What works and what doesn't work

[LaRoux]

Someone posted this clip:
Wing Chun guy fighting with techniques that work.


It shows an excellent example a clip of a wing chun guy using techniques to dominate a guy with Muay Thai training in a no rules standup fight.

What is instructive about this clip is that is it shows what techniques are used effectively to get the job done- mainly straight punches and (gasp!) round punches. Once again, pretty much the same techniques you see almost any time any kind of stylist starts to actually attempt to fight full contact.

What is also instructive is what he doesn't use- mainly those little chopping backfists, forearm throat strikes, "knee breaks", and arm holding techniques that so many "masters" of wing chun show in their demonstrations.

[Kellen Bassette]

It also shows someone who obviously spars, is comfortable under pressure, and experienced in distance and timing in a live situation. All of which is equally as important as the techniques he is using.

[LaRoux]

It also shows someone who obviously spars, is comfortable under pressure, and experienced in distance and timing in a live situation. All of which is equally as important as the techniques he is using.

Is sparring important? Of course it is.

But the bigger lesson is that those who actually spar (especially those who spar outside their system) quickly figure out that they have to scrap a large majority of the techniques they were taught by their "masters" who never really sparred or fought much and never figured this out themselves.

[Kellen Bassette]

Is sparring important? Of course it is.

But the bigger lesson is that those who actually spar (especially those who spar outside their system) quickly figure out that they have to scrap a large majority of the techniques they were taught by their "masters" who never really sparred or fought much and never figured this out themselves.

Your right.

Actually, you can probably make all those techniques work against someone who has no training, and isn't particularly athletic or aggressive. But against a fighter, an athlete, or an aggressive person, (the kind that is likely to attack you in the street,) you probably won't fare well.

[EternalSpring]

But the bigger lesson is that those who actually spar (especially those who spar outside their system) quickly figure out that they have to scrap a large majority of the techniques they were taught...

It's a good idea to keep in mind, but that lesson doesn't always hold true, and I think that's the reason people have mentioned that the MT guy was not all that great, at least in this particular video. It's very easy to think the wrong things work if your sparring partner isn't as effective with his/her art. But props to the chun guy.

[GlennR]

Someone posted this clip:
Wing Chun guy fighting with techniques that work.


It shows an excellent example a clip of a wing chun guy using techniques to dominate a guy with Muay Thai training in a no rules standup fight.

What is instructive about this clip is that is it shows what techniques are used effectively to get the job done- mainly straight punches and (gasp!) round punches. Once again, pretty much the same techniques you see almost any time any kind of stylist starts to actually attempt to fight full contact.

What is also instructive is what he doesn't use- mainly those little chopping backfists, forearm throat strikes, "knee breaks", and arm holding techniques that so many "masters" of wing chun show in their demonstrations.

Yep, the WC was fine, though the MT was very poor

But you're right , he kept to the basics to get the job done

[JPinAZ]

I didn't really focus on any techniques he used in the clip. To me, that doesn't mean much. IMO, talking about which techniques work and which don't is really missing the point of WCK.

For me, WCK is about understanding structure, gravity, proper leverage and positional control, etc thru understanding of concepts based on very specific principles - with the end goal toward fighting with maximum efficiency. The techniques are just a by-product of this way of fight training and shouldn't be the focus. All WCK techniques have the correct time and place, the trick is understanding these core foundational principles of the system which dictates what works and when (which sparring is a great avenue for doing this!).

Glenn mentioned that the guy in the clip 'kept to the basics'. If by basics he means keeping it simple by use of centerline occupation & domination supported with good structure, position, leverage and applied fwd pressure - then I fully agree. And IMO, that is more in line with what fighting with WCK should be about

[LaRoux]

All WCK techniques have the correct time and place,.

Maybe on a cadaver.

But on a live, adult person there are a whole bunch that aren't going to be very effective.

[JPinAZ]

Maybe on a cadaver.

But on a live, adult person there are a whole bunch that aren't going to be very effective.

Sorry if your technique focused experience in WCK makes you feel this way, my experience tells me otherwise.
And great reply to my post BTW - pick just a single comment out (out of context as it was) and give no examples to back up your smart a$$ reply. Good job

[LaRoux]

Sorry if your technique focused experience in WCK makes you feel this way, my experience tells me otherwise.
And great reply to my post BTW - pick just a single comment out (out of context as it was) and give no examples to back up your smart a$$ reply. Good job

I tried posting and giving examples based a video showing a bunch of techniques that wouldn't work worth beans. It was deleted by the mods, so it seems like giving examples doesn't really fly around here.

[Sihing73]

Oh,

One other thing.............Wing Chun is an ecletic system...........always has been.
We seem to forget that today with all the arguing over what is and what is not Wing Chun. We seem to ignore the fact that the founders of WC drew on other arts to formulate the system we know today as WC. There are many variations with some families not doing forms but rather san sik, some may not even do chi sau. My point is that there is room at the table for everyone..............if you allow there to be.

Also, sometimes the idea of fighting is kind of pointless.

Take me for example: I can tout real world experience from time in Law Enforcement or growing up in a not so great area. But it really does not matter nor does it carry over into all arenas.

Since I train in Wing Chun but also train in Silat, Pekiti Tersia and now am exploring Hsing Yi as well, my approach in combat, while perhaps effective, would have some claiming that what I used was not Wing Chun. To me this argument is kind of funny since the point is to win a fight so I would prefer to use what I find works. Bottom line to me is that I want to go home at the end of the day and I really do not care how I do it. Then again, common sense goes a long way in avoiding situations where you would need to test your combat skills. Most of us live in areas where we do not need to fight our way out of the house every day.........if I did then perhaps I would utilize something else.......maybe a tech 9 lol.

Kev you will like this

Did not the great WSL warn us not to become slaves to the system?
My point is that most of the online bickering we do and the posting of challengs is pointless and immature. And yes, I have done the same in my time as well so I speak from experience. I believe most of us would get along fine in person. Of course then we would not have keyboards and the net to hide behind either.

[k gledhill]

Oh,

One other thing.............Wing Chun is an ecletic system...........always has been.
We seem to forget that today with all the arguing over what is and what is not Wing Chun. We seem to ignore the fact that the founders of WC drew on other arts to formulate the system we know today as WC. There are many variations with some families not doing forms but rather san sik, some may not even do chi sau. My point is that there is room at the table for everyone..............if you allow there to be.

Also, sometimes the idea of fighting is kind of pointless.

Take me for example: I can tout real world experience from time in Law Enforcement or growing up in a not so great area. But it really does not matter nor does it carry over into all arenas.

Since I train in Wing Chun but also train in Silat, Pekiti Tersia and now am exploring Hsing Yi as well, my approach in combat, while perhaps effective, would have some claiming that what I used was not Wing Chun. To me this argument is kind of funny since the point is to win a fight so I would prefer to use what I find works. Bottom line to me is that I want to go home at the end of the day and I really do not care how I do it. Then again, common sense goes a long way in avoiding situations where you would need to test your combat skills. Most of us live in areas where we do not need to fight our way out of the house every day.........if I did then perhaps I would utilize something else.......maybe a tech 9 lol.

Kev you will like this

Did not the great WSL warn us not to become slaves to the system?
My point is that most of the online bickering we do and the posting of challengs is pointless and immature. And yes, I have done the same in my time as well so I speak from experience. I believe most of us would get along fine in person. Of course then we would not have keyboards and the net to hide behind either.

CZ 75 is my choice I still use the VT methods

[Vajramusti]

Someone posted this clip:
Wing Chun guy fighting with techniques that work.


It shows an excellent example a clip of a wing chun guy using techniques to dominate a guy with Muay Thai training in a no rules standup fight.

What is instructive about this clip is that is it shows what techniques are used effectively to get the job done- mainly straight punches and (gasp!) round punches. Once again, pretty much the same techniques you see almost any time any kind of stylist starts to actually attempt to fight full contact.

What is also instructive is what he doesn't use- mainly those little chopping backfists, forearm throat strikes, "knee breaks", and arm holding techniques that so many "masters" of wing chun show in their demonstrations.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
La Roux-this thread is doing the usual thing of wandering all over the place. There are several problems in your post and I briefly touch on them and comment briefly.
1. "a wing chun guy's techniques" may or may not be the best examples of wing chun.You seem to assume knowledge of some "standard" techniques.
2. re "gasp"-"round punches". There can be round punches in wing chun-a key thing is what is direct at a given moment.
3/"chopping back fists"?-not good wing chun
4."masters"?-maybe to their own followers
5.a wing chun move may look similar to what is there in other styles but there is likely to be significant differences...we generally have two arms and two legs but the permutations and combinations of their usage are many and can be style specific..
------
6. Without appropriate development of wing chun stance training and wing chun conceptions pf structure and dynamics- wing chun techniques are diminished in their importance. Not very fruitful to comment on "technique" without understanding this.
7. Wing chun does not mean being frozen in postures but the developmental training is crucial for wing chun flow and fluidity.
8. Wing chun is not the only way to self defense or fighting. Individual levels of skill development
plus courage, determination and guts are also important variables. There is a huge amount of bad wing chun out there- and per Gresham's law on money the bad often drives out the good in the public eye. You tube is inundated with junk-though people cherry pick on this and other forums.
I don't think that this thread is informative. Egos and posturing has overwhelmed any semblance of discussion.

[LaRoux]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
La Roux-this thread is doing the usual thing of wandering all over the place. There are several problems in your post and I briefly touch on them and comment briefly.
1. "a wing chun guy's techniques" may or may not be the best examples of wing chun.You seem to assume knowledge of some "standard" techniques.
2. re "gasp"-"round punches". There can be round punches in wing chun-a key thing is what is direct at a given moment.
3/"chopping back fists"?-not good wing chun
4."masters"?-maybe to their own followers
5.a wing chun move may look similar to what is there in other styles but there is likely to be significant differences...we generally have two arms and two legs but the permutations and combinations of their usage are many and can be style specific..
------
6. Without appropriate development of wing chun stance training and wing chun conceptions pf structure and dynamics- wing chun techniques are diminished in their importance. Not very fruitful to comment on "technique" without understanding this.
7. Wing chun does not mean being frozen in postures but the developmental training is crucial for wing chun flow and fluidity.
8. Wing chun is not the only way to self defense or fighting. Individual levels of skill development
plus courage, determination and guts are also important variables. There is a huge amount of bad wing chun out there- and per Gresham's law on money the bad often drives out the good in the public eye. You tube is inundated with junk-though people cherry pick on this and other forums.
I don't think that this thread is informative. Egos and posturing has overwhelmed any semblance of discussion.

1. Other systems have standard techniques of which there is significant evidence for those techniques working in live settings.

2. That's good to know there are round punches, because many wing chun people seem to promote the idea that there aren't.

3. Chopping backfists (as well as back forearms and back open hands) sure seem to be shown in a lot of the clips the "masters" are showing.

5. Techniques should be judged by their application in live, resisting settings.

8. It could be productive. All people would need to do was to explain which wing chun techniques are viable and which are not and then show evidence of the ones they claim are viable.

[Kellen Bassette]

8. It could be productive. All people would need to do was to explain which wing chun techniques are viable and which are not and then show evidence of the ones they claim are viable.

This really isn't that cut and dry. I have been able to pull of several kicking techniques that would be impractical for most people. I have seen techniques I had written off as useless garbage applied brilliantly in sparring. Granted 99% of people couldn't do it, but the particular executor had a gift for landing unorthodox techniques.

How unrealistic and impractical is a flying triangle? Or jumping off the cage to do a spin kick? Yet we've seen them work.

The truth is that some techniques, not everyone will be able to pull off. Finding what works for you is a personal matter of trial and error against resisting partners. The problem is when the entire body of techniques from a system is assumed to work for an individual when he has never tested any of them under fire.