CSL Sparring Clip

[GlennR]

Ask the guy fighting what principles he used.
I always remember that take from WSL, how he was criticized for using a knee strike to beat an opponent, how he was asked what WC principle he used and he said:
Closest weapon to closest target.
Or something to that effect.

To be fair, he asked a civil and intelligent question.
If you say you can see WC in it, point it out for him.

[sanjuro_ronin]

To be fair, he asked a civil and intelligent question.
If you say you can see WC in it, point it out for him.

I was pointing out that if he can't see what he thinks he SHOULD see that has no baring on whether it is "WC", or not, whatever that even means.
Some would argue that the moment an elbow is thrown that it isn't WC.
Some would say that if there is no "chi sao" evident that it isn't WC.
Some would argue that if it doesn't look like what they THINK it should, it isn't WC.
Of course that leads us to the often debated point of what SHOULD WC look like VS a person trying to knock you face off and NOT doing "chi sao" with you.
That leads us to the question of what WC should look like VS something that is NOT WC.
That also leads us to the question of what WC should look like in a practical fight and NOT a controlled drill.

[LFJ]

so thats a no then you cant post it?

You're passing the buck...

We already have a video posted for analysis, which some people are suggesting shows WC principles, while many aren't seeing it. So I asked for someone to analyze the video and explain where WC principles are being utilized.

It does nothing but pass the buck to say "show me a video" in response. I could say the same thing to you. "So that's a no, then you can't say where the principles are in this clip?"

I thought it was a fair question....

[LFJ]

I was pointing out that if he can't see what he thinks he SHOULD see that has no baring on whether it is "WC", or not, whatever that even means.
Some would argue that the moment an elbow is thrown that it isn't WC.
Some would say that if there is no "chi sao" evident that it isn't WC.
Some would argue that if it doesn't look like what they THINK it should, it isn't WC.
Of course that leads us to the often debated point of what SHOULD WC look like VS a person trying to knock you face off and NOT doing "chi sao" with you.
That leads us to the question of what WC should look like VS something that is NOT WC.
That also leads us to the question of what WC should look like in a practical fight and NOT a controlled drill.

Already said I wasn't looking for techniques or appearance of WC, but the principles that some have claimed are present. I just don't see them being utilized.

[sanjuro_ronin]

We we do see in that clip (the first one) is the guy in the tank top ( called TT from now on) doing th is:
Striking up the centerline
Checking and trapping the hands and hitting ( with gloves so it must be modified accordingly from bare hands)
Controlling the centerline and striking with the elbows down ( where a typical boxer would have most definitly gone for hooks and overhands on more than one occasion).
Head gear and gloves make for modifications and adjustments, things that one must do in ANY fight.

[GlennR]

We we do see in that clip (the first one) is the guy in the tank top ( called TT from now on) doing th is:
Striking up the centerline
Checking and trapping the hands and hitting ( with gloves so it must be modified accordingly from bare hands)
Controlling the centerline and striking with the elbows down ( where a typical boxer would have most definitly gone for hooks and overhands on more than one occasion).
Head gear and gloves make for modifications and adjustments, things that one must do in ANY fight.

Now we're talking

Regarding the lack of hooks and over hands id agree with you there, i dont think their footwork sets them up for them

[Wu Wei Wu]

Irrespective of background arts (e.g. Wing Chun) people quickly adopt a skill-set during sparring which looks less like the art and more like you would expect from a non-traditional fighter.

The more you spar, the more you intuitively start moving in a way that fits the profile for sparring (head movement, mobility), which oftentimes departs from the strict tactics adhered to in traditional arts. If you want to "see" moves then ask the person doing the sparring to show you a form!

God knows, that my training in Wing Chun was more "traditional" than 99% of the posters here, but my EXPERIENCE training with and against reasonable fighters from other arts has allowed me to conform less to tradition and more in line with what happens in fighting.

Sticking to tradition lends to a good understanding of the martial art, period. Sparring bridges the gap between the tradition and fighting. Ultimately sparring isn't fighting. But better to be a decent sports fighter which transfers better to street effectiveness, than a "dry-land swimmer" theorist.

Suki

[Alan Orr]

I agree. Also, I liked the sparring clip - to me shows an adaptation of the art to a more limited rules format like MMA. I have no problem seeing the body mechanics of WC there. It was a good solid full contact mma rules sparring round.

Don't understand the criticism on this thread of "that's not WC". People are looking for tan, bong, fuk instead of the core fundamentals of the art such as centerline, hip/elbow connection, flanking facing. They need to learn to see beyond the shapes to what is really important.

Nice post. Thanks

[Alan Orr]

Can I ask Alan (and this is a semi serious question) were you bored when you posted this clip and just looking to start another flame war with the too deadly to spar street fighting keyboard worriers (sorry I mean warriors) on this forum?
It as always amazes me people can take the time to write about how unwingchun like Alans stuff is, respond to him over and over, and yet can’t find the time to…oh I don’t know…actually post a clip of themselves in action….the best most of them can do is post a clip of PB swinging a pole or playing slap fighting with a student (WSL must be turning in his grave)

It also amazes me that the few people not badmouthing Alan, phil, Andrew, Wayfaring have all come from clubs where fighting and sparring is commonplace

It really is amusing here on the WC forum

The flame wars do make me laugh for sure. But really ... my goal to to help wing chun! I love wing chun but hate seeing all his demo of 'fighting skills' when the best example is to do it. I'm not trying to say I'm better that anyone - I'm just showing what we do and why. I even want to show day to day clips of sparring and training, but then I get people saying 'at 2.10 secs' you turn you small finger the wrong way! LOL Its real training with real pressure in the real world.

Anyway I will be posting a lot more clips! I've been busy this week training 2 of my fighters in CSL Wing Chun boxing skills, so I find it hard not laugh about guys telling I don't know wing chun. Who really think that I don't know wing chun?

[Alan Orr]

Well I think, and this is totally personal opinion of course, that a lot of Wing Chun practitioners have this notion of "form over function". So you will stick with your side-on goat stance, with your hands near your chest, thinking that no matter what comes, it won't get past your arms.

In reality of course, because you have never sparred with anybody ever, you have all this self confidence, and you promptly get pounded by somebody who HAS actually been hit in the head before. It's called pressure testing, and it is the most essential part of training for self-defence, by a mile.

Now because Alan is trying to actually apply WC to competition AND self defence you are all very unhappy because he found out that for practical purposes he dumped the (rather terrible) stance, and only uses it as a beginners training method.

What you, who claim to teach WC, should do, is actually spar REGULARLY, and see how much your style needs improving. THEN you should all go and spar with people from OTHER styles, and compare notes, and see what needs changing.

After you've done all this, please come back and post videos, because nothing would make me happier than seeing good WC working under pressure. (:

Very true.

[Alan Orr]

Can anyone point to a timestamp on the video where any such WC principle is being utilized? Maybe we just don't see it?

I'm not looking for taan, bong, fuk, etc.. But I don't see any centerline, hip/elbow connection, flanking facing or any of these concepts.

What I do see is a lot of dropping or pulling back of the rear hand when throwing a punch with the other, such as at 1:15 and many other places. Most defense is just "cover your head" like a boxer. I see no body mechanics, counterattacks or other principles of WC demonstrated.

Perhaps point to a timestamp like that and explain how it shows a certain WC principle. Since it's all pure WC that should be easy enough, right? I should wonder why so many are just seeing kickboxing, and no WC....?

I will post a new clip with a breakdown of some of the applications we use in sparring. It will example the bridge between forms - chi sao - sparring - fighting.

The hand must cover you head when you punch. In real fighting people don't just take chain punches with out throwing back at you. You have to be able to hit and not get hit - if you can. Sometime you will have to take a hit. Thats fighting.

In the clip I can see - use of body weight, positioning, power control, power development, control in line of attack, correct fist use, correct control of defence when attacking and much more.

You learn tan. jum etc as control of your own movement and space. I will show a few examples in my next clips.

I will do a clip tonight on chain punching as well! What it is and what its not in CSL Wing Chun!

I look forward to seeing others post their clips of sparring and how they bridge chi sao to sparring or fighting!

[Alan Orr]

You're passing the buck...

We already have a video posted for analysis, which some people are suggesting shows WC principles, while many aren't seeing it. So I asked for someone to analyze the video and explain where WC principles are being utilized.

It does nothing but pass the buck to say "show me a video" in response. I could say the same thing to you. "So that's a no, then you can't say where the principles are in this clip?"

I thought it was a fair question....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ZnIVhighInU