Wing chun long, medium, or short range sparring?

[YouKnowWho]

You are right! WC is your primary art. You had developed your foundation from WC.

Actually you're wrong in your assumption. I started in boxing and unfortunately defending myself in street fights when I was younger.

I just hate the following conversation.

A: This is my opinion ...
B: You are right because ...
A: You are wrong. You did not understand what I was trying to say.
B:

Now I understand why there are so many argument in the WC threads.

When

- I agree with you 50% and disagree with you 50%, I would like to talk about our agreement.
- you agree with me 50% and disagree with me 50%, you would like to talk about our disagreement.

WC has been my focus for over 11 years and you have mentioned you haven't studied it very long.

If you said that the WC is not your foundation art but you have focus on it for 11 years, I had cross trained the WC system since 1973 from one of Ip-man's students Jimmy Kao (currently lives in Houston, Tx). WC has been my focus for 41 years.

Not trying to brag about my training time. But I'm not a beginner in the WC system. One of my students Paul Wayne Gerald was a WC instructor when he came to me 20 years ago. In the past 20 years, he has evolved himself from a "WC instructor" into a "Sanda coach".

[Faux Newbie]

YKW has flt out stated that he is a hybrid fighter. If his outside in or inside out sometimes is flat out Wing Chun, then it is from Wing Chun.

Also, there was a previous comment about round kick being open to attack, which I agree with. The problem is, everything is open for attack in some way, that is the basis of a lot of kung fu, including wing chun, being at the opening at the right time instead of being closed off from it.

Two practitioners being equal, things will happen that are not things the style says to have happen. The style takes that approach for training purposes, so that, in training, you can avoid the worst position difficulties as much as possible, but in the fight, those things will often happen against an equal or better. It is not the premise of style to then ignore the reality or blame the practitioner for what they have to do to get back into a zone where they can use what they are best at.

If two people who do wing chun fight, and one has trained it well against many methods, and the other has trained it well against wing chun, and the first recognizes that his wing chun is not getting through, but also recognizes that his opponent is vulnerable to a roundhouse kick because they are not accustomed to it, the first person, by using the roundhouse at the right time shows a better understanding of his opponent's wing chun and his own. To not do so while being able to in order to be "more wing chun" is denying his knowledge based in wing chun.

[YouKnowWho]

Here is a good example that it's better to add "roundhouse kick" into your "chain punches" when your opponent uses "rhino" strategy on you.

A combo of

- jab,
- cross,
- roundhouse kick,

will change the whole situation.

[KPM]

I just hate the following conversation.

A: This is my opinion ...
B: You are right because ...
A: You are wrong. You did not understand what I was trying to say.
B:

Now I understand why there are so many argument in the WC threads.

When

- I agree with you 50% and disagree with you 50%, I would like to talk about our agreement.
- you agree with me 50% and disagree with me 50%, you would like to talk about our disagreement.

]

Huh. Someone else having a problem with the way JP participates in discussions. And here I thought it was just me! I have him on "ignore" status for a reason John.

[Hendrik]

I just hate the following conversation.

A: This is my opinion ...
B: You are right because ...
A: You are wrong. You did not understand what I was trying to say.
B:

Now I understand why there are so many argument in the WC threads.

When

- I agree with you 50% and disagree with you 50%, I would like to talk about our agreement.
- you agree with me 50% and disagree with me 50%, you would like to talk about our disagreement.


If you said that the WC is not your foundation art but you have focus on it for 11 years, I had cross trained the WC system since 1973 from one of Ip-man's students Jimmy Kao (currently lives in Houston, Tx). WC has been my focus for 41 years.

Not trying to brag about my training time. But I'm not a beginner in the WC system. One of my students Paul Wayne Gerald was a WC instructor when he came to me 20 years ago. In the past 20 years, he has evolved himself from a "WC instructor" into a "Sanda coach".

For wcners who don't know John.

Johns' sifu late Gm Chang Dung Shen is one of the best top fighter in Chinese martial art in past 80 years until his passing, who's expertise is SC.

So, John knows what he is talking about since he is train by Gm Chang himself. It is always honor to get John here to argue with me.






Johns' rhino is close to Yik kam Wck with the different of yik kam Wck use a different stance for entery and range Thus, he and I have an exchange view on roundhouse kick versus step in yesterday .

[JPinAZ]

I just hate the following conversation.

A: This is my opinion ...
B: You are right because ...
A: You are wrong. You did not understand what I was trying to say.
B:

Now I understand why there are so many argument in the WC threads.

When

- I agree with you 50% and disagree with you 50%, I would like to talk about our agreement.
- you agree with me 50% and disagree with me 50%, you would like to talk about our disagreement.

John, I'm not trying to argue with you. We agree on some things, we disagree on others. When you make a point based on an assumption about me, it's only fair to correct that assumption because yes, you were wrong. Not a big deal really, I took no offense by it. Actually, I've always appreciated your 'common sense' POV posts thru the years as in your previous post. I just don't always agree with your ideas of what WC is or how a WC fighter operates.

As for your 50%/50% comment, I try to address both sides - the agreements and disagreements. This is how we learn from each other and leave the option open for me to say I'm wrong You have your preference of only focusing on the agreement, I have mine. There's room for everyone here

If you said that the WC is not your foundation art but you have focus on it for 11 years, I had cross trained the WC system since 1973 from one of Ip-man's students Jimmy Kao (currently lives in Houston, Tx). WC has been my focus for 41 years.

Not trying to brag about my training time. But I'm not a beginner in the WC system. One of my students Paul Wayne Gerald was a WC instructor when he came to me 20 years ago. In the past 20 years, he has evolved himself from a "WC instructor" into a "Sanda coach".

I appreciate you sharing your experience and the fact that you aren't trying to brag by stating it. I think we can both can agree that it's not always the case that time in a system equals understanding. Example, LT has been doing WC a LOOONNNNGGG time and I rarely agree with what I see him doing. If it works for people that study his method, cool - more power too them. It's just not for me I don't think you fall into he same category as him as I repsect your background and experience, just using it as an example

And, I wasn't trying to slight you when I asked about your level of WC understanding. If you thought I was I appologize. I just wanted to know your background & your defenition of what WC is to forma baseline to discuss from. Also because when we met in Texas in I think 2007, you gave the distinct impression that you've while you've had wing chun training, it wasn't your primary focus and that you hadn't gone all the way thru the system. Maybe I had it wrong or that's changed..

[kung fu fighter]

Let me use an example Ronda is trained in judo right? When she fights she is not "doing judo" but fighting. She brings her judo training into her fights. That training developed certain tools tactics and strategies or skill set that helps make her a better fighter.

Same with Lyoto Machida, you can still see the essence of his Shodokan Karate training in the stand up portion of his MMA fights. He didn't sell out to MMA and jump on the MMA band wagon of only muai thai, boxing, wrestling and BJJ works. That's why I respect him! He follows his own path like myself. which is to implement your own game and not fall into playing his opponent's game.

[JPinAZ]

For wcners who don't know John.

Johns' sifu late Gm Chang Dung Shen is one of the best top fighter in Chinese martial art in past 80 years until his passing, who's expertise is SC.

So, John knows what he is talking about since he is train by Gm Chang himself. It is always honor to get John here to argue with me.

I doubt anyone here denies John'e experience & pedigree. But you defending him is a bit ironic when you, more than anyone else here, often imply that his posting or view doesn't have a place in discussions because he's not a WC person (your words) - usually when he's proving you wrong.

[Hendrik]

I doubt anyone here denies John'e experience & pedigree. But you defending him is a bit ironic when you, more than anyone else here, often imply that his posting or view doesn't have a place in discussions because he's not a WC person (your words) - usually when he's proving you wrong.

When John does a creat job in rhino using Wck concept. I praise him

[YouKnowWho]

when we met in Texas in I think 2007, you gave the distinct impression that you've while you've had wing chun training, it wasn't your primary focus and that you hadn't gone all the way thru the system. Maybe I had it wrong or that's changed..

Where did we meet in Texas back in 2007? I don't remember I had ever said that I had bad WC training.

Here is the ending part of the WC Biu Jee form that I had performed when I was still in my middle 20. Good or bad, it doesn't matter. Just to prove that I was there.

[JPinAZ]

Where did we meet in Texas back in 2007?

We met and had dinner at a tourney there. Me, you, Sifu Ashe Higgs, Sifu Eric, and others. It was a good time and I enjoyed hearing your stories and sharing your experiences with us.

I don't remember I had ever said that I had bad WC training.

Who said anything about good or bad? If you're wondering why discussions go south on this form, this is exactly the reason why imo. I never said good, bad or otherwise.

I tried to be civil and even admitted I could be wrong and offered an apology if I was. But I don't appreciate when people twist my words or put words in my mouth that I never said. Maybe you are mistaken. I suggest you reread what I wrote, as I never said anything about the quality of any of your training:

"'And, I wasn't trying to slight you when I asked about your level of WC understanding. If you thought I was I apologize. I just wanted to know your background & your defenition of what WC is to form a baseline to discuss from. Also because when we met in Texas in I think 2007, you gave the distinct impression that you've while you've had wing chun training, it wasn't your primary focus and that you hadn't gone all the way thru the system. Maybe I had it wrong or that's changed.."

If you still believe I said that, then I have nothing more to say.

[YouKnowWho]

Who said anything about good or bad? If you're wondering why discussions go south on this form, this is exactly the reason why imo. I never said good, bad or otherwise.

while you've had wing chun training ....

You are right! This is my fault. Please accept my apologize on this. Besides my bad Chiglish, my eyes are not very good sometime. I just had my 2nd glaucoma surgery a month ago.

When you said, "while you've had wing chun training." I read as,"while you've bad wing chun training."

I just didn't want to upset the person who introduced me into the WC system (incase he read this forum). Again, it's my fault.

[JPinAZ]

You are right! This is my fault. Please accept my apologize on this. Besides my bad Chiglish, my eyes are not very good sometime. I just had my 2nd glaucoma surgery a month ago.

When you said, "while you've had wing chun training." I read as,"while you've bad wing chun training."

I just didn't want to upset the person who introduced me into the WC system (incase he read this forum). Again, it's my fault.

hah, no problem, mistakes happen! hope you are healing quickly!

[Faux Newbie]

To the topic, and out of general interest.

The thing with close range is that one needs a fairly comprehensive system of take downs, throws, strikes, and holds/seizing in that range.

The thing with long range is that reach is vital.

Where I am curious on how to view wing chun in this is that, in the close category, I am perhaps not familiar with the throwing and takedown repertoire, but the impression I had is that it was not a focus, and not seeking to be comprehensive.

On the long range, because of the center line thing, I was perhaps under the assumption that this requires that line to be on the opponent often in attacks, which reduces the overall range while for others one may face, they retain that range.

On the reach issue, stepping is only an answer if your opponent lacks the skill to also step in order to maintain a reach advantage.

I am curious what inaccuracies people others may think rest in these assumptions.

[YouKnowWho]

The thing with long range is that reach is vital.

When you

- step in, your opponent may step back.
- touch your arm on your opponent's arm, his arm may move away too.

If you try to depend on the "sticky" principle to

- control distance, and
- build bridge,

it may not be effective enough. The "sticky" principle is just too easy to be broken apart. Instead, the "hook" principle is much better solution. When you put a "hook" on your opponent's body and if he moves back, he will pull your body with him.

In this clip, he puts 2 "hooks" on his opponent's arms. He also applies "sticky leg" principle on his opponent's leading leg.