Why not have an open mind about real fighting?

[SAAMAG]

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...

[old jong]

I personaly don't see Wing Chun as a complete MA,in the sense of including all techniques and ranges.It is a weapon that can be very sharp or dull just like any weapon.
But ,this is a Wing Chun forum and it is getting very hard to talk about Wing Chun around here.This is not a MMA forum.Is that true?...

[Ultimatewingchun]

"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."

You're right, Van.

Because accepting the facts would mean having to start over - to a certain degree.

But some people prefer to rest.

They think they've climbed to the top of the mountain...and nobody is going to tell them otherwise.

Let them be.

So that they can continue to play in their own little world.

[SAAMAG]

No, you're right OJ, this is a WC forum. We talk about wing chun here, but the "occasional" questions about whether or not wing chun would work against this or that...well that just helps us out as personal martial artists and keeps us honest. I for one welcome anything that might save my life one day.

I do see what you're saying however....but I feel that as long as people stay on the topic of the posts, it wouldn't be hard at all to speak about wing chun.

[iblis73]

Hey Van, I've come to find your postings to be sensible and informative. I still lurk on this forum even tho I dont train with the WT crowd anymore and will be starting jkd/mma soon. I really want to get into bjj and go as far as I can in that.

People like sytems and groupings, I think we are wired for it psychologically. I loved training at Parkers and doing wt-but whenever sumpin came up, well, it sorta broke down. I've gone far afield and found that sport based and mma type systems just seem to natural to me. I had an epiphany after training so intently in WT (sometimes 10-12 hrs a week.) I got into martial arts to learn how to FIGHT, or as one student put it so succintly I got into MA to learn how to kick someones ass. I did not get into it to "do martial arts" master a style or any of that.

After talking with and training with jkd folks, garage groups and military/leos, going back to "traditional" training just feels like a regression. Thats the biggest reason I left WT and the TMA world in general-the psychological stuff and mentality of so many is something I couldnt deal with.

[Phil Redmond]

Originally posted by old jong
I personaly don't see Wing Chun as a complete MA,in the sense of including all techniques and ranges.It is a weapon that can be very sharp or dull just like any weapon.
But ,this is a Wing Chun forum and it is getting very hard to talk about Wing Chun around here.This is not a MMA forum.Is that true?...

Michel, it's good to know the competition is doing
PR

[Phil Redmond]

Vankuen, contrary to what some might believe WC is first for me. I just don't want to be caught unaware. So, I'm experimenting with other MAs. If it's not againt forum rules I'd like to copy your post and email it to my students. It is on the money.
Phil

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I doubt that there is such a thing as a “complete” martial art, which has the answers for all situations. However, Wing Chun has the capability to obtain the answers to each and every situation simply because it is a system of concepts rather than techniques. If one understands the energy and angles behind various attacks then one is not limited to a preset group of responses. Wing Chun should teach one to “think outside of the box” after all doesn’t Biu Tze teach us to do just that?

I think that Wing Chun was developed as an eclectic style and thus took in what it needed in order to deal with the types of attack sit was most likely to face. I think that in keeping with that tradition we who train today should keep an open mind and realize that there may be other things, which could benefit our approach by their inclusion in our training. Of course this does not open the door to doing and training a hodgepodge of techniques or systems but it does present one with the opportunity to explore other arts and then build upon your Wing Chun base. For example, many have found it quite beneficial to incorporate BJJ into their Wing Chun in order to improve their ground fighting skills.

I think that we do no disservice to the founders of Wing Chun when we expand our take on the art to include methods not originally found within the system. I feel that we need to constantly evaluate and evolve as times change. I always point to the inclusion of the pole as a good example of the need and sometimes the acceptability of looking outside of the system.

I do understand Old Jong’s point though that many people fail to thoroughly explore Wing Chun in favor of the perceived shortcut of sometimes adding techniques from outside of the system. I am not against integrating other arts with ones Wing Chun, however I do think that one should fully explore their own art before they start adding things.

Peace,

Dave

[SAAMAG]

Biu tze to me, simply teaches techniques to use in the event something went wrong with the basic techniques. Emergency techniques I believe is the coined term? Everything necessary to fight with wing chun however can be found in the first two sets. The third set and even the weapon sets aren't "necessary" to fight empty handed using wing chun.

Had you not said this first Dave, I would have. The long pole is a great and undeniable example of integration/evolution. There is no disservice to wing chun at all when you integrate ideas and techniques to better yourself as a martial artist, because quite frankly wing chun is there to help us as individuals...and well, wing chun has no identity after all. It's just a set of concepts and techniques that fall directly under those set concepts.

Like I said...it's an awesome system, and I can't think of any of other style that can develop ones hands and body unity the way wing chun does. It's second to none in that department...it's just the other departments that I think we owe to ourselves to look into when addressing combat in the truest sense of the word.

[OdderMensch]

Originally posted by Vankuen
I've only been back on the forum for a few months now since my 3 year long hiatus from training.

<<<sniping some good stuff here>>>

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.

Well for me, there are two reasons I have a closed mind in this case. One is that it hinders my ability to have a very open mind about the possibilties present within WC. The second is that I belive any form of fighting (yes even hard core sparring/mma freestyle) is going to have a balance of pro's and cons. WC seems to me to be a very well thought out and considered balance, and I trust (at least for now) the designers plans.

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.

No fear here. Well ok heights do bother me a bit, but other than that.........But one thing that has always struck me about WC is that every time I read/see/hear about some aspect or range of fighting that WC does not seemingly address, I soon learn from my Sifu how and where WC addresses it.

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.

OK this is a bit esoteric, but one must consider the mindset of the creators of WC. They were most likely buddists and or daoists and those people have been philiosphicly thinking outside the box inside the box and realizeing there is no box for thousands of years.

To cite an example of why we should start thinking ouside the box...<<<<<<<<<snipped a trademark example of WC misteachings>>>>>>> That's not fighting smart, that's fighting blind.

I won't point out to you why he was 'wrong' on a techical level, cuz this is not about that. But i have heard BJJ instucters telling people to just 'not worry' about takeing a few shots to the face or head while going in for a takedown. While I am sure there are times this is good advice it strikes me as absurd!

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...

By all means lets debate this, but understand I do not follow blindly into any mindset. Kabbalah (sp) and some parts of the new testament left out over the centueries tells us that the faithful should go thru stages.

In the first stage, one must simplly belive and have faith. Latter as the person grows, they should study and confirm that faith. The greeks said an unexamined life is not worth liveing, they belived that unexplored faith was not worth haveing.

So yes at this stage in my training I have faith that WC will give me all the tools I need on order to fight.

[SAAMAG]

Originally posted by Phil Redmond
Vankuen, contrary to what some might believe WC is first for me. I just don't want to be caught unaware. So, I'm experimenting with other MAs. If it's not againt forum rules I'd like to copy your post and email it to my students. It is on the money.
Phil

I don't mind Phil, go right ahead.

This was just something I was thinking about, and I was getting sick of the bickering between the groups, I feel like I'm right in the middle of them, although I do cater to the pragmatic side. I want to get more advanced in wing chun, and I love discussing it...however one cannot dispute that to be good at fighting in general...we need to practice other things as well...and since it's still martial arts, we should be eager to learn these things...I know I was/am everytime someone is willing to share useful knowledge with me in a NONCONDESCENDING or egotistical fashion. On the same token, I've never charged anyone for any of my coaching/teaching either and I love doing that as well. There's nothing quite like the feeling of helping trying to teach someone something and finally seeing them apply it correctly in it's environment. It's almost as good as when it happens to you!

[OdderMensch]

Biu tze to me, simply teaches techniques to use in the event something went wrong with the basic techniques. Emergency techniques I believe is the coined term? Everything necessary to fight with wing chun however can be found in the first two sets. The third set and even the weapon sets aren't "necessary" to fight empty handed using wing chun.

I'd just like to go on recored as saying I almost completely disagree with thqat statement. All three handsets work to expand and clarify each other a proper understanding of chum kui is no less or more important than a proper understanding of Biu Jee

the "emergency techniquies" are just one aspect of that form, just as the stance is just one aspect of SLT.

[SAAMAG]

To justify that statement, simply look at the most common wing chun techniques typically used in whatever sparring you may happen to see (as it happens very little in most schools) in addition to the chi sau. Aside from the elbows, and the biu sau, what other biu tze techniques do you think are absolutely necessary in wing chun fighting that aren't already present in the previous two forms?

You will typically see paks, tan, bong, fook, lap, lan, biu, hiuen, gaan, gwat, on the defensive side and the punches, palms, and elbows on the offensive side consistantly in most exchanges (at least from what I've been exposed to...maybe I'm wrong) But even my sihings and other wing chun people I've discussed this with agree that most of is used can be found in the first two forms. But like I said, everyone's reality is slightly different. Some people need more information to fight better, some do not. From one thing know ten thousand right? I guess that's why we the everlasting debate that started this thread exists right?

[SAAMAG]

Originally posted by OdderMensch
Well for me, there are two reasons I have a closed mind in this case. One is that it hinders my ability to have a very open mind about the possibilties present within WC. The second is that I belive any form of fighting (yes even hard core sparring/mma freestyle) is going to have a balance of pro's and cons. WC seems to me to be a very well thought out and considered balance, and I trust (at least for now) the designers plans.

just like yin and yang everything will have it's ups and downs, pro's and con's etc. Wing chun is indeed a well thought out system derived from some very smart people. That is why we must upkeep the intelligence level by thinking logically about fighting and how wing chun fit's into the totality of it.

No fear here. Well ok heights do bother me a bit, but other than that.........But one thing that has always struck me about WC is that every time I read/see/hear about some aspect or range of fighting that WC does not seemingly address, I soon learn from my Sifu how and where WC addresses it.

if that is happening and your sifu can adapt the concepts of wing chun kuen to address the different ranges of fighting then that's great! That is what needs to happen. Use the wing chun, don't let it use you!


OK this is a bit esoteric, but one must consider the mindset of the creators of WC. They were most likely buddists and or daoists and those people have been philiosphicly thinking outside the box inside the box and realizeing there is no box for thousands of years.

"most likely...probably..." I'm glad you're saying it that way instead of "they were..." because honestly...we really don't know who they were. The concepts are taken by every individual differently, and this is good because that is what allows for growth. But if they indeed did think "outside the box" they probably didn't think that fighting was going to evolve the way it has either. So we must do the thinking for them...as we are the ones carrying the torch in this day and age. We will decide the evolution or stagnation of the system, or your system rather as you would interpret it.



I won't point out to you why he was 'wrong' on a techical level, cuz this is not about that. But i have heard BJJ instucters telling people to just 'not worry' about takeing a few shots to the face or head while going in for a takedown. While I am sure there are times this is good advice it strikes me as absurd!

As you do not need to because it was pretty evident what was wrong there in his thinking...that was the point of the story. But the idea of people taking hits to get better ones in may not sound right in theory, it happens that way because fighters...or people that have time actually fighting, have learned that no matter who you are or how good you think you may be, you're most likely going to take hit(s) in any given fight (against a semi skilled opponent). The thinking doesn't go "take these hits on purpose to get this hit in" but moreso "It's highly probably you may take a few hits when doing..." This obviously doesn't sound right to a wing chun person who relies on the wing chun "safe hitting" maxim wherein the attacks happen after a trap when it's "safe" to hit. The hard reality is that even a non trained person with simply good athletic ability can keep his hands from being trapped...depending of course on the skill levels and natural ability of the untrained person. Too many variables my friend to give absolutes here...so on we go to the next tidbit...

By all means lets debate this, but understand I do not follow blindly into any mindset. Kabbalah (sp) and some parts of the new testament left out over the centueries tells us that the faithful should go thru stages.

In the first stage, one must simplly belive and have faith. Latter as the person grows, they should study and confirm that faith. The greeks said an unexamined life is not worth liveing, they belived that unexplored faith was not worth haveing.

So yes at this stage in my training I have faith that WC will give me all the tools I need on order to fight.

Well I hope that you will learn fast, and start to explore a little bit to "reinforce" your faith. I too have faith that wing chun will work...

... for it's intended use. I do not have faith that wing chun will get me out of situations that wing chun does not train in. So it's not a matter of having no faith, it's a matter of thinking for yourself and understanding that there's more out there that you have to be ready for....that's all. Nothing wrong with wing chun at all...just remember that there's more out there my friend. That's all.

[anerlich]

I do understand Old Jong’s point though that many people fail to thoroughly explore Wing Chun in favor of the perceived shortcut of sometimes adding techniques from outside of the system. I am not against integrating other arts with ones Wing Chun, however I do think that one should fully explore their own art before they start adding things.

These are good points. However, the question that it begs is how long it takes to "fully explore" one's own art, at least to the point where one is competent enough to be able to judge the value of other systems and approaches.

Frank Shamrock turned pro after 8 months training. He won a world title after a year and a half. Anyone who's met him knows he's no idiot.

If you are an adult of reasonable intelligence, following someone else's track for several decades without applying your own judgement and critical faculties seems foolish and an abrogation of both potential and maturity.

In Japanese culture, sometimes derided by Sinophiles and others as being a nationality inflexible in their thinking and attitude, the concept of Shu Ha Ri is espoused.

Simplistically, you follow Shu for ten years, and train your art as laid down by your instructors.

In the next phase, Ha, you are EXPECTED to break away, try other things, look for weaknesses, think for yourself, find your own path.

In the third stage, Ri, you integrate your own learning with your inheritance.

So you are EXPECTED to go outside the boundaries of your system. After about ten years. If you haven't got a decent understanding of what you are doing after a decade, something is wrong with you or the people allegedly instructing you. If you want to stay in that bubble, or you are ordered to, ditto IMO.

As for "a conceptual based art, which has the answers to everything if you understand the concepts, and if you want to do something else you haven't understood..." I could just as easily have gone to a CLF, BJJ, taiji school or Peekaboo boxing gym and be told the same thing, and unfortunately for the true believers, it would be right. I went to a WC school because I liked the instructor's skill and personality, not because I was looking to hook up to a philosophy of life, religion, or cult. I wasn't looking for a black hole to fall into.

WC is an elegant and effective system. I've trained hard in this system for 15 years. It's great. I did forms and chi sao with a couple of training buds before work this morning, though - shock horror - sorry - we did move out of the "traditional TWC" drills into hip tosses, arm drags, duckunders and knee strike/snapdown/front chokes.

When I saw BJJ, I saw a similarly elegant and beautiful art. Once I tried it, I was hooked. So effective, and so much fun, such a challenge both physically and intellectually. It can be a brutally effective means to dominate superior attributes with skill, and it can also be a gentle art of restraint. Plus most of the other students have less attitude than most TMAers.

I see boxing as a great challenge. So much more to it than just bashing someone. In some ways, it's a more efficient striking art than WC, with some concepts that are IMO superior.

I'm going to continue following all these paths. Because I like them all. I don't just choose one, because .. I don't have to.

Got a problem with that? Then *you* got a problem, not me.