# Benny Meng - WC, Sparring and Competition



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 6, 2006)

I would like to share this with you guys.

http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1651

Now, one of the reasons I left WC was the lack of sparring. After two years of non sparring classes, I had enough and I left (it´s a long story, but that´s the short version).

Mr. Benny Meng agrees with many of the opinions I have regarding Wing Chun. No sparring, no competition, and no brutality makes a system worthless as a self defense tool.

Yes, I know many schools do allow their students to spar, but it seems there are not many of those, and even those schools will not usually prepare students for competition. That is my personal experience in Brazil, and according to the e-conversations I had, that is also the norm abroad.

I always found it funny when the WC non-sparring crowd claimed the system had proved itself during the infamous rooftop Hong Kong challenges in the 50´s (Choy Lay Fut/Wing Chun), but they never realize that what those guys were doing was nothing but a competition! It was refreshing to see that Benny Meng agrees with me that the combat sports nowadays provide the very same function.

Incidentally, I once saw a video of one of those rooftop challenges, I am looking for it right now (I´ll post the link when I find it). It was pathetic, but at least they were fighting.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 6, 2006)

Is this the part whereby you enlighten us all to which superior MA you do? 

I've sparred a few times in my class, been caught in the face, taken punches, given them etc etc... In fact, there are many MA which aren't "pressure tested", as it's not always practical to have a class full of invalids. I come back from class covered in bruises, on my arms, legs, face etc, drenched in sweat, and utterly shattered. 

By all means use objective, constructive criticism, but to slate a system for (in your experience) a "lack of sparring" which is only a training aid in itself, is childish, lacking in developed debate, and shows a lack of knowledge of the MA in general. If you came here to stir up a **** storm, then that speaks volumes in itself. I would make an assertion that you probably do something along the lines of MMA, BJJ? Great. Lovely. Not the be all and end all of MA. UFC fan by any chance???

Muay Thai I see. Nice sport. Great art.


----------



## 7starmantis (Apr 6, 2006)

Lets please keep discussion (even disagreements) at a respectful and polite level. Personal attacks have no place here. We can all offer our opinions while still remaining civil.

- MT Super Mod - 
Adam C
7starmantis


----------



## Kensai (Apr 6, 2006)

I thought I was? I made no personal remark other than disputing the validity of the argument for or against WC as a MA. 

Also, why people that don't train in a particular art, go onto other sections to berate them. I don't go onto the Muay Thai part and say "muay thai is a great sport/art in the hands of a professional athlete, but next to useless in the average Joe on the street, but is very good for people who want to appear hard" do I? 

By all means, question certain ways and methods taught, but to slate an entire art because of one persons experience, or lack of sparring, and finding another thread to validate it, isn't reasoned debate, but "my MA's better than yours" attitude, which as previously mentioned, is a pet peeve. I don't think Wing Chun is the be all and end all, but having studied various arts, I do rate it. I think it's general lack of grappling could be a glaring weakness, you could argue that having only linear straight line attacks is also a potential weakness, but to simply say "oh there's no sparring, it's therefore gash" isn't a reasoned argument, but a sweeping statement. I used to do ju-jitsu, with no sparring in that, does that make it a rubbish MA? No.

Forgive the annoyance, but reasoned debate:yes. Sweeping statements:no. :asian: No offence intended.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 6, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> I would like to share this with you guys.
> 
> http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1651
> 
> ...


 

As sparring goes, theres only so long before what it teaches you becomes absorbed.  When wing chun is broken down it simply is injected directly into the sub concious mind and makes the system more like a natural reaction.  Like when someone throws a ball you have an immediate catching reaction, no thought.  The same is true of wing chun, you just begin to inject these natural reactions and actions without being mindful of it.  To that end you can be very effective without the need to be brutal or in competition, the key is to tap into peoples comfort and confidence ratio and work them so they gain confidence in less comfortable situations.  The purpose for this is the ability to react rather than freeze, the reaction can be to fight or to freeze. 

This is the essence of sparring also but if you spar all day for ever its still just a manufactured environment, if i was to use wing chun in a real situation i would do everything in my power to stop the other person and i mean everything.  I can't do that in sparring, i can't really do it in competition as they have rules.  Whilst i agree sparring has a place i also believe that once you have used it and absorbed it you are no longer gaining anything more that you couldn't do in a more relaxed manner, it would seem that the environment you put yourself in thereafter would be just hitting and getting hit for the sake of it.  I accepted being hit a long time ago and i know full well i'm not going to forget to hit bloody hard when threatened.  






			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Yes, I know many schools do allow their students to spar, but it seems there are not many of those, and even those schools will not usually prepare students for competition. That is my personal experience in Brazil, and according to the e-conversations I had, that is also the norm abroad.


 
So are there many schools that spar or not?  You said there were many schools that spar but that there weren't many of them?

 And where does chi sau become gor sau and when does gor sau equate to sparring?



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> I always found it funny when the WC non-sparring crowd claimed the system had proved itself during the infamous rooftop Hong Kong challenges in the 50´s (Choy Lay Fut/Wing Chun), but they never realize that what those guys were doing was nothing but a competition! It was refreshing to see that Benny Meng agrees with me that the combat sports nowadays provide the very same function.


 
The functioned seemed to encapsulate an image of wing chun from one angle.  Nothing wrong with testing your skills and how they work for you but unless your life is able to keep up with a huge training regieme what do you do to learn self defense skills and still lead your normal life away from martial arts.  You have a fixed focus on what martial arts means to you and what you want from it and thats fine but people will come from a different angle.  To some the biemo of the 50's or the combat sports today aren't a huge focus, they have a hobby in learning a skill base which can help them if needs be, not everyone wants to spend the time or has the time to be a ring ready fighter.  What i will say however is you may find some schools are to soft and fluffy but on the flipside of that there are some that are to brutal and meat head like.  A healthy balance and getting the most of your training in relation to what you want to put in to it, this is what we all want and that will differ from person to person and thus different schools appeal to a different demographic.  You've isolated out this non sparring WC crowd to make comment on but who exactly are you making comment on?  Some particular school?  or the fact that someone points to a notable part of wing chun history for some example of wing chun in a different environment than the kwoon?



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Incidentally, I once saw a video of one of those rooftop challenges, I am looking for it right now (I´ll post the link when I find it). It was pathetic, but at least they were fighting.


 
I wouldn't base judgement on one video when theres a generally accepted description of the biemo that negates what you are seeing.  Its pretty much assured that what you are seeing is probably not what gave the notoriety they have gained.  Of course even the good ones probably look a little funny now.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 6, 2006)

:ultracool

Much better put than I ever could mate.


----------



## Phil Elmore (Apr 6, 2006)

I would also dispute the appeal to authority implicit in referencing anything a given Wnig Chun personality has to say about the art's validity, positive or negative.  For every person who thinks Benny's a great guy, you'll find another person willing to speak ill of him behind his back.  That's the politicking of the Wing Chun world.  What he says about Wing Chun is therefore gospel or heresy, depending on whose camp one occupies.

Taught well -- meaning taught with proper structure and realistic contact, regardless of reliance on sparring or on alternative combat drill methodologies, Wing Chun is an extremely effective, efficient art.  Taught poorly, it is a mess.  There is a lot of bad Wing Chun out there and plenty of good Wing Chun.  I therefore automatically discount those naysayers who are quick to condemn the entire art based on whatever component experience they may have with it.

A lot of people get very caught up in the sparring/no sparring concept and never is this more vehemently stated than when the topic of "Wing Chun does chi sao and not sparring" makes another in its ceaslessly repeating appearances.  I think this is usually well-meaning ignorance; at its higher levels of development, chi sao becomes something akin to (if not equivalent to) sparring.


----------



## dmax999 (Apr 6, 2006)

This is one of those sticky spots for me. I'll have to agree with Wing Chun Lawer on this and have to say I know exactly where he is coming from.

He was not saying that WC is junk, he was not even saying WC without sparring is junk, he was saying that WC without sparring is not good for self defense as it should be.

I used to be in a WC class with HEAVY amounts of sparring. Its was probably too much for me at the time. Now I can't find a kung-fu class with sparring more then once every three months, push hands in Tai Chi is too intense for them now. We end up with techniques that require catching punches holding on to them and turning the catch into a Chin Na. You try that junk in my WC sparring class, you get your head knocked off in a split second, style of MA doesn't matter in this case.

Practicing without sparring is good, but you don't get used to being hit in the head, used to seeing tons of punches thrown at your head, learn which of your techniques you are so poor at that you need to realize they won't work if you depend on them (for me inner taun sau for example), etc.

I used to love going to WC class, but hated looking up WC stuff on the internet. Take a look at the average WC fighting video and how bad they usually are (This was also about 10 years ago). Does that look like the WC you want to be practicing? I know I wasn't that bad, and it wasn't because I thought I was better, it was because I knew exactly how to take someone down in a sec no matter how they attacked because of sparring. There are lots of cheap shots out there and unless you practice against them they will get you every time.

MAs are designed for fighting, especially WC. If you don't want to fight with the MA you are in, even sparring, you should think again about why you show up.

Sorry to anyone offended, this is just a really sore spot for me.


----------



## Phil Elmore (Apr 6, 2006)

What you describe is not simply practicing 'without sparring' -- it is practicing without realistic contact and without any sort of grounding in practical application.


----------



## yipman_sifu (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Incidentally, I once saw a video of one of those rooftop challenges, I am looking for it right now (I´ll post the link when I find it). It was pathetic, but at least they were fighting.


 

I think you mean this one.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31&q=bruce+lee


----------



## Ric Flair (Apr 7, 2006)

I'd have to say Wing Chun has many of its positives if you stick with it, have an open mind, learn to relax, and have patience to learn the principles of the big and small details you can improve.

however I do agree to an extent that Wing Chun doesn't have that "Muay Thai" mentality where fighters really fight all out.

I guess cuz Wing Chun doesn't believe in "wasted energy" but, come on.  My Sifu said original mainland China W.C at one point was often geared towards warfare and battlefields.  People had to fight long periods of times somedays and, even though Wing Chun doesn't believe in wasting energy it was still an art that developed the body structure and conditionings to last long in a battle.  warfare is for keeps right?

I see a lot of Wing Chun schools today trying tooooo hard to not waste energy by not practicing with ANY energy.  There was no purpose or intent behind every single move behind the forms.  Sometimes people didn't even understand the original intent of techniques such as say the Fook or Tan Sau or Bong during Si Lum Tao and just did it with no energy or intent.  They just did it lazy thinking they were "relaxed".  

My Sifu said there is a proper way to relax when doing Wing Chun forms.  The proper way he said was "to know when tension or strength was to be applied during the forms while not being too stiff with that strength or tension".  

A relaxed tension he said.  

Alright I'm kinda going off topic but, Wing Chun does have its weaknesses in the sense it doesn't directly put its students into a all out environment like a Muay Thai ring or Boxing ring and a W.C artist CAN get in trouble if he fights a skilled Thai boxer or Western boxer.  Also when it comes to weapons, a W.C person can be in trouble with an Arnis or Kali person who is armed if the W.C person has lack of experience in this field.  That is why it is good as a W.C artist to be open minded to other arts and principles in order to figure out what is useful to add to what you already know.  In Wing Chun you are supposed to learn to respect other arts.

yeT W.C has its strengthes too, if you are patient enough to discover them. 
All in all, it comes down to the individual also.  Sifu told me "Wing Chun is to be YOUR art, not your Sifu's.  You are learning W.C for yourself first, not anyone else.  What you put in is what you put out.  Just because you take W.C doesn't mean you will be a great fighter if you don't apply yourself properly.


----------



## Phil Elmore (Apr 7, 2006)

The difference is that with Wing Chun, a one-hundred pound woman can be taught to defend herself effectively.  This is not so of Muay Thai, where that same woman would be told simply that she is not big enough or physically powerful enough to "compete" against larger attackers.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> 1) As sparring goes, theres only so long before what it teaches you becomes absorbed. When wing chun is broken down it simply is injected directly into the sub concious mind and makes the system more like a natural reaction. Like when someone throws a ball you have an immediate catching reaction, no thought. The same is true of wing chun, you just begin to inject these natural reactions and actions without being mindful of it. To that end you can be very effective without the need to be brutal or in competition, the key is to tap into peoples comfort and confidence ratio and work them so they gain confidence in less comfortable situations. The purpose for this is the ability to react rather than freeze, the reaction can be to fight or to freeze.
> 
> 2) This is the essence of sparring also but if you spar all day for ever its still just a manufactured environment, if i was to use wing chun in a real situation i would do everything in my power to stop the other person and i mean everything.
> 
> ...


 
1) I disagree. Top level fighters like Silva still spar hard and often. Now, I will be the first to agree that you should not spar every day, techniques should be practiced repeatedly and often. BUT, any serious martial artist should spar as often as he feels necessary to, in order to avoid getting back to the infamous confort zone. In my experience, there is no such thing as enough sparring.

2) Same here.

3) Nope, I disagree. There is no such thing as enough sparring. Human beings will forget what they learn if they don´t practice their skills. This is true in all areas of human achievement. A doctor who leaves his area of expertise for years cannot be expected to perform a surgery as well as he did when he was practicing. A fighter who does not fight for long periods will also see his performence diminished.

4) My mistake, sorry. I said many schools do not spar. Few do spar, at least in Brazil - and, it seems, the same rule applies abroad as well.

5) I don´t kow what gor sau is (do you mean gong sau?). I suppose we could debate all day what is the distinction between sparring and chi sao. Personally, I believe sparring, as opposed to chi sao, does not contain weird rules of engagement like not being allowed to remove your hands, retreat, and/or use your legs. 

6) I agree with you. Many people indeed approach the martial arts for reasons other than for self defense. But if you want to be able to use your skills in a real encounter, you must spar hard and often. That has nothing to do with the intent of the practitioner, this is about good and bad methods of teaching a skill. I would not trust a surgeon who never went past his textbooks.

7) I was referring to the WC non sparring crowd, who believe that (i) there is no need to spar to learn how to fight, or (ii) you only have to spar up to a certain point, or you don´t have to do it often, as it is secondary to the teachings of the system. I could name some WC schools in Brazil who do just that, if you want. Thomas Lo´s schools and Philipp Andreas´ school (my former school).

8) Do feel free to post a link to another video of the 50´s rooftop challenges. I will believe they were good when I see evidence of it. What I saw was terrible.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

dmax999 said:
			
		

> 1) This is one of those sticky spots for me. I'll have to agree with Wing Chun Lawer on this and have to say I know exactly where he is coming from.
> 
> 2) He was not saying that WC is junk, he was not even saying WC without sparring is junk, he was saying that WC without sparring is not good for self defense as it should be.
> 
> ...


 
1) Cool.

2) Glad to know someone actually read what I wrote!

3) Lucky bastard. The only WC school I found which allowed sparring is located in the other side of my city.

4) Yeah. Sparring allows you to realize what are your weak and strong spots. This is essential, specially since your skills will vary over time (if you don´t practice dodging for a time your dodge skills will go down, etc).

5) Practice makes perfect in all areas. I can´t see why people would think martial arts would be different.

6) Common sense. Nice.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Ric Flair said:
			
		

> I'd have to say Wing Chun has many of its positives if you stick with it, have an open mind, learn to relax, and have patience to learn the principles of the big and small details you can improve.
> 
> however I do agree to an extent that Wing Chun doesn't have that "Muay Thai" mentality where fighters really fight all out.
> 
> ...


 
Excellent post. Just a few thoughts on it.

First of all, I would like to avoid going into the historical side of WC. That is a whole other can of worms which I would prefer not to open at the moment.

As for the "Muay Thai mentality", well, I suppose I see what you mean by that, and I tend to agree with you that a competitive mentality will bring you far. All the WC schools I visited were isolated - they did not send representatives to open competitions, they did not promote crosstraining. I suppose the same happens in your country.

This is bad. Remain isolated and you will not test yourself, you will not see what are your strengths and weaknesses, you will not see where do you have to improve. This is the great benefit of competition, which, AFAIK, most WC schools choose to ignore.

You also make a good point on the energy issue. My WC school, and the others I visited, insisted on avoiding any waste of energy, without properly distinguishing between economic effort and laziness. A tan sao or a straight punch should not be tense, but they certainly should not be relaxed - they should be READY. There is a difference. Not knowing this difference results in the limp noodle punches we see in many WC demonstrations.

As for WC not putting a student in an all out environment, well, I do not speak for all WC schools. But that usually is an issue, yes. Experience is everything.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

yipman_sifu said:
			
		

> I think you mean this one.
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31&q=bruce+lee


 
Precisely. Thanks a lot, yipman sifu.

As I said, it is pathetic. I can´t see why people will point to such challenges as proof of anything. I mean, OK, none of those guys were professional fighters (I do know many WC pracitioners of that time were waiters), but those guys:

1) Had no notion of timing. There was not a single solid blow in that entire video.

2) Had a complete lack of structure. They both fell lack a sack of potatoes after a ridiculous trade of weak kicks!

3) Were scared. Terribly scared. See how they look away when it comes to punching range! They flinch every time a fist comes close to their faces.

That is typical of people who do not spar. At least they had the right idea and were testing themselves. But personally, I would rather test myself against my kung fu brothers first before going for a challenge.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Kensai said:
			
		

> 1) I thought I was? I made no personal remark other than disputing the validity of the argument for or against WC as a MA.
> 
> 2) Also, why people that don't train in a particular art, go onto other sections to berate them. I don't go onto the Muay Thai part and say "muay thai is a great sport/art in the hands of a professional athlete, but next to useless in the average Joe on the street, but is very good for people who want to appear hard" do I?
> 
> ...


 
1) True, you made no personal remark. I am always happy to discuss my opinions, and you are free to attack them, no problem.

2) I did not berate WC. Please read again what I wrote.

3) That is precisely what I am doing. I am criticizing the lack of sparring and competition present in many WC schools: I am criticizing the method of teaching, not the art itself. I made no sweeping statements of any kind towards WC as a martial art. Please read again what I wrote.

If you want to discute WC´s TECHNICAL strengths and weaknesses, by all means start a thread to do that - the grappling and the linear attacks are certainly good points to start. But this is not what I am doing here. I am talking only about the non-sparring, non-competiton mentality present in lots and lots of WC schools. That is a fair criticism, not a direct attack on the art itself.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Phil Elmore said:
			
		

> The difference is that with Wing Chun, a one-hundred pound woman can be taught to defend herself effectively. This is not so of Muay Thai, where that same woman would be told simply that she is not big enough or physically powerful enough to "compete" against larger attackers.


 
Not really. In my MT gym we have two girls who can fight pretty damn well, and who are both interested in the self defense application of the art - which my coach is happy to teach them.

You just expressed your prejudice towards MT and your high opinions of WC without any factual basis.

Muay Thai can be taught to women of all sizes and shapes, who, if they learn it well, can use it to defend themselves - provided they learn some grappling, of course.

The very same statement can be made of Wing Chun. And of practically all martial arts, as a matter of fact. It is naive to believe that art X is automatically good for self defense whereas art Y is not.


----------



## Ric Flair (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Not really. In my MT gym we have two girls who can fight pretty damn well, and who are both interested in the self defense application of the art - which my coach is happy to teach them.
> 
> You just expressed your prejudice towards MT and your high opinions of WC without any factual basis.
> 
> ...




Yeah, I've heard 2 big guys get discouraged from taking Wing Chun because they were too "big" and how they would not do too well.  The two guys though, being the type who don't allow others to keep them down didn't listen to this "advice"

and stuck with Wing Chun for at least 4 years and boy can they fight!


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Ric Flair said:
			
		

> Yeah, I've heard 2 big guys get discouraged from taking Wing Chun because they were too "big" and how they would not do too well. The two guys though, being the type who don't allow others to keep them down didn't listen to this "advice"
> 
> and stuck with Wing Chun for at least 4 years and boy can they fight!


 
I never understood how people can so easily label fighting systems into "good for small, weak people" and "good for big, strong people".

A bigger, stronger person will ALWAYS have an advantage, that is so obvious that it is beyond debating. But we all have two arms and two legs: the physical mechanisms which make a punch or an armlock useful can be equally applied to big or small people.


----------



## Odin (Apr 7, 2006)

Phil Elmore said:
			
		

> The difference is that with Wing Chun, a one-hundred pound woman can be taught to defend herself effectively. This is not so of Muay Thai, where that same woman would be told simply that she is not big enough or physically powerful enough to "compete" against larger attackers.


 
Thats not true Im afraid my good friend infact size matters not in muay thai!where by maybe in the ring that could statement could be true ,in a real life defence situation she would be be quite able to defend herself against people much larger then herself after all do you think you could win a fight with noog toom??(")peace!


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Odin, Nong Toon(sp) could probably kick all our asses combined, with or without rules, sex change operation or not.

But I am not quite sure she qualifies as a woman for our purposes here...


----------



## Odin (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Odin, Nong Toon(sp) could probably kick all our asses combined, with or without rules, sex change operation or not.
> 
> But I am not quite sure she qualifies as a woman for our purposes here...


 
lol yeah man,I'll be honest I just watched beautful boxser so he/she name is stuck in my head....what about dekker though he wasnt a big guy but dman could he punch!
.....but i leave that for the mt room.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 1) True, you made no personal remark. I am always happy to discuss my opinions, and you are free to attack them, no problem.
> 
> 2) I did not berate WC. Please read again what I wrote.
> 
> ...




:asian: Fair enough. Just hard to rationalise the debate, when from my own personal experience, we do spar, and hit hard, and get covered in bruises. I imagine, that your experience would lead you to make your comments. Again, from that perspective, if that's all you'd ever known of WC, then I can appreciate why it would appear that way to you. However, I think it's also a fair point that sparring is only as effective as:

1. A training aid, and 
2. Depends on the other person training with you.

There's one guy at my class, *really*, *really *nice bloke, but _*USELESS *_when it comes to fighting. I'm sure there are 5 year old girls with more killer intent and agression than him, so I avoid him like the plague when it comes to training.

Also, please forgive my initial assumption of your thread, I had thought you'd simply tried to start up a fight, as it happens, good debate, the most action I've seen round here for a good week or two. ;0)


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Kensai said:
			
		

> :asian: Fair enough. Just hard to rationalise the debate, when from my own personal experience, we do spar, and hit hard, and get covered in bruises. I imagine, that your experience would lead you to make your comments. Again, from that perspective, if that's all you'd ever known of WC, then I can appreciate why it would appear that way to you. However, I think it's also a fair point that sparring is only as effective as:
> 
> 1. A training aid, and
> 2. Depends on the other person training with you.
> ...


 
See, it all comes down to personal experience. The problema is that the three WC schools I visited in São Paulo do not allow sparring ("chi sao is fighting practice!"), and, according to what I read in the internet, and according to Benny Meng, that is a very common trend everywhere.

If YOUR Wing Chun school allows sparring, I would say you qualify as a lucky bastard. I certainly looked for WC schools like that before turning to Muay Thai, trust me on this (the fact that there was a good MT school three blocks from home and the only hardcore WC school I heard of is about two hours from my place did have some influence on my choice, of course).

And I suppose you could qualify sparring as a training aid, yes. As I see it, it´s something you should do regularly, if only to measure your skills and to avoid getting soft: it certainly does not substitute techniques training - rather, it should go hand in hand with drills of all kinds.

There is a certain temptation to spar all the time, and there is also a temptation to avoid sparring regularly: the correct path, I believe, is in the middle.

And I know where you are coming from regarding non aggressive sparring partners. I have one fellow MT practitioner who is exactly like you described, he seems unable to feel that cold rage you need to fight. In fact, he seems to be so damned happy all the time it gets annoying! Of course, he does suffer for it. Personally, I like to pound him into next week whenever he gets too soft.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

dmax999 said:
			
		

> This is one of those sticky spots for me. I'll have to agree with Wing Chun Lawer on this and have to say I know exactly where he is coming from.
> 
> He was not saying that WC is junk, he was not even saying WC without sparring is junk, he was saying that WC without sparring is not good for self defense as it should be.


 
but self defense is only about 10% physical, what you gain from sparring is a very narrow part of self defense and its always going to be relative to the person doing it.  Most people will not have the option to train full time which means most clubs are not as good as they should be, with the word "should" being highly subjective.  I broke a friends finger during sparring once, it did nothing for his fighting skill, this illustrates cons to this practice also.  I mean when you get the protective gear on it does continue to remove the training from reality but there is a value to sparring and using wing chun in a number of different ways.  So what i am saying is whilst there is a value to sparring its really not a hugely significant part of everyday training, especially once you have got used to sparring and done a fair ammount of it.  After a while its just a case of "yes i can hit, yes people can hit me, yes it hurts, yes i'm here to learn and this is no longer what i need to be learning".



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> I used to be in a WC class with HEAVY amounts of sparring. Its was probably too much for me at the time. Now I can't find a kung-fu class with sparring more then once every three months, push hands in Tai Chi is too intense for them now. We end up with techniques that require catching punches holding on to them and turning the catch into a Chin Na. You try that junk in my WC sparring class, you get your head knocked off in a split second, style of MA doesn't matter in this case.


 
well yes, practicing realistically doesn't always equate to sparring it means training a valid skill, you can practice all kinds of fancy stuff in the kwoon but what you need is your head on straight saying, yes i can see this in application and in reality and it will/wont work.  relying on catching punches isn't realistic, if it happens then great if you can use it but at the base level you need to work very raw wing chun basics.  But its like you said the heavy sparring at one point was too much, its something you come too and pass through, i don't intend to be sparring when i'm 70 but i do intend to be training my skills.  Its a great exposure tool but it comes back to what i was saying about some schools being way too fluffy to give you any realism and other schools being intensely and unecessarily brutal that you are convinced its all super real.  A healthy middle path is what i advocate and there is nothing to stop anyone sparring external from a club if not enough is done there for ones liking.



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> Practicing without sparring is good, but you don't get used to being hit in the head, used to seeing tons of punches thrown at your head, learn which of your techniques you are so poor at that you need to realize they won't work if you depend on them (for me inner taun sau for example), etc.


 
Yeah but like i'm saying, how long does it take for you to get used to being hit in the head and how long are you going to want to do it, maybe you want to be hit forever but a lot of people don't.  If you are honest with your training you should always pick up your weak points and you can pick them up outside of sparring a lot, perhaps more so.  theres a tonne of great ways to improve your wing chun, a sparring partner is great but he can't test your inner tan sau for all varients, if the structure of your inner tan is wrong  then you can pick that up elsewhere, if its movement or deploying it habitually in circumstances when perhaps a bui sau would be better you can drill new habbits in different ways.  the workout is great and sparring can be good fun but its importance isn't something i'd place as a vital part of my ongoing training.  thats not to say it isn't there.



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> I used to love going to WC class, but hated looking up WC stuff on the internet. Take a look at the average WC fighting video and how bad they usually are (This was also about 10 years ago). Does that look like the WC you want to be practicing? I know I wasn't that bad, and it wasn't because I thought I was better, it was because I knew exactly how to take someone down in a sec no matter how they attacked because of sparring. There are lots of cheap shots out there and unless you practice against them they will get you every time.


 
Do you know all the cheap shots then?



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> MAs are designed for fighting, especially WC. If you don't want to fight with the MA you are in, even sparring, you should think again about why you show up.


 
Because wanting to fight and having to fight are different, most people hope never to have to fight and want to enjoy there training - sparring won't make you invincible, understanding yourself and your attitude completely won't either but if i know i'm not up for fighting i won't be fooled by a false sense of bravado and my plan will be flight rather than fight.  That said because of the way wing chun is taught people are often very supprised at themselves when they do use it, it can be used if you have sparred or not but to suggest that people shouldn't train if they don't want to spar is ridiculous.



			
				dmax999 said:
			
		

> Sorry to anyone offended, this is just a really sore spot for me.


 
No offence taken, it certainly does seem sore for you though.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

I´ll use an analogy to explain the need to spar often, even for advanced practitioners.

A surgeon needs to read lots of books, he needs to commit to memory numerous items, he needs to understand what he is supposed to do.

But he also needs to practice. He needs to open people up and fix them. Of course, it is crucial for him to do it during the first stages of his studies, because otherwise he will never learn how to apply what he learned.

Eventually, he will get good at it, he will have acquired quite a lot of experience.

But this does not mean he can stop performing surgeries now. Not if he intends to keep his skills. There is always room for development, and development of a skill demands practice: also, it is a well known fact that any and all human skills will degenerate if they are not practiced often. 

A closer example would be driving. It is a physical skill, demanding good reflexes, perception, and eye-hand coordination. Have you ever spent a long time without driving? When you do get behind the wheel, you will have some problems adjusting, because you are out of practice. 

The same analogy could be applied to any and all areas of human achievement. A driving school would not get any clients if they did not allow its students to drive; a medical school needs a hospital to allow its students to practice; a law school will usually provide facilities for its students to get their own cases, or will enroll them at law offices or such.

It is quite sad that, of all areas, the martial arts are probably the only one where some of its practitioners believe constant practice is not essential in order to acquire and maintain their skills.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 1) I disagree. Top level fighters like Silva still spar hard and often. Now, I will be the first to agree that you should not spar every day, techniques should be practiced repeatedly and often. BUT, any serious martial artist should spar as often as he feels necessary to, in order to avoid getting back to the infamous confort zone. In my experience, there is no such thing as enough sparring.


 
your experience is yours then, i'm glad its not mine.  I don't care about silva i care more aboput my lifestyle and how i live, i don't live with the need to be the best fighter, i know what i can do and i know this idea of the comfort zone i was in before i began martial arts is immpossible for me to return to.  If you feel i'm not serious thats fine and you are welcome to disagree based on simply your own experience.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 2) Same here.


 
good.




			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 3) Nope, I disagree. There is no such thing as enough sparring. Human beings will forget what they learn if they don´t practice their skills. This is true in all areas of human achievement. A doctor who leaves his area of expertise for years cannot be expected to perform a surgery as well as he did when he was practicing. A fighter who does not fight for long periods will also see his performence diminished.




I disagree with you, what a supprise.  There is such thing as enough sparring, maybe not for someone like you but as its subject to what your intentions and needs are, such a thing does exist believe it or not. you obviously can only see this from your point of view.  The skills are continually being practiced you just don't have to spar in order to do so and no one is talking about leaving wing chun.  sparring isn't fighting so it really doesn't really figure.  People train up to level that fits in with their lifestyle, sparring and risking injury means risking peoples livlihood - thats not smart self defense or preservation. If being a fighter is your buisness then fine but some people want a level of skill to use in a event that hopefully never occurs - the majority of that skill is psychological and whilst for a certain amount of time sparring can help once you have broken down certain confidence barriers repeatedly doing this has little value.  If you do resort somehow to being scared or whatever then maybe it would have value again but the usual way things go is that they thrive on the change in attitude and its brought on board and continually used not just in MA but also in their everyday approach. 






			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 4) My mistake, sorry. I said many schools do not spar. Few do spar, at least in Brazil - and, it seems, the same rule applies abroad as well.


 
All schools i've been to have had sparring of some sort so i greatly dispute this.  Its just not number one on everyones agenda and its not a marketing point wing chun incorperates.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 5) I don´t kow what gor sau is (do you mean gong sau?). I suppose we could debate all day what is the distinction between sparring and chi sao. Personally, I believe sparring, as opposed to chi sao, does not contain weird rules of engagement like not being allowed to remove your hands, retreat, and/or use your legs.


 
No i don't mean gong sau i mean gor sau.  You are allowed to remove your hands in chi sau, you are thinking of poon sau.  You are allowed to retreat, the principle is a guide line to ensure you don't retreat when advancing although a little more scarier is more benificial.  Also because retreating can invite more oncoming pressure, generally you will find the priciple is there to helpe you work better at close quarters.  You can use your legs if arranged before hand, its just bad form to kick your training partner when they aren't up for training with those techniques, its a rule that is more politeness than anything.  so if you can do all these things is it then sparring?



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 6) I agree with you. Many people indeed approach the martial arts for reasons other than for self defense. But if you want to be able to use your skills in a real encounter, you must spar hard and often. That has nothing to do with the intent of the practitioner, this is about good and bad methods of teaching a skill. I would not trust a surgeon who never went past his textbooks.


 
No i know plenty of people that have used wing chun and never sparred, they have chi sau'd they have trained hard.  This training is realistic and perhaps to you its just reading a text book but thats really not what it is and the analogy really doesn't fit.  I guess in your eyes what i say is impossible but its really the truth about the way wing chun works.  I'm happy for you to disagree with me.





			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 7) I was referring to the WC non sparring crowd, who believe that (i) there is no need to spar to learn how to fight, or (ii) you only have to spar up to a certain point, or you don´t have to do it often, as it is secondary to the teachings of the system. I could name some WC schools in Brazil who do just that, if you want. Thomas Lo´s schools and Philipp Andreas´ school (my former school).


 
So this really comes down to a couple of schools that you've experienced.  You know a lot of people in fights have no martial art experience or any training, so are they unable to fight or just less able than someone who trains a lot?  After your description of chi sau i would already see fault in the schools you mention.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 8) Do feel free to post a link to another video of the 50´s rooftop challenges. I will believe they were good when I see evidence of it. What I saw was terrible.


 
I'm not gonna go look for them, if you want to watch more than just one to get a more solid opinion then please go ahead, i do however doubt you will find a lot of videos online of these fights.  I don't doubt what you saw was terrible, theres lots of terrible videos in existance representing wing chun.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> 2) Glad to know someone actually read what I wrote!


 
So i didn't read what you wrote then?


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> I´ll use an analogy to explain the need to spar often, even for advanced practitioners.
> 
> A surgeon needs to read lots of books, he needs to commit to memory numerous items, he needs to understand what he is supposed to do.
> 
> ...


 
I never said constant practice wasn't required.  I just don't need to get hit round the head often to know what it feels like.  I don't need to spar hard in order to be happy in my ability to deal with a self defense situation.  I do need to continually train hard and explore myself.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Ed, I really can´t go beyond that analogy I made, and I can´t go beyond the training practices of professional fighters. Practice makes perfect, and that´s all there is to it. If you believe there is such a thing as enough sparring, and if you believe it is not necessary to spar to keep and improve your skills, fine, I´ll agree to disagree.

But lots and lots of famous and skilled martial artists disagree with you. That is beyond my personal experience, and that´s beyond your personal experience as well.

Personally, when I want to learn a skill, I see how people who actually proved themselves good at that skill managed to get there. In the case of the martial arts, I would rather follow the examples of Masahiko Kimura, Wanderlei Silva and Mas Oyama, who have documented fights (which they won), rather than try to emulate what people in the 50´s were (poorly) doing, without an objective proof that their method yields results.

It´s your choice. I, for one, am not content with my skills, nor do I expect to be - martial arts are a lifelong goal to me. So I intend to keep training and to keep sparring so that my skills will improve, until the day I physically cannot do it anymore.

Incidentally, Helio Gracie is well into his nineties, and he still spars.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> I never said constant practice wasn't required. I just don't need to get hit round the head often to know what it feels like. I don't need to spar hard in order to be happy in my ability to deal with a self defense situation. I do need to continually train hard and explore myself.


 
OK, I´ll try one more time.

So, you said you sparred enough.

Does that mean you

1) Sparred every single person that could ever provide you with a different angle on your skills?

2) Sparred every single person who could provide you with a challenge?

3) Sparred every person who could beat you, and eventually managed to improve your game until you finally beat that person?

4) Did all of the above with different rulesets, in order to avoid developing bad habits?

If your answer is not "yes" to all the questions above, I am afraid you have not sparred enough.

If your answer to even one of those questions is "no", and you are still content with your current skills, I would say you have settled for being less of a fighter than you could ever be, whatever your goals are (self defense or not). 

Of course, that is your choice.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Ed, I really can´t go beyond that analogy I made, and I can´t go beyond the training practices of professional fighters. Practice makes perfect, and that´s all there is to it.


 
I don't make professional fighters, a lot of people don't have the time to be such.  If we were talking about professional fighting i would agree 100%.




			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> If you believe there is such a thing as enough sparring, and if you believe it is not necessary to spar to keep and improve your skills, fine, I´ll agree to disagree.


 
I believe for different students different things are required, there is definitely such a thing as enough sparring as for some students the best thing they get from it is overcomming a psychological barrier.  If you are saying skills can only be improved and kept if you spar then yes i disagree.  Chi sau becomes progressivley different as people go through their training and they bring on board a lot of skills picked up in other areas and continue to utilise them there and in other facets of their training.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> But lots and lots of famous and skilled martial artists disagree with you. That is beyond my personal experience, and that´s beyond your personal experience as well.


 
disagree all they please, they don't teach my students and my students don't choose to go to a class that spars every week.  With that  in mind they are free to spar their skills and i do push my students and teach in a very realistic wing chun approach.  



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Personally, when I want to learn a skill, I see how people who actually proved themselves good at that skill managed to get there. In the case of the martial arts, I would rather follow the examples of Masahiko Kimura, Wanderlei Silva and Mas Oyama, who have documented fights (which they won), rather than try to emulate what people in the 50´s were (poorly) doing, without an objective proof that their method yields results.


 
I want to give people a skill set that is quite viable and accessable and can be used in a situation that they don't want to be in.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> It´s your choice. I, for one, am not content with my skills, nor do I expect to be - martial arts are a lifelong goal to me. So I intend to keep training and to keep sparring so that my skills will improve, until the day I physically cannot do it anymore.


 
What makes you think that i am any different to that?



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Incidentally, Helio Gracie is well into his nineties, and he still spars.


 
Not in wing chun he doesn't.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

Ed, the mechanisms behind the training undergone by professional fighters and the training undergone by hobbyists such as me are the same. There is no distinction, or at least there should not be. Acquire the skill, improve the skill, train the skill, don´t lose the skill. 

Simple as that.

I really can´t see your point here. True, your students are not professional fighters. But their training regime should be as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters, since the goals are the same (i.e. acquire, improve, train, and retain certain skills).


----------



## lenatoi (Apr 7, 2006)

"should be as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters, since the goals are the same (i.e. acquire, improve, train, and retain certain skills)."
I have to disagree here. Different students don't neccessarily have the same goals. To aquire and retain certain skills, yes, but wich skills? The knowlgedge of proper body alignment, or the flow of motion for some. For others (the ones you're tlking about) those skills would be perhaps self defence or speed.
I must caution you not to discredit other arts because you do not understand them.


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 7, 2006)

lenatoi said:
			
		

> "should be as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters, since the goals are the same (i.e. acquire, improve, train, and retain certain skills)."
> I have to disagree here. Different students don't neccessarily have the same goals. To aquire and retain certain skills, yes, but wich skills? The knowlgedge of proper body alignment, or the flow of motion for some. For others (the ones you're tlking about) those skills would be perhaps self defence or speed.
> I must caution you not to discredit other arts because you do not understand them.


 
Fighting skills. That´s what I am talking about here. In order to acquire, improve, train, and retain fighting skills, you should spar often.

Proper body alignment and flow of motion are not useful skills by themselves, they are part of fighting skills. Any and all student of the martial arts which intend to learn fighting skills (whether for self defence or not) should train in a way as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters. Which is, incidentally, the way the proved masters used to train (Kimura, Oyama, and others).

Of course, if the goal of the student is just to get in shape, more power to him or her. But that´s not what I am talking about here.

Incidentally, I did Wing Chun for two years (Lee Shing lineage). I am certainly not a master, but I am quite sure I know enough about it to talk about it.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> OK, I´ll try one more time.
> 
> So, you said you sparred enough.
> 
> ...


 
well i don't train full time so yes i am less of a fighter i could be.

like i have said its all relative to what you personally want to gain from the art.  Yes to be a professional fighter you'd want to be answering yes to all your questions but if you are training with a different goal in mind then sparring isn't always going to be top of the list.  

I think at this point you need to look how a lot more wing chun schools train in order to appreciate what i am saying about sparring.  You are at the moment disregarding any other ways of training used in wing chun and also adhering to the idea that peoples goals are not attainable unless they continue to spar for ever. I have tried to explain that people can take ideas and skills from sparring and continue to use them in other areas.  You are also assuming the reason i sparred is the same as yours and ignoring any reasons i have brought up for the case of sparring.  

I answered no to all your questions as they are designed so that is the only viable answer but they still do not say that i haven't got from sparring all i needed to for me or that it is necessary to spar before you can fight.  And the answers also do not say that i don't continue to chi sau and gor sau and increase my skill level within those platforms and other training ideas.  Its not like i don't get padded up to do some step in work or even to play gor sau with some more impact but the way wing chun is designed kinda just means we look at sparring in a different way.  Essentially i guess you could say most of my lessons are sparring but to me thats just the way wing chun is trained and its not that idea of sparring that i was discussing, its like sparring broken down and put under a microscope.  I mean we train chi sau with body and head protection in order to be able to up the game, i asked earlier when chi sau becomes sparring because i feel i am continually advancing in my training improving skills and the ability to use them more effectively but i don't consider the training i do to do that sparring.  Maybe you would call it sparring, who knows, its just something to think about.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Ed, the mechanisms behind the training undergone by professional fighters and the training undergone by hobbyists such as me are the same. There is no distinction, or at least there should not be. Acquire the skill, improve the skill, train the skill, don´t lose the skill.


 
lawyer, but wing chun does acquire the skill, improve the skill, train the skill and not lose the skill.  And i have made no distinction in mechanisms but rather in reasons and purposes.  Why have i used sparring and feel that i have sufficed that need?  Is wing chun not valid unless its repeatedly sparred, what exactly constitutes sparring lawyer, especially in reference to chi sau.





			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> I really can´t see your point here. True, your students are not professional fighters. But their training regime should be as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters, since the goals are the same (i.e. acquire, improve, train, and retain certain skills).


 
Ummm, no, i'm not going to put them through the training needed to be a professional fighter.  They don't need to spar to build up wing chun skill but you don't believe that skill to have any value, thats fine.  They want to have a system that can help them get away or react quick enough to preturb a random attack.   It works in my experience, i'm sorry it hasn't in yours.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 7, 2006)

At the risk of you feeling "ganged up on" WCL, I still think that sparring is only a training aid. Sparring is not fighting. No-one in a street fight will necessarily give their opponent a margin for error, or, control their aggression, so even sparring has a limited use. 

If it is used as an aid with which to practice various moves, combinations, then all well and good. I'd like to see if we can "bridge the gap" (did you like the WC euphemism there?) between the main points being raised here,

1. Sparring is important, but different people will want to train to different levels, based on time/natural ability/inclination. 

2. Sparring is simply a training aid, neither the only way to train nor the best. 

3. Sparring does give any MA practitioner the ability with which to try out moves and combo's, but again, still limited to the extent to which one can "attack" an opponent, or utilise the full repetoire.

I would advocate precisely what I have in my class, sparring on a cyclical basis, to practive moves learnt over a couple of weeks, either with gloves, or bare knuckle, and learning to control yourself under such conditions. Our sifu used to make us do continual pad work, week in, week out. Before long, my knuckles were in shreds, and I was slightly bored. He now varies the contents of a lesson more, and its fun. I do get slightly nervy when he announces a sparring sesh, but I find it concentrates the mind wonderfully. Although it is inevitably done bare knuckle, we will control attacks more if fighting someone of weaker strength/ability etc. My sifu also makes us spar with a variety of people, and also includes padded sparring to enable us to "go at it" a lot more. I come home with bruises on my arms, legs, sometimes face, shoulders, chest... I have a few moves that I "like", and train up a lot, and to me, it gives me as much confidence knowing those, than sparring and knowing what it's like to be punched in the face. I can tell you that for free. "It 'urts". Just my tuppence. 

I totally agree that the middle path is "possibly" the best way to proceed. A mixture of sparring and general training is always good, as is retaining an open mind, form is emptiness, emptiness is form.


----------



## ed-swckf (Apr 7, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Fighting skills. That´s what I am talking about here. In order to acquire, improve, train, and retain fighting skills, you should spar often.


 
In that case chi sau is sparring as it achieves these objectives.



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Proper body alignment and flow of motion are not useful skills by themselves, they are part of fighting skills. Any and all student of the martial arts which intend to learn fighting skills (whether for self defence or not) should train in a way as close as possible to that undergone by professional fighters. Which is, incidentally, the way the proved masters used to train (Kimura, Oyama, and others).


 
How close is as close as possible?  I mean i work students through scenario work and alertness skills.  these skills work better for defense, the fighting aspect is constantly explored from realistic angles of other sorts that relate to self defense and not professional fighting.  Its repeatedly trained and upkept - is that then equatable to sparring it?



			
				WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Incidentally, I did Wing Chun for two years (Lee Shing lineage). I am certainly not a master, but I am quite sure I know enough about it to talk about it.


 
It didn't work for you, or fit what you wanted i guess.


----------



## dmax999 (Apr 7, 2006)

Here is another point to consider, especially relevant to WC more then almost any other MA.

WC is a great MA and very powerful, but if done incorrectly or poorly you are better off with a month of any other MA instead of WC.  

We have all been in the WC class with the guy who just doesn't get it.  Is it fair to him to tell him he doesn't need to spar or practice realistic because the style is so awsome?  First real fight he gets into he will be beaten to a pulp because he didn't realize how poorly he execute the basic techniques of WC.  He didn't recognize them because he never sparred.  Now imagine a full class like that and you get the typical WC video clips posted.

I personally believe learning a MA without sparring is dangerous because you don't know how bad you really are.  It take months to get good with frequent sparring.  And once you get good, the number of hits to your head reduce or you end up quitting because you are just not cut out for it.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 7, 2006)

But does this mean that only people who want to be hit in the head should do MA? I thought the whole point of learning any art is to try and avoid precisely that?


----------



## Hung Fa Moose (Apr 8, 2006)

Interesting topic. I admit that I did not read every post fully, I don't have alot of time to do so at the moment. I am also probably a bit biased here,as I am a direct student of Sifu Meng. I will do my best to not take sides, though it seems that everything here is very neutral and productive thus far, one of the reasons I enjoy this forum compared to others where things get personal very quickly. 

The article in question as part of the topic is very much true from more than Meng Sifu's eyes. As curator of the VTM, he has probably seen and experienced more Wing Chun in person during the last decade than many do in a lifetime. His research team did not do book research to find out about Wing Chun, they went to different schools around the nation, some the world, and did hands on research and took live expereinces with as many families as they could. Does this mean that they had every possible xp with WC? No, of course not. This is just so everyone knows what the Team's POV is based in. Not conjecture, but in their expereinces. The article was based partly on some of these experiences, not just those of one man, but rather on those of a team doing research for the last 10 plus years. 

As I have said in other posts, WC is meant for Martial Artists with some kind of background experience in the martial arts. In the Shaolin Temple, it was not knowledge given to beginners. They went through years of rigorous training, cultivating their bodies into effective fighting instruments first, then as time went on, they became more efficient through their own experience, meaning they became better fighters and did what worked for them. Wing Chun was reserved for the higher level Monks to become efficient in a standardized way that could be repeated and taught to future generations. Why? Well, the older you get, the harder it is for your body to take the rigors of training that a younger one can take. The older it get, the harder it is to keep up with the younger generations, right? So, how can the older Monks still play to hone and maintain their skills? Become more efficient, correct? Make sense? 

Look at Morihei Ueshiba (Founder of Aikido), he's a tiny guy, but could deal with people much larger than him. Why? He had a lot of xp in the martial arts before he created Aikido. He understood that there needs to be a certain level of body karma in a person before they can move up in the gong wu. (Yeah, yeah, I doubt he used the Chinese, but you get the piont.) 

Many people today train in Wing Chun without a firm foundation or any previous development of their Body Karma in another martial art. They come and train and expect miraculous results, but have not experienced anything else, and get beat down just for lack of experience with other martial arts. Wing Chun is an advanced programming language for the body. But you cannot make it work if you don't even have the ABC's of your body down. Calculus does not work without basic Math, correct (except the occasional savant)? The same is true of Wing Chun. No previous body karma, the less likely it will work for someone in sparring or in self-defense/combat. 

Thoughts?


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 8, 2006)

Nice posts guys, I´ll try to answer next week. Sorry if I have not answered all the points made here, but it is getting hard to follow all the arguments (some of us still have lives, you know ).


----------



## Kensai (Apr 8, 2006)

WingChun Lawyer said:
			
		

> Nice posts guys, I´ll try to answer next week. Sorry if I have not answered all the points made here, but it is getting hard to follow all the arguments (*some of us still have lives, you know* ).


 
Yeah, right! 

























:asian:


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Apr 9, 2006)

I just have to say as a jujitsuka who really wants to train in WC, this has been an interesting and informative thread.

Jeff


----------



## Kensai (Apr 10, 2006)

JeffJ said:
			
		

> I just have to say as a jujitsuka who really wants to train in WC, this has been an interesting and informative thread.
> 
> Jeff


 
It has hasn't it. I didn't give WCL the credit, as I initially thought that it was just a blatant flame attempt. I'm big enough and ugly enough to admit that it was a good debate. 

Funnily enough, I'm pretty keen to expand my MA training to include ju-jitsu soon. Trying to find a place in Wolverhampton. :asian:


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 10, 2006)

Kensai said:
			
		

> At the risk of you feeling "ganged up on" WCL, I still think that sparring is only a training aid. Sparring is not fighting. No-one in a street fight will necessarily give their opponent a margin for error, or, control their aggression, so even sparring has a limited use.
> 
> If it is used as an aid with which to practice various moves, combinations, then all well and good. I'd like to see if we can "bridge the gap" (did you like the WC euphemism there?) between the main points being raised here,
> 
> ...


 
Kensai, I believe we are actually in agreement over this issue.

Sparring is a training aid in the same sense that a drill is a training aid. It is a relevant part of training: the trick is using it correctly in your favour. You will never do enough sparring, for the very same reason that you will never do enough pad work or shadow boxing.

It certainly is not fighting, we can agree with that. But it is as close to a real experience as your average student will get, and for that reason alone it is invaluable - how else would a student learn how to control his adrenalin surge or his fight or fight reflex, other than with lots of sparring practice? There is no other way, other than picking up fights. Something which I, for one, do not advocate.

Also, even people who have been into real fights can learn a lot in the controlled environment provided by a sparring exercise. Depending on the rules you adopt, sparring can get pretty damn close to a real fight, and you can therefore use your own brain to fill in the gaps created by the rules. This will result in a better fighter. 

As for your three points, I would say all three are essentially correct. Sparring is just a tool. You do not discard, overuse or under utilize a tool - you use it when you need to.

And sparring on a cyclical basis is precisely what good schools do. For instance, my roundkicks currently suck: my coach has kept me out of sparring for a couple of weeks, training those, because he wants me to get good at roundkicks.

When I finally "get it" (hopefully this week!), he will put me back in the ring, so I can practice what I learned against someone who wants to kick my *** into next week.

If I do not use my roundkick well during my sparring match, it´s back to the drawing board again - probably two more weeks going cold turkey until I learn to kick decently! If I do well, we will work on something else, but he will put me back into regular sparring practice so I can practice my roundkicks in the meantime.

This is what I call "cyclical" use of sparring. This, I believe, is how sparring should be done. It should be used for a specific goal, in a certain context. Going at it with no goal other than to "learn by experience, w00t!" is certainly a good way to get some bruises while getting little in return.

PS: when you spar bareknuckle, do you actually make contact with the face? How hard (nosebleeds, lost teeth, broken noses?)? I ask you because I never tried bareknuckle sparring with contact to the face, so I am genuinely curious. I mean, your girlfriend will certainly not like it!


----------



## WingChun Lawyer (Apr 10, 2006)

Hung Fa Moose said:
			
		

> Many people today train in Wing Chun without a firm foundation or any previous development of their Body Karma in another martial art. They come and train and expect miraculous results, but have not experienced anything else, and get beat down just for lack of experience with other martial arts. Wing Chun is an advanced programming language for the body. But you cannot make it work if you don't even have the ABC's of your body down. Calculus does not work without basic Math, correct (except the occasional savant)? The same is true of Wing Chun. No previous body karma, the less likely it will work for someone in sparring or in self-defense/combat.
> 
> Thoughts?


 
I will not get into the historical part of your post, because, as I said, I have no information to discuss that and anyway I don´t want to open that particular can of worms.

As for WC being an advanced art, meant only (or mostly) for experienced people, it does ring somewhat true. I would expect an older man to fight cautiously, without losing his balance, and to avoid bobbing and weaving, yes. But then we would need an actual example to verify this, right? I mean, we would need an older man who did well against youngsters using WC principles to see if the body mechanics and tactics of WC are well suited for use by senior fighters.

That said, all arts will benefit from (good) previous experiences of the practitioner. Judo helps me immensely in Muay Thai, for instance, and it helped me a lot in WC as well.


----------



## Kensai (Apr 11, 2006)

_WingChun Lawyer wrote:_

_PS: when you spar bareknuckle, do you actually make contact with the face? How hard (nosebleeds, lost teeth, broken noses?)? I ask you because I never tried bareknuckle sparring with contact to the face, so I am genuinely curious. I mean, your girlfriend will certainly not like it!_

Well, it's controlled, but accidents do happen I guess..


----------



## swiftpete (Apr 11, 2006)

Did no one else notice that the video in the link is labelled as Bruce Lee fighting? It's not very clear so it's hard to see who it is. Has his name just been attached to a video of random fighters cos he's well known as a martial arts name or is that actually him?


----------

