I've only been back on the forum for a few months now since my 3 year long hiatus from training. Back then I remember talking mostly about wing chun only, there wasn't as much MMA talk as there is now...but a couple things I've been noticing...

First let me say that I love the art of wing chun, I feel it's got some of the best theories and concepts...it's simple and direct, as the saying goes. It develops great sensetivity and reaction time which is good for any fighter. It's also conceptual, which means it's ideas can work across many areas and styles of combat.

Wing chun grew famous as being a FIGHTING art. It's techniques directly address FIGHTING...not meditation, not exercise, not the betterment of one's moralities and personality flaws...but FIGHTING.

So then why do some of the people here have such a closed mind when it comes to the idea that wing chun MIGHT not have all the answers to fighting? True, perception of the art and the level of understanding can make a difference in what "effective" really is, but the sky is blue and the grass is green, these are things that we cannot dispute, just as in FIGHTING, we cannot dispute effectiveness or lack of effectiveness.

It's quite obvious when stepping back and looking at the system's methodology, that it is indeed a highly specialized system and doesn't take into consideration all aspects of fighting. One cannot dispute that. It takes very little intelligence to see, and refusing to see is just a fear of accepting the facts.

So then if we practice an art that was known for effective fighting, and are presented with facts that may help us to stay effective as fighters...why are we so closed minded to it? Because it didn't come from China or Hong Kong? Because it doesn't follow the straight line maxim?

Like I said, I love wing chun, but I from 23 years of martial arts, I see things differently now, I don't think in the box anymore, and I stay open to new ideas and things that would make me better as a fighter, and a martial artist in general.

To cite an example of why we should start thinking ouside the box...I was in a wing chun school, and was doing some anti grappling using wing chun against the leg clinch/ leg shoot. When I was the wing chun person, and the "attacker" went for my leg, I simply moved it back while punching him. He stopped and looked at me and said "I don't think that's right. I said "why wouldn't it be? You didn't get my leg, and I managed to keep hitting you in the process..." He said "well, in wing tsun we don't give up space, so we don't step the leg back." I looked at him like I thought he was joking at first but he wasn't. INSTEAD of thinking logically and reacting naturally, he wouldve left himself in a situation wherein his leg would've been taken, all because a style that doesn't even really address that area of fighting, told him not to. That's not fighting smart, that's fighting blind.

We should use wing chun for what it's good for, but also be able to go outside the box and think for ourselves, think logically, and realistically. Not be made into robots that follow rules based on no imperical evidence. Science doesn't come up with answers based on what someone thinks will happen, it experienments and gathers data, and then makes an assessment. If you gather no data, then how can you say what you do works, doesn't work, works but is need of improvement in "x" area....etc??

I'm just wondering really how one can get so offended at people questioning blind faith. It's a valid question/debate, and one really should take into consideration the evidence that's out there.

Just my two cents...