WC's Ground Game

[Knifefighter]

BJJ black belts dont come free thats true its hard to get one. BJJ is probably the most popular grappling art today.

Freestyle and folkstyle wrestling are the most popular grappling systems today.

IMO Wing chun doesnt have ground work because on the battlefield going to the ground would mean death.

This is one of the biggest misconceptions of what happened on the battlefields before firearms came into existence.

Grab some weapons, put on some armor and grab about 60 guys to go 30 on 30. You will find that, just as often as not, people end up grappling on the ground.

As far as using WC principles on the ground, that is about as ludicrous as saying you can use ground principles in the standing realm.

[Knifefighter]

The title of this thread is kindof misleading. I wanted to say in MMA but the UFC isnt real mixed martial arts more like jack of all trades master of none.

Actually, what they are masters of is MMA.

[Knifefighter]

"Position over submission"- Tony Cecchine (Catch as Catch Can)

That was not Tony's philosophy at all. His quote was "submission from any position."

[t_niehoff]

This is one of the biggest misconceptions of what happened on the battlefields before firearms came into existence.

Grab some weapons, put on some armor and grab about 60 guys to go 30 on 30. You will find that, just as often as not, people end up grappling on the ground.

As far as using WC principles on the ground, that is about as ludicrous as saying you can use ground principles in the standing realm.

I can't remember the title of the book that cited the study off-the-bat (I'll try to find it), but the US Army recently did a "study" of combatants that had actual hand-to-hand confrontations on the "battlefield" and determined that all of them ended up in grappling, and the overwhelming majority went to the ground.

P.S. I found the source: "Hand to Hand Combat" by Greg Thompson and Kid Peligro. Matt Larson, the man considered to be the "father of Modern Army Combatives" (the system of hand to hand combat taught to the U.S. Rangers and special forces), interviewed hundreds of soldiers that engaged in hand to hand combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. According to Larson, "every hand-to-hand fight we have documented has involved grappling, but not a single one has involved only striking."

[anerlich]

John Will, one of the earliest Aussiie BJJ black belts, does regular seminars with the Australian army and other police and military groups.

According to a number of his military students who have seen combat in Iraq, it is fairly common in house-to-house clearing operations for the guys they are trying to track down to conceal themselves then try to tackle the soldier as he enters the room, rendering their rifles less effective. So ending up on the ground is definitely seen as a potential problem scenario by modern soldiers.

The soldiers don't try to armlock or choke the guy just create enough space with their legs to draw a knife and kill the enemy.

I don't know too many details as it was a farily short anecdote in the context of teaching techniques, but the man is no bu11Sh1tter and definitelty knows his stuff.

[anerlich]

I was wondering though how you have a forum join date of 1970?

Did the internet even exist then???

It was all tin cans and bits of string. Or tubes

The forum went belly up a few years back and everyone woh had joined before it went belly up ended up with that join date when it came back on line.

[taai gihk yahn]

I was always skeptical of the argument that "traditional" and "battlefield"-based styles (???) didn't teach ground because in a battle between two armies, going to the ground was neither desirable nor likely; if you are talking about HTH between 2 large groups, I think a lot of peeps are going to end up on the ground: if it's random, crazy weapons melee, sooner or later someone's going to slam into you and knock you over from behind or the side, or you are going to trip over someone's corpse, or your opponent will charge you to get inside your weapon's range (especially if he has been somehow disarmed); also, so-called "battlefield" arts are predicated more on large troop movements, using serfs with pikes as cannon fodder, that sort of thing; if you ever watch Branagh's Henry V, while some of the HTH choreography is questionable, you get a pretty good idea of the craziness that battlefield combat involved, and a lot of it was rolling around in the muck...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Gravity rules, people fall, perhaps more so in large scale combat than in 1-on-1.
The differnence would be that in a "mass combat environment" the primary goal is to defend and get off the ground instead of trying to fight ON the ground, though obviously that would play a huge part in it.

[t_niehoff]

Gravity rules, people fall, perhaps more so in large scale combat than in 1-on-1.
The differnence would be that in a "mass combat environment" the primary goal is to defend and get off the ground instead of trying to fight ON the ground, though obviously that would play a huge part in it.

But the better you are at fighting on the ground, the better your skill will be at getting up off the ground should you want to. In other words, it is grappling skill that is involved in getting up (escaping holds and pins, being able to control your opponent, etc.).

[Kansuke]

Freestyle and folkstyle wrestling are the most popular grappling systems today.

Thank you.

[AdrianK]

BJJ: im not a huge fan of. They pretty much ignore the lower half of the body. Im more fond of the Russian sambo style of leg locks position. "Position over submission"- Tony Cecchine (Catch as Catch Can)


What do you all think?

I think singing the praises of wing chun ground game and then criticizing an extremely effective and extensively proven art which has in general, a much higher level of quality control, is extremely disrespectful, not to mention idiotic.

You want to criticize some arts, start with wing chun itself.

And while wing chun concepts will work on the ground, the fact of the matter is, Wing Chun does not have even close to a complete understanding of the ground fight.

[taai gihk yahn]

I think singing the praises of wing chun ground game and then criticizing an extremely effective and extensively proven art which has in general, a much higher level of quality control, is extremely disrespectful, not to mention idiotic.

although at the same time, it does manage to encapsulate in a rather pity manner the inherent quirkiness that is the TCMA mentality!

[monji112000]

The title of this thread is kindof misleading. I wanted to say in MMA but the UFC isnt real mixed martial arts more like jack of all trades master of none. Sorry, back on point.

Do you all believe that WC has a ground game? How about throws? Could it rival BJJ on the ground? Whats your take on TWC being used in a combat sport setting? TWC on the street in a true NHB setting?

This has probably been asked several thousands times before but ive been viewing this forum for a few years now. It has less trolls and more info than ever before thats why i posted these questions again for the umtenith time.



My take on it:

Ground Game: You can use the same basic principles of wing chun on the ground just as if you were standing. You have to have a good base nomatter what position your in. Constant forword pressure. Dont let your self collapse, right and left defend accordingly. dont give up your center. Those can all be used on the ground. William Cheung recently wrote and article in Bla** Belt magazine about just such techniques.

Throws: I love throws having a JJ background, but its all there in the wing chun. Chum Kiu has the outside leg circles at the beginning of the form (atleast our version does) those are clearly leg reaps. The turning double lan saus can become head & arm throws like Uchi Mata or Ochi Gari variations. In Biu Gee, the Emergency bend at the waist towards the end of the form easily become hip throws like Ogoshi. Just looking at the motions looks alot like Seio Naga. If you just set down at the bend over position its a sit down throw.


BJJ: im not a huge fan of. They pretty much ignore the lower half of the body. Im more fond of the Russian sambo style of leg locks position. "Position over submission"- Tony Cecchine (Catch as Catch Can)


What do you all think?

Do you know anything about martial arts? I'll ignore the MMA attack, because its silly. WC has 0 ground techniques outside of maybe chain punching from a version of knee of belly.

Ground Game: You can use the same basic principles of wing chun on the ground just as if you were standing.

First off you go from school to school and you find that nobody agrees on the basic "principles" and even ones that seem the same its not used in the same way. Its like saying I'll use WC to ride a horse.. sure.. but you have to first learn how to ride a horse.

I love throws having a JJ background, but its all there in the wing chun. Chum Kiu has the outside leg circles at the beginning of the form (atleast our version does) those are clearly leg reaps.

Anyone can stretch a kung fu forms into being they are not.

BJJ ignores half of the body? WTF?? Maybe some people do, but thats pretty blind. The general mantra of every BJJ school is position over submission.
You have no idea what the heck your talking about. Don't quote Tony Checchine, like anyone cares what he thinks. How can you talk about leg locks and then say position over submission? a large amount of them put you out of position, which is why you don't see them as much in MMA. Its a gamble unless you are VERY good at them. Even then they aren't as high percentage. That doesn't mean they don't work or they aren't good. The are NASTY! But in all honesty, why gamble with getting your face smashed over a heel hook? Why not take the top and knock his teeth out? Allot of people will just let their legs get jacked up and continue to fight. How many people have a broken arm and continue fighting? I can think of only one person I have ever heard of in MMA. Perfect example is the recent Rafael dos Anjos fight. Great JJ guy, had a calf crush from hell on the guy. I believe the guy had surgery from it, because he probably destroyed his knee. Rafael dos Anjos lost the fight. He should have taken the guys back and finished the fight.

again you know nothing about martial arts.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ground Game: You can use the same basic principles of wing chun on the ground just as if you were standing. You have to have a good base nomatter what position your in. Constant forword pressure. Dont let your self collapse, right and left defend accordingly. dont give up your center.

The principles are fine, in theory, they just have to be modified quite a bit in practice and practice in a ground fighting environment, not a WC one.
EX: the principle of constant forward pressure applied to the ground may get you subbed in more ways than one cares to imagine, even more so if applied as typiclaly done while STANDING.

[lkfmdc]

I"m afraid that by introducing logic into this thread, I'll disrupt the flow of this conversation and perhaps, e gad, end the thread

Can you take certain wing chun principles and apply them on the ground? Yes.

Unforatunately, you'll be wasting a lot of time trying to figure out what is real and what is fantasy on the ground and developing techniques.

But, more importantly, you'll then find out the end that those wing chun principles that do work on teh ground are already part of established grappling systems

YOur time might be better spent trying to invent a device with four wheels that runs on a fossil fuel and can convey people to locations