Alan Orr Wing Chun questions

[guy b.]

I am going to insult everyone.

I have to say that the P. Bayer art looks like the higher level and more complete approach compared to CSL. In terms of principles and concepts it just appears more complete, interlocking, and solid. However this is compromised by the fact that they do not fight and so there is no way of knowing if it actually is. They are also afflicted by the need to criticise everything. This points to mental weakness, either in terms of the message being delivered or the students being attracted to the art. Nothing is the answer to everything in fighting. And yet PB guys seem to think they have it. Obviously there is a real and dangerous lack of actual fighting experience in this lineage.

My problem with Alan Orr's approach is that Alan doesn't appear to teach or fight anything remotely similar to what his best guys do in the ring. There is no doubting that his 2 or 3 best guys can punch very hard and that they are difficult to take down. But this isn't what Alan does himself. Where his fighters stand in good posture, move well, and punch crisply above their weight, Alan puts his head down in sparring, looks slow, uses bodyweight to push lighter guys around, does choppy and slappy chi sau, and just generally doesn't look like he's doing the same thing. I don't know why this is: perhaps he is a much better coach than a fighter? Perhaps the CSL system with its many different levels of achievement and ridiculous marketing is more a money making tool than any kind of wing chun innovation? Who knows.

Alan obviously has much more actual experience of what it takes to train guys to fight in the ring than the Bayer crew, but his system in a way presents a similar environment in that it has an untouchable cult figure (Alan), and various levels of disciple. Sadly this is a disease of most kung fu. People on pedistals and their disciples never respond very well to criticism as this thread shows.

[Grumblegeezer]

I am going to insult everyone...

Alan obviously has much more actual experience of what it takes to train guys to fight in the ring than the Bayer crew, but his system in a way presents a similar environment in that it has an untouchable cult figure (Alan), and various levels of disciple. Sadly this is a disease of most kung fu. People on pedistals and their disciples never respond very well to criticism as this thread shows.

More of an analytical opinion than an insult, I'd say. The "sifu on the pedestal" phenomenon isn't just a kung-fu problem. It's inherent in most traditional Asian martial arts. But if Alan is actually putting his guys out there and testing his stuff, I can't see how he's guilty of this.

[guy b.]

If you go to an Alan Orr class or watch the dvds and fight clips you will see 2 contradictory things:

1. Alan doesn't or cannot do what his young fit fighters can do. He simply doesn't fight in the same way. This is probably because he was already quite old when he discovered the CSL method and so well past his prime, if he was ever gifted in that area. This would not be a problem except that:

2. Alan is at the peak of an extended teaching structure with different belt levels and little bits of information being fed, mostly to the kind of physically ungifted individuals that make up the average martial arts class, in a drip drip fashion over a long period of time. Even though the guys that fight are clearly better at puching and kicking in a live environment than Alan is, he still needs to dominate them in some way in order to maintain the heirarchy necessary for the business model being used. This is done as described earlier in chi sau and other drills using body weight, tactics of questionable real-fight utility, and a slappy chi sau technique that appears irrelevant to the way they actually fight. The obvious unfamiliarity of the best guys with chi sau shows that they are not doing a lot of it in training.

I think that CSL probably has some great ideas about whole body power but the way it has been set up with a single UK rep is unfortunate. It isn't large enough to prevent kung fu-itis setting in. This could be prevented if Alan portrayed himself as a coach only and was strictly about results in the ring, but he also likes to be the sifu with the special knowledge like any kung fu guy.

The "you don't even understand how our kung fu works" crap that goes on whenever closed groups argue about approaches is very evident here from both sides. Bayer guys are all about the elbow nobody else seems to notice. Alan's guys are all about the whole body power everyone else is missing. It is sad that CSL didn't manage to rise above this given their ring combat orientation.

[Buddha_Fist]

I am going to insult everyone.

Go for it!

I have to say that the P. Bayer art looks like the higher level and more complete approach compared to CSL. In terms of principles and concepts it just appears more complete, interlocking, and solid. However this is compromised by the fact that they do not fight and so there is no way of knowing if it actually is.

Not a fact, your opinion. Philipp has had his fair share of action. Some of his students and students of theirs have started to venture into MMA fights, which evidenced that ground game is a prerequisite in that arena. Many have had non-publicized bouts and don't shy away from having an "open door" policy at their schools. Go and visit Philipp or a student and get first-hand practical experience before propagating an opinion as a fact. If you're in LA, let's meet.

They are also afflicted by the need to criticise everything. This points to mental weakness, either in terms of the message being delivered or the students being attracted to the art. Nothing is the answer to everything in fighting. And yet PB guys seem to think they have it. Obviously there is a real and dangerous lack of actual fighting experience in this lineage.

I know only a handful of students that write on forums. We're adults, each person is resposible of his/her own acts. Furthermore, each person writes based on his own background and experiences. You are extrapolating your perception of who this handful is on to the other 95% of trainers and students who don't spend time writing on forums. Regarding practical experience, see my input above.

[Hardwork108]

If you go to an Alan Orr class or watch the dvds and fight clips you will see 2 contradictory things:

1. Alan doesn't or cannot do what his young fit fighters can do.

That may (or may not be) true in the ring scenario, but kung fu was never about ring fighting, it was and is about actual combat. Ring fighting can be a testing ground for some, not all TCMA combat aspects. Do you doubt that Alan Orr can fight for real?

He simply doesn't fight in the same way. This is probably because he was already quite old when he discovered the CSL method and so well past his prime,

For ring fighting you may need to be in "prime", but as a kung fu fighter, not really. The whole TCMA training aims to make you effective (and healthy) well into your old age.

if he was ever gifted in that area.

I am curious to know why you make such assumptions???

This would not be a problem except that:

I don't really think that there is a problem.

2. Alan is at the peak of an extended teaching structure with different belt levels and little bits of information being fed, mostly to the kind of physically ungifted individuals that make up the average martial arts class, in a drip drip fashion over a long period of time. Even though the guys that fight are clearly better at puching and kicking in a live environment than Alan is, he still needs to dominate them in some way in order to maintain the heirarchy necessary for the business model being used.

More assumptions.

This is done as described earlier in chi sau and other drills using body weight, tactics of questionable real-fight utility, and a slappy chi sau technique that appears irrelevant to the way they actually fight. The obvious unfamiliarity of the best guys with chi sau shows that they are not doing a lot of it in training.

Did you know that Alan also organizes or at least organized contact chi sao competitions?

Also, chi sao was never about real fighting, but it develops attributes and ultimately can turn into real fighting once the rules are loosend up, turning it into "free hands" fighting.

I think that CSL probably has some great ideas about whole body power but the way it has been set up with a single UK rep is unfortunate. It isn't large enough to prevent kung fu-itis setting in.

The concept of whole body unity is prevalent in all TCMAs, albeit in different ways.

This could be prevented if Alan portrayed himself as a coach only and was strictly about results in the ring, but he also likes to be the sifu with the special knowledge like any kung fu guy.

KUng fu training is not strictly for ring fighters, nor is ring fighting an ultimate goal of TCMA training.

Also, people who train basket ball players, baseball players and even boxers and wrestlers, can be referred to as "coaches". In my humble opion, kung fu teachers should always be referred to as sifus.

The "you don't even understand how our kung fu works" crap that goes on whenever closed groups argue about approaches is very evident here from both sides.

Most people, including those who train and even claim to teach kung fu, don't even understand their own very style, let alone someone elses. I have trained two kung fu styles and most people who claim to train kung fu do not understand the approachs taught to me, and I am no sifu, but an intermediate student in Wing Chun and even less so in Chow Gar.

So, as far as kung fu goes, the real McCoy is very difficult to come by out there. You are more likely to find a Wing Chun school without elbows, than real authentic school.

Bayer guys are all about the elbow nobody else seems to notice. Alan's guys are all about the whole body power everyone else is missing. It is sad that CSL didn't manage to rise above this given their ring combat orientation.

Without "whole body power", and or, whole body unity (and there are different types), one cannot have real kung fu. The best one can get is an empty shell kung fu, that does not deliver.

The other guy can use all the "theories" and "concepts" against you, but if you can explode onto and through him, then he will have as much chance of deflecting you power, as child would, using the same principles against a fully grown adult.

It seems that the PB guys focus on elbow alignments, but some how do not "linger" on the elbow (and knee) striking. There is only one PB guy here that says that he practices this, so one starts asking questions about those who don't drill these important weapons, that are present in probably all of the kung fu styles on the planet.

So yes, different lineages will have different ways, but when members of one lineage act like they have discovered the holy grail and enter a thread and criticize a sifu from another, and he defends himself, we should understand why.

[guy b.]

That may (or may not be) true in the ring scenario, but kung fu was never about ring fighting, it was and is about actual combat. Ring fighting can be a testing ground for some, not all TCMA combat aspects. Do you doubt that Alan Orr can fight for real?


For ring fighting you may need to be in "prime", but as a kung fu fighter, not really. The whole TCMA training aims to make you effective (and healthy) well into your old age.




I am curious to know why you make such assumptions???




I don't really think that there is a problem.



More assumptions.


Did you know that Alan also organizes or at least organized contact chi sao competitions?

Also, chi sao was never about real fighting, but it develops attributes and ultimately can turn into real fighting once the rules are loosend up, turning it into "free hands" fighting.


The concept of whole body unity is prevalent in all TCMAs, albeit in different ways.


KUng fu training is not strictly for ring fighters, nor is ring fighting an ultimate goal of TCMA training.

Also, people who train basket ball players, baseball players and even boxers and wrestlers, can be referred to as "coaches". In my humble opion, kung fu teachers should always be referred to as sifus.


Most people, including those who train and even claim to teach kung fu, don't even understand their own very style, let alone someone elses. I have trained two kung fu styles and most people who claim to train kung fu do not understand the approachs taught to me, and I am no sifu, but an intermediate student in Wing Chun and even less so in Chow Gar.

So, as far as kung fu goes, the real McCoy is very difficult to come by out there. You are more likely to find a Wing Chun school without elbows, than real authentic school.




Without "whole body power", and or, whole body unity (and there are different types), one cannot have real kung fu. The best one can get is an empty shell kung fu, that does not deliver.

The other guy can use all the "theories" and "concepts" against you, but if you can explode onto and through him, then he will have as much chance of deflecting you power, as child would, using the same principles against a fully grown adult.

It seems that the PB guys focus on elbow alignments, but some how do not "linger" on the elbow (and knee) striking. There is only one PB guy here that says that he practices this, so one starts asking questions about those who don't drill these important weapons, that are present in probably all of the kung fu styles on the planet.

So yes, different lineages will have different ways, but when members of one lineage act like they have discovered the holy grail and enter a thread and criticize a sifu from another, and he defends himself, we should understand why.

f you want me to reply please condense into a proper answer without reactive qoute sniping. Type a couple of coherent paragraphs.

[guy b.]

Go for it!



Not a fact, your opinion. Philipp has had his fair share of action. Some of his students and students of theirs have started to venture into MMA fights, which evidenced that ground game is a prerequisite in that arena. Many have had non-publicized bouts and don't shy away from having an "open door" policy at their schools. Go and visit Philipp or a student and get first-hand practical experience before propagating an opinion as a fact. If you're in LA, let's meet.



I know only a handful of students that write on forums. We're adults, each person is resposible of his/her own acts. Furthermore, each person writes based on his own background and experiences. You are extrapolating your perception of who this handful is on to the other 95% of trainers and students who don't spend time writing on forums. Regarding practical experience, see my input above.

All martial artists have had their fair share of action, nudge wink. All tell fantastic stories about how great they are. The only way to be certain in an objective way is to see results from competitions or to visit the school. I have not visited Philip Bayer but I have visited WSL places. They have a certain flavour.

It is a fact that Bayer and WSL schools do not generally take part in sporting comps. I have seen a few low level attempts on youtube but it is safe to say that Alan Orr is way ahead in this respect based on the available evidence.

[anerlich]

LOL at you guys extrapolating fine details of Alan's and the Bayer crew's motivations out of your a$$es.

The "problems" IMO come down to this:

1. The usual compromises that come with marketing and commercialism, which everyone trying to make a buck out of something they love has to deal with - not that there's anything wrong with that

2. http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/...brand-loyalty/

I've been around the block, and IMO you could do worse than to choose either, but I also believe I train with partners and under instructors who are at least as good and probably much better than either or both, and definitely more experienced both ring (fighting and coaching, standup, grappling or MMA) and street.

So, basically, get off the forum and stop boring me.

[GlennR]

Most people, including those who train and even claim to teach kung fu, don't even understand their own very style, let alone someone elses. I have trained two kung fu styles and most people who claim to train kung fu do not understand the approachs taught to me, and I am no sifu, but an intermediate student in Wing Chun and even less so in Chow Gar.

You do rattle on dont you

So, as far as kung fu goes, the real McCoy is very difficult to come by out there. You are more likely to find a Wing Chun school without elbows, than real authentic school

Hows does an intermediate student know what the 'real mccoy" is?

It seems that the PB guys focus on elbow alignments, but some how do not "linger" on the elbow (and knee) striking. There is only one PB guy here that says that he practices this, so one starts asking questions about those who don't drill these important weapons, that are present in probably all of the kung fu styles on the planet.

How do you know whats present in every KF system in the world??
If Kevin and friends choose NOT to use the elbow thats fine, theres big risks associated with that range that youll only realise by sparring at that range.
Tell me how your expertise in the art of using your elobows has developed?

So yes, different lineages will have different ways, but when members of one lineage act like they have discovered the holy grail and enter a thread and criticize a sifu from another, and he defends himself, we should understand why

.

With the above paragraph in mind, i suggest you re-read everything you have written

[guy b.]

LOL at you guys extrapolating fine details of Alan's and the Bayer crew's motivations out of your a$$es.

The "problems" IMO come down to this:

1. The usual compromises that come with marketing and commercialism, which everyone trying to make a buck out of something they love has to deal with - not that there's anything wrong with that

2. http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/...brand-loyalty/

I've been around the block, and IMO you could do worse than to choose either, but I also believe I train with partners and under instructors who are at least as good and probably much better than either or both, and definitely more experienced both ring (fighting and coaching, standup, grappling or MMA) and street.

So, basically, get off the forum and stop boring me.

Hang on, you just dismissed what I said, then paraphrased it. Are you ok?

[Phil Redmond]

At about 1:30 here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QfXUeGuZsY
is what Kevin showed me about the use of their elbow. If I'm wrong Kevin please correct me. I must say that I also showed him why I wouldn't subscribe to that method.

[k gledhill]

At about 1:30 here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QfXUeGuZsY
is what Kevin showed me about the use of their elbow. If I'm wrong Kevin please correct me. I must say that I also showed him why I wouldn't subscribe to that method.

The clip is not punching at 1:30 just implying the striking distance of Bil gee inside the arm...then a normal jum punch outside the arms, compared to man sao distances [aka pak sao angling offline] even greater distance...
The elbow I showed you was just in a development stage of jum sao alone Dan chi-sao level, not a fighting or moving idea.
If I can make Sunday again which I would like too, great atmosphere, I can elaborate.
I know you're teaching so its not easy to ignore your students for long.

I will try to show a clip of the process to fruition fighting, it just looks like punches, you cant see jum punch energy or tan punch energy...

[Buddha_Fist]

...I have not visited Philip Bayer...

Visit him or his students before proclaiming opinions about him as facts. That's what I would do, but then again that's me...

[nunchuckguy]

For any category of knowledge, you will always find people who are more conservative and those who are more liberal in their interpretations.

Alan Orr is obviously a sifu in the liberal camp. I agree with him to take Wing Chun to real combat without limiting oneself to the orthodox Sao's of Wing Chun. The most powerful thing of Wing Chun is its philosophy. But having said that, after looking at his sparring clips on youtube, I would love to see him applying more Wing Chun principles in his fighting. And one of the way to increase the percentage of Wing Chun is to use the Sao's, because the principles are manifested through them.

I believe you can actually use the Wing Chun moves without being limited by them.

And one thing I want to point out is, when you see a punch coming, if you duck you head and grab your head with both hands trying to take that blow, the moment you do that, it is not Wing Chun anymore.

Nunchuck Guy

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . .
And one thing I want to point out is, when you see a punch coming, if you duck you head and grab your head with both hands trying to take that blow, the moment you do that, it is not Wing Chun anymore.

Nunchuck Guy

It's obvious that you never learned the "WC" way of defending your head when on the ground. This was something I learned in WC years ago from Sifu Duncan Leung. I have a problem with people saying what WC doesn't have based on their personal experiences or those of their Sifus.