-less left with is a bag of techniques and not much reference on how to put them together. Not saying it can't be done, nor am I saying it can't be effective - but I feel it takes many more hours trying different things and seeing what works/what doesn't work (trail/error) to become effective. I feel that with understanding 'WC Principles/concepts' from the start (and all through fighting/training), the learning time for effectiveness is decreased - the techniques then are results of the principles (if that makes sense).

Jonathan

Hey Jonathan

That is how I feel. They are the backbone, the foundation.

J