What do you think of Wing Chun in Sanshou competitions?

[Knifefighter]

I guess my classmates that have succeeded using WC in kickboxing, MMA, and kyokushin rules must be wrong then, unlike you, a non-fighter.

So must Alan Orr and his guys..

Here's the problem. When boxers, BJJ, MMA, and MT fighters fight, they look very much like they do when they drill and spar.

Most WC, including Alan and his guys, look very little in fighting like they do when they are doing their WC drills. In my opinion, most of any success they have comes from their crosstraining, rather than their specific WC training.

[t_niehoff]

Only if you are looking from a technique POV, which you are obviously doing. I don't think we can even have a conversation here on a WC forum because, frankly, you really don't seem to undersand WCK.

We can't have a conversation because you are dealing in fantasy (on many levels) and I in reality.

Athletes practice movement, regardless of the athletic activity. You don't do anything physical except through your movement. No movement, no martial art. The movement that WCK practitioners learn and train is WCK movement. This is true for all martial arts.

What are you even talking about? What is a 'wing chun movement'?? Are you talking about the techiniques like Taan Bong Fook? What supports these movements? Answer: the concepts/principals.

Your body can't do a concept/principle -- it performs a movement. Tan/bong/fook are actions, they are movements that have a specific objective. Throwing a ball isn't a concept, it is a movement, a skill (a movement with an objective).

Sorry, but you're wrong - WC isn't just a bunch of movements. I can use WC concepts with boxing gloves on or off. No duh, some of the 'movements' don't work, but the ideas of center line, body structure, 2-line, gate thoery, etc still remains. Ok, so I can't use a fook with gloves on, so does that mean I can't use WC because I can't use a few techniques?

All your theories are nonsense, fantasy. If you are not using WCK movement, you are not using WCK. If you are not using boxing movements, you aren't doing boxing. The movements are the "tools" of your art. You guys like to kid yourselves into believing that while you can't use the tools of WCK in fighting, that you know and "understand" WCK.

It's funny, you come here saying what is and isn't WC, how would you even know? It's clear why you think someone would be speaking a foreign langauge, you don't even know how to say hello with WC....

I'm sorry, what do I need to do -- steal some forms, make up some history, call myself grandmaster, found a lineage, come up with a nonsensical theory to "know" what I am talking about?

It is easy to see if someone is boxing or not or if someone is wrestling or not or if someone is doing judo or not -- you can look at their movement, and see if they are doing the things (the movements) they learn and practice in their sparring. Simple. It's so simple that even you should be able to see it.

[sihing]

I think it is fair to say that if one is training in WC at a intense level, that this will be seen in what they do in their fighting actions, up to a point. The goal is to never perform WC. And this is where I see the problem today. If you go on youtube, all you really see is practitioners trying to use WC, performing tan sau's, bong sau's, chain punches, etc..., the problem with this is WC is NOT a application art. It is a training system, the drills and forms teach us body mechanics and attributes (facing, fast stable footwork, straightline punching, structure, efficency, short power, etc...), the drills are not meant to compete with, nor are they meant to fight with. It is the attributes we gain from the training that we use when defending ourselves, so it is I that is moving, punching, kicking, not the art of WC. The application of it is totally up to the individual, and IMO no two practitoners (even from the same lineage), should not look the same when using what they have learned from the training.

A old story about WSL, most have probably heard this before, but he was fighting in a beimo match, and the opponent had his head in a lower level position, WSL brought his knee up and hit his opponent with it, ending the match. He was chastised by his fellow practitioners for not using "WC technique", he replied by saying that he used the closest weapon to the nearest target, that is Wing Chun. The techniques bring alive the concepts and prinicipals that WC teaches us, but economy of motion dictates to us that we only use what we need from the system to get the job done, and to not be a slave to it.


As far as the question this thread askes, I do not think it is possible to use WC in san sau comps, as it is always the individual practitioners that are using anything they have learned. WC is not meant for comps, not because it is too "deadly", rather because it is limited in it's application and not designed for such a purpose. San sau, like all "fighting, is a comparison of combat skills btwn two individuals looking to find how good they are. Self defence is different, it is unexpected, with no fore knowledge, and much more dangerous. WC is designed to teach us how to efficiently defend ourselves, finish the job fast and get out with the least amount of injury, not to trade blows with someone, to score points or to win approval from the crowd. Different environments, different needs. This is not to say that competiton guys can't defend themselves, off course they can, but this is not the purpose of their training.


James

[t_niehoff]

I think it is fair to say that if one is training in WC at a intense level, that this will be seen in what they do in their fighting actions, up to a point. The goal is to never perform WC. And this is where I see the problem today. If you go on youtube, all you really see is practitioners trying to use WC, performing tan sau's, bong sau's, chain punches, etc..., the problem with this is WC is NOT a application art. It is a training system, the drills and forms teach us body mechanics and attributes (facing, fast stable footwork, straightline punching, structure, efficency, short power, etc...), the drills are not meant to compete with, nor are they meant to fight with. It is the attributes we gain from the training that we use when defending ourselves, so it is I that is moving, punching, kicking, not the art of WC. The application of it is totally up to the individual, and IMO no two practitoners (even from the same lineage), should not look the same when using what they have learned from the training.

Another great example of trying to explain why you can't use the things you learn and practice -- in this case, your theory is that those things you learn and practice are never meant to be used in the first place!! Brilliant! Spend years, decades, doing forms and drills, practicing movements that you will never use. That makes absolutely no sense -- and you won't develop any "attributes" that way.

The "attributes" only matter in using our tools, our movements -- what does it matter if a boxer or a wrestler has good "attributes" if he doesn't have a boxer's or wrestler's tools (skills)? Good technique (movement) not only uses attributes but maximizes them. You develop good technique from practice, from repetition of movement.

Of course it is up to the individual, and no two will look the same, but that is true of boxers, wrestlers, MT, BJJ, etc. Yet, they all move the same way in application (fighting) as they learn and practice.

A old story about WSL, most have probably heard this before, but he was fighting in a beimo match, and the opponent had his head in a lower level position, WSL brought his knee up and hit his opponent with it, ending the match. He was chastised by his fellow practitioners for not using "WC technique", he replied by saying that he used the closest weapon to the nearest target, that is Wing Chun. The techniques bring alive the concepts and prinicipals that WC teaches us, but economy of motion dictates to us that we only use what we need from the system to get the job done, and to not be a slave to it.

The story is silly. Who says knee strikes aren't in the WCK arsenal?

Closest weapon to the nearest target is not WCK "theory". Not only that, but that "theory" itself makes poor sense. Nor does or can "economy of motion" -- another nonWCK "theory" -- dictate anything we do. Where do people come up with this crap?

The only thing people seem a slave to is nonsensical "theory".

As far as the question this thread askes, I do not think it is possible to use WC in san sau comps, as it is always the individual practitioners that are using anything they have learned. WC is not meant for comps, not because it is too "deadly", rather because it is limited in it's application and not designed for such a purpose. San sau, like all "fighting, is a comparison of combat skills btwn two individuals looking to find how good they are. Self defence is different, it is unexpected, with no fore knowledge, and much more dangerous. WC is designed to teach us how to efficiently defend ourselves, finish the job fast and get out with the least amount of injury, not to trade blows with someone, to score points or to win approval from the crowd. Different environments, different needs. This is not to say that competiton guys can't defend themselves, off course they can, but this is not the purpose of their training.
James

It's not a question of whether or not it is "meant for competition" -- the issue is whether if we have fighting skills we can use them in a fighting environment, including competition. And obviously, as long as the rules of the competition don't prevent us from using our skills (as putting a wrestler in a boxing match would, for example) we should be able to use them. The rules of the sanshou competition impose outside (noncontact) fighting, so it will "look" like boxing or kickboxing and not WCK.

[KPM]

The rules of the sanshou competition impose outside (noncontact) fighting, so it will "look" like boxing or kickboxing and not WCK.

Bingo! But I think you need to explain to everyone what you mean by "outside/noncontact" fighting vs. "inside/contact" fighting. Not everyone understands their WCK this way, which is the problem. I have been training my WCK this way following things I've learned about Robert Chu/Alan Orr's approach and its made a big difference in what I do. So I think I understand what you are saying. But my bet is that I'm probably the only one here that does.

[Knifefighter]

Self defence is different, it is unexpected, with no fore knowledge, and much more dangerous. WC is designed to teach us how to efficiently defend ourselves, finish the job fast and get out with the least amount of injury, not to trade blows with someone, to score points or to win approval from the crowd. Different environments, different needs. This is not to say that competiton guys can't defend themselves, off course they can, but this is not the purpose of their training.

LOL @ the old self-defense rationalization... one of the biggest cop-outs ever invented.

[sihing]

Another great example of trying to explain why you can't use the things you learn and practice -- in this case, your theory is that those things you learn and practice are never meant to be used in the first place!! Brilliant! Spend years, decades, doing forms and drills, practicing movements that you will never use. That makes absolutely no sense -- and you won't develop any "attributes" that way.

The "attributes" only matter in using our tools, our movements -- what does it matter if a boxer or a wrestler has good "attributes" if he doesn't have a boxer's or wrestler's tools (skills)? Good technique (movement) not only uses attributes but maximizes them. You develop good technique from practice, from repetition of movement.

Of course it is up to the individual, and no two will look the same, but that is true of boxers, wrestlers, MT, BJJ, etc. Yet, they all move the same way in application (fighting) as they learn and practice.



The story is silly. Who says knee strikes aren't in the WCK arsenal?

Closest weapon to the nearest target is not WCK "theory". Not only that, but that "theory" itself makes poor sense. Nor does or can "economy of motion" -- another nonWCK "theory" -- dictate anything we do. Where do people come up with this crap?

The only thing people seem a slave to is nonsensical "theory".



It's not a question of whether or not it is "meant for competition" -- the issue is whether if we have fighting skills we can use them in a fighting environment, including competition. And obviously, as long as the rules of the competition don't prevent us from using our skills (as putting a wrestler in a boxing match would, for example) we should be able to use them. The rules of the sanshou competition impose outside (noncontact) fighting, so it will "look" like boxing or kickboxing and not WCK.

I think you may have missed the point, but that is okay, we all see what we want to see in interpreting things based on our POV.

Good Luck to you.

James

[Edmund]

It is the attributes we gain from the training that we use when defending ourselves, so it is I that is moving, punching, kicking, not the art of WC. The application of it is totally up to the individual, and IMO no two practitoners (even from the same lineage), should not look the same when using what they have learned from the training.

I agree.
Training drills and forms will not always look like how it is applied. A great example is judo. The uchi mata as seen in Judo kata or static drills only demonstrates the basic idea of the throw. In competition, it almost never looks like that. There's so many variations of mechanics, grips, setups and entries for uchi mata because of individual preference or the situation.

WC is not meant for comps, not because it is too "deadly", rather because it is limited in it's application and not designed for such a purpose. San sau, like all "fighting, is a comparison of combat skills btwn two individuals looking to find how good they are. Self defence is different, it is unexpected, with no fore knowledge, and much more dangerous. WC is designed to teach us how to efficiently defend ourselves, finish the job fast and get out with the least amount of injury, not to trade blows with someone, to score points or to win approval from the crowd. Different environments, different needs. This is not to say that competiton guys can't defend themselves, off course they can, but this is not the purpose of their training.

I think that you can't prepare for a san sao match without adapting to the format. You'd have to train more specifically for that sort of thing. There's rules and equipment. It's not possible to just enter on a whim. You'd have to change your style to do well.

Having said that, the techniques of WC are a decent fit for san sao matches. There's kicks, punches and throws. The main problem is that high throws score quite highly compared to strikes AFAIK.

[Edmund]

The rules of the sanshou competition impose outside (noncontact) fighting, so it will "look" like boxing or kickboxing and not WCK.

I think that's a little inaccurate. You have to watch some of it from China. In san shou, you throw when you are in contact. Even a little trip or sweep scores a bit. They do not let you just hug it out for 10 seconds though.

[Liddel]

Another one of these threads in fine form. LOL

My boxing friends HATE light sparring without Gloves, i love it. They cant handle the contact without raps and padding.

I have TKB sparring partners (one of which is my best friend) who dont use elbows or kness in sparring cause they are to dangerous. (thats thier training approach)

I have a grappler friend who cant roll with strikes, and forget about trying to practice in my garage with a concrete floor, we have to go to the local school to use the grass field.

IMO these are just some similar examples to what we are discussing here with VT in a specific setting. (SanShou)

I feel there are some valid points about how VT aint the best approach for competing in SanShou comps etc.

Personally in a comp setting just with gloves on i feel i need more space, my elbow must give more space, my center punching must be wider, im not allowed to kick knees or stomp to start and end combos....elbows are out

So while i agree with some points about VT ineffectness in certain settings i know what settings it is good for. ....

and i personally believe if you dont see what i call the base habbit actions of VT. Bong Tan Pak. the diff stepping shapes and weight dist, the timing behaviour - action vs reaction.... in such a setting. That particular person doesnt belong in the comp using VT in the first place.

DREW

[Ultimatewingchun]

Functional wing chun has got to look very similar to boxing, kickboxing, etc. until if and when the fight is very close quarter - and even then there's much that will happen that can and will look alot like boxing or Muay Thai - but perhaps with more of an emphasis on center-of-mass or blindside positoning, forward pressure while attacking his center-of-mass and of course some signature wing chun moves like lop, pak, lan, bil, garn, vertical fist punches, low heel kick, etc.

But not always. The fight could be over by knockout or into a clinch before hardly any of the above happens.

Certain wing chun principles can be used at other ranges - but wing chun "signature" moves will only be seen at close quarters - and could come and go in the blink of an eye.

Marrying wing chun to boxing, kickboxing, etc. is the answer - whether people admit what they're doing or not. No knock on Alan and his guys - especially since I think they're good fighters - and certainly no knock on Keith Mazza'a TWC guys who've appeared on this forum via tournament vids....(to use but 2 examples)...

but they look alot like boxers/kickboxers - and the same "criticism" was leveled at me several years ago when I posted some sparring vids.

But it is what it is.

[t_niehoff]

"Functional wing chun" is using the movement of WCK successfully in fighting (if you can't use it successfully, how can it be functional?). But, there is really no such thing as "functional wing chun" -- that's like saying "functional tennis". You simply perform at your level.

If your movement/technique "looks" like boxing or kickboxing, then you are not using the movements of WCK as boxing and kickboxing has a different sort of movement than WCK (and WCK has a different sort of movement than boxing and kickboxing). Just look at the traditional WCK forms and drills -- how much does THAT movement "look" like boxing or kickboxing?

Skill in WCK is using the movements that we practice, those things/tools from the forms/drills successfully in fighting. If you are not using those movements, then you are not doing WCK. So if what you are doing "looks" like boxing or kickboxing, you are not using WCK.

But when people try to fight on the outside in nonattached fighting, it will come to "look" like boxing or kickboxing because it has to. For example, take greco and fight on the outside and you won't see any greco movement, you will see boxing/kickboxing. That's what happens when you take a attached (contact) fighting method like WCK and try to make it "work" on the outside -- it will "evolve" into kickboxing, devoid of most WCK movement (which is attached, contact movement).

Seeing this, people rationalize it (after all, their grandmaster couldn't be wrong!) by saying "well, yes, you can't use the movements, but you can use the principles of wing chun"! They don't see that you can't separate the movement from the principle. When you aren't using WCK movement, you are not using WCK principle.

[LoneTiger108]

It's good to see sensible discussion about a topic I created!

I personally like the Sanshou model and can see many points being raised here that only add to my sometimes wayward opinions.

If only the UK based BCCMA had more Wing Chun competitors! Maybe then there would be a recognised arena for us to roll-out Internationally.

Time will tell.

[punchdrunk]

i think wing chunners have to adjust their training and fighting methods for competition, just like every other art, depending on the venue. bjj, wrestling, boxers, thai boxers everyone changes for mma vs other forms of comp vs self defense. Stances change, strikes change, grappling changes so does the training methods... it comes down to the athlete not the "style"

[Liddel]

t_niehoff
Skill in WCK is using the movements that we practice, those things/tools from the forms/drills successfully in fighting. If you are not using those movements, then you are not doing WCK. So if what you are doing "looks" like boxing or kickboxing, you are not using WCK.

I agree to an extent - and thats to say we need to be more specific in whats similar and whats totally different.
I can only speak of myslef in this regard.

When i saprr in a ring, you see a more mobile horse and a less obvious Bi Jong pose or guard if you will, from say Gor Sau ... but its still VT.

Youd see rounder punches because of the space i need with 16oz gloves.
A lack of several habbit actions wouldnt come out, like elbows and stomps...so i counter that with using more round punches like hooks etc.

You can say it looks like im boxing but in fact i create round punches in a different way to boxing. Im not widening my elbow away from my body... my turning body creates the round shape still adhering to techniques in my VT.
It snaps in a different way and takes a differnt path but "looks" similar cause its still a punch dam it LOL

You would see habbit actions like Tan to open space for my punch, if anything it is more pronounced as my punch requires more space with a glove on.
Youd see me Parry (Pak) actions like jabs and even crosses.

Youd see me bong Guarn or Gum kicks.
I use front kicks like my Kickboxer sparring partners but my touch point is differnt and i raise the action differnt, my body support is differnt but to a lamen it looks similar......so i feel you should see elements of VT not something totally foreign to other fighting arts...

Its when you see nothing that resembles VT then theres a problem.

DREW