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

[BPWT..]

What would a batting average be like if the player held the bat in their mouth?

Start the pool game with a bad break?

Start your long jump off the wrong foot?

Treat the patient with the wrong drug?

Symptoms, Wayfaring. "Start as you mean to go on."

Okay, I promise - end of the thread for me... despite the allure. I'm like a zombie drawn to a bunch of forum posters stuck in a ditch.

[Alan Orr]

What would a batting average be like if the player held the bat in their mouth?

Start the pool game with a bad break?

Start your long jump off the wrong foot?

Treat the patient with the wrong drug?

Symptoms, Wayfaring. "Start as you mean to go on."

Okay, I promise - end of the thread for me... despite the allure. I'm like a zombie drawn to a bunch of forum posters stuck in a ditch.

I think you may find that you are the one stuck lol

Everyone else seems quite normal

[Wayfaring]

What would a batting average be like if the player held the bat in their mouth?

Start the pool game with a bad break?

Start your long jump off the wrong foot?

Treat the patient with the wrong drug?

Symptoms, Wayfaring. "Start as you mean to go on."

Okay, I promise - end of the thread for me... despite the allure. I'm like a zombie drawn to a bunch of forum posters stuck in a ditch.

Then you would be living in an Alanis Morissette song.

[Alan Orr]

tc101,

The guys I spar with - they "are all trying to punch me in the head" when we spar. And the Muay Thai guy adds to the mix by trying (succeeding) to pulverise my legs. We train privately, but sure - I could head to a boxing gym... and I'm sure I'd have difficulties there. I spar purely to add some more live training to my regular Wing Tsun training. It is what it is. I make slow improvements doing what I do. I'm happy with that. If I wanted quicker improvements, I'd go train MMA like Alan's guys. Like I said - different goals.

If I take a pounding during the sparring sessions, you might say, "Well, that's because your method doesn't work under real pressure." But if I'm doing quite well, what then? "Well, your training partners aren't pro fighters." None of that means much to me, to tell you the truth. The only question I ask myself is whether I can see improvements in what I am doing, the way I am doing it.

Alan and his guys can use any method they like in the ring. If it works for them, that's great. If they came to the conclusion that Wing Chun's kicking methods just didn't work well for them, for example, and so they decided to train Muay Thai methods instead - good for them. They can still call it Wing CSL, I guess. Their system.

I asked "why do you do something in a particular way, how does that fit with your Wing Chun's concepts and methods, and which line/lineage of Wing Chun from Robert Chu does that come from?"

If they say that they do what they do because it works in the ring, okay. I don't think it really answers my questions, and so I don't know how to view what they do and understand how it is Wing Chun, but okay... I don't really care enough to continue asking beyond 26 pages.

The funny thing, is that even though I don't train in the PBVT method, if I watch Sean's sparring clips I don't need to ask these questions. Sean's guys are not competing in the way that Alan's are, but still... everything is pretty clear and their sparring looks like the methods their line teaches transfer well.

I'll happily watch Alan's instructional clips, but I've lost all interest in trying to better understand how they utilise their system. Alan's kinda petty with the school-boy insults. It was certainly an eye-opener talking to the man. :roll eyes:

School boy? Says the guy with no name. Lol

In truth I don't have time to answer and explain each second of my fighters matches. It's not how fighting works anyway. Also we not sharing all our reasons on a forum, as my guys still fight and I don't choose to give away all our methods. I'm happy to post clips and share. But it's up to me what I show and what I don't. If you are happy with your style then just get on with it. If you want question our wing chun then make the effort and meet us rather that waste so much time on someone's hand positioning.

[LFJ]

Sean's guys are not competing in the way that Alan's are, but still... everything is pretty clear and their sparring looks like the methods their line teaches transfer well.

Same goes for the Iron Wolves. You just don't understand their method and how it should transfer. They only train CSLWC for their standup and they're knocking people out in pro fights. I'd say it's transferring extremely well!

Cool! I wonder if PB visits often. Will have to try and look into it.

Not sure, but it's a PBVT representative school in your current city. You should definitely drop in and have them show you firsthand how the system works. Opportunity is right across the street!

[tc101]

tc101,

The guys I spar with - they "are all trying to punch me in the head" when we spar. And the Muay Thai guy adds to the mix by trying (succeeding) to pulverise my legs. We train privately, but sure - I could head to a boxing gym... and I'm sure I'd have difficulties there. I spar purely to add some more live training to my regular Wing Tsun training. It is what it is. I make slow improvements doing what I do. I'm happy with that. If I wanted quicker improvements, I'd go train MMA like Alan's guys. Like I said - different goals.

I do not know who the guys you spar with are. The thing about sparring is that how you do it and most importantly who you do it with makes all the difference. Sparring under the guidance of a good fight trainer is a whole different level like the difference in doing some exercises on your own versus using a personal fitness trainer.

When ever I hear guys saying I will do this or that in fighting I find it lol funny. I do not mean this as condescending but I have learned from over 20 years in a boxing gym and from my wing chun training also that what will work for you depends heavily on what your opponent can do, how good he is at doing it and what he is doing at the moment. There is no such thing as a formula or fixed approach. Your strategy and tactics depend for the most part on your opponent since they have to deal with the unique problems that individual is giving you. You often go in with plan A quickly move to plan B then start improvising lol.

From what I have seen many many many people in wing chun only spar a bit and with their wing chun partners so they only see very very very very limited things in sparring. I pointed this out to Kev. His ideas sound great if you face other PB guys locked into a specific way of doing things but what when you face someone not doing that? Like Obasi?

For example this stuff about the guard. If I am only facing guys who throw elbow down straight punches while facing me squarely and never feint and so forth I might be able to use a mun wu type guard successfully. The choice of guard is a TACTICAL CHOICE and it's success will depend on what my opponent is doing. The point is there is no universal right or best way even if the model teaches you that. You have to do those things make those tactical choices that work against that particular opponent and with what he is doing. That is fighting. You learn to do that only through experience.

If I take a pounding during the sparring sessions, you might say, "Well, that's because your method doesn't work under real pressure." But if I'm doing quite well, what then? "Well, your training partners aren't pro fighters." None of that means much to me, to tell you the truth. The only question I ask myself is whether I can see improvements in what I am doing, the way I am doing it.

Alan and his guys can use any method they like in the ring. If it works for them, that's great. If they came to the conclusion that Wing Chun's kicking methods just didn't work well for them, for example, and so they decided to train Muay Thai methods instead - good for them. They can still call it Wing CSL, I guess. Their system.

Their kicking method like everything else is wing chun based. You keep looking at things from the model pov and think because it does not look like the model it is not wing chun. That is because you believe that your fighting should look like the model and since it doesn't they are not using wing chun. I keep trying to tell you that the model is a finger not the moon. You do not see that wing chun in application that is in fighting most often will not look like the model. It's like you keep saying yes but their forehand does not look like how the book teaches to do a forehand. I keep telling you that when you really play tennis you will find that it rarely looks like it does in the book. The model is to help you learn how to kick not to limit or restrict you. Learn the principle but do not be bound by the principle. Who said that?

I asked "why do you do something in a particular way, how does that fit with your Wing Chun's concepts and methods, and which line/lineage of Wing Chun from Robert Chu does that come from?"

If they say that they do what they do because it works in the ring, okay. I don't think it really answers my questions, and so I don't know how to view what they do and understand how it is Wing Chun, but okay... I don't really care enough to continue asking beyond 26 pages.

Yes yes you keep asking that question but what you do not get is things don't work like that. You learn the strategies tactics skills concepts of the art but in fighting you adapt them to your opponent. So when you ask why did you do it that way the answer is because it works against that particular guy.

The funny thing, is that even though I don't train in the PBVT method, if I watch Sean's sparring clips I don't need to ask these questions. Sean's guys are not competing in the way that Alan's are, but still... everything is pretty clear and their sparring looks like the methods their line teaches transfer well.

I'll happily watch Alan's instructional clips, but I've lost all interest in trying to better understand how they utilise their system. Alan's kinda petty with the school-boy insults. It was certainly an eye-opener talking to the man. :roll eyes:

It goes back to what I said in my first paragraph.

[KPM]

OK. At risk of being accused of driving on a pointless argument, or having an agenda, or whatever....I just had to respond to this.

School boy? Says the guy with no name. Lol

.

Yes Alan, "school boy" is pretty appropriate. You should take a good hard look in the mirror. I'm a nobody. You are a public face of Wing Chun. Go back and read through this thread. I have been very surprised by your behavior. When faced with people asking very polite and respectful questions (whether you liked the questions or not is irrelevant) you responded by saying they were "low level", "stupid", "the walking dead", "clueless".....and I'm sure I missed a couple of others. So yeah, "school boy" seems like a nice way to put it. And with behavior like that you wonder why BPWT is reluctant to give his name?

If a new potential student with no background in Wing Chun but some knowledge of boxing/MMA came to your school considering signing on and asking the very same questions, would you have responded like this?

As I pointed out to crazy Dave, it takes two sides to drive any discussion/argument. Responding like you have certainly doesn't help to end said discussion/argument. But for some reason the blame only gets pointed in one direction.

Hopefully this thread will now die a natural death.

[LFJ]

@KPM

Yeah. You guys totally came on here respectfully asking questions to understand their system... by arguing/telling them that what they do isn't Wing Chun!

You shouldn't expect Alan to happily provide free handouts detailing their system if you come on insulting it (saying "congrats but it's not Wing Chun" is an insult). His response was pretty natural and expected.

For some people, respect is reciprocal.

[Alan Orr]

@KPM

Yeah. You guys totally came on here respectfully asking questions to understand their system... by arguing/telling them that what they do isn't Wing Chun!

You shouldn't expect Alan to happily provide free handouts detailing their system if you come on insulting it (saying "congrats but it's not Wing Chun" is an insult). His response was pretty natural and expected.

For some people, respect is reciprocal.

Thank you ! True wisdom. You would think that was all common sense but it's not been the case as we know lol

[Alan Orr]

OK. At risk of being accused of driving on a pointless argument, or having an agenda, or whatever....I just had to respond to this.




Yes Alan, "school boy" is pretty appropriate. You should take a good hard look in the mirror. I'm a nobody. You are a public face of Wing Chun. Go back and read through this thread. I have been very surprised by your behavior. When faced with people asking very polite and respectful questions (whether you liked the questions or not is irrelevant) you responded by saying they were "low level", "stupid", "the walking dead", "clueless".....and I'm sure I missed a couple of others. So yeah, "school boy" seems like a nice way to put it. And with behavior like that you wonder why BPWT is reluctant to give his name?

If a new potential student with no background in Wing Chun but some knowledge of boxing/MMA came to your school considering signing on and asking the very same questions, would you have responded like this?

As I pointed out to crazy Dave, it takes two sides to drive any discussion/argument. Responding like you have certainly doesn't help to end said discussion/argument. But for some reason the blame only gets pointed in one direction.

Hopefully this thread will now die a natural death.

This is BS. As it's been said - telling my guys well done for winning fights even though it's not wing chun is being rude. Then going on and on about parts of the fight where no wc can be seen etc is again a low attack at the hard work of my team. Now you want to act like your the nice guy and I'm the one playing games. Lol keep going.

I have taking time to film and post videos, what have you guys addressing questions, what have you done?

Just more talk

If a new student came to my class? Are you saying your comments are due too you being a new student of wc? A new student I hope would come with an open mind and want to listen and learn.


When I talked about low levels of understanding I am talking about people who can not see or understand what we do. If you can't then yes the level must be a lower level to the basic standards I set my guys. Is that you ? I don't know. I'm talking about my general opinion.

Yes I have a lot of knowledge in the martial arts not just wing chun so I'm not just guessing. I have been around the block a few times.

Why not post clips to explain what you think would work better and would have made the fight more of a success that just a knockout.

[KPM]

Nice, thanks for the new moniker! From the first moment that I commented on this thread you've tried to tell me what I should think and what I saw as if I was too stupid and naive to form a conclusion for myself. You did your best to steer me towards your viewpoint

What the heck are you talking about? Yes, "crazy Dave" seems to be an appropriate moniker!

When you posted this video on the general forum, irregardless of how good you say your intentions were, you did it in hopes of gaining a consensus for your argument.

As I have already said (and now you are forcing me to repeat myself, so who is still instigating this argument?) I posted that clip without prejudice and in as positive a way as I could. I was truly curious if non-WCK people would just accept it out-right as Wing Chun, or whether they would ask some of the same questions we were asking. Then guys that had been following this thread chimed in and it became a "let's bash the Wing Chun guys" thread and then you jumped in and actually encouraged them! I was willing to accept the results which ever way they went. But now we'll never know because the Wing Chun bashers poisoned the whole thread.


Your correct in saying that it takes two to drive a discussion, but what you and BPWT are doing is nothing short of trolling, hoping Alan and his crew will back down so that you can feel triumphant in your argument.

That's total BS! Yes, there are two sides or two perspectives to any discussion or argument. Yet you felt the need to attack me alone and I wasn't even the one doing most of the posting. But that's beside the point. Let me summarize this whole thread from my perspective. Obviously most others haven't seen it this way. But at least try to see where I am coming from, and I think BPWT would agree. This is highly paraphrased of course. And the thread has meandered this way and that as threads like this tend to do. But this is my impression of this whole discussion. I ask everyone to at least consider this side of this whole weird thread.

Alan: Here are a couple of clips showing a great Wing Chun knockout and one showing Wing Chun sparring.

Walking Dead: Thanks! Great clips! Congrats to Josh! But I noticed that I don't see any obvious Wing Chun in those clips. It looks like the boxing that most MMA fighters are using. This seems to be Wing Chun adapted to MMA and not "straight up" Wing Chun.

Alan: Of course its Wing Chun. It hasn't been "adapted" to anything. You must be low level and clueless if you can't see it. Wing Chun fighting doesn't look like Wing Chun drills because under pressure things change. We train CSL Wing Chun and our fighting and sparring uses Wing Chun concepts, structure, and techniques.

Walking Dead: Ok. Its just that someone in a wide stance with their hands up in front of their face, their body inclined forward, chin tucked in, bobbing and weaving and using bouncing footwork looks more like boxing than Wing Chun. Can you explain how this is an expression of your Wing Chun concepts and structure?

Alan: No. Its Wing Chun because I say its Wing Chun. I don't have to explain anything. I have already explained by saying that we use CSL Wing Chun concepts, structure, and technique. If you can't see the Wing Chun in these clips, then you must be stupid and clueless. Applied under pressure Wing Chun is not going to look like it does in training.

Walking Dead: But what about those two recent clips showing Wing Chun sparring under pressure that still looked like Wing Chun and not boxing?

Alan: Those clips are irrelevant and I am ignoring them. What counts is whether YOU spar. If you don't think YOU could take on one of my fighters then you don't have the right to express an opinion or ask any questions.

Again....this is how I have seen this discussion from MY perspective. Just hoping people are willing to take a step back and actually consider what has really been said here.



Keith, you asked me what your agenda is, well frankly I think it is to come off to others that you are the smartest in the room. Got news for you, your not.

No, I don't think I'm the smartest in the room. And I haven't pretended to be clairvoyant and say that I know what someone else's intentions are either. If I have any agenda, it is to bring up a point or observation that I believe to be true and then ask questions to those that have a different viewpoint. I tend to keep at it until someone either convinces me that there viewpoint it valid or until its obvious that we can agree to disagree. If someone keeps coming back at me and telling me my viewpoint is "stupid" or that I'm "clueless", or that I'm "low level", well... that's not agreeing to disagree, and I'll going to keep coming back. Ok. Maybe that's a fault, maybe I should know when to give up. But if someone keeps telling me I'm wrong, but doesn't give me a convincing reason WHY I'm wrong, I tend to keep pushing own point. Don't know whether that qualifies as an "agenda" or not. If anything, I think I'm guilty of being stubborn and hard-headed!


You know what? I still think those clips look more like Boxing than Wing Chun. That's the "obvious" part I kept referring to, but Alan called me "clueless." Alan said no, those clips are "straight up" Wing Chun, not Wing Chun adapted to a Boxing scenario. So we have been asking questions as to how CSL Wing Chun concepts are being expressed in those clips. And no, we haven't gotten very good answers. If anyone else thinks they have, then please explain to this stubborn clueless low-level idiot how the quite obvious western boxing elements we have seen in those clips are actually all based upon and conform to Wing Chun concepts.

So you can call me anything you want. You can accuse me of anything you want. You can say I have an "agenda" or that I am "spamming" or that I am "trolling." But that is the bottom-line for me. I still think Alan is doing great work, though I think a little less of him as a person now. But that's it! I'm out! I'm sure you guys will have more catchy comebacks though!

[KPM]

I had left this conversation until YOU felt the need to drag me into it again.

Ah! You mean just like you dragged me back into it with your weird attack on me several pages back???



First of all your intentions are transparent, I'm not clairvoyant just intuitive, don't take my word for it ask some others what they believe your intentions were.

I just told you what my intentions were. Are you now calling me a liar?


I never called you stupid or clueless

Haven't you even been reading along Dave? I said it was Alan who called us stupid and clueless.

Simple fact is, you asked they answered.

Ok. Maybe I missed it. So I will repeat my request I wrote just above...... please explain to this stubborn clueless low-level idiot how the quite obvious western boxing elements we have seen in those clips are actually all based upon and conform to Wing Chun concepts. Can you do it Dave?


All of this started because you and BPWT have insinuated that Alan Orr is a liar.

What? Dave you really are crazy! We may have said we didn't see what he was saying or understand why he was calling things a certain way, but we certainly never said he was liar! So I would appreciate it if YOU didn't put words in MY mouth!

For the record, I'm not on anyone's side.

Really? You sure fooled me!

I've already voiced my opinion on the subject. This conversation we've been having isn't about Wing Chun it's about ethics. These childish rants going back and forth,

You mean like the one you launched when you freaked out on me?

[Alan Orr]

Nice, thanks for the new moniker! From the first moment that I commented on this thread you've tried to tell me what I should think and what I saw as if I was too stupid and naive to form a conclusion for myself. You did your best to steer me towards your viewpoint

What the heck are you talking about? Yes, "crazy Dave" seems to be an appropriate moniker!

When you posted this video on the general forum, irregardless of how good you say your intentions were, you did it in hopes of gaining a consensus for your argument.

As I have already said (and now you are forcing me to repeat myself, so who is still instigating this argument?) I posted that clip without prejudice and in as positive a way as I could. I was truly curious if non-WCK people would just accept it out-right as Wing Chun, or whether they would ask some of the same questions we were asking. Then guys that had been following this thread chimed in and it became a "let's bash the Wing Chun guys" thread and then you jumped in and actually encouraged them! I was willing to accept the results which ever way they went. But now we'll never know because the Wing Chun bashers poisoned the whole thread.


Your correct in saying that it takes two to drive a discussion, but what you and BPWT are doing is nothing short of trolling, hoping Alan and his crew will back down so that you can feel triumphant in your argument.

That's total BS! Yes, there are two sides or two perspectives to any discussion or argument. Yet you felt the need to attack me alone and I wasn't even the one doing most of the posting. But that's beside the point. Let me summarize this whole thread from my perspective. Obviously most others haven't seen it this way. But at least try to see where I am coming from, and I think BPWT would agree. This is highly paraphrased of course. And the thread has meandered this way and that as threads like this tend to do. But this is my impression of this whole discussion. I ask everyone to at least consider this side of this whole weird thread.

Alan: Here are a couple of clips showing a great Wing Chun knockout and one showing Wing Chun sparring.

Walking Dead: Thanks! Great clips! Congrats to Josh! But I noticed that I don't see any obvious Wing Chun in those clips. It looks like the boxing that most MMA fighters are using. This seems to be Wing Chun adapted to MMA and not "straight up" Wing Chun.

Alan: Of course its Wing Chun. It hasn't been "adapted" to anything. You must be low level and clueless if you can't see it. Wing Chun fighting doesn't look like Wing Chun drills because under pressure things change. We train CSL Wing Chun and our fighting and sparring uses Wing Chun concepts, structure, and techniques.

Walking Dead: Ok. Its just that someone in a wide stance with their hands up in front of their face, their body inclined forward, chin tucked in, bobbing and weaving and using bouncing footwork looks more like boxing than Wing Chun. Can you explain how this is an expression of your Wing Chun concepts and structure?

Alan: No. Its Wing Chun because I say its Wing Chun. I don't have to explain anything. I have already explained by saying that we use CSL Wing Chun concepts, structure, and technique. If you can't see the Wing Chun in these clips, then you must be stupid and clueless. Applied under pressure Wing Chun is not going to look like it does in training.

Walking Dead: But what about those two recent clips showing Wing Chun sparring under pressure that still looked like Wing Chun and not boxing?

Alan: Those clips are irrelevant and I am ignoring them. What counts is whether YOU spar. If you don't think YOU could take on one of my fighters then you don't have the right to express an opinion or ask any questions.

Again....this is how I have seen this discussion from MY perspective. Just hoping people are willing to take a step back and actually consider what has really been said here.



Keith, you asked me what your agenda is, well frankly I think it is to come off to others that you are the smartest in the room. Got news for you, your not.

No, I don't think I'm the smartest in the room. And I haven't pretended to be clairvoyant and say that I know what someone else's intentions are either. If I have any agenda, it is to bring up a point or observation that I believe to be true and then ask questions to those that have a different viewpoint. I tend to keep at it until someone either convinces me that there viewpoint it valid or until its obvious that we can agree to disagree. If someone keeps coming back at me and telling me my viewpoint is "stupid" or that I'm "clueless", or that I'm "low level", well... that's not agreeing to disagree, and I'll going to keep coming back. Ok. Maybe that's a fault, maybe I should know when to give up. But if someone keeps telling me I'm wrong, but doesn't give me a convincing reason WHY I'm wrong, I tend to keep pushing own point. Don't know whether that qualifies as an "agenda" or not. If anything, I think I'm guilty of being stubborn and hard-headed!


You know what? I still think those clips look more like Boxing than Wing Chun. That's the "obvious" part I kept referring to, but Alan called me "clueless." Alan said no, those clips are "straight up" Wing Chun, not Wing Chun adapted to a Boxing scenario. So we have been asking questions as to how CSL Wing Chun concepts are being expressed in those clips. And no, we haven't gotten very good answers. If anyone else thinks they have, then please explain to this stubborn clueless low-level idiot how the quite obvious western boxing elements we have seen in those clips are actually all based upon and conform to Wing Chun concepts.

So you can call me anything you want. You can accuse me of anything you want. You can say I have an "agenda" or that I am "spamming" or that I am "trolling." But that is the bottom-line for me. I still think Alan is doing great work, though I think a little less of him as a person now. But that's it! I'm out! I'm sure you guys will have more catchy comebacks though!

Cherry picking comments and rewriting the 27 pages in one post is twisting things around.

The main point is and will always be that you can not accept that we use CSL wing chun in our fighting.

Straight up wing chun - what even is that ?? Drill wing chun, training wing chun?

No what you see in the fight is applied wing chun

You would think with the bad rep wing chun is gaining from the you tube rubbish you see, that you would be happy we stick to our wing chun as out art and stand up for wing chun as a martial art

[Alan Orr]

I had left this conversation until YOU felt the need to drag me into it again.




I have looked at it from your point of view. If you go back through the thread there are some points on which we agreed, but your constant rebuttal of every answer given you by Alan, his student and his supporters puts you in a bad light. If you don't think CSL Wing Chun is represented in the clip, fine, but who are you to tell the Sifu of the fighter that it is not CSL Wing Chun? Do you practice CSL Wing Chun? Alan Orr is taking offense because you and BPWT keep insulting him by insinuating that he does not do Wing Chun when time after time he has said that it is what CSL Wing Chun looks like under heavy pressure. Here is a simple question for you: Have you ever been in a REAL fight? I'm not talking about heavy sparring, I'm talking about a knock down drag out brawl where the individual is trying to do you serious harm? If so what were the results, win or lose is irrelevant, did your Wing Chun look like something out of the movies or was it something a little less romantic?




First of all your intentions are transparent, I'm not clairvoyant just intuitive, don't take my word for it ask some others what they believe your intentions were. I never called you stupid or clueless I only insinuated that your were being a douchebag for the way you were acting. As far as being wrong, in this case, on many points you are. You don't study CSL Wing Chun, they tried to provide answers as best they could, you persisted to the point of insulting their integrity which leads to my questioning of your intentions and agenda. Simple fact is, you asked they answered. If you didn't like or agree with the responses that's your prerogative no need to keep insisting that they provide you or BPWT with a more detailed explanation that is more in line with your understanding or personal philosophy. Accept what is given, agree or not and let it be.




And you are certainly entitled to your opinion, let others have theirs. In this case, Alan Orr and his crew. I believe they have tried to explain, maybe not in as much detail as some would like or in a manner that others can understand. This is their choice and no one has the right to try and coerce them to do otherwise. In actuality they don't have to explain anything to you or anyone else. You and BPWT act as if you are entitled to the methods of their art without putting anything in. All of this started because you and BPWT have insinuated that Alan Orr is a liar. You can re-butte that all you want but that's how I see it and I'm sure that is how many others including Alan Orr see it.

For the record, I'm not on anyone's side. I've already voiced my opinion on the subject. This conversation we've been having isn't about Wing Chun it's about ethics. These childish rants going back and forth, people trying to convince each other that their view is the only one. I understand that it is a discussion forum but at some point the ADULT in all of us needs to come out and speak the voice of reason.

Good balanced post

[PalmStriker]

Cherry picking comments and rewriting the 27 pages in one post is twisting things around.

The main point is and will always be that you can not accept that we use CSL wing chun in our fighting.

Straight up wing chun - what even is that ?? Drill wing chun, training wing chun?

No what you see in the fight is applied wing chun

You would think with the bad rep wing chun is gaining from the you tube rubbish you see, that you would be happy we stick to our wing chun as out art and stand up for wing chun as a martial art

Applied WingChun? Yes you are correct, Sifu. If you were using applied Muay Thai in an MMA format there would be much less contention. Fact is, if you and your guys are absorbed in TCMA WingChun there will be a big difference in that application as opposed to Korean base or Okinawan base or Taiji base. * Your fighter caught his opponent off guard and he never was able to recoup, especially in the psychological. They will be paying more attention to that attack strategy in future bouts. (The Art of War). Keep up the good work! K.P. deGreenham