Best Wing Chun KO in MMA - Iron Wolves Fighter Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun

[Alan Orr]

If the CSLWC guys say this is their orthodox WC style, then it is WC. Simple as that.

My own VT is very different from many others and creates a different type of fighter as well. I understand that and have no problem with CSLWC saying what they do is WC. I don't own the title. Who am I to say it is not?

Sure, that type of punch isn't recognized by other lineages and doesn't seem to adhere to WC principles as many see it. But from my POV, all you "sticky bridge" people don't adhere to the principles as I see it either.

It just means there are different WC lineages with different principles, and these create vastly different fighters.

But no one owns the right to say what is and isn't WC. There is just that which works and that which doesn't. CSLWC works.

Balanced post. We have different styles so the eye for what is right can be different. Thank you

[Alan Orr]

Your welcome, but I can also see what KPM is obsessing and making a fuss over, that the visual appeal isn't there. He was correct in saying that if Wing Chun wasn't in the tag line I wouldn't have looked twice.
I get where you're coming from, I've been in the ring, under heavy pressure things look way different than in the classroom. My only criticism, tell him to keep his elbows in.

This punch is a combination of levels. First form is all elbows in, Second form we have a structure principle where our elbow fans out. The third form its all about connecting the body to the fist, the elbow can be out if the shoulder is relaxed and the timing on connection is right on impact.

[Alan Orr]

No, don't! I mean, if what he's doing works, why mess with success?

In my earlier posts, I was just wondering aloud if some of Alan's fighters look more typically "WC like" than Josh. And if so, have they also been successful in competition? Just call it a geezer's curiosity.

Chris, perhaps you could address this. Is there considerable variety in the way different fighters from your CSL/Iron Wolves group look in the ring, or do you all have pretty much the same personal styles?

Different fights we focus on principles of our Wing Chun to beat the opponent. So sometimes the goal is different. Also body types. Some movements work well some more that others. The key is our body structure, which is hard to see unless you have trained it our way - is always used by all my fighters. Thats why we KO guys and why my guys look very strong and can more guys around. Also somethings we make mistakes and under pressure it can get messy. Thats the real world. Not a class of drilling.

[Alan Orr]

For me, WCK is a bridging art with an emphasis on striking and controlling at the same time. The drills we train help us to do this, based on the art's concepts and principles.

So when I see Alan's recent clips (the instructional ones), he is often showing Chi Sau and Lap Sau and I can see that the Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun is teaching this striking and controlling. I like these clips a lot - and I think Alan is a gifted teacher, teaching a comprehensive system. The linking/delinking clip, for example, was extremely good, IMO.



Well, I do look to see people using the attributes gained from drills and I also agree that when people fight they won't look like they are using drills as is (no one expects to see someone fight in a MMA contest using Chi Sau and Lap Sau as they are used in a class environment).

However... ... as so much Wing Chun training involves bridge work and, for me therefore, the art is a bridging system (an emphasis on fighting using Chi Kiu as a preference to Lei Kiu), I always watch clips of Wing Chun guys entering MMA fights and hope to see this - the use of Chi Kiu.

Don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with people fighting using Lei Kiu methods as a preference - people using western boxing and Muay Thai use this to great effect. All fights, regardless of system, start from Lei Kiu... but in WCK the system looks to implement Chi Kiu as soon as possible, whenever possible - hence the various and numerous drills and training methods that work from contact.

In Yip Man's words, from the interview with New Martial Hero in the early 70s:

loi lau heui sung, lat sau jik chung... "the word sung in the motto is a forward movement. The word chung is also a forward movement. The word lau in the motto is stay and stick to the opponents fist (arm) and not use brute force to push it aside."

Yip Man is talking about bridging in that quoted part, and some Wing Chun lines talk about 14 or 18 or 20 Kiu Sau methods/key words (e.g. press, swallow, slice, etc,... or lead, leak, float, etc,... or fold, sheer, pull, etc.) Some lines don't mention these things specifically, but you find them in the training drills.

So for me these are part of the attributes you should see when WCK is applied. However, I think that when WCK guys step into the ring they seem to go with the typical Lei Kiu methods other arts use. Their WCK (in terms of the stand up game they are using) starts looking like western boxing or kickboxing or Muay Thai (arts with a Lei Kiu emphasis), which mirrors what their opponents will be using/giving them.

So I agree with KPM on this point when he said: "Wing Chun has a visual signature as much as it has concepts and principles."

But maybe I'd go one step further . Wing Chun's visual signature is directly tied to its concepts and principles - they are two sides of the same coin - you aren't looking to separate them. The body methods, shapes and motions tie in directly with the concepts and principles, particularly the eight key characters LL, HS, LSJC.

In other words... Wing Chun is a Chi Kiu art, bridging is part of WCK's strategy and tactics, these are all connected to the body methods employed and these in turn all relate to the art's principles and concepts. No one part is more important than any of the others because they are all connected.

If we think of the visual signature and the concepts and principles as being two sides of the same coin, then in application WCK is that coin being flipped in the air, spinning rapidly. When you look at the coin are you looking at the heads or tails side? You're looking at both.

In the fight clip that Alan posted, his student did an awesome job - winning the fight in a convincing fashion. He did it largely using Lei Kiu methods.

Did it work? Absolutely (congrats to the fighter!)
Did it look like Wing Chun? IMO, no.
Was it Wing Chun? IMO, I would say no (and as KPM said, that in no way detracts from the fact that the fighter got in the cage and beat his opponent)
Does it matter either way? For the fighter, no. His aim was to win the fight and he did - so a successful day at the office For those reading that the fighter was a Wing Chun guy using Wing Chun, yes it matters in as much as the label is incorrect (which is hardly "matters" in a life or death important way ). The fighter might train the Wing Chun that Alan shows in his instructional clips, but in application I think he wasn't using it to win.

Was it Wing Chun? That is what we train. CSL Wing Chun. So that is what it is.

[Alan Orr]

Well i think its about what you want to achieve and how you are going to go about it.
In a pure self defense scenario youll drift back to your more "traditional" WC approach, straight punch, control centerline and overwhelm. Quickly shut down the other guy.
That wont work in the ring.
There is no element of surprise, your opponent has time and distance, the two most likely things you wont have in a SD scenario.... so what do you do?
You adopt strategies of successful striking orientated combat sports, boxing being the obvious one.
Is it WC?

For me no.

Sure you may utilise your WC stance and structure, your engine so to speak, but you are blurring the lines between sport and self defense which, in itself, creates a blur between WC and boxing..... its neither one or the other.

From my observations of Alans guys, the more recent the clip, the less i see of the WC structure and more i see of boxing/Mt structure..... i feel like im watching evolution in process to get to a method that already exists.

No no no. We are not using a BOXING OR MT structure at all. In fact what I teach is very different from these arts. If you can not see what I am doing thats all cool. But stop trying to overlay you ideas on what I am doing when you have no idea what I am doing. CSL Wing Chun is what we train and what we apply.

[Alan Orr]

Maybe guys need to post videos of their own Wing Chun pressure tested so we can see how clean it looks when facing a trained fighter.

All we can do in CSL Wing Chun is continue to test our system and grow.

My guys all train CSL Wing Chun and we are very proud of that. To be told by a few people that it can't be Wing Chun as Wing Chun doesnt work under combat sports pressure is a joke. Maybe your Wing Chun wouldn't work, that's fine. But don't tell me what works and doesn't. Show your own stuff rather that keyboard warrior your limited mind sets.

Then saying wing chun has never worked in the cage is again a joke and plain stupid. My guys over many years have had 100's of fights. Plus other styles of Wing Chun have also enter MMA as well.

I understand a lot of Wing Chun guys what to grow and learn how to keep their training up to date with current developments. That's what we are all about. I also understand some see that as a stress as that would be getting out of your comfort zone and taking on more pressure that a few drills and chi sao.

Wing Chun is MMA is not going to look like self defence Wing Chun, when your opponent may be unskilled and unfit. So the pressure my fighters take on only adds to their self defence skills.

I ask you would you rather face one of my fighters on the street with your Wing Chun or a guy who trains just drills and chi sao?

[GlennR]

WTF are people stupid? My team has had 100's of MMA K1 and boxing matches using CSL Wing Chun. So that's just not true at all. Our Wing Chun works on the street and in combat sports. If your doesn't not then that is fine. But stop telling me what you don't understand.

Before you lecture me on WC, learn to read a sentence.....

In the middle of what i said was... " if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it".... my point being if you expecting to see a whole lot of tans, bongs and fooks you arent going to see that.

So get off your high horse, read what i said and try to resist "educating" people you think "dont understand"

[BPWT..]

Was it Wing Chun? That is what we train. CSL Wing Chun. So that is what it is.

That's okay, as others have said. You can define CSL how you define it, and then say it is a Wing Chun method. No one is telling you to change the name of your method or school... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

For me, however, your fighter was fighting using Lei Kiu methods - as a boxer would or as a Muay Thai guy would. I'm not saying that makes what he did boxing or Muay Thai, but for me, Lei Kiu range and its methods are not really Wing Chun's emphasis. The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

I thought Robert Chu's system also had an emphasis on Kiu Sau methods (which I was saying go hand in hand - no pun intended - with Chi Kiu but not with Lei Kiu - this is the case by definition). Or perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Robert's system had Kiu Sau methods/key words?

Good post! Well stated! This actually is closely related to what Hendrik has been writing on his "1848" thread.

Yes, Hendrik's posts were about close body work and the methods used when at that range. I agree with what he's saying.

[Alan Orr]

Before you lecture me on WC, learn to read a sentence.....

In the middle of what i said was... " if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it".... my point being if you expecting to see a whole lot of tans, bongs and fooks you arent going to see that.

So get off your high horse, read what i said and try to resist "educating" people you think "dont understand"

You said you couldn't see Wing Chun in our fights, so you have not understanding of our wing chun.

High horse lol I don't need one as I and lucky to have a complete system and and lots of great level guys to teach, train with and learn from. Our system is one of the few that is not hiding behind playing on words.

[Alan Orr]

That's okay, as others have said. You can define CSL how you define it, and then say it is a Wing Chun method. No one is telling you to change the name of your method or school... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

For me, however, your fighter was fighting using Lei Kiu methods - as a boxer would or as a Muay Thai guy would. I'm not saying that makes what he did boxing or Muay Thai, but for me, Lei Kiu range and its methods are not really Wing Chun's emphasis. The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

I thought Robert Chu's system also had an emphasis on Kiu Sau methods (which I was saying go hand in hand - no pun intended - with Chi Kiu but not with Lei Kiu - this is the case by definition). Or perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Robert's system had Kiu Sau methods/key words?

Yes, Hendrik's posts were about close body work and the methods used when at that range. I agree with what he's saying.

Wake up. Wing Chun is a close range style. But it's not limited to just that. Of course we have Key words. You point is what? Yes what you are now saying is fine. It may not be what you do or know. I have no problem with that. On point was don't tell me its not our Wing Chun.

[Alan Orr]

I completely understand. I was just being facetious for all the naysayers. To me it looked like the short hook from Biu Jee or the bouncing cut from Chum Kiu with a little english on it.

Sounds like we are on the same page. Its funny that some others are talking about Wing Chun not having a long range. Of course Wing Chun is best in close, but a fight has all ranges.

[LFJ]

... some of us are just saying that "to us" what we saw is not what "we" would define as Wing Chun.

Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.

The art, IMO, is about Chi Kiu more than Lei Kiu.

You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

Speak about your system and try to understand the others.

[Alan Orr]

Hi, I am a Chu Sau Lei instructor under Alan Orr Sifu. I don't fight in MMA, neither do my students. However, when we apply our art under pressure it looks no different to what Josh or Aaron look like in the clips my teacher has supplied. Does that mean I am not a Wing Chun practitioner? The Chu Sau Lei syllabus is a very comprehensive Wing Chun training model focussing heavily on body structure and a practical approach to the application of the art. To me, Wing Chun is a training method, the drills give you the tools and attributes for fighting.

You then take what you have learnt and refine your skills through pressure testing until hopefully you arrive at a point where you can hold your own against someone who is trying to overwhelm you. At this point of refinement if someone who is watching me says "that doesn't look like Wing Chun" I know they haven't been through the same process and smile. These individuals have a romanticised idea of what the art should look like under pressure , they want to see people fighting using drills , not the attributes gained from them. I consider myself a Wing Chun practitioner and just because my application of the art doesn't fit in with another persons preconceived idea of what Wing Chun should look like doesn't mean I'm not doing Wing Chun...

Chris like me trained in other wing chun styles before finding CSL Wing Chun, so he understands full well the difference in our approach.

[Alan Orr]

Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.



You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

Speak about your system and try to understand the others.

Sound wisdom.

[BPWT..]

Wake up. Wing Chun is a close range style. But it's not limited to just that. Of course we have Key words. You point is what? Yes what you are now saying is fine. It may not be what you do or know. I have no problem with that. On point was don't tell me its not our Wing Chun.

Of course I am not telling you it is not your Wing Chun. You say it is your Wing Chun. What I am saying is that for many people they look at that fight clip and they don't see Wing Chun as they understand it. I am one of them. You say it is Wing Chun, for me I say that is not Wing Chun as I understand the system

I agree that WCK is not limited to being just a "close range style", but that (close range/close body) is its emphasis. If you have Kiu Sau methods/key words, and you say that Wing Chun is a close range style, then I would expect to see a close range body method that involves Kiu Sau when your guys fight. I don't see it in that particular fight.

Like I said, all I see at the stand up, striking stage, is Lei Kiu. Your fighter's emphasis was, IMO, on using only what I consider to be a method Wing Chun does not place emphasis on.

Maybe you (all of us) should try not to define "Wing Chun", but only your (our) lineage of Wing Chun.

Sure, but I did (and do) try to use the qualifier "IMO". So yes, I'm looking at things from the WCK (Wing Tsun) that I learn. So like I said, "for me" I didn't see Wing Chun in the fight clip Alan posted. I see it in abundance in the training clips he posts. In those clips it seems apparent that his art has Kiu Sau methods and works them (naturally, of course) from Chi Kiu. In the fight I didn't see those things; no Kiu Sau via Chi Kiu.

Again, I'm not knocking the fighter - just saying that IMO he didn't use these things - and for me they are essential parts of the WCK system, the core of how the art expresses itself.

You and Alan don't train the same art. What you say applies to your LTWT.

Yes. But in other clips Alan posted, I see a lot of things that have similarities to what I learn. Just like I see similarities when I watch a Hawkins Cheung video, or some Sifu Sergio videos, or when I read some of Hendrik's posts.

These are also completely foreign concepts to me.

I understand that, as the WSL lineage (in my opinion) flips things around and itself has a different emphasis - having more Lei Kiu than Chi Kiu. It takes one aspect of the art (which would be an aspect used less in the LTWT line, for example), and gives it much greater emphasis. You can see this very clearly with Philipp Bayer, for example. He has far less focus on bridge work than other Yip Man derived WCK, but what he does he does really, really, really well.

Indeed, if different lineage training develops vastly different types of fighters, then they are basically separate arts/systems/skills, although perhaps with common ancestry. So it makes little sense for any of us to try to define "Wing Chun" and tell others they aren't doing it right.

I accept there are different approaches. And I wouldn't outright say that Alan and his people are "not doing it right." Their training is right for them if they think it is right for them. All I would say (again! ) is that I see lots of things in their training that fit with the approach I learn, but then when I see them fighting I don't see them using much of that. Why train bridge work and controlling - via the drills they have shown - if you don't use bridge work and control via the bridge, in a fight? Why have Kiu Sau methods in your system if you don't use them?

Of course, there might be times when you really don't need to - you hit the guy, knock him out, and the fight is over - no more required. But if you start issuing punches without the control (here I mean the control seen in Alan's other videos) then the fighter runs a far greater risk of being caught by the opponent's unchecked response.

But like I said earlier - Lei Kiu is far, far easier to train and try to work with, than Chi Kiu methods.

But fair enough - maybe we all just see things differently and we should let it stay that way. To each his own.