Page 7 of 32 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 479

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

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    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.
    BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage? If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?
    "No contaban con mi astucia!" --el Chapulin Colorado

    http://www.vingtsunaz.com/
    www.nationalvt.com/

  2. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    First, can you more precisely define Chi Kiu and Lei Kiu for me in your understanding? We have a definition of Chi Kiu in our wing chun art (HFY) that I am very sure is different than what you are talking about.
    In simple terms, as they are both just two words , Chi Kiu (contact with the opponent's bridge), Lei Kiu (no bridge).

    So within Chi Kiu you'd find the Kiu Sau methods/key words I mentioned when I said: "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."

    Lei Kiu would be striking without control of the bridge (the bridge usually means hand/wrist to elbow, but can include up to the shoulder). Of course, WCK can utilise Lei Kiu too - if the opponent drops his arms and just stands there - you'd just hit (or raise an eyebrow and ask him if he's done ).

    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    Bridging is absolutely not part of WCK's strategy. You don't seek to bridge. It is a direct art - you go directly to the target. IF there is a bridge in the way, you sink it.
    Yes, you go to the target. What I mean is that the art assumes the opponent won't just drop their arms and let you hit them. But at the same time the art doesn't avoid the opponent's bridge - say going around it - without controlling it. You will face the opportunity to bridge in a fight, but WCK looks to control the bridge, hence no ducking and weaving (at least in the WCK I train we don't duck and weave).

    So bridging is, IMO, absolutely a part of the WCK strategy. Yip Man talks about it in the interview I mentioned, and many WCK lineages utilise Kiu Sau methods. IMO the art recognises that it is too risky to just avoid incoming limbs without controlling them - the art wants to turn contact (brief or not) to its advantage.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    In this fight, the only form of bridge I saw put up by Josh's opponent was a BJJ guard.
    You might be right, as when the punches were thrown both were using Lei Kiu methods. Of course you could argue that BJJ is a Chi Kiu method - or rather a Chi method, as contact and control (of various limbs and body parts) is desired.

  3. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumblegeezer View Post
    BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage?
    I knew someone would ask this

    No, I don't have any good clips - and that is the problem I don't think any WCK guy (or girl) has stepped into the ring and used the art.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumblegeezer View Post
    If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?
    I really don't know, to be honest.

    Do we train unrealistically (as TC101 would put it)?

    Or do we train incorrectly (subjective use of the word 'incorrectly'), meaning do we let ourselves be pulled into the 'playing their game, not ours' scenario?

    Or does the need to deal with ground work (something WCK doesn't really deal with/train for) mean that we need to train, say, BJJ (I agree it would be important to train this for a MMA fight) but then that somehow changes our emphasis when in stand up?

    Or as Glenn suggests, is an art for the street and an art for the ring simply incompatible in terms of what is used, the goal of the fight, the duration (and the possible time expectation) of a fight? I once saw a Wing Tsun guy have to deal with two guys outside of a restaurant (he stepped in to say something as one of the guys was close to hurting a woman) and the WT guy dealt with them very quickly and it looked like Wing Tsun from start to finish. So I know the art can be used and look the way it is trained.

    Overall, I dunno.

    For sure, however, I think Lei Kiu arts are quicker to learn and easier to implement than Chi Kiu arts, they are - in essence - simpler. Not better or worse as systems for fighting, just simpler and easier to put into use (so some might argue that that is indeed "better").

  4. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    So Jeet Kune Do is Wing Chun? The reason so many lineages have stayed secret for so long is to keep their teachings intact. You can't just do anything you want and call it Wing Chun. There has to be some standards. Otherwise after a few generations there is nothing left of the original. If you just want to learn to fight and be effective in the ring, then just study MMA or BJJ or boxing. Why are you doing Wing Chun?
    It is not for me say to say what is and what is not wing chun, on the other hand it is. No one owns it so what gives any of us the right to tell anyone else what they are doing is or is not wing chun? People are creatures of habit and despite their best intentions, very few like change and most like to follow so the original you are worried about disappearing will always be there. What people have to accept is that change and evolution are necessary, nothing stays fixed forever. Language, music, technology, architecture all change so why should the martial arts not. No amount of letters typed on forum board will prevent change.

    I assume stuff was kept secret due to insecurity and that it had not been tested otherwise it would evolve. I was initially drawn to wing chun in the mid 90s; adverts in martial arts mags kept repeating the mantra about scientific street fighting and assumed it had the answers to the questions and fears I had then. It did not so I continued my search but that has now come full circle as I am back training wing chun.

    20 years ago there was genuine debate about which martial art was the best. Now we know with certainty which are thanks to pressure testing competition - the UFC. You listed yourself what shoulde be used to fight effectively in the ring. I used to be a hopeless martial romantic that all the esoteric systems had the answers, they did not, although there was that kick that Seagal taught Machida...

    I have studied BJJ and MMA for 5 years and had no desire to fight in the cage but I had a desire to find about who I am and what I could do in arts that constantly pressure test. Why lie to myself and guess? It was hard and scary, but also bloody good fun. Now I have a better understanding because I have experienced it. No one told me, I did not read it in a book or watch it on youtube. Experiential learning is key.

    I now do wing chun because I believe in what my instructor does. His philosophy of wing chun has changed and evolved based on his own experiences in the street and in MMA gyms. He is bold enough to acknowledge the gaps but also the qualities of wing chun and evolve it accordingly. If he did not he would be doing himself and us the students a dis-service. Honesty, integrity and certainty should be guiding principles all teachers have.

    Oh and I am on this journey to find out more about myself.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by BPWT.. View Post
    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.
    Good post! Well stated! This actually is closely related to what Hendrik has been writing on his "1848" thread.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayfaring View Post
    Hey Chris nice to meet you. Of course you're a wing chun practitioner. And your coach does well teaching it adapted to MMA. .
    Now hold on WF! "Adapted" is NOT what Alan said! You are going to incite his indignation as I did!

    Alan said:

    Let me make it very clear -

    I teach Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen under my teacher Robert Chu Sifu. What my guys train and use in combat sports and normal self defence is Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen.

    CSL Chinese Boxing is CSL Wing Chun Kuen!


    No adaptation here. What you saw Josh doing in that clip is "straight up" Wing Chun.
    Last edited by KPM; 04-18-2014 at 05:55 PM.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumblegeezer View Post
    BPWT do you, or anyone else have any good clips of anybody with an unmistakable WC/WT/VT "visual signature" dominating their opponent in the ring or cage? If not, are we to assume that the characteristics of the traditional "visual signature" to use your term, are simply not compatible with competitive, MMA style fighting?
    100% correct

  8. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennR View Post
    100% correct
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Could be but:Aint necessarily so.

    An issue of the size of most purses.

    The average NFL guys make more than the average pro boxer- partly accounts for the decline of American boxing and the rise of East Europeans.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,252
    Quote Originally Posted by Vajramusti View Post
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Could be but:Aint necessarily so.

    An issue of the size of most purses.

    The average NFL guys make more than the average pro boxer- partly accounts for the decline of American boxing and the rise of East Europeans.
    This arguments been going on too long Joy, if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it, worked in the MMA circuit we would have seen it by now.

    We havent

    Anything that does work has been modified, adapted..... whatever.

  10. #100
    hi, just as a data point here, when i spar hard with mma fighters, sanda fighters, muay thai guys etc, my wing chun probably doesn't look at that much different than alan orr's guys wing chun either. under violent chaos, speed and pressure with threat of knock out strikes and take downs you better not be standing like a static target thinking youre doing your forms or you're gonna get ktfo. at times plenty of signature wc techniques may be visible (to someone who knows what theyre looking at) and the subtle energy generation, angles, footwork and strikes etc are there, just often trans-mutated under pressure and fitting the immediate application. i use only wc in clinch fighting (ive never taken a mt class) and do fine against mt clinch. also use plenty of wc mixed in on the ground. and guys with typical boxing/mt striking backgrounds usually say my fighting style is weird and unorthodox but effective (because it truly is different and is wc based), but you guys would probably just look at it and tell me i was just doing boxing or mt or something like that. would i care or would that matter to me? no. probably doesn't matter to alan and his fighters either, especially if theyre busy ending fights like that (nice work and congrats btw!)

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ᏌᏂᎭᎢ, ᏥᎾ
    Posts
    3,257
    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.

  12. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    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.
    Powerful words

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    44
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by LFJ View Post
    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.
    LFJ, that is one of the best posts I've seen on this forum

  14. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennR View Post
    This arguments been going on too long Joy, if WC, as a lot of people like to identify it, worked in the MMA circuit we would have seen it by now.

    We havent

    Anything that does work has been modified, adapted..... whatever.

    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.

  15. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Mutant View Post
    hi, just as a data point here, when i spar hard with mma fighters, sanda fighters, muay thai guys etc, my wing chun probably doesn't look at that much different than alan orr's guys wing chun either. under violent chaos, speed and pressure with threat of knock out strikes and take downs you better not be standing like a static target thinking youre doing your forms or you're gonna get ktfo. at times plenty of signature wc techniques may be visible (to someone who knows what theyre looking at) and the subtle energy generation, angles, footwork and strikes etc are there, just often trans-mutated under pressure and fitting the immediate application. i use only wc in clinch fighting (ive never taken a mt class) and do fine against mt clinch. also use plenty of wc mixed in on the ground. and guys with typical boxing/mt striking backgrounds usually say my fighting style is weird and unorthodox but effective (because it truly is different and is wc based), but you guys would probably just look at it and tell me i was just doing boxing or mt or something like that. would i care or would that matter to me? no. probably doesn't matter to alan and his fighters either, especially if theyre busy ending fights like that (nice work and congrats btw!)

    Good post. Many thanks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •