Wing Chun sparring

[YungChun]

When fighting, which can mean many things, only the most trained, most useful (to the individual) and the circumstances will come out.. Some folks will have very little hard core training, some will have very little good traditional training and beyond that you will get all kinds of mixes of innate ability.. The truth is most students of chun are just that, students, beginners... Why? Because of the numbers and access to good training..

The majority of what you see will represent the majority of people, not terribly good for whatever reasons... That said, don't expect to see all kinds of complex moves from anyone in actual application..

A single or multiple punch or palm KO is a very valid expression of the system--so long as general WCK structure is used... Then the questions come up why train X,Y,Z if you don't use them? Because they are or were deemed useful some part of the time... WCK has lots of moves from when folks used to fight other similar styles.. You won't see many other Southern styles around these days mixing it up with similar moves so many of those counters are not going to come out. But that doesn't mean that leaning how to deal with various positions and energy is bad, not all opponents are boxers and not all opponents are bent on killing you... Some very basic moves and tools can be of use when conditions are not of the Ring variety..

It is also true that in a fight where you are effective you simply can't expect to see tons of moves used, especially in an art like WCK...that's in the movies.. WCK in application should be simple and direct and very busy IMO... If it works then don't worry about how pretty it is...

In the end you shouldn't have to ask someone else if your art is effective.. Go out and find out for yourself.. In the old days most serious folks would be sure to do this.. Some would do it every chance they had... There are many ways to do this these days... In the end it is you who must assess and decide if what you do passes the reality test or not..

[Chop suey]

So basically to sum up the two sides of this...argument...

I)One the one hand we have those who say
A)all "fighting" pretty much looks the same, regardles of what martial art has been trained.
B)Wing chun is inadequate to be used by itself. The techniques are either to complicated to be used in a real situation or are no longer applicable in a modern context.
C) while certain theories are valid, wing chun should be combined with other arts to make up for its short comings. (mma)

II) On the other hand we have those who say
A) If it doesnt look like wing chun, it probably isnt. If it doesnt look like wing chun, the person doing it hasnt trained either hard or long enough. I learn wing chun because I want to do wing chun.
B) Wing chun is logical and reasonable. The techniques can actually be used and applied. They are performed almost automatically or at least with very little thought.
C) It doesnt need to be combined with anything else. It can stand on its own.

Group I could be called the Realists and group II could be called the Purists. I for one consider myself amongst the Purists. I do not believe wing chun makes me invincible.

[Tao Of The Fist]

So basically to sum up the two sides of this...argument...

I)One the one hand we have those who say
A)all "fighting" pretty much looks the same, regardles of what martial art has been trained.
B)Wing chun is inadequate to be used by itself. The techniques are either to complicated to be used in a real situation or are no longer applicable in a modern context.
C) while certain theories are valid, wing chun should be combined with other arts to make up for its short comings. (mma)

II) On the other hand we have those who say
A) If it doesnt look like wing chun, it probably isnt. If it doesnt look like wing chun, the person doing it hasnt trained either hard or long enough. I learn wing chun because I want to do wing chun.
B) Wing chun is logical and reasonable. The techniques can actually be used and applied. They are performed almost automatically or at least with very little thought.
C) It doesnt need to be combined with anything else. It can stand on its own.

Group I could be called the Realists and group II could be called the Purists. I for one consider myself amongst the Purists. I do not believe wing chun makes me invincible.

I would like to think that I am among group III, which I would call the Progressive Traditionalists. Combat is always going to change, as it has since forever; like the christian saying 'the Devil is always diligent so must we be as well.' However, the techniques in Wing Chun wouldn't still be around if they didn't work. So you take from it what works for you. Adhere to the nature, but change the form accordingly.

[YungChun]

A or B misses the point...

It's just a fighting system... Too many folks turn their chosen style into a religion where faith drives each post (here) and often replaces hard work and testing..

Or the opposition, where hatred and often misunderstanding of the art taints every post (here) and drives their analysis of the system ...

That's half the problem..

It's just a fighting style.. If you like it great and if not great...

Like almost any style WCK specializes in a range. Don't expect it be the--be all, end all--just as no other single style is the be all end all of all ranges of combat..

It's a big world out there and there are plenty of good styles and systems out there... If you want to be a complete fighter/warrior...you need experience in all ranges of combat..

And that goes for weapons and tactical training as well.. It's a big world.. Too much to learn in one lifetime for most.. But cross training is great, more info is great--care not from where something comes if you can use it..

It's just a style folks... And it's finally you and your group who will make it good or not, 'real WCK' or not, theoretical or not, effective or not and tested or not...

[Chop suey]

Very well put. When you say different ranges, are you meaning like close range or long range? I've heard alot of people talk about this. But, I've only been able to understand within-range or out-of-range so far.

[chusauli]

I think a lot of confusion are the terms "system", "style", "curriculum", and "Training methodology".

The majority of us here train in Yip Man system, other in YKS system, or other WCK system.

Style is something personal and unique in your expression that differentiates it from Joe's style or someone else's style.

Curriculum is the progression learned: SNT, Chum Kiu, Pak Sao, Lop Sao, Dan Chi Sao, etc.

Training methodology varies from teacher to teacher - for example, I emphasize body alignment linkage bone structure, others like to shift...

I think the WCK world would benefit greatly understanding all 4 of these terms. Hence, in developing your personal style after studying the Yip Man system and curriculum, emphasizing free fighting/MMA training methodology, and tailoring your curriculum is perfectly okay. There is no conflict here. Its what all martial artists are supposed to do.

[YungChun]

When you say different ranges, are you meaning like close range or long range? I've heard alot of people talk about this. But, I've only been able to understand within-range or out-of-range so far.

Yes, sort of..

You should check out Jeet Kune Do's ranges of combat....and get a copy of The Tao of Jeet Kune Do....a great book of one man's perspective on H2H..

They will discuss ranges of hand to hand and keep looking as ranges of combat go beyond H2H..