# Has Wing Chun "gone off course"?



## KPM (Nov 5, 2017)

This came up in another thread and seemed like a good topic for discussion.  So, in order to not divert the other thread way off course I decided to start a new one!

Marnetmar noted:
*From looking at Kulo stuff it's become apparent to me that Wing Chun was once something far greater and more practical than it is today and that saddens me because you would think it'd be the other way around. What went wrong?*

I responded:
Maybe it went from a "fighting art" to an emphasis on being good at Chi Sau? I think it certainly has become too "specialized" and somewhat narrow in focus.

As DanT noted in the other thread, the Pin Sun Chi Sau in the clips I posted looks a lot like Bak Hok Chi Sau.  It also looks a lot like Southern Mantis Chi Sau and the Chi Sau in other southern Chinese styles.  That is because it is somewhat of a "generic" sticky hands.  Years ago I had a friend that was a 6th degree black belt in Kenpo.  He had learned to do Chi Sau like this as well.  So we would train together this way.  And this was before I learned Pin Sun! 

Now we all know that NONE of these southern Chinese systems mentioned puts as much emphasis on Chi Sau as modern Wing Chun, and particularly Ip Man Wing Chun.  Also none of them have the "specialized" version of Chi Sau that Ip Man Wing Chun has.  This means that Ip Man Wing Chun has lost the ability to interact with them in this way.  Of course, it is easy enough to go back to this older method of rolling in order to do Chi Sau outside of Wing Chun circles.  But how often does this happen?  So, no offense intended here, but I think Ip Man Wing Chun has been developed and has evolved to function well specifically while doing Ip Man Wing Chun Chi Sau, and to some extent has lost sight of how it should work against other systems.  This is  what I mean by it becoming too "specialized."   And one lineage of Ip Man Wing Chun (at least according to one infamous forum member) has become so specialized that they see everything as being a method of landing a punch, to the point that their version of Wing Chun has no "applications", no Kum Na moves, etc.  

Now obviously several of you are  going to post and say..."this does not apply to MY version of Wing Chun!"   And maybe it doesn't!  I'm just talking about a tendency and trend we seem to see that prompted Marnetmar to make the comment that he did.


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 5, 2017)

What "kulo stuff" is he taking about?


----------



## KPM (Nov 5, 2017)

wckf92 said:


> What "kulo stuff" is he taking about?



The thread that I started on "Pin Sun Level 1."


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 5, 2017)

KPM said:


> The thread that I started on "Pin Sun Level 1."



Oh ok. Thx. Didn't know if he / she had viewed some other YT footage.


----------



## jlq (Nov 5, 2017)

KPM,

virtually all styles of Chinese martial arts have some sort of "bridge contract training", as you said - especially for southern Chinese styles which emphasize "lei kiu chi da" and "chi kiu chi da".

However, in my opinion one should be careful with making statements such as "what it once was" - nobody actually knows what and how things were. 

Leung Zhan is known to - like any other masters of old - to teach different people different things. So he taught Wong Waah Saam techniques and strategies a small guy could employ. However others were taught different things, so not all "Gulao" Wing Chun is "just" Pien San Wing Chun, some of them have "more" or at least "other" things.

What Fung Leung shows in various videos... Is that how Wong Wah Saam's Gulao Wing Chun is supposed to be like? Is it Fung Chun's version of it, or even Fung Leung's personal version of that version?

Unless there is more information available, this is impossible to even guess.



The "rolling and stepping" thing he does in one of the videos is actually the partnerdrill corresponding to the "dai Sap Yee Lou", i.e. no. 12, the last of the 12 loints, as it is taught by at least one student of Fung Leung in Saaping (they call this section "Fuhk Fu") - as far as I remember (various Gulao schools have somewhat difference sequences and a different order of sets), it has been a while since I was there...



To me it seems like some Wing Chun has a lot of content while others have less - the question is whether there wasn't that much to Wing Chun in the first place and then different things mixed in by different people or there was a lot but then later disappeared...

Either way, YM WCK is not the only WCK which utilizes the Luhk Sau/Pun Sau drill, it is also used in YKS/SN Wing Chun, Yiu Choi Wing Chun, Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun - and even Tang Yik Weng Chun has something similar.

Notice, I called the Luhk Sau a drill. So it has a specific purpose/purposes and is not a sort of platform from which to engage in "chi sau training" with other schools/styles. Real "chi sau" is about establishing a bridge, "controlling" it and most importantly, striking the opponent as fast and as hard as possible. There is no "rolling" or "circling" for the sake of establishing some common platform from which to play a game of chi sau.

And why should there be?

It should be about applying the principles and concepts in application you learn from the various Chi Sau drills you train in application. 

Does the YM Wing Chun style do that? 

Yes, I think so, at least some of the versions out there.


----------



## KPM (Nov 5, 2017)

*However, in my opinion one should be careful with making statements such as "what it once was" - nobody actually knows what and how things were.*

---That's true!  Which leads to some frustration when trying to look back at Wing Chun "history", as we have stated before!  

*Leung Zhan is known to - like any other masters of old - to teach different people different things. So he taught Wong Waah Saam techniques and strategies a small guy could employ. However others were taught different things, so not all "Gulao" Wing Chun is "just" Pien San Wing Chun, some of them have "more" or at least "other" things.*

---But what other lineages of Gulao other than through Wong Wah Sam are still around for comparison? 

*
What Fung Leung shows in various videos... Is that how Wong Wah Saam's Gulao Wing Chun is supposed to be like? Is it Fung Chun's version of it, or even Fung Leung's personal version of that version?*

----That's hard to say in any lineage.  Is Sum Nun's Wing Chun the same as Yuen Kay Shan's, or is it his "version"?  Is Wong Nim Yi's Wing Chun the same as his father's, and was his father's Wing Chun the same as Yuen Kay Shan's Wing Chun?  Is Wong Shun Leung's Wing Chun the same as Ip Man's, or is it his "version"?  


*
To me it seems like some Wing Chun has a lot of content while others have less - the question is whether there wasn't that much to Wing Chun in the first place and then different things mixed in by different people or there was a lot but then later disappeared...*

---I do think things were added over time!  It seems likely to me that Leung Jan taught 12 "original" or "core" sets in Gulao.  But over time various people have added in other sets with the same teaching structure.  There likely was no butterfly knife form in anyone's Wing Chun, but people have added it over time.  


*Either way, YM WCK is not the only WCK which utilizes the Luhk Sau/Pun Sau drill, it is also used in YKS/SN Wing Chun, Yiu Choi Wing Chun, Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun - and even Tang Yik Weng Chun has something similar.*

----Yes, but some theorize that the Luhk Sau chi sau rolling  was developed jointly or at least shared after development between Yuen Kay Shan, Ip Man, and Yiu Choi, and possibly Ng Chun So.  Then likely picked up on by others.   But again, without having specific documentation of what the various lineages were like at different points in history....who can really say?


*Notice, I called the Luhk Sau a drill. So it has a specific purpose/purposes and is not a sort of platform from which to engage in "chi sau training" with other schools/styles.*

---It is a "platform" now!  That's part of the evolution of things!  Various Wing Chun lineages/people host events and get together specifically to have Chi Sau exchanges.  There are open martial arts tournaments that include a Chi Sau division that is open to more than just Wing Chun people.  


* Real "chi sau" is about establishing a bridge, "controlling" it and most importantly, striking the opponent as fast and as hard as possible. There is no "rolling" or "circling" for the sake of establishing some common platform from which to play a game of chi sau.*

----That's not how current Ip Man Wing Chun approaches it.  And that's not how current Pin Sun Wing Chun approaches it either.  Maybe back a few generations ago that was true.  On the other thread I posted video of both Fung Leung and Fung Keung using the same Chi Sau "rolling platform" and playing around with it for demonstration purposes.  Absolutely in Pin Sun the rolling platform is intended as a way to practice the applications and techniques from the various San Sik "on the fly" so to speak.  And if your partner is providing you with any resistance at all to challenge you to test your technique, then that just naturally and automatically becomes a "game of Chi Sau."   But my initial point was that being able to play this "Chi Sau game" well seems to have become the prime focus of a lot of Wing Chun today.  I think it has gotten far more emphasis than it did in times past.  So is this at least part of what "went wrong" to try and answer Marnetmar's original question?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 5, 2017)

*Has Wing Chun "gone off course"? *

In WC sticky hand, if your opponent uses his right hand to grab on your left wrist, uses his left hand to grab on your right wrist, your sticky hand cannot continue.

You may not do this to your opponent. But you can't prevent your opponent from doing it on you. In WC sticky hand training, I see no training to deal with that. Why?

IMO, if you want to deal with opponents in general, you will need to add more training than the current WC sticky hand. 100 years ago, WC was used to deal with southern Chinese. Today WC needs to deal with people from all over the world.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 5, 2017)

Here's how I see Wing Chun based on the numerous conversations that I've read here about WC.  This is also how I see martial arts in general.

Imagine a timeline graphic.  Nothing special, just a line with a few dots where the dots to the left are points in the distant past and dots to the right head toward the present.  Each dot represents a stage and time period in the development of Wing Chun where something in WC changed big time.    WC schools pick which time reference in which to train WC.  And that's all that's too it.   There's no "gone off course."   

It's all WC and preferences of training based on Time period and Development Changes.  Instead of claiming something as true claim the Time Period and the methods of the training during that time period.    The only way something can truly "go off course" is if there is only one way to do something.  Like everything else, there is more than one way to do WC.  Somethings will stay the same or similar but other things will change.  Much of it will change because of Purpose of Training.  If you only do martial arts for exercise and stress relief then things will seem "off course."  But in reality it could be a modern day approach to Wing Chun Health.

If you only want to view the time line for WC fighting then simply remove the non-fighting training methods and schools from the time line and you'll end up with different timelines in which WC was trained for fighting.  Doing this will help to identify the training that is needed in order fight using Wing Chun along with practical application of techniques.



KPM said:


> Maybe it went from a "fighting art" to an emphasis on being good at Chi Sau?


It could be that you are looking at the wrong timeline marker.


----------



## Marnetmar (Nov 5, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> *Has Wing Chun "gone off course"? *
> 
> In WC sticky hand, if your opponent uses his right hand to grab on your left wrist, uses his left hand to grab on your right wrist, your sticky hand cannot continue.



This isn't really true. Depending on how he grabs you, you can:

- Use a lan sau and a shift
- Use a tan sau followed by a pak and punch
- Come up around outside of the hand with a fuk sau (albeit not a "proper" one)
- Use a tan sau followed by a fuk sau
- Use the sup jee sau movements at the start of Biu Jee

To break through the thumb.

Also the reason we don't grab, at least in my lineage, is to prevent from getting immobilized ourselves. Instead we cup the arm without wrapping our thumb around the opponent's arm/wrist.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 5, 2017)

Yeah but fighting who? People can fight better now.


----------



## DanT (Nov 5, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> *Has Wing Chun "gone off course"? *
> 
> In WC sticky hand, if your opponent uses his right hand to grab on your left wrist, uses his left hand to grab on your right wrist, your sticky hand cannot continue.
> 
> ...


I can think of a bunch of solutions to this. If you don't train Wing Chun how do you know what Wing Chun has or hasn't? If the opponent grabs my wrist I can: 

-counter with a Tan Da

-counter with a Gwai Jeurn and break his wrist if he doesn't let go.

-counter with a Kwan Sao and Po Pai Jeung.

-counter with a Heun Sau and Pak Da.

There you go. 3 solutions to the "hand grab" situation.

Traditional Wing Chun can work well against "modern" fighters, and one way of doing this is sparring with one Wing Chun fighter doing Wing Chun only, and the other Wing Chun fighter using techniques from other styles (boxing, kickboxing, etc.).


----------



## Flying Crane (Nov 5, 2017)

Well, the percentage of wing chunners around the globe who are here on Martialtalk engaging in these debates is, I am sure, stunningly small. 

I am sure nobody has been able to visit and thoroughly view the training methods and thereby judge even a fraction of all wing chun schools in the world, so the sample is tiny.

Personally, I don’t put much stock in sweeping generalizations.


----------



## Danny T (Nov 5, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In WC sticky hand, if your opponent uses his right hand to grab on your left wrist, uses his left hand to grab on your right wrist, your sticky hand cannot continue.
> 
> You may not do this to your opponent. But you can't prevent your opponent from doing it on you. In WC sticky hand training, I see no training to deal with that.


This, again, shows you really have no real knowledge or understanding of the training in WC.
Not a knock on you...really it's that you just don't know and from what I see you think you do. You may have 'some' wc experience but from my perspective it appears beginner level. Possibly your instructor/s were not very knowledgeable. One cannot pass on what one does not have.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, if you want to deal with opponents in general, you will need to add more training than the current WC sticky hand. Today WC needs to deal with people from all over the world.


This I agree with and in the wc training I have been exposed to there is a far more than just sticky hand training. I feel certain in other good wc there is as well.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 5, 2017)

DanT said:


> I can think of a bunch of solutions to this. If you don't train Wing Chun how do you know what Wing Chun has or hasn't? If the opponent grabs my wrist I can:
> 
> -counter with a Tan Da
> 
> ...



Larp.

And then you write this.

*This, again, shows you really have no real knowledge or understanding of the training in WC.
Not a knock on you...really it's that you just don't know and from what I see you think you do. You may have 'some' wc experience but from my perspective it appears beginner level. Possibly your instructor/s were not very knowledgeable. One cannot pass on what one does not have.*

Which is pretty much the counter argument to getting one of your mates to attack you with pretend boxing or whatever.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 5, 2017)

Flying Crane said:


> Well, the percentage of wing chunners around the globe who are here on Martialtalk engaging in these debates is, I am sure, stunningly small.
> 
> I am sure nobody has been able to visit and thoroughly view the training methods and thereby judge even a fraction of all wing chun schools in the world, so the sample is tiny.
> 
> Personally, I don’t put much stock in sweeping generalizations.


Viewing the training methods won't be enough.  One would need to actually spar with the fighters of that school.  It's the only way to know, and the sparring can't be  WC vs WC.  Style A vs Style A is not a reliable measure of application ability.   My guess is that those who train to fight using WC will not fit within the OP's title "Has Wing Chun gone off course."


----------



## Danny T (Nov 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Larp.
> 
> And then you write this.
> 
> ...


drop bear: you seem to gotten confused with myself (Danny T) & DanT.

Oh and what is "larp"? 

On a wing chun person pretending to boxing or whatever:
Yeah...I'm not much in favor of such. Why not get with a real boxer or a Nak Muay, or a whatever to train with. Attempting to practice against someone pretending isn't going to develop much in real skill.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 6, 2017)

Danny T said:


> drop bear: you seem to gotten confused with myself (Danny T) & DanT.
> 
> Oh and what is "larp"?
> 
> ...



Yes I did. Sorry.

Live action role play.


----------



## DanT (Nov 6, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Larp.
> 
> And then you write this.
> 
> ...


Are you saying I have no real knowledge or understanding of the training in Wing Chun?


----------



## DanT (Nov 6, 2017)

I should clarify, I'm not suggesting to have someone attack you with fake boxing. Everyone I train with has training in other styles (black belts in TKD or Karate, national level kickboxers, etc). I am suggesting having them use those styles, so it will be WC vs Kickboxing rather than WC vs WC.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 6, 2017)

DanT said:


> I should clarify, I'm not suggesting to have someone attack you with fake boxing. Everyone I train with has training in other styles (black belts in TKD or Karate, national level kickboxers, etc). I am suggesting having them use those styles, so it will be WC vs Kickboxing rather than WC vs WC.



If they are actual stylists then a different scenario.


----------



## Steve (Nov 6, 2017)

DanT said:


> I can think of a bunch of solutions to this. If you don't train Wing Chun how do you know what Wing Chun has or hasn't? If the opponent grabs my wrist I can:
> 
> -counter with a Tan Da
> 
> ...


This is a terrible idea and how training models break down entirely, so that we get things like WC anti-grappling or ninjutsu anti-bjj techniques.  It's as bad as a BJJ guy who has never sparred with weapons talking about knife defense. 

I would say sparring with actual kickboxers, boxers, wrestlers, mma-ists or what have you, is how you might be able to apply your skills against "modern" fighters (whatever that may mean).


----------



## Martial D (Nov 6, 2017)

The problem isn't with the system itself, but one could argue how it is taught(for the most part) and how it is viewed by those teaching it could be argued to be 'off course'. This of course all depends on the course, of course. A horse, of course.....

Sorry, I went off track there a little.

For pure fighting, sure, a lot of it seems to be like driving in nails with the wooden end of the hammer, but some people have figured out which end to hold it by too. Those ones tend to use it situationally even if they prefer to call it 'pure wing chun' (Hi DanT)

But there is also the other angle, doing it can be fun, and you always feel very mentally focused when you leave the class. If that is the course..to get some exercise, build up your reflexes and coordination, get out of the house and have some fun, then the course is right on track.


----------



## Steve (Nov 6, 2017)

FWIW, right or wrong, I have the impression that @JowGaWolf probably has a pretty good handle on using his art outside of his school.  I have this impression because he speaks enthusiastically about sparring with other martial artists from diverse backgrounds.  Not just guys in his school who at one point have done something else, but, well, pretty much anyone.  I think this is excellent.

Another example would be @Tony Dismukes, who trains in about a dozen styles (maybe slightly exaggerated ) and welcomes challenges to what he does and why.

Lastly, this kind of diversity in a training model is institutional and also individual.  In other words, if your instructor does this, it will help your training, even if you don't.  His openness to diverse feedback will inform what and how he teaches you.

It's better if you also do this as a student.  Even better if everyone in the school is involved.

Just to be clear, I'm not commenting on WC training good or bad.  I'm strictly commenting on the training aspect to this being discussed by DanT and Drop Bear.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

DanT said:


> I can think of a bunch of solutions to this. If you don't train Wing Chun how do you know what Wing Chun has or hasn't? ....



Right. Every thread, like clockwork. If he never posted posted again, we would all know that his perspective is that Wing Chun is lacking and has some technical ideas about how it should be fixed. Yet, your statement above sums it up perfectly. He doesn't actually train Wing Chun at all appears to be based on what he's seen on-line. But, I think we can count on him to continue posting some similar statement to every Wing Chun thread.
*
Has Wing Chun gone, off-course? *I would say...yeah, kind of. 

It is an anomaly among a family of southern, short-bridge systems in that is was exported and commercialized. This resulted in a lot of variance and a lot of formality and very westernized curriculum that I don't think was common traditionally in China. The thing I most commonly read about Wing Chun here (usually by people who don't know it) is that it needs MORE of that. More cross training, more ring fighting, more level testing and certifying, none of which were original to Wing Chun. Then we've got the "chi-sao should be an Olympic sport" crowd. That is all off-the-rails in my opinion.

I've met some great Wing Chun players, including some who used their skills professionally and had no complaints about it's efficacy. None of them have YouTube videos, by the way, which is considered the only source of truth to many modern martial artists and aspirings. 

There are still people and places who I think are training Wing Chun well and seem satisfied with it. I don't think the system is lost, but you can't look to the most commercial branches, books, movies, YouTube, and tournaments to find it. In that way, it is the same as hundreds of other great systems that are being preserved and are hiding in plain sight.


----------



## DanT (Nov 6, 2017)

Steve said:


> This is a terrible idea and how training models break down entirely, so that we get things like WC anti-grappling or ninjutsu anti-bjj techniques.  It's as bad as a BJJ guy who has never sparred with weapons talking about knife defense.
> 
> I would say sparring with actual kickboxers, boxers, wrestlers, mma-ists or what have you, is how you might be able to apply your skills against "modern" fighters (whatever that may mean).


I already clairified but I'm assuming you missed my post: I'm not suggesting to have someone attack you with fake boxing. Everyone I train with has training in other styles (black belts in TKD or Karate, national level kickboxers, etc). I am suggesting having them use those styles, so it will be WC vs Kickboxing rather than WC vs WC.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Right. Every thread, like clockwork. If he never posted posted again, we would all know that his perspective is that Wing Chun is lacking and has some technical ideas about how it should be fixed. Yet, your statement above sums it up perfectly. He doesn't actually train Wing Chun at all appears to be based on what he's seen on-line. But, I think we can count on him to continue posting some similar statement to every Wing Chun thread.


I think you are talking about me here. Yes, I did train WC 44 years ago but I don't train WC today. Even the person who taught me the WC system doesn't train WC any more. I assume he is not Yeh Men's best student.

But I do use the WC principle such as to protect the center from inside out. I also use the principle from other MA system such as to protect the center from outside in.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

I have no criticisms of your training. I've looked at your web site and I'm actually interested in what you do and would love a chance to train with you. 

But, you don't know what you think you know about Wing Chun and I wish you should stop trolling in every Wing Chun discussion implying that you do. You think we all have a blind spot and you're here to enlighten us, well first of all, we are not all one thing. Second, you are missing your own blind spots, as people focused to much on educating others tend to be. Why not take the energy you seem to have for trying to set us straight and put it into your own training?

If you want to know about Wing Chun, ask questions rather than make statements and consider the source as you get answers.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> He doesn't actually train Wing Chun at all appears to be based on what he's seen on-line.


Here is a clip to prove that I had trained WC back in 1973 when "on-line" was not even existed.

Again, please stay on the topic and leave "YOU" and "I" out of the discussion. How about I don't criticize your WC skill, and you don't criticize my WC skill. Let's just talk about MA. If you don't agree with my opinion, you can explain yours. You don't have to say thing such as

- You don't know WC.
- You learn WC online.
- Your WC is bad.
- Your WC is not pure.
- You have a bad WC teacher.
- ...

I have said many good things about WC such as

- center line,
- block and strike at the same time,
- forward pressure,
- ...

I have also pointed out some weakness in WC such as:

- move arm without move body during SNT training stage.
- lack of body rotation.
- lack of grappling.
- ...


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

I didn't accuse you of lying about having done some Wing Chun training 44 years ago. 

But, go ahead, assume that you know everything, keep trolling. I'll consider my ability to not take the bait part of my own training, if that's how it has to be.


----------



## Steve (Nov 6, 2017)

DanT said:


> I already clairified but I'm assuming you missed my post: I'm not suggesting to have someone attack you with fake boxing. Everyone I train with has training in other styles (black belts in TKD or Karate, national level kickboxers, etc). I am suggesting having them use those styles, so it will be WC vs Kickboxing rather than WC vs WC.


Yeah, I get it.  Better than nothing, I suppose.  But one of the things about any technique is using it against a variety of people at a variety of skill levels.  Having a guy in the school with some experience is a step in the right direction.  It's just a very, very small step.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> But, go ahead, assume that you know everything, keep trolling.


It's not fair for you to say that I'm trolling. I may have shared more clips and pictures in this forum than most of the members have. Everything that I have said, I try to prove it as much as I can. You said that I learned WC on-line. I have to find an old clip to prove that I didn't. That's not what a person who is trolling will normally do.

I love MA and I love to discuss MA. WC is only one of my "cross training" systems. I always look at a particular MA system from a "general" MA point of view.

When some said that the

- long fist system doesn't know how to protect center,
- Shuai Chiao system doesn't have ground game,
- Preying mantis system has power generation issue.
- Baji system has speed generation issue.
- Taiji push is a bad idea.
- Bagua system has cross legs issue.
- XingYi system always move leading leg first is risky.
- ...

I would say that I agree with that person 100%. I'm not just criticize WC. I criticize all MA systems.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

Okay. Critize all martial arts systems. Just don't be surprised when people devoted to those systems respond negatively.


Personally, I am more focused on developing myself than tearing others down.

For the record: Kung Fu Wang did not learn Wing Chun on-line. He had some experience with it 44 years ago.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> For the record: Kung Fu Wang did not learn Wing Chun on-line. He had some experience with it 44 years ago.


Thanks for clear that one up.



ShortBridge said:


> Okay. Critize all martial arts systems. Just don't be surprised when people devoted to those systems respond negatively.


I don't mind people responds to my post negatively.

In another forum, All Taiji guys hate me. But it won't stop me from saying, "Push your opponent away is a bad idea. You should keep your friend close but your enemy closer."

IMO, if I'm afraid of saying something from the bottom of my heart, I should not get involve with online discussion in the first place.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In another forum, All Taiji guys hate me. But it won't stop me from saying, "Push your opponent away is a bad idea. You should keep your friend close but your enemy closer."



As long as that makes you happy, I guess.

Tell me though, have you managed to change taiji? Have you helped anyone become better at what they do? Or do you just do this to make yourself feel superior?

To be honest, I don't hate you. I looked you up and I think I would like you in real life and I suspect that given the chance, hands on, I could learn a lot from you and would enjoy the experience. Who knows, you might feel the same about me afterward.

But the way you explain your on-line activity in this thread is exactly that of an internet troll.


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 6, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have also pointed out some weakness in ****my**** WC such as:
> 
> - move arm without move body during SNT training stage.
> - lack of body rotation.
> - lack of grappling.



...fixed that for ya


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Tell me though, have you managed to change taiji? Have you helped anyone become better at what they do? Or do you just do this to make yourself feel superior?


Both my teacher and I had tried to change Taiji by adding the "leg skill" (such as cut, hook, lift, twist, scoop, bite, break, ...) back into Taiji.

For example, to add

- leg seize into Peng.
- leg spring into Lu.
- Inner hooking into Ji.
- outer hooking into An.
- foot sweep into cloud hand.
- front cut into brush knee.
- ...

But Taiji guys took that as an insult. They believed that Taiji is so perfect and no addition will be needed (sound familiar, does it?). That task was only done inside the Chang Taiji system.

Do I feel superior? If I can just help one person in MA, my time that spent on-line will be worthwhile. If this online information can be kept and last forever, 1000 years from today someone will still remember a Chinaman had evolved WC "Tan Da" into "rhino guard" 1000 years ago.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

And you're sure that you understand the training that goes on in my class and it's limitations?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> And you're sure that you understand the training that goes on in my class and it's limitations?


That will be up to you whether you want to share your information or not. I can only speak from my point of view.

For each and every post that I put up, should I always attach:

- This is only my point of view.
- I can only speed for myself.
- In my limited experience.
- my 0.2 cent.
- ...

I have always assumed that's the default. Of course I can only speak what I know and you can only speak what you know. This is called "online discussion" and "information sharing".


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> And you're sure that you understand the training that goes on in my class and it's limitations?


When someone said that his Taiji has "leg twist". I politely asked him to put up a clip. Unfortunately that clip has not been seen since.


----------



## Marnetmar (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Okay. Critize all martial arts systems. Just don't be surprised when people devoted to those systems respond negatively.
> 
> 
> _Personally, I am more focused on developing myself than tearing others down._
> ...



You're purposely misinterpreting KFW's posts acting like a manipulative dolt in the process.


----------



## Vajramusti (Nov 6, 2017)

KPM said:


> This came up in another thread and seemed like a good topic for discussion.  So, in order to not divert the other thread way off course I decided to start a new one!
> 
> Marnetmar noted:
> *From looking at Kulo stuff it's become apparent to me that Wing Chun was once something far greater and more practical than it is today and that saddens me because you would think it'd be the other way around. What went wrong?*
> ...


----------------------------------------------------------Dangers off over generalization for all lineages. Briefly regarding good folks in mine:1. many people only briefly studied withwing chun.2. Ho  Kam Ming was longer with Ip Man than any one 3.All the major students of Ho Kam Ming
have maintained high standards and the main people in those lines have fought successfully as well as doing good chi sao.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

Marnetmar said:


> You're purposely misinterpreting KFW's posts acting like a manipulative dolt in the process.



I have no idea who you are and don't remember ever interacting with you in the past. I also don't know what a dolt is, but assume it is not a compliment. 

I am in fact not deliberating misrepresenting his posts. He said he must speak from his heart, I believe everything that I have typed on the subject as well. If you think he's a credible source of Wing Chun information, by all means, follow him and ignore me. I won't lose sleep over that.


----------



## Marnetmar (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> I have no idea who you are and don't remember ever interacting with you in the past. I also don't know what a dolt is, but assume it is not a compliment.
> 
> I am in fact not deliberating misrepresenting his posts. He said he must speak from his heart, I believe everything that I have typed on the subject as well. If you think he's a credible source of Wing Chun information, *by all means, follow him and ignore me. I won't lose sleep over that.*



You sure about that?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 6, 2017)

Here's the thing about training.  It should be easy to identify what is lacking when a person gives the purpose and focus of their training.  

If you want to be good with WC then you have to use it against none Wing Chun martial artists.  Outside of competitions, what good is WC if you can only beat WC practitioners?  This holds true for all fightings systems not just WC.  

Fighting against other systems will highlight the holes in your training and the level of your understanding of WC.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

Marnetmar said:


> You sure about that?



Quite.

One of the reasons that I get worked up about KFW is that I actually have some interest in what he does. I just wish that he would post more about his own system instead of everyone else's.

I don't care about you at all. Don't know anything about you except that you've been doing Wing Chun for "about four years" according to your profile. Have a good life.


----------



## Marnetmar (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Quite.
> 
> One of the reasons that I get worked up about KFW is that I actually have some interest in what he does. I just wish that he would post more about his own system instead of everyone else's.
> 
> I don't care about you at all. Don't know anything about you except that you've been doing Wing Chun for "about four years" according to your profile. Have a good life.



So are you going to quit deflecting or not?


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

Marnetmar said:


> So are you going to quit deflecting or not?



Dude, honestly, what are you on about? Here was my answer to Keith's question:
*

Has Wing Chun gone, off-course? *
_I would say...yeah, kind of. 

It is an anomaly among a family of southern, short-bridge systems in that is was exported and commercialized. This resulted in a lot of variance and a lot of formality and very westernized curriculum that I don't think was common traditionally in China. The thing I most commonly read about Wing Chun here (usually by people who don't know it) is that it needs MORE of that. More cross training, more ring fighting, more level testing and certifying, none of which were original to Wing Chun. Then we've got the "chi-sao should be an Olympic sport" crowd. That is all off-the-rails in my opinion.

I've met some great Wing Chun players, including some who used their skills professionally and had no complaints about it's efficacy. None of them have YouTube videos, by the way, which is considered the only source of truth to many modern martial artists and aspirings. 

There are still people and places who I think are training Wing Chun well and seem satisfied with it. I don't think the system is lost, but you can't look to the most commercial branches, books, movies, YouTube, and tournaments to find it. In that way, it is the same as hundreds of other great systems that are being preserved and are hiding in plain sight.

_
No one had any comments or questions for me about that. I'm not deflecting ****. KFW replies to every Wing Chun thread and apparently every taiji thread with what he thinks is inferior about those systems and how he would fix them, regardless of what the question or topic was. It's noise. He's not the only one, but he's the one I happened to call out on it. You don't like it? I don't give a ****. Do you want to contribute to the conversation about the state of Wing Chun or are you just starting **** with me?


----------



## KPM (Nov 6, 2017)

*Has Wing Chun gone, off-course? *I would say...yeah, kind of.

It is an anomaly among a family of southern, short-bridge systems in that is was exported and commercialized. This resulted in a lot of variance and a lot of formality and very westernized curriculum that I don't think was common traditionally in China. 

----I think that's part of the problem.  We don't really know what was common traditionally in China!  A big deal was made in years past about "rooftop challenge matches" in HK during Ip Man's heyday.  Turns out that most of them were by a group of teenagers and likely didn't really amount to much.  A big deal has been made about Leung Jan's "300 challenge matches" in Foshan.  But we don't really know what those were like at all.  We all want Wing Chun to kick *** when used in open sparring matches, and that simply doesn't happen.  Maybe we have the wrong expectations?  Maybe Wing Chun was never intended for that kind of fighting?  Then what was it intended for?   When the answer to that question is somewhat unclear, then questions as to whether today's Wing Chun has "gone off course" are going to naturally appear.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

I agree that it is tough to work backward to the history of Yip Man Wing Chun. The history is less clouded over with similar systems that haven't been commercialized and exported to the same extent.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 6, 2017)

KPM said:


> It is an anomaly among a family of southern, short-bridge systems in that is was exported and commercialized. This resulted in a lot of variance and a lot of formality and very westernized curriculum that I don't think was common traditionally in China.


There will always be variance.  If you actually use martial arts then there will be variance. That just the "natural evolution of the same."  If WC was a car, half of the WC practitioners would be driving around in a Ford Model T, bragging about the superiority.   Did the Ford Model T "fall off" or did it just improve through variance?  Today's modern cars have variances of what we see in the Ford Model T.    





WC practitioners should ask themselves.  Do they want to preserve tradition and be the Ford Model T?  Or do they want to advance WC?  Or do they want to do both?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> I agree that it is tough to work backward to the history of Yip Man Wing Chun. The history is less clouded over with similar systems that haven't been commercialized and exported to the same extent.


Go back as far as you can.  Start there and keep better track of WC history from this point on.


----------



## ShortBridge (Nov 6, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> There will always be variance.  If you actually use martial arts then there will be variance. That just the "natural evolution of the same."  If WC was a car, half of the WC practitioners would be driving around in a Ford Model T, bragging about the superiority.   Did the Ford Model T "fall off" or did it just improve through variance?  Today's modern cars have variances of what we see in the Ford Model T.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You know, JowGa, you're another one who seems to exist only to troll every Wing Chun thread, no matter what it's about.

We get it, your system is better than ours. You're better than us. Blah Blah Blah


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> You know, JowGa, you're another one who seems to exist only to troll every Wing Chun thread, no matter what it's about.
> 
> We get it, your system is better than ours. You're better than us. Blah Blah Blah


Tell me what was wrong about what I stated?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 6, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> We get it, your system is better than ours. You're better than us. Blah Blah Blah


I'm pretty sure that you are the only one who thinks that.


----------



## DanT (Nov 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> Yeah, I get it.  Better than nothing, I suppose.  But one of the things about any technique is using it against a variety of people at a variety of skill levels.  Having a guy in the school with some experience is a step in the right direction.  It's just a very, very small step.


Despite having over 30 people to spar (ranging from national champions to beginners), I agree. Which is why I compete yearly to expose myself to others.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 7, 2017)

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Differing opinions are a fact of human nature, and without them, conversation would be pretty boring.
However, the rules here require that discussions be kept civil. Tensions have been rising in this thread. If you'd like to avoid seeing yet another Wing Chun thread locked, keep the discussions polite and professional.

Thank you.
Mark A Cochran
Dirty Dog
MartialTalk Senior Moderator


----------



## geezer (Nov 7, 2017)

_@ Shortbridge: _Ving Tsun is my core art and I've been at it for a while, so I totally get where you are coming from. But contrary to you, I really enjoy the contrarian perspectives offered by our loyal non-WC "interlopers" such as _Jow Ga Wolf,_ _Kung Fu Wang, Drop Bear _and others.

Often I disagree with these guys, but they are sincere and knowledgeable martial artists and their input really livens up this WC forum. Like you, I am sometimes taken aback by posts that seem totally ignorant of some aspects of WC, and feel compelled to post back and clarify. That's what I call a _conversation_ or even a _debate_. These guys are not trolls by any stretch, and their input keeps me on my toes.

Besides if it weren't for_ them_, the rest of us would probably just turn on _each other_ like the treacherous, ravenous beasts we WC folk are known to be.


----------



## wckf92 (Nov 7, 2017)

geezer said:


> _@ Shortbridge: _Ving Tsun is my core art and I've been at it for a while, so I totally get where you are coming from. But contrary to you, I really enjoy the contrarian perspectives offered by our loyal non-WC "interlopers" such as _Jow Ga Wolf,_ _Kung Fu Wang, Drop Bear _and others.
> 
> Often I disagree with these guys, but they are sincere and knowledgeable martial artists and their input really livens up this WC forum. Like you, I am sometimes taken aback by posts that seem totally ignorant of some aspects of WC, and feel compelled to post back and clarify. That's what I call a _conversation_ or even a _debate_. These guys are not trolls by any stretch, and their input keeps me on my toes.
> 
> Besides if it weren't for_ them_, the rest of us would probably just turn on _each other_ like the treacherous, ravenous beasts we WC folk are known to be.



I gotta side with @ShortBridge and disagree with @geezer on this one. KFW comes across as if he is a WC practitioner of about 1 month experience, yet wants to "evolve" WC by having us charge ahead full speed with his football field long footwork clips combined with a rhino horn or whatever. If he wants to leave his mark on the MA world...call it "_John Wang Skipping Rhino Kung Fu_" and leave it at that. 
And, for the record, I like some of what he has posted over the years; but when he posts his usual MO stuff (i.e. rhino's and what-have-you...) it always has this messianic feel to it. Kind of like another cat who used to post here about so called "ancient" WC...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 7, 2017)

wckf92 said:


> I gotta side with but when he posts his usual MO stuff (i.e. rhino's and what-have-you...) it always has this messianic feel to it.


I invented the "right mouse click" (patent number 4686522 8/11/1987). Everybody on this planet is using it. I also invented the "rhino guard". People can use it for free if they want to.

Do we all want to "contribute something" to this world that we love and live in?


----------



## Steve (Nov 7, 2017)

I invented the term drop down box.  Before that it was called a hidden menu.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> I invented the term drop down box.  Before that it was called a hidden menu.


Xerox Star and Apply Lisa invented "pull down menu". Microsoft used "pull up menu". Even today, I still could not understand how could Microsoft get away from that patent law sue.


----------



## Steve (Nov 7, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Xerox Star and Apply Lisa invented "pull down menu". Microsoft used "pull up menu". Even today, I still could not understand how could Microsoft get away from that patent law sue.


Lol.  You called my bluff.  . 

The amiga os was before apple lisa... wasn’t it?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> Lol.  You called my bluff.  .
> 
> The amiga os was before apple lisa... wasn’t it?


I didn't know where did the drop down box come from. Your invention will be remembered by the history for the next 10,000 years. Back then the GUI technology was new. I still remember there were 1 button mouse, 2 button mouse, 3 button mouse, even 4 button mouse.

One day when you and I will meet, we will need to talk about computer as well as CMA.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 7, 2017)

Talking about my "rhino guard" idea, It just fully utilizes the WC principle "protect center from inside out".

If you  put one Tan Shou in your center path, your opponent's arm can still slide in along your Tan Shou. Of course you can move your body (or move your Tan Shou) to deflect it. But it will put you into defense mode. If you use double Tan Shou, it will be more difficult for your opponent's punch to slide in. If your opponent tries to slide in from the outside of your arms, you can change your Tan Shou into Bong Shou to deflect it. The only issue left is what if your opponent's punch come in between your double Tang Shou? My "rhino guard" just seals that hole, and make your double parallel Tan Shou into a single wedge with angles. The last issue is if you use double Tan Shou (or rhino guard), you don't have any arm left to punch back. The "big fist" can be your striking weapon.

It's a trade off. You have strong defense but weak offense. For those who only care about defense and try to protect your head from punching, the double Tan Shou (or rhino guard) can be a good choice.

In the following picture, he had his swords cross. If he lets both sword tips to touch instead, he will give himself the maximum amount of "safe zoom". Will you feel safe by holding 2 swords as a wedge and hide your body behind that "safe zoom"?


----------



## geezer (Nov 7, 2017)

I'd prefer two arming swords over the "Rhino guard". But who cares. Besides Matt Easton has funny ears!


----------



## geezer (Nov 7, 2017)

wckf92 said:


> I gotta side with @ShortBridge and disagree with @geezer on this one. KFW comes across as if he is *a WC practitioner of about 1 month experience ...*
> And, for the record, I like some of what he has posted over the years; but *when he posts his usual MO stuff (i.e. rhino's and what-have-you...) it always has this messianic feel to it.* Kind of like another cat who used to post here about so called "ancient" WC...



Gotta differ with you. I'm sure it was a long time ago, but John didn't learn _Biu Tze_ with only a month in WC. And I don't get that egotistical, messianic vibe from him either. It's more like he came up with some things he really likes and is excited about them. 

Now I don't like them so much, and I also think his recollection of WC is a bit fuzzy, but I really like people willing to debate and share ideas. So I I don't have a problem. But then I'm just like that. Living in my own little happy world.... ...until I go all psycho


----------



## Martial D (Nov 8, 2017)

I'd trade one Wang for any ten of you, with a couple of exceptions, in terms of being a gold mine of TMA knowledge.

People that think one style or other has all the answers are a roadblock to productive discussions.


----------



## TMA17 (Nov 8, 2017)

“We all want Wing Chun to kick *** when used in open sparring matches, and that simply doesn't happen. Maybe we have the wrong expectations? Maybe Wing Chun was never intended for that kind of fighting? Then what was it intended for? When the answer to that question is somewhat unclear, then questions as to whether today's Wing Chun has "gone off course" are going to naturally appear.”

-
I was criticized for asking these questions in another thread although I believe that person misread my question.  Anyway being new to WC my opinion may not amount to much, and maybe I’m putting the cart before the horse being I have only practiced WC for a little over two months.  Coming from a boxing background and playing sports all my life, I felt WC was uniquely different than anything I have done before.

The questions KPM posted above are good questions.  There are different ways to look at it.  And let’s be honest here, WC is a highly criticized art, for better or worse. BJJ/Muay Thai/wrestling all don’t share this common theme of effectiveness.

It could very well be just an inferior art by design or it could be that it’s just not for combat sport.  I personally think it’s more of an art for close combat efficiency.

Why do we see so many people modify it?  I have to say I now believe that WC should remain strictly as WC.  I am training WC bc I like certain aspects of it, but in all honesty if I were to get into a real fight my Kung Fu is boxing.  In time if I become better at WC maybe that will be my Kung Fu.

I recently bought a Muay Thai heavy back to work with my kicks. I went to an MMA gym and took a few MT classes.  I feel I can learn the basics of MT on my own. To me it’s a very simple but effective art, like boxing.

My issue will be whether I can learn WC and retain what I know in boxing as they are to me very different.  I could potentially become a worse fighter learning WC for all I know.

I’m studying WC as a hobby.  All of this is a hobby to me.  If I was really serious about fighting I’d learn BJJ/wrestling and keep up with Muay Thai.

I enjoy the movements and forms of WC Kung Fu.  It’s fun.  I do think it can be effective and I also think it’s a good art for older folks.  I’m 41 and think WC is a good art to learn as you age.

Here are some videos I thought were good representations of WC and fighting another style.  I shared these before.

If you YouTube “Wing Chun vs Karate” you’ll find several of these videos.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 8, 2017)

I still cringe every time somone tells me their art is not designed for sparring. But desighned for combat or whatever.

As if people are actually using them for combat. when plainly people are not.

That statement really means your system is not designed to be used at all. Which is why you struggle using the system.

And I mean there is not that big a surprise that there is a link there.

There are a whole bunch of things i would do if I wanted to put a person in to a ring fight of any sort. These things I feel are necessary because if you can't fight in the ring and you do you will get unnecessarily hurt. And that just seems a bit negligent.






Now in theory if I was to prepare somone for a street fight. I would prepare them better because nobody is there to save them and nobody will stop.

But because almost nobody actually has to use their system for combat. Nobody has to care what sort of martial artist you produce. 

Designed for combat, for me anyway, is just an excuse for negligent training that is a system based on hope.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 8, 2017)

TMA17 said:


> “We all want Wing Chun to kick *** when used in open sparring matches, and that simply doesn't happen. Maybe we have the wrong expectations? Maybe Wing Chun was never intended for that kind of fighting? Then what was it intended for? When the answer to that question is somewhat unclear, then questions as to whether today's Wing Chun has "gone off course" are going to naturally appear.”
> 
> -
> I was criticized for asking these questions in another thread although I believe that person misread my question.  Anyway being new to WC my opinion may not amount to much, and maybe I’m putting the cart before the horse being I have only practiced WC for a little over two months.  Coming from a boxing background and playing sports all my life, I felt WC was uniquely different than anything I have done before.
> ...


My only response to that is:  When is WC no longer WC?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 8, 2017)

drop bear said:


> I still cringe every time somone tells me their art is not designed for sparring. But desighned for combat or whatever.
> 
> As if people are actually using them for combat. when plainly people are not.
> 
> ...


What's the story behind that video? How did she get in the ring?


----------



## drop bear (Nov 8, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> What's the story behind that video? How did she get in the ring?



No idea.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 8, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Their art is not designed for sparring. But designed for combat or whatever.


If you

- have knocked/taken down 10 guys, the chance that you may knock/take down the 11th guy will be high.
- can prevent 10 guys from knocking/taking you down, the chance that you can prevent the 11th guy from knocking/taking you down will be high.

The question is where can you accumulate those 10 valuable experience if you don't use ring/mat environment?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 8, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you
> 
> - have knocked/taken down 10 guys, the chance that you may knock/take down the 11th guy will be high.
> - can prevent 10 guys from knocking/taking you down, the chance that you can prevent the 11th guy from knocking/taking you down will be high.
> ...



In the ER...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 8, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> In the ER...


You can't accumulate your fighting experience in street. You either

- get hurt,
- hurt someone, and go to jail or be sued.

That means you can only accumulate your fighting experience in the ring or on the mat.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 8, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You can't accumulate your fighting experience in street. You either
> 
> - get hurt,
> - hurt someone, and go to jail or be sued.
> ...



The vast majority of my experience has been outside the ring or mat - I haven't done tournament stuff in years, but I did take down three different people this weekend.
Other non-competition sources of experience would be law enforcement, security, bouncer, gang banger, generally being douche nozzle, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, with a little thought, but clearly your assertion is incorrect.

In any case, your list of outcomes is quite incomplete. You can also

- avoid the fight,
- subdue them without hurting them,
- hurt them and don't go to jail because it was self defense,
- hurt them and don't go to jail because it was mutual combat,
- hurt them and leave without giving them your phone number, so they can't sue you...
- etc etc etc.

I discount the "you get hurt" bit as spurious, since people get hurt in competition all the time.


----------



## Steve (Nov 8, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> The vast majority of my experience has been outside the ring or mat - I haven't done tournament stuff in years, but I did take down three different people this weekend.
> Other non-competition sources of experience would be law enforcement, security, bouncer, gang banger, generally being douche nozzle, etc. I'm sure I could come up with more, with a little thought, but clearly your assertion is incorrect.
> 
> In any case, your list of outcomes is quite incomplete. You can also
> ...


So, what about the students who aren’t cops, bouncers, gang bangers or douche nozzles?  How does the kid you’re training gain experience?  The soccer mom?  The dentist or the accountant?  

Don’t get me wrong.   It’s heartening to see you furthering this idea, but while I agree and support your change of heart, @Kung Fu Wang also makes a valid point which is that a lot of people train who aren’t professionally exposed to violence.  They aren’t cops, bouncers, gang bangers or douche nozzles.  The only exposure to violence they have is their training.  These folks are being sold a bill of goods by instructors who tell them they don’t need any experience to become an expert.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 8, 2017)

Steve said:


> So, what about the students who aren’t cops, bouncers, gang bangers or douche nozzles?  How does the kid you’re training gain experience?  The soccer mom?  The dentist or the accountant?



Steve, you like to try and twist what I say. Please stop it. All I said was that the statement 'you can't get experience except in competition' is incorrect. That's it. Nothing more. 



> Don’t get me wrong.   It’s heartening to see you furthering this idea, but while I agree and support your change of heart,



What change of heart? When have I ever, in any context, said or even implied that experience (from any of the various sources) was a bad idea?



> @Kung Fu Wang also makes a valid point which is that a lot of people train who aren’t professionally exposed to violence.



That isn't what he said, either. Did you actually read either of the posts, or are you just replying based on what you think we would have said?

What he said (and I quoted it earlier...) was  





> You can't accumulate your fighting experience in street. You either
> 
> - get hurt,
> - hurt someone, and go to jail or be sued.
> ...



Which is just categorically wrong.

Please do me a favor. If you don't understand what I've written, ask and I'll do my best to clarify. If you do understand what I've written, please respond to THAT, rather than making up positions for me that I've never supported. Please?


----------



## drop bear (Nov 8, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> The vast majority of my experience has been outside the ring or mat - I haven't done tournament stuff in years, but I did take down three different people this weekend



Not terribly good volume from a training perspective.

I mean let's go back to this context of training for the street. I you did want to reliably take down three guys in the ER. you would want to have taken down 20 guys in the gym.

Not be unable to take anyone down and then suggest that you don't train sport. So therefore it is OK.


----------



## DaveB (Nov 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Not terribly good volume from a training perspective.
> 
> I mean let's go back to this context of training for the street. I you did want to reliably take down three guys in the ER. you would want to have taken down 20 guys in the gym.
> 
> Not be unable to take anyone down and then suggest that you don't train sport. So therefore it is OK.



But his statement was that he DID take down 3 people irl, not that he was unable to. And presumably without the 20 man royal rumble you suggest is needed.


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> Steve, you like to try and twist what I say. Please stop it. All I said was that the statement 'you can't get experience except in competition' is incorrect. That's it. Nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i think you’re being very defensive and that’s locking up your noggin.  

He said you can’t accumulate fighting experience on the street.  You can only accumulate ina. Ring or on a mat.   You pointed out how this isn’t true and gave a few examples of other ways people accumulate experience,   I agree with you, and also with @Kung Fu Wang.  You each have half of it.

So, again, the question is, if a person doesn’t accumulate experience on the street, as a cop, a bouncer, a douche nozzle or in competition, how does that person gain experience?  I don’t have demographic stats on everyone who trains MA But I think it’s safe to say that there are a lot of people who don’t accumulate any experience.


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2017)

DaveB said:


> But his statement was that he DID take down 3 people irl, not that he was unable to. And presumably without the 20 man royal rumble you suggest is needed.


Again, I think there are two great points being made.  On the one hand, Drop Bear and Kung Fu Wang are pointing out one of the great benefits of competition, which is that you can basically do it as much as you want.  Because the application is essentially scheduled, you can accumulate a ton of experience.  That's a strength and also a weakness.

Folks with an agenda on one side point out the strengths and ignore the weaknesses.  Folks with an agenda on the other side focus on the weaknesses, but can't seem to acknowledge the strengths.

Conversely, professional experience is terrific, too.  Strengths are that it is contextual, meaning that you are applying the techniques "for real" in a given context.  If you are an ER nurse, and have to 'take down' douche nozzles fairly often, you are gaining real world experience doing just that.  There is real value in this.  It's not theoretical knowledge. The downside is that it is opportunistic and specific, meaning that if you have a quiet day, week, month or year, you aren't gaining any experience.   And the experience you are gaining is limited to a single context.

I think either of these approaches is sound as a minimal approach to developing skills.  The thing I thought @Dirty Dog was [finally] acknowledging is that you have to gain experience somewhere.  My personal opinion is that, if I were a professional douche nozzle who needs to use my violent skills often, realistic training AND competition AND practical experience is best.  Even better than this is incorporating as much diversity into both the competition and the training.  As I said earlier, this is where I really admire guys like @Jow Ga Wolf and @Tony Dismukes.  The former trains in one style but embraces the diversity of experiences.  He seems to welcome new situations in which to apply his technique.  Tony does this and also seems to be genuinely curious and interested in cross training and also values competition.

Point is, I see you guys arguing about where someone gains experience, and it truly makes my day.  The larger issue I see is what that means to the folks who are not LEO, bouncers, gangbangers, douche nozzles or otherwise exposed to violence, AND who train in a style that has little or no competitive element.  There are some guys who lack any experience who have managed to convince others here and in the real world that this experience is not necessary.

Tying this back to the topic at hand, as an outside observer, I see a lot of conflict between the guys who train WC who are also gaining experience somewhere (not in competition because it's WC), and the guys who train WC who are not gaining experience elsewhere.  The tenor of the conversations is, "We do this because it works... adapt that because it works" vs "that's not WC... that's not how we're taught... that's poor technique."


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Not terribly good volume from a training perspective.



From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.


----------



## Danny T (Nov 9, 2017)

In the fight game, whether it be for competition or personal protection the ability to adapt is extremely important. (Unless winning or surviving is not ones goal.)
In the I only want to train a particular thing in a particular way cause I like it and don't want to change game stagnation is important. (I guess)

I think the system can remain but the individual should grow beyond and not be slave to the system. Some other opinions are different.


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2017)

Danny T said:


> I think the system can remain but the individual should grow beyond and not be slave to the system. Some other opinions are different.


Related to another thread, what you say above is essentially the definition of mastery.   Analysis and evaluation of the system that leads to innovation is tge essence of mastery in that system.


----------



## Danny T (Nov 9, 2017)

Steve said:


> Related to another thread, what you say above is essentially the definition of mastery.   Analysis and evaluation of the system that leads to innovation is tge essence of mastery in that system.


I understand and won't argue against your point but will remark that the goal show be not to master the system, rather it should be to master yourself. Which is probably an impossible task because of the ever changing human condition. There should be a constant polishing and refining of one's art; that being yourself not the system.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 9, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.


I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than a punch on the head.

The Chinese in the following picture says: Brick is the best street fight weapon ...


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 9, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than to punch on his head.
> 
> The Chinese in the following picture says: The best street fight weapon ...


I'm starting to think that 100 years ago that there were bricks just laying around in the street ready to be picked up and used as a weapon lol.   My Grandfather told my dad as child, that if someone is bigger than you then pick up a brick and hit them in the head then run. lol.  

I can't remember the last time I've seen a brick laying on the street.  I guess they keep the bricks in the allies these days or in run downed areas in the city or country.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 9, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> I'm starting to think that 100 years ago that there were bricks just laying around in the street ready to be picked up and used as a weapon lol.   My Grandfather told my dad as child, that if someone is bigger than you then pick up a brick and hit them in the head then run. lol.
> 
> I can't remember the last time I've seen a brick laying on the street.  I guess they keep the bricks in the allies these days or in run downed areas in the city or country.


This is why Chinese like to carry a brick in his day-pack. It's perfect legal. 

A girl with a brick in her hand can scare you to death in a dark alley.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 9, 2017)

Dirty Dog said:


> From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.



See in training over the weekend I took down five guys. And more than once. 

More repetition better understanding of what I am doing.

It makes the people I take down in real life easier.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 9, 2017)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than a punch on the head.
> 
> The Chinese in the following picture says: Brick is the best street fight weapon ...



Is that some sort of secret? I have hit people with foreign objects. Hell I have done it in training. Over the weekend a girl bounced my head off a window. 

I never realized how increadably street I have been training.


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Is that some sort of secret? I have hit people with foreign objects. Hell I have done it in training. Over the weekend a girl bounced my head off a window.
> 
> I never realized how increadably street I have been training.


You're badass.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 9, 2017)

Steve said:


> Again, I think there are two great points being made.  On the one hand, Drop Bear and Kung Fu Wang are pointing out one of the great benefits of competition, which is that you can basically do it as much as you want.  Because the application is essentially scheduled, you can accumulate a ton of experience.  That's a strength and also a weakness.
> 
> Folks with an agenda on one side point out the strengths and ignore the weaknesses.  Folks with an agenda on the other side focus on the weaknesses, but can't seem to acknowledge the strengths.
> 
> ...



I have friends who took down three guys on the weekend and they don't train.

Pretty sure all martial arts is a scam.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 9, 2017)

Steve said:


> You're badass.



I rolled with a guy who swung off a rope to pass guard once.


----------



## KPM (Nov 9, 2017)

Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."


----------



## JowGaWolf (Nov 9, 2017)

KPM said:


> Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."


1.  Style A vs Style A is a bad idea for building use of martial arts application.
2.  The weight / size was the first time I've heard that.  I don't think it's a valid reason.  It makes the assumption that the majority of the people taking Wing Chun are fighting people who are bigger.

Other than than those 2 things, which are universal to any fighting system.   I think he's on point, but non of those reasons support the notion that "Wing Chun has gone off course."  

If a person only practices Wing Chun for health, then how is that "Wing Chun gone off course."  

I asked a question earlier and no one answered it.

At what point does Wing Chun "go off course."?


----------



## KPM (Nov 10, 2017)

*1.  Style A vs Style A is a bad idea for building use of martial arts application.*

---Yep!  Something that has been pointed out multiple times.  But this point seems to get ignored often.   But if someone assumes that they are training martial arts application, but only train against fellow students doing the same style....is that not a way of having gone "off course"?

*2.  The weight / size was the first time I've heard that.  I don't think it's a valid reason.  It makes the assumption that the majority of the people taking Wing Chun are fighting people who are bigger.*

---Not really.  The assumption is that when Wing Chun was designed it didn't take into consideration "head hunters" that had knock out power in their punches.  Until fairly recently it seemed like Wing Chun people always kept their focus at chest level.  I've wondered in the past if perhaps there was some kind of "gentleman's agreement" back in the day that said they weren't going to hit each other in the head when "crossing hands."


*Other than than those 2 things, which are universal to any fighting system.   I think he's on point, but non of those reasons support the notion that "Wing Chun has gone off course."  *

---If you are training for martial arts application and only train against your own style, then you have "gone off course."   If you are trying to be a practical fighting style and are not prepared to defend well against modern boxing type punches targeting the head, then you have "gone off course." 

*If a person only practices Wing Chun for health, then how is that "Wing Chun gone off course." *

---Wing Chun is not Tai Chi.  Even people training just for the fun of it and as a form of exercise are still typically told by their teacher that they are doing a fighting style.  But if in the end they can't fight at all........
*
I asked a question earlier and no one answered it.*

---I commented earlier that unless it is very clear what Wing Chun was originally designed for or intended for, then questions like in the OP and like yours are going to naturally come up.

*At what point does Wing Chun "go off course."?*

---Wing Chun has "gone off course" when it is not doing what it was designed for, or fulfilling the expectations of the people practicing it.   So then the question becomes.....how accurate and legitimate are those expectations to begin with, and exactly what was Wing Chun designed for?   And are people's expectations and Wing Chun's original intent the same thing, or have they diverged and evolved over time?


----------



## TMA17 (Nov 10, 2017)

KPM said:


> Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."




Excellent video thanks for sharing.  I believe this guy is absolutely correct and he nails it.  

For myself, I'd like to learn WC traditionally first as a hobby and because I find it interesting.  I like traditional arts, especially Kung Fu.  Not just for the sake of fighting, but for the forms/movements and history behind them.  The esoteric aspect of Kung Fu is what appeals to me.  What one does with their WC is up to them.  Guys like Orr or this guy are modifying it and that's great.

I would also add that one simply could learn boxing or MT and be done with it.  But that takes the fun out of learning the unique traditional aspect of WC, which again is an esoteric art.


----------



## geezer (Nov 10, 2017)

_Problem:  _Integrating more realistic training into a school and organization with very traditional (i.e. artificial) training methods emphasizing WC vs. WC,  chi-sau as a goal in itself rather than as a means to and end, and an authoritarian curriculum discouraging questioning  and testing through sparring other stylists.

Practically minded students have probably already left in favor of boxing, grappling, and MMA gyms. The remainder are clinging to a _wuxia_ fantasy of what kung-fu is, and they will probably leave when you introduce realistic training that pops that bubble.

So, even if the head instructor understands the problem, trying to get his WC back on-course may destroy his business. Especially, if he was trained in that same artificial way and isn't good fighter. So the situation continues, unchanged...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 10, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> what was Wing Chun designed for?


I truly believe that WC is designed for this. No other MA systems on this planet should be able to do this better than the WC system can.


----------

