# Wing Chun/Tsun and FMA's



## geezer (Nov 23, 2007)

Ever since Bruce Lee met Dan Inosanto, there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts--Escrima, Arnis, Kali and the like. My first love was Wing Tsun, but after about five years, I began studying Latosa Escrima. My Si-Fu tolerated this, but sure didn't approve. As for myself, I love training in both arts. What do you make of the Wing Chun-FMA connection?


----------



## UrBaN (Nov 23, 2007)

Same family arts. Silat too.

Almost everything seen in wing chun in empty hands, can be found in fma or silat and vice versa. 

Study one in depth and can easily adapt and progress to the other.

Just my opinion.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Nov 23, 2007)

I completely dissagree that there is any particluar special connection between these arts

Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this

I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this
 I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to

BJJ is one of the best as BJJ practitioners use stick when rolling and ground work is missing from the wing chun system


----------



## UrBaN (Nov 23, 2007)

*" Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this"*

Who said anything like that? 
I'm talking purely on body / hands / foot movement similarities and most of all mindset.

*" I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this"*

Actually this doesn't prove anything.

Bjj is far away from the purpose/spirit of either Wing Chun or FMA or Silat. I agree on the sticky aspect, but for me, ground is the area that needs the less training.

If I had to set priorities then my list would be:

- Striking
- Grappling (stand up)
- Weapons
- Ground

*" I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to"*

I'm not talking about application, but similarities. 

But I agree, Wing Chun's tactics and strategy apply to any style with the same goals.


----------



## dungeonworks (Nov 23, 2007)

I have been seeking Wing Chun in my area and nearly every instructor I have talked with or read about in said area has some FMA in their repertoire or background.   I would love to train in either/or WC or FMA.


----------



## geezer (Nov 23, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I completely dissagree that there is any particluar special connection between these arts
> 
> Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this
> 
> ...



Hey Kamon, no need to get grumpy. I just meant that here in the States you see an awful lot of schools that teach Wing Chun and FMA's. I know that the European WT guys in the EWTO also teach both arts, as does Bill Newman in England. I've seen no such connection in the Karate and Taekwondo schools around here.

As far as combining different martial arts goes, I think you've got it about right. I feel that my plate is full with WT and Escrima, but if I were younger and talented enough to handle a third martial art, it would be BJJ. I wrestled in my youth and I highly respect the role of grappling in learning a complete self defense program.  And, as you said regarding BJJ and sticking, it's true that in grappling you learn to stick and feel you opponent's body position, his balance and weaknesses in a manner somewhat akin to Chi Sau. These are the only two arts I know in which you can effectively compete blindfolded. It seems to me that they would complement each other nicely.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Nov 23, 2007)

Wing Chun and Filiphino styles have many similarities. Similar method of teaching (drills), similar focus (hands, kinda sorta), and they do blend well. The Wing Chun drills can be done with sticks (on a conceptual level), and they become very effective. Filiphino drills can be done disarmed, and then blend well with regular Wing Chun drills. 
Cuong Nhu guys some times cross train in Wing Chun (which is a major style of influence) or Filiphino styles. And when we teach either style, we often teach both together.


----------



## arnisador (Nov 23, 2007)

nikos said:


> Almost everything seen in wing chun in empty hands, can be found in fma or silat and vice versa.



I'm not sure I'd go quite that far, but there are certainly lots of analogies, and working FMA improved my WC (when I took it) and vcie versa. Jeet Kune Do shows how well they can be blended together.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Nov 27, 2007)

nikos said:


> *" Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this"*
> 
> Who said anything like that?
> I'm talking purely on body / hands / foot movement similarities and most of all mindset..


The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'
This disturbed me a great deal
It would appear that people are saying that wing chun is derived directly from Bruce Lee (ie what about the countless wing chun schools that have never had any involvement with Filipino Arts?)
You can train ANY art with wing chun (even karate) but it does not mean there is any special link



nikos said:


> *" I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this"*
> 
> Actually this doesn't prove anything.
> 
> ...


 
Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range? Because if you are talking about guns you aren't going to stand much of a chance anyway
You should never set priorities when training - if you build up strikes, that should deal with weapons.If you train clinchwork, you should be using strikes to assist you. 
Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc
Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc). As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that



nikos said:


> *" I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to"*
> 
> I'm not talking about application, but similarities.
> 
> But I agree, Wing Chun's tactics and strategy apply to any style with the same goals.


Well if you are talking of similarities, why not mention Tai Chi rather than Escrima?


----------



## barnaby (Nov 28, 2007)

way I heard it, long ago the Chinese were selling combat ideas to the Filipinos for silk.  

This story comes from a Chinese teacher, who was teaching out of Mr. Inosanto's school for a while.  so why would Lee and Inosanto not find familliar ground in working with each other?


----------



## UrBaN (Nov 28, 2007)

@Kamon guy:

* The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'
This disturbed me a great deal*

  Well, I didnt say that. You cant blame me for other peoples quotes. Im just talking about similarities.



*    Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range?*

  Definitely. I always assume that the opponent(s) is armed in my training. I advise you should too.


*    You should never set priorities when training*

  Well I do and I disagree with your statement. For example, why should I spent 3 years training in nunchaku, when there is no way Im ever going to use it. Or why should I train to disarm firearms, when the possibility of such an occurrence is rare where I live. If I was living in Beirut that would be my No.1 priority. Why spend time & energy, to develop combative tools that are probably never going to happen to me and not use that time effectively to develop other aspects of combat?
  Priorities have another level in our training. We should set our priorities in order not to attempt the wrong things at the wrong time. When its the right time to hit, to grab, to disarm, to sacrifice etc.


*   Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc*

  Yep, thats mostly stand-up grappling (like freestyle, Greco-roman, etc), not ground necessarily. Grappling is no.2 in my priorities, remember?


*   Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc).*

  Most deaths occur due to lack of awareness. Most fights ending on the floor, is a myth.


*    As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that*

  I agree, thats why you should train in a grappling art. Thats the only way.


*   Well if you are talking of similarities, why not mention Tai Chi rather than Escrima?*

Im sure it has too, but I only talk about stuff Ive trained at.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Nov 28, 2007)

nikos said:


> @Kamon guy:
> 
> *The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'*
> *This disturbed me a great deal*
> ...


You queried my comment, I gave a response
You asked who had said that there was a link between WC and Escrima. 
Hence why i quoted the above



nikos said:


> @
> *Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range?*
> 
> Definitely. I always assume that the opponent(s) is armed in my training. I advise you should too..


What I meant by that was that if you approach someone ina bar fight, you shouldn't let him even get to a weapon. If he goes for his pockets, he is going down. If he does anything out of the ordinary I am going to blast the guy til he is subdued. Hit first, ask questions later
Don't wait until he gets a weapon and then engage him



nikos said:


> @
> *You should never set priorities when training*
> 
> Well I do and I disagree with your statement. For example, why should I spent 3 years training in nunchaku, when there is no way Im ever going to use it. Or why should I train to disarm firearms, when the possibility of such an occurrence is rare where I live. If I was living in Beirut that would be my No.1 priority. Why spend time & energy, to develop combative tools that are probably never going to happen to me and not use that time effectively to develop other aspects of combat?
> Priorities have another level in our training. We should set our priorities in order not to attempt the wrong things at the wrong time. When its the right time to hit, to grab, to disarm, to sacrifice etc..


I do not understand - if you are training in one area, you are setting priorities. I was saying that you should be training everything. 
It is no good focusing in one area and forgetting the rest. 



nikos said:


> @
> *Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc*
> 
> Yep, thats mostly stand-up grappling (like freestyle, Greco-roman, etc), not ground necessarily. Grappling is no.2 in my priorities, remember?.


No it wasn't. You stated clinchwork was your second priority, groundwork was your fourth
For me they go hand in hand



nikos said:


> @
> *Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc).*
> 
> Most deaths occur due to lack of awareness. Most fights ending on the floor, is a myth..


Are you joking!!!?????
Every fight I have ever seen or been in has involved someone going to the floor. Think about it - how else would you win (ie if you punch someone and they don't go down they are just going to hit you)



nikos said:


> @
> *As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that*
> 
> I agree, thats why you should train in a grappling art. Thats the only way..


Completely agree


----------



## Spartan (Nov 28, 2007)

Geezer, 
All that I've ever heard is how great these two disciplines compliment each other - showing different aspects of, in many ways, similar movements. 

I don't understand why your Si-Fu would have any hard feelings towards this style, especially if you wanted some solid weapons training.


----------



## geezer (Nov 28, 2007)

Spartan said:


> Geezer,
> All that I've ever heard is how great these two disciplines compliment each other - showing different aspects of, in many ways, similar movements.
> 
> I don't understand why your Si-Fu would have any hard feelings towards this style, especially if you wanted some solid weapons training.



Who can say why? Pride? Money? Tradition? He's a Chinese Grandmaster and he feels that his art is the best. For one of his instructors to study or teach something else really bothered him. He felt that if you wanted weapons training, put in a decade or two of serious training, teaching and  a lot of money, and then you could learn his version of the Bart Cham Do or "Butterfly Swords". I admit he was, and is, a superb martial artist, but eventually, I reached a point where I needed a more open minded instructor... I believe I sent you a PM with his name. Sure I have to either travel to his state or help get a seminar together and fly him in to train, but it's worth it. Same for my main FMA instructor.


----------



## Spartan (Nov 28, 2007)

Geezer, 
How effective is the the weapons side of wing chun? Is there a significant number of wing chunners out there who could take their weapons skills and implement them w/ objects they would find in a real scenario?

Also, do you think that the same kind of exclussion exists in other styles that you have found w/ certain wing chun Si-Fu's?


----------



## UrBaN (Nov 29, 2007)

@Kamon guy
  Weapons: Its another thing to say that you dont believe a person will use a weapon at close range and another thing that you are not going to let him access one. Decide what you want to say.

  Priorities: I cant explain any better. My areas of training are the 4 I mentioned before. Train in Everything cant happen at least in one lifetime.

  Grappling: I divide it in stand-up and ground. If you dont thats fine with me. BUT, I spend more time on stand-up than ground.

  Kills: No Im not joking, lack of awareness is the reason that gets you killed. (sudden attacks with a weapon) Most fights that youve seen isnt the end all, is it? 

  Ground: Most fights dont end up on the ground. They either stop in a couple of strikes and people get into the way, or we have KOs. Ground is the less probable thing to happen. It's a hype. You should train in it, but that would be like 10% of my training.

  As I said thats just my opinion in all of the above, so you should relax, we are only talking here.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Nov 29, 2007)

UrBaN said:


> @Kamon guy
> Weapons: Its another thing to say that you dont believe a person will use a weapon at close range and another thing that you are not going to let him access one. Decide what you want to say..


two different scenarios - one is where a guy approaches you weapon in hand (ie in a mugging)
Another is where you engage an empty handed attacker and he then draws a weapon

The first scenario is simple - strike hard and fast (enough to drop him) then worry about the weapon. You should't be training specifically for weapons
The second scenario is simple - do not let him get to a weapon

If you can't do these, then be compliant and hope for the best



UrBaN said:


> @
> Priorities: I cant explain any better. My areas of training are the 4 I mentioned before. Train in Everything cant happen at least in one lifetime..


'Everything' is a concept that you have taken too literally
In my class, I don't train in just punching for the whole lesson
We work stancework, footwork, striking, clinchwork, fighting techniques, drills etc. You can't say to people 'train primarily in striking and play around with grappling for ten minutes at the end'. You should train these areas equally, especially as they intertwine  



UrBaN said:


> @
> Grappling: I divide it in stand-up and ground. If you dont thats fine with me. BUT, I spend more time on stand-up than ground..





UrBaN said:


> @
> Kills: No Im not joking, lack of awareness is the reason that gets you killed. (sudden attacks with a weapon) Most fights that youve seen isnt the end all, is it? .


Lack of awareness is a fault concept
Working for who I work for (the police), I am privvy to numerous crime reports where people are attacked. These people are very switched on people (of course elderly and teenagers get attacked a lot - but that is more to do with their physical weakness rather than their awareness)
People who are attacked in shopping centres or who are assaulted on a bus - you wouldn't expect attacks like that to happen but they do
The ones inside nightclubs are usually over silly things
I was beaten to within an inch of my life several years ago in a very public place
It is good to be aware, but it will not save you



UrBaN said:


> @
> Ground: Most fights dont end up on the ground. They either stop in a couple of strikes and people get into the way, or we have KOs. Ground is the less probable thing to happen. It's a hype. You should train in it, but that would be like 10% of my training..


Have you never seen anyone punched to the ground? I am not talking about a complete KO (ie where the guy loses conciousness) but where the guy is knocked down. It happens
There are plenty of other scenarios, (rugby tackled, grabbed by a bouncer, kicked over, etc) People go to ground all the time
I myself have gone to ground on numerous occasions, despite being very good at keeping my feet
I would dare you to go into any BJJ school and say that fights hardly ever go to ground



UrBaN said:


> @
> As I said thats just my opinion in all of the above, so you should relax, we are only talking here.


If my posts come across aggressive, that is not my intention - I am typing fast as I am on lunch


----------



## geezer (Nov 29, 2007)

Spartan said:


> Geezer,
> How effective is the the weapons side of wing chun? Is there a significant number of wing chunners out there who could take their weapons skills and implement them w/ objects they would find in a real scenario?
> 
> Also, do you think that the same kind of exclussion exists in other styles that you have found w/ certain wing chun Si-Fu's?


 
"The Value and Effectiveness of Wing Chun/Tsun Weapons", and Narrow-minded Si-fu's", These are both good topics for new threads. I think I'll post them when I get off work. See ya--


----------



## Spartan (Dec 18, 2007)

Overall, do you all think it's an easier transition to go from wing chun into the FMA's , or visa versa?


----------



## arnisador (Dec 18, 2007)

The FMAs are less formal, so I'd say they're easier to switch to, in my opinion.


----------



## tellner (Dec 18, 2007)

Rice. That's about all I see in common between [V,W]ing [Ts,Ch]un and the FMA. The cultures they came from both eat a lot of rice.

What similarities do you see between them?

I see radical differences in the footwork, the use of center, angles, body mechanics, how they employ weapons, ranges, how levels are employed and a dozen other basic things. 

As for WC and Silat, all I can say is that there are many, many styles of Silat. The ones I'm familiar with are not much like WC. There may be others that are.


----------



## arnisador (Dec 19, 2007)

The trapping is the most obvious thing. Close-in stick styles tend to trap and block-the-block in a way similar to what WC is known for--the pak sau, lop sau, etc. These aren't just specific moves I'm referring to but rather a whole strategy of getting in close and getting several quick hits in on your opponent to stun/off-balance him before the big blow, removing obstructions (we use exactly that term in Modern Arnis) as we go along.

Stances and footwork are generally different, though you might be surprised...take a very close-in style like Balintawak Eskrima and you'll see weight-shifted-back stances and more linear footwork. That style emphasizes punyo ("poke-poke" or butt-end of the stick) strikes that will come right down the center and one defends it in a somewhat similar way. Certainly, lots of simultaneous block-and-defense (use of both hands at once for defending and counterstriking) appears in each, and the need for punches at a short range and with limited twist of the torso (your stick may be holding anothre stick away from you so you can't put your whole body weight into a left cross without losing that, making a WC-style punch or snake strike a good option as a distraction for you to change hand positions). Not blocking outside your body is always a good idea, but WC's approach matches well with setting up a stick-based defense around your body.

For a FMA at long range, and often at medium, there are many fewer similarities. Certainly, the way some WC ideas are incorporated in JKD is much closer to the FMA feel, for so many reasons. But training WC will help your FMA in close. I'm less sure about the other way around.

Certainly, I agree that you can find many differences also. But the success of JKD with WC and the FMA (and much else) mixed in is one piece of evidence that they can be mixed successfully. I recommend studying some WC to FMAers--the focus on the trapping hands and related punch/block material will help.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 19, 2007)

As to commonalities in wing chun and fma, it would depend upon which filipino martial art you are looking at. I'm continually bewilder how so many seem to consider FMAs as all the same yet don't do the same for JMA or CMA. I would agree that many FMAs appear similar but the same certainly can be stated for many CMAs as well as JMAs.

When looking a Pekiti-Tirsia for instance many of the largo range and some of the medio range movements seem to have little similarities to WC however the principles of controling the center, angling and face are very much the same especially when in corto range. Elbow down to control center and covering the line become previlent. The trapping aspects are very similar though there is a bit more of circlar movement as the body moves once contact is made. I do have some training is several other FMAs and at a low level again there are appearances that it is very different yet as one progress and the movements move from a gross action into smaller and smaller movements one sees more similarities again especially at the very close ranges. 

Long range movements provide for greater footwork and angles. Close range the angle are still there however they are reduce in length and one has to face into the opponent otherwise the back and kidneys become very hard to defend. In espada y daga action much of what one can get away with at long range become detrimental at medio and corto range. Therefore the footwork and body facing again changes into more of a centerline facing and weight shifting more often over the rear foot rather than the front.

Again it really depends on what art one is looking at even within the FMAs.

Danny


----------



## geezer (Dec 21, 2007)

Danny T said:


> As to commonalities in wing chun and fma, it would depend upon which filipino martial art you are looking at.



This is an excellent point.  My foundation in the FMA's is with Rene Latosa's "Escrima Concepts". In many ways it is outwardly very different from my experience in Wing Tsun. However the underlying combat concepts in both systems have much in common--efficiency, economy of motion, directness, forward energy, constantly pressing the attack, and so forth. Rene's escrima system places much more emphasis on developing raw power than Wing Tsun and isn't shy about using it, _provided you have edge_. One commonality not previously noted is the development of "short power". Latosa teaches how to generate explosive power in a very short distance, like Wing Tsun/Chun's famous "one-inch punch". This is teriffic for fighting at close-quarters. Other systems have their own strengths to share. I think Arnisador had it right when he referred to the informality typical of many FMA's. My FMA contacts are usually very open to adapting their arts and happy to share with people from diverse martial arts backgrounds. The Chinese tradition is typically more closed. It was easy for me to move from Wing Tsun to Escrima. Going back has been tougher.


----------



## CatNap (Dec 21, 2007)

I must be in the minority here.  My first WC sifu taught a blend of WC and FMM, specifically Arnis.  It was the worst mistake I've ever made to stay with him for as long as I did - it totally messed up my footwork, my rooting, and my WC drills which were seriously flawed as I learned when I found a strictly WC teacher.  I had to start all over again.  Maybe studying such a different style is fine when you're at an advanced level but I find that FMM is in no way compatiable with WC - but that's my experience.  In my case, I've met few WC guys that have studied FMM for long or at all.


----------



## arnisador (Dec 22, 2007)

I don't think you're wrong. Classical WC footwork and stancework isn't really compatible with the FMA. Some other aspects are though, and WC as adapted into JKD is _very _compatible with FMA.

As usual, getting a base in one art first is often a good idea!


----------



## geezer (Dec 22, 2007)

CatNap said:


> I must be in the minority here.  My first WC sifu taught a blend of WC and FMM, specifically Arnis.  It was the worst mistake I've ever made to stay with him for as long as I did - it totally messed up my footwork, my rooting, and my WC drills which were seriously flawed as I learned when I found a strictly WC teacher.  I had to start all over again.  Maybe studying such a different style is fine when you're at an advanced level but I find that FMM is in no way compatiable with WC - but that's my experience.  In my case, I've met few WC guys that have studied FMM for long or at all.



I understand your position, and in fact, I didn't begin Escrima until I was already advanced in WT. Like you I found that the footwork in the FMAs I've studied (Latosa and DTE) to be very different from my WT footwork. For example, the escrima stances weight the front foot while WT weights the rear when advancing. I would definitely advise against "blending" the two arts. As I tell my students, you might as well try to take parts from a Porsche and try to tack them onto a Ferrari. You'll just ruin two beautiful pieces of engineering. On the other hand, I feel that Escrima _concepts_ have really enriched my understanding of combat and self-defense. However I do try to keep the _techniques_ of the two arts separate. It would be interesting to ask some of the rest of you who do both Wing Chun/Tsun and FMAs to share your views on how you maintain the integrity of each art.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 23, 2007)

geezer said:


> I understand your position, and in fact, I didn't begin Escrima until I was already advanced in WT. Like you I found that the footwork in the FMAs I've studied (Latosa and DTE) to be very different from my WT footwork. For example, the escrima stances weight the front foot while WT weights the rear when advancing. I would definitely advise against "blending" the two arts. As I tell my students, you might as well try to take parts from a Porsche and try to tack them onto a Ferrari. You'll just ruin two beautiful pieces of engineering. On the other hand, I feel that Escrima _concepts_ have really enriched my understanding of combat and self-defense. However I do try to keep the _techniques_ of the two arts separate. It would be interesting to ask some of the rest of you who do both Wing Chun/Tsun and FMAs to share your views on how you maintain the integrity of each art.


In the early stages of my training in Pekiti I found many differences from Wing Chun. As I progressed into intermediate areas I began to see far more similarities than differences. As I continue to grow today I find WC and Pekiti very similar. The major differences were/are in the methodologies of the training. Because the method of training is different I find maintaining the integrity of the training simple. The art is the individual and in the final analysis one must lose the method or be limited by it.

In a discussion with Tuhon Bill McGrath someone asked about the training of Tuhons son and what arts would he most likely have the son train if not Pekiti. There were several discussed with Tuhon strongly resounding about not training Wing Chun. When asked why not WC Tuhon remarked that he felt WC resembled Pekiti so much that he felt it would be better to work something that Pekiti didnt already have and develop different attributes and abilities.

Now, as to the weight over the front foot or rear foot? At the lower levels of my training in both WC and Pekiti it was always over the rear foot with the front foot being very light or with no weight. As we learned more about our bodies and the proper use of the hips were in-trained and ingrained the weight was shifted more and more forward until it became more of a 50-50 weight distribution. The shifting of the weight from being centered to front foot or back foot became more of a hip movement rather than a body movement. In other words the hip placement is what shifts the body and its center of gravity. Due to the very close quarter nature of Wing Chun and Pekiti their usage of the hip and body are very similar. At the longer ranges due to wider and longer footwork movement there is more weight forward usage. Each usage has its advantages and disadvantages and must be used at the proper range and time.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 23, 2007)

Danny T said:


> Now, as to the weight over the front foot or rear foot?


 
Yah, I still don't even understand how you could advance with weight on your lead foot, unless you were just walking forward. Which would be a no-no from little of the Martial Arts I know.


----------



## geezer (Dec 24, 2007)

Danny T said:


> IDue to the very close quarter nature of Wing Chun and Pekiti their usage of the hip and body are very similar. At the longer ranges due to wider and longer footwork movement there is more weight forward usage. Each usage has its advantages and disadvantages and must be used at the proper range and time.


Good points. I have used a similar approach. When fighting at a longer range, with a stick for example, I assume a forward weighted Escrima stance. In close I shift into a Wing Tsun stance, even when using a weapon. The WT really takes over as I move inside.


----------



## Seidogirl (Dec 26, 2007)

This is an interesting thread.  I've been taking karate for 2 years and recently started FMA and I feel like they complement each other really well, but I don't know if I'd take karate and WC at the same time.  My best friend's husband teaches WC and I've watched some of his classes and the way they do things is so opposite of what I've learned in karate that I think it would be a mess to try to take them at the same time.  He also teaches some FMA though so I figure there must be some connection between WC and FMA or else he wouldn't have FMA as part of the curriculum.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Dec 26, 2007)

(warning, voice of experince moment), I find that merging techniques between Karate and Wing Chun is all but impossible (well, effectivly, anyway). However, there are few things more amussing then using Shotokan with the concepts form Wing Chun. Really messes with people. 

I suppose that's what conversations like this come down to, are you trying to merge technique or concept? Are you trying to merge technique directly, or are you blending? Lots of subtleties to these kinds of conversations.


----------



## arnisador (Dec 26, 2007)

Yes, Uechi is about the only style of Karate I could imagine fusing with WC, and that's only because Uechi-ryu Karate-do _is _Southern Chinese Kung Fu, as WC is. Shotokan and WC are very far apart in technique and strategy and power generation and...well, pretty much everything!


----------



## Spartan (Dec 30, 2007)

While I don't consider kenpo karate to be one of the true karate styles, from what I've heard and read I do see it possible to mesh this art with certain wing chun concepts with very good effect.


----------



## geezer (Jan 1, 2008)

Seidogirl said:


> This is an interesting thread.  I've been taking karate for 2 years and recently started FMA and I feel like they complement each other really well, but I don't know if I'd take karate and WC at the same time.  My best friend's husband teaches WC and I've watched some of his classes and the way they do things is so opposite of what I've learned in karate that I think it would be a mess to try to take them at the same time.  He also teaches some FMA though so I figure there must be some connection between WC and FMA or else he wouldn't have FMA as part of the curriculum.


Good observations, Seidogirl. I agree with Arnisador that hard-style karate and Wing Chun/Tsun are too contradictory in their approaches to be practiced together. Hoewever, I've seen both of these styles work together with Latosa Escrima. The Karateka and Wing Chun/Tsun stylist each adapt the fundamental concepts of Escrima to complement their respective strengths. And, through Escrima, each expands their understanding of combat beyond what is typical for their other system. The Karateka benefit by exploring the fluidity and adaptability of escrima, while the Wing Chun/Tsun stylists expand their knowledge about generating power and working at longer ranges. Both stylists benefit by learning how to adapt everyday objects as weapons to augment their combat effectiveness. For me, the FMAs have made me a better martial artist, and have been a bridge to connect with martial artists from many backgrounds.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 1, 2008)

tellner said:


> Rice. That's about all I see in common between [V,W]ing [Ts,Ch]un and the FMA. The cultures they came from both eat a lot of rice.
> 
> What similarities do you see between them?
> 
> ...




*Yep yep.*


----------



## Seidogirl (Jan 1, 2008)

geezer said:


> Good observations, Seidogirl. I agree with Arnisador that hard-style karate and Wing Chun/Tsun are too contradictory in their approaches to be practiced together. Hoewever, I've seen both of these styles work together with Latosa Escrima. The Karateka and Wing Chun/Tsun stylist each adapt the fundamental concepts of Escrima to complement their respective strengths. And, through Escrima, each expands their understanding of combat beyond what is typical for their other system. The Karateka benefit by exploring the fluidity and adaptability of escrima, while the Wing Chun/Tsun stylists expand their knowledge about generating power and working at longer ranges. Both stylists benefit by learning how to adapt everyday objects as weapons to augment their combat effectiveness. For me, the FMAs have made me a better martial artist, and have been a bridge to connect with martial artists from many backgrounds.


 
I REALLY like what you said in the last sentence.  I'm very new to FMA, but I can see already how adaptable it is to just about any situation and it's making me a better karateka.  I just think it's so cool that FMA is able to do that.  In the style of karate that I practice, we don't learn anything about weapons until black belt, so I was so surprised when I started using weapons on the first day in FMA.  I asked the instructor and he said, "Filipinos are born with a weapon in our hands" so I was glad to be able to learn to use weapons and as you said, "through Escrima, each expands their understanding of combat beyond what is typical for their other system".  This is so true!  I feel like I'm getting from escrima what I'm not getting from karate and it's making me a more complete martial artist.

I originally wanted to take Wing Chun as my first MA, but my friend lives too far from me for me to be able to take classes from her husband, so I settled on karate since the dojo is right near me.  I don't regret taking karate at all and I've met some wonderful people, but I do question it's effectiveness for self-defense.  Escrima has everything I'm looking for and seems to be a more complete MA.


----------



## arnisador (Jan 1, 2008)

Seidogirl said:


> I REALLY like what you said in the last sentence.  I'm very new to FMA, but I can see already how adaptable it is to just about any situation and it's making me a better karateka.



I have heard this a lot. The FMAs are good for Karateka in terms of additional weapons work but also, what I hear more often, is the footwork/mobility the FMAs bring out.

By the same token, I started out in Karate and when I started the FMA I was often complimented on my precise stances and solid punches because of it! It works both ways.

The "using weapons to teach empty hand" approach of the FMAs is very different but as you can imagine I am a believer!


----------

