# Rambling Ruminations



## KPM (Mar 11, 2015)

Steve wrote:
*Anyway, KPM ...if you will excuse an of-topic comment... A while back on another thread, I believe you made a comment about having some isues lately with WC and spending more time lately with Silat or FMA? Is this true or did I just have another bout of rye-ergot poisoning? If so, why not start a thread. As an eternal skeptic and fellow FMA practitioner, I'd be really interested in your comments/observations.*

Ok.  You asked for it!  ;-)  When I get run out of here on a rail I'll blame you!  

You are remembering correctly.  I have been spending my time lately reinvigorating my Panantukan skills and adding some 52 Blocks to it.  I have become a bit disillusioned with Wing Chun.

My reasoning goes like this:   Far too many WC people seem to put a high emphasis on Chi Sau and a low emphasis on sparring.  Chi Sau is not fighting.   When we do see clips of WC people sparring or fighting, a high percentage of them look more like a form of kickboxing than WC.  Alan Orr is someone I really respect and think has high WC skills.  But as we see more and more footage of his students sparring and fighting....I still can't help but think it still looks like a form of kickboxing and not what we think of as "classical" WC.   Sure there are WC concepts at work there, and many will say this makes it WC and it doesn't have to "look" like the forms and training methods.  But tell that to a boxer or kickboxer and they will look at you like you are stupid or something.  They would ask you why you can't make your WC-specific techniques actually work!  Why train one way but fight another way?  You should train the way you fight and fight the way you train.  That's the way I look at it.

What do we see working in the MMA area?  It is some version of a boxing/kickboxing based striking method.  What has been the main striking combat sport for generations?  Boxing & Kickboxing.   When the Chinese set out to develop their on striking based combat sporting method (Sanda) what did it end up looking like?  A  type of kickboxing!  

So if what has been proven to work well time after time in sparring and fighting competition is some form of boxing/kickboxing, shouldn't our training focus on that?  If even WC people end up resorting to something that looks as much or more like a version of kickboxing when sparring or fighting under pressure, shouldn't our training focus on that?  Boxers don't train one way and fight another.  Kickboxers don't train one way and fight another.  MMA guys don't train one way and fight another.

If you don't believe what I have been saying, just do a search on youtube for "Wing Chun vs. ....."  or "Wing Chun sparring", etc. 

So the end result of my line of thinking has been that what is going to be the most reliable and natural and easiest to pull off under pressure is something boxing-based.  Panantukan is boxing-based with some cool "martial" add ons.  52 Blocks is boxing-based and puts a heavy emphasis on what works in sparring. 

I have spent much more time training Wing Chun than Panantukan or boxing.  I have learned 3 different "families" or "styles" of Wing Chun.  But when I find myself under some heavy pressure, what comes out for me is my boxing-based Panantukan more than WC.  You might say that is a failure in my WC training method, and you might be right!  But I haven't trained any differently over the years than the majority of other WC guys, so I tend to think there is more to it than that.

Who knows, I might change my opinion again at some point and find a renewed faith in Wing Chun.  But I am having fun with the Panantukan and 52 Blocks right now!  ;-)


----------



## KPM (Mar 11, 2015)

And one more thing.....if I was asked "what system has the best punching method out there?"  Factoring in speed, power generation, number of combinations, and difficulty to defend against...... My answer would be "hands down....western boxing!"  As a Wing Chun guy, if you asked me what kind of fighter I would LEAST want to face?  Hands down...a good western boxer.


----------



## Drose427 (Mar 11, 2015)

While I have no dog in this fight, it's important to note that free sparring in nearly any striking style looks like Kickboxing, that's where kickboxing came from..

In bunkai (outside of what my school calls "test bunkai") you'll see things from forms (such as elbows and knees) and what not that would look the same in an MMA.

Free sparring and kickboxing  looks that way cause "risk vs reward". In K1 and MMA you have karate/TKD guys who spar exactly like you'd see in their root style, and you have others who aren't comfortable or feel they aren't fast enough, or some any other of many reasons who aren't comfortable taking the risk of kicking. Many times its more a personal decision than one on style.

People fight/freespar using their best techs, the techs they feel they can accomplish the easiest with the Minimal risk.

Depending on the setting and a person's training these can be different things.

As for applying and/or using  more of the Wing Chun Specific concepts,  I can't chime in there. But I'm sure you'll get a strong debate from this


----------



## Eric_H (Mar 11, 2015)

Do what makes you happy man, only one life. I love WC, but would tell most people to run screaming from it.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 11, 2015)

I say Wing Chun is a training method of how to use one's body as well as controlling the center. How one utilizes or applies such will may be different for everyone. Use what works best for you.


----------



## KPM (Mar 11, 2015)

it's important to note that free sparring in nearly any striking style looks like Kickboxing, that's where kickboxing came from.

---But why is that?   The answer I have come to is that the biomechanics of boxing/kickboxing is a more natural and instinctive way to move.  You take a classical martial art (be it Wing Chun, Karate, Hung Ga, etc. ), throw it into a sparring situation and you see a version of kickboxing.  If that is what works when fighting, shouldn't THAT be what people are actually training?  Why spend all that time training the "classical" style?


Free sparring and kickboxing  looks that way cause "risk vs reward". In K1 and MMA you have karate/TKD guys who spar exactly like you'd see in their root style, and you have others who aren't comfortable or feel they aren't fast enough, or some any other of many reasons who aren't comfortable taking the risk of kicking. Many times its more a personal decision than one on style.

---They do what is going to help them win.  How often do you watch a UFC fight where one can actually say that someone is doing TKD, or traditional Karate....or heck even classic Muay Thai anymore?  Lyoto Machida is the closest, and as time has gone on his classical Karate is less and less recognizable in the Octagon.  And even if you could say someone was doing TKD, its going to be Olympic TKD and not the TKD they train in their numerous classical forms and one-step sparring routines.
.

As for applying and/or using  more of the Wing Chun Specific concepts,  I can't chime in there. But I'm sure you'll get a strong debate from this

---No doubt!   Although people have been nice to me so far!  ;-)


----------



## Drose427 (Mar 11, 2015)

KPM said:


> it's important to note that free sparring in nearly any striking style looks like Kickboxing, that's where kickboxing came from.
> 
> ---But why is that?   The answer I have come to is that the biomechanics of boxing/kickboxing is a more natural and instinctive way to move.  You take a classical martial art (be it Wing Chun, Karate, Hung Ga, etc. ), throw it into a sparring situation and you see a version of kickboxing.  If that is what works when fighting, shouldn't THAT be what people are actually training?  Why spend all that time training the "classical" style?
> 
> ...



Well as in Karate/TKD/TSD, the actual moves in Kata fall into 2 categories.

Illegal in freesparring and not

The first are meant to be treated as bunkai and drilled with a resisting opponent coming to break your nose. These are the throws, elbows, knees, etc. Theyre regularly practiced

The second are the punches and kicks. Where the actual technique of that specific move will be the same in Sparring. I.e. Srtaight punches, and the kicks. To be fair, stances in forms depend on your styles lineage. Okinawan styles use high realistic stances, my association uses deep stances in forms to build muscle and flexibility. When we spar, we're as light if not lighter than an average boxer.

These techs/combinations are again, regularly drilled.

Some folks would rather drill defending against an attacker with techs that are highly likely to work, but are illegal in their competitive medium, even MMA has a lot of things outlawed that folks who train forms are regularly drilling.

When both get regularly drilled with  contact and resistance,  where an individual puts the most time dictates how they react to a real attack. In a sport environment, it will almost always look like kickboxing. 

We had a girl in my association who was walking to her dorm late at night and was attacked. The cell phone video someone recorded showed she knocked him out with a knife hand strike straight out of forms.

Both times I had to deal with a belligerent drunk, I handled it like a kickboxer. But I boxed before I found TSD. The only other time Ive had to use my training, I used an arm lock, took him down and just held him there by torquing it till someone broke it up.

Regardless, the assumption that one is slacking off his sparring to work on Bunkai is typically wrong.



Its pretty easy to pick out when a fighter is using moves from a specific style. Anthony Pettis, Anderson Silva, Ben Henderson, all use or have used blatant TKD kicks. Its pretty disctinctive from Muay Thai.

For Karate you have Machida and GSP, and Machidas Striking is still exactly whatd youd see at a high level Karate tournament. He's simply added grappling to it.

Finally, while youre right that most (if not all) of the TKD guys come from Kukki TKD, they very regularly drill numerous classic forms. While technically its possible to find a school that doesnt do SD drilling or One step, I've personally never seen it or heard of a school not doing it.


----------



## geezer (Mar 11, 2015)

KPM -- I pretty much anticipated your response. WC attracts a fair number or "true-believer" types who follow their lineage and instructors with cultish fervor. And then there are the critical thinkers who come to WC because it offers a fascinating and unique theory of how to approach unarmed combat. But as you say, the theory may not always hold up in practice. And if you _are_ a critical thinker, that's going to bother you. Big time.

I love WC, but I hear what you are saying. Thanks for being open about it. Now I'll shut up and listen to what others have to say.


----------



## dlcox (Mar 12, 2015)

Keith you opened a can of worms you rebel 

      I definitely hear what your saying. I've discussed my thoughts on Chi Shou before and stand by my belief that, as a practice that is supposed to relate and transfer into martial ability, it just doesn't hold up under pressure. I have argued that the platform is awkward and that it is not conducive to natural response or reflexive action in it's classical presentation. If Yong Chun is supposed to be natural and not "Animal" based why is it so awkward and not based upon gross motor skill? Conceptually I believe that Chi Shou is fantastic for wrestling not boxing, though some actions are naturally transferable. Anyways, being from the camp of concepts vs. form, I will argue the principles of Yong Chun as being evident in some fights, whether the individual practices Yong Chun or not. As I believe that principles exist without form, that being said I can relate to what you are saying about appearances. Perception is what gives us classification and I agree that in order for an art to be represented as such it should be presented as such.

      As for your question of kickboxing. Why do many classically trained stylist revert to it? I addressed this issue once before on that other forum. It simply has to do with Gross Motor Skill vs. Combined Motor Skill vs. Fine Motor Skill. Yong Chun as an art is mostly a Combined to Fine Motor Skill Art. It has a heavy focus on finesse, Fine Motor Skill is the first thing to go when under pressure. Arts like boxing and kick boxing are Gross to Combined Motor Skill arts and fare way better under pressure. This has to do with not only the techniques involved but also the principles. It is a combination of how the two communicate. Ambiguous principle combined with fine movement doesn't translate well under pressure, Yong Chun is riddled with this and uses Chi Shou as a vehicle to explain the theory involved within set parameters and rules. The problem with this is that when it is to be applied outside of the presented platform it falls short because it does not allow for variables contradictory to the rule set. It's complexity stunts it's effectiveness. Many will undoubtedly disagree with me and fervently defend it, but to each their own. Usefulness is in practicality and effectiveness based on high percentage of probability. In short if you can't pull it off even 50% of the time under heavy pressure, I don't want to hear how effective a method it is. Gross Motor Skill is the foundation from which effective movement, technique and application is based. From here it should be refined to Combined Motor Skill then to Fine Motor Skill. It should not start with Fine Motor Skill, as in Yong Chun. I was always told that Yong Chun is an advanced art, it is not for beginners and should only be taught to those who have a solid background in a Gross Motor art (like Long Fist), because it is an art of refinement. Yong Chun is a key that can unlock many doors and allow one to better understand nuances of what can be considered "cruder" methods.

      Your third point on usage of Yong Chun is directly related to my second response with the addition of intent. Many will argue that they do practice under pressure but I will argue that it is also most likely in some manner choreographed or scripted to an extent. This isn't a bad thing but it is also not outright organic. What I mean by this is that rules are still being followed as far as the technique is concerned. This is where the argument of concept vs. technique comes into play. Again I subscribe to the school of concept as opposed to strict adherence to form. Yes technique is important to maximize the full concentrated effect of a certain movement, but this also requires an absolute adherence to refinement. The problem with this is that it doesn't allow one to naturally refine the technique through progression in application. Many Shifu want their students to perform the movement perfectly as they see it and not as how the practitioner perceives, understands or feels it, simply because that is how they understand it. Peoples mechanics are heavily influenced by their upbringing and environment, this has to be taken into consideration. We cannot expect them to move like us or us like them without practice, time and practical relatable experience. How we react to stimuli is not the same, just as how we initiate contact is not the same. Some will prefer a punch over a grab, others a grab over a kick. This has everything to do with how we perceive conflict and what intent we confront it with. The other part of this equation is the methods in which we train to condition response. Many employ way to many movements to counter a simple aggressive act, this creates confusion under heavy pressure as it places one out of the gate in a Combined Motor Skill mindset, it sets them up to fail. Many also practice with dead movement, ie; The aggressor leaves his arm hanging without retracting, this give a false sense of security to the defender as they believe that the technique is actually working correctly. Practical simple responses based upon live movement, ie; The aggressor retracts the arm as quickly as it was thrown, allows the defender to work on timing, distance, intent, control and use in a realistic manner. Once this is achieved combinations can be added and refinement can be introduced.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 12, 2015)

I think much of what we see on video are WC people who are still at the "technique" stage.
As dlcox  posted above, to be effective, it must be a gross motor skill. If you are thinking "technique", then you are at the fine motor level.
From the very beginning we were taught to get the force out of our hands and into our elbow...then the lats, back, scapulae.
If you are able to do this, then the movements are gross motor movements.
The problem is that this is a long process.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 12, 2015)

Wing Chun is a method to learn to feel your body and to feel changes in your opponent's movements, center of gravity, pressure changes. The biggest problem I've seen for most is they never really pressure test in a fighting situation. Chi sao is not fighting and is only a small piece of training/practice. Just because you can chi sao does mean you can fight or even understand fighting. Most of what is shown as wc fighting is terrible and by persons who play at it. Same can be said for most martial training out there from what I have seen. The basic training in wc vs a person making perfectly straight center line punching is for learning how to defend the line but does little to train one for other type of punches. WC training is filled with twor person drills, drills, drills and drilling is not fighting. To really understand and have the ability to apply what one learns from wc training one must spar vs someone making hard forceful attacks and throwing strong non choreographed punches, kicks, grabs, throws, and takedowns. I agree with Yak Sao on it is a long process. WC is a simple system but takes a lot of practice and takes practice against pressure.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 12, 2015)

One thing I stress is that our forms, unlike the forms from other kung fu systems, are not "fighting forms".  One of their purposes is to instill structure into the body. This structure goes beyond the outward appearance of tan, bong, jum.... It needs to move deep into the torso, and of course the stance.
The same can be said for chi sau...it's not meant for fighting. It's a bridge to fighting.

I see so many WC people trying to do a one for one translation of the forms and chi sau. and what you are left with is a very shallow interpretation of WC....one that falls apart under pressure.


----------



## kung fu fighter (Mar 12, 2015)

KPM said:


> Far too many WC people seem to put a high emphasis on Chi Sau and a low emphasis on sparring.  Chi Sau is not fighting.



In my opinion chi sao is a training method designed specificly to focus on the development of a fighter's ability to project and read intent while handling momentum using wing chun tools, nothing more. I believe if more people treat it as such, they will gain much more from it. It does not tell you to fight a specific way, instead it gives you tools which can be combined and used in infinite ways.



dlcox said:


> Fine Motor Skill is the first thing to go when under pressure.


completely agree, unless you have developed your intent to a high level.


----------



## KPM (Mar 12, 2015)

The first are meant to be treated as bunkai and drilled with a resisting opponent coming to break your nose. These are the throws, elbows, knees, etc. Theyre regularly practiced

---You seem to be forgetting that throws, elbows and knees are all legal and allowed in MMA competition...heck, even in some Sanda competition!


Some folks would rather drill defending against an attacker with techs that are highly likely to work, but are illegal in their competitive medium, even MMA has a lot of things outlawed that folks who train forms are regularly drilling.

---Do you mean fish-hooking and eye gouging?  ;-)


When both get regularly drilled with  contact and resistance,  where an individual puts the most time dictates how they react to a real attack. In a sport environment, it will almost always look like kickboxing.

----One can't drop into a low stance and throw reverse punches in a sport environment?  Once can't use outward forearm blocks while drawing the other hand back to the waist in a sport environment?  Why is that?


Its pretty easy to pick out when a fighter is using moves from a specific style. Anthony Pettis, Anderson Silva, Ben Henderson, all use or have used blatant TKD kicks. Its pretty disctinctive from Muay Thai.

---Using a kick that comes from TKD is not the same as doing TKD in the ring.  I can throw a decent roundhouse kick that doesn't come from Wing Chun or Panantukan.  Does that mean I know TKD?  Why  train all the classical techniques from the forms if they aren't going to be used when actually fighting under pressure?  When was the last time you saw Pettis, Silva, or Henderson throw a punch that looked anything like what is trained in classical TKD forms?


----------



## Drose427 (Mar 12, 2015)

KPM said:


> The first are meant to be treated as bunkai and drilled with a resisting opponent coming to break your nose. These are the throws, elbows, knees, etc. Theyre regularly practiced
> 
> ---You seem to be forgetting that throws, elbows and knees are all legal and allowed in MMA competition...heck, even in some Sanda competition!
> 
> ...



Yes like eye gouges

But to go straight into the other points.

If you're throwing a tkd roundhouse, you're doing tkd.....if you're throwing A different styles, it's a different style rou.dhouse. But when the technique is picture perfect from style X, at that point you're doing style X.

They can, but I'm sport it's not recommended. For most schools that ise them deep syances are just there for conditioning and flexibility. Manu styles use upright stances. The downward block in forms isn't just a downward block, it's pretty obviously part of a takedown to those who train it. Treating it always as a block is dangerous because 9/10 it won't work as such.

Those guys all regularly use reverse punches and Tkd kicks, which are in the form. The stance is just different


No one on the planet mimics forms perfectly, in bunkai or sparring. That's not what forms are. You seem to be thinking people consider them a "super realistic, be all- end all," thing and they arent.

They're a textbook of techniques for you to apply and drill on resisting opponents while building core strength and focus.


----------



## KPM (Mar 12, 2015)

Keith you opened a can of worms you rebel 

---It's Steve's fault!!!!  ;-)

 being from the camp of concepts vs. form, I will argue the principles of Yong Chun as being evident in some fights, whether the individual practices Yong Chun or not. As I believe that principles exist without form, that being said I can relate to what you are saying about appearances.

---Fighting has changed some over the generations.  Maybe at some point in the past the "classical" arts represented the fighting of the day.  Maybe at some point Wing Chun was the best way to express those principles you refer to in fighting.  But Bruce Lee pointed out rather nicely that this may not be the case today.

 Perception is what gives us classification and I agree that in order for an art to be represented as such it should be presented as such.

---I'm glad you agree.  One should fight the way they train, or they are likely wasting a lot of training time.

      As for your question of kickboxing. Why do many classically trained stylist revert to it? I addressed this issue once before on that other forum. It simply has to do with Gross Motor Skill vs. Combined Motor Skill vs. Fine Motor Skill. Yong Chun as an art is mostly a Combined to Fine Motor Skill Art. It has a heavy focus on finesse, Fine Motor Skill is the first thing to go when under pressure. Arts like boxing and kick boxing are Gross to Combined Motor Skill arts and fare way better under pressure.

---Good way of putting it!    I have said that the boxing biomechanic just seems to be more natural and more likely to hold up under pressure.  Maybe this is why.  Maybe it just comes the closest to using a human being's natural gross motor skills.

 It's complexity stunts it's effectiveness. Many will undoubtedly disagree with me and fervently defend it, but to each their own.

---That's an interesting statement.  Wing Chun is supposed to be less complex than other Gung Fu methods.  That's one of its claims to fame....being a stripped down and stream-lined art.

Usefulness is in practicality and effectiveness based on high percentage of probability. In short if you can't pull it off even 50% of the time under heavy pressure, I don't want to hear how effective a method it is.

----I certainly agree!  The problem is, a large percentage of Wing Chun people don't realize that they can't pull it off under pressure against a non-Wing Chun fighter because they have never tried!


 I was always told that Yong Chun is an advanced art, it is not for beginners and should only be taught to those who have a solid background in a Gross Motor art (like Long Fist), because it is an art of refinement. Yong Chun is a key that can unlock many doors and allow one to better understand nuances of what can be considered "cruder" methods.

---Another interesting statement!   But then you have to wonder if a classic Long Fist fighter turned Wing Chun fighter would be any more successful under pressure without resorting to some version of Long Fist-ish kickboxing.

---One of the advantages of practicing a boxing-based method is that you are constantly training against someone throwing techniques from a boxing-based method.  In today's modern setting, most attackers are likely going to be using some kind of pseudo-boxing method against you....throwing haymakers, jabs, hooks, etc.  Wing Chun is too specific.  Wing Chun people spend the vast majority of  their time training against  someone else doing Wing Chun.


----------



## KPM (Mar 12, 2015)

As dlcox  posted above, to be effective, it must be a gross motor skill. If you are thinking "technique", then you are at the fine motor level.

---I think you are misunderstanding what is meant by a "gross motor skill."   A gross motor skill is one that requires a low number of nerves firing to affect a large number of muscle fibers.   A fine motor skill is one that requires a larger number of nerves firing to effect a smaller number of muscle fibers, but with a higher level of control.  Training does not convert a fine motor skill into a gross motor skill.  It just reinforces the fine motor skill.


----------



## KPM (Mar 12, 2015)

yak sao said:


> One thing I stress is that our forms, unlike the forms from other kung fu systems, are not "fighting forms".  One of their purposes is to instill structure into the body. This structure goes beyond the outward appearance of tan, bong, jum.... It needs to move deep into the torso, and of course the stance.
> The same can be said for chi sau...it's not meant for fighting. It's a bridge to fighting.
> 
> I see so many WC people trying to do a one for one translation of the forms and chi sau. and what you are left with is a very shallow interpretation of WC....one that falls apart under pressure.



If you aren't training the way you fight and fighting the way you train then something is wrong.  If forms and Chi Sau don't translate to fighting then why are you doing them?  I understand that you are saying they develop a deeper level of structure that will be used in fighting, but heck....shouldn't they give you some basic techniques for defense?   Aren't we all told the story that Wing Chun was designed to be simple, learned quickly, and intended for training someone to fight faster then those other second rate Gung Fu styles that were its competitors back in the day?  ;-)


----------



## KPM (Mar 12, 2015)

If you're throwing a tkd roundhouse, you're doing tkd.....if you're throwing A different styles, it's a different style rou.dhouse. But when the technique is picture perfect from style X, at that point you're doing style X.

---I disagree.  Picking a technique here and another there doesn't mean you are doing multiple martial arts.  What counts is the biomechanics behind what you are doing....the powerbase or "engine" behind your movement.  Classical TKD forms teach you to move a certain way and generate punching power with a specific biomechanic.  Its a package deal.  Vitor Belfort would drive in on guys and back them up with a flurry of centerline Wing Chun punches, but no one ever claimed he was doing Wing Chun.


No one on the planet mimics forms perfectly, in bunkai or sparring. That's not what forms are. You seem to be thinking people consider them a "super realistic, be all- end all," thing and they arent.

---And again, this illustrates part of the problem I see with classical martial arts.  Seldom do they fight the way they train.

They're a textbook of techniques for you to apply and drill on resisting opponents while building core strength and focus

---Then they are an outdated textbook of techniques that seldom show up when sparring or fighting under real pressure.


----------



## Drose427 (Mar 12, 2015)

KPM said:


> If you're throwing a tkd roundhouse, you're doing tkd.....if you're throwing A different styles, it's a different style rou.dhouse. But when the technique is picture perfect from style X, at that point you're doing style X.
> 
> ---I disagree.  Picking a technique here and another there doesn't mean you are doing multiple martial arts.  What counts is the biomechanics behind what you are doing....the powerbase or "engine" behind your movement.  Classical TKD forms teach you to move a certain way and generate punching power with a specific biomechanic.  Its a package deal.  Vitor Belfort would drive in on guys and back them up with a flurry of centerline Wing Chun punches, but no one ever claimed he was doing Wing Chun.
> 
> ...



Considering all the guys I mentioned are TKD and Karate black belts, yes they are doing TKD and karate......many of them even throw reverse punches like from TKD and Karate.... they aren't doing a general roundhouse, it's picture perfect how it's taught I'm that style. Saying it isn't Karate or TKD when it's blatantly a tech ique from that style they learned while training in that art, you're letting a personal vendetta against TMA's keep you in denial

And yes they do show up in real pressure if you've trained them enough. You're asking on a forum full of folks who have used movements from forms in SD, just because you dont, doesn't make them outdated or useless.

Machida, GSP, and Silva all do forms regualrly. Superfoot was still regularly doing his forms while Kickboxing. 

If professional fighters believe they're useful for their fighting or growth as a martial artist, they're useful.


----------



## dlcox (Mar 12, 2015)

*---That's an interesting statement.  Wing Chun is supposed to be less complex than other Gung Fu methods.* _*That's one of its claims to fame....being a stripped down and stream-lined art*_.

Unfortunately I don't see it. The movements of Yong Chun may be simpler than other methods but the level of refinement needed for effective practical use is way more complex, because it is based upon Fine Motor Skill (FMS). FMS requires constant conditioning under heavy duress before it can become second nature, Unlike Gross Motor Skill (GMS) arts like boxing that require much less coordination/conditioning and are more natural responsively to stimuli.

*---Another interesting statement!   But then you have to wonder if a classic Long Fist fighter turned Wing Chun fighter* *would be any more successful under pressure without resorting to some* *version of Long Fist-ish kickboxing*.

Correct, they would resort to GMS movement, Yong Chun would give them refinement of GMS elevating it. In a sense it would make their GMS more effective and economical. I use the term "Chasing the Taiji", FMS is about refinement, the act of trying to make your technique the most powerful, economical and efficient with the least amount of effort. Large movements can always be made smaller, Small movements cannot be made bigger (at least not efficiently). A sculptor does not add stone to create the sculpture he chips away at a large block to reveal the image. "Chasing the Taiji" is about striving to become the ultimate. Unfortunately many approach the methodology backwards, starting from refined movement and work towards unrefined movement. Using unrealistic and complex theory with simple movement or using unrealistic and complex movement for a simple theory.

*---One of the advantages of practicing a boxing-based method is that you are constantly training against someone throwing techniques from a boxing-based method.  In today's modern setting, most attackers are likely going to be using some kind of pseudo-boxing method against you....throwing haymakers, jabs, hooks, etc.  Wing Chun is too specific.* *Wing Chun people spend the vast majority of  their time training against  someone else doing Wing Chun.*

I don't necessarily believe the problem lies in Yong Chun working against Yong Chun so much as it is the mindset and approach to training. To me Yong Chun is a very specific art meant to deal with very specific conditions and environments. That is why I believe it is an advanced art meant to be a supplement to an art that is more GMS based. Ideally you want to be able to defend yourself with Combined Motor Skill (CMS). This is a realistic approach, this is where Boxing and Wrestling lie and why they are so effective, they are firmly based in the CMS realm and start with GMS. Yong Chun starts with FMS (Xiao Lian Tou Quan) and works its way backwards to a more GMS realm with Biao Zhi Quan, small movement to large movement. This is counterproductive in terms of learning biomechanic application. The art of White Crane that I do has many theories and techniques similar to Yong Chun, but they are not introduced until the end. We start off with big movements and large circles then gradually refine them to little movements and small circles. To me this is where Yong Chun shines as a standard for refinement of structure and mechanics, but it's a theoretical method, it's "Chasing the Taiji". It's  hypothetical, a "This is what it could potentially be" type of thing, not a "This is what it is" type of thing.

This brings me to question that, if Yong Chun is supposed to be a complete art, why does it feel as if something relevant is missing? Many of the older family styles and mainland styles have more than just the 3 forms. Many of them have broader beginner forms that employ more GMS than is commonly seen in standard Ye Wen or Yuan family Yong Chun. Many of these systems also start the practitioner off with a set of "Boxing Like" San Shi, like the _3 Arrow Punch_, which covers the Straight Punch, Hook and Uppercut and _Whipping Hand_, which covers Inward Parry, Upward Parry and Downward Parry and _4 Gates_, which covers footwork based on the fighting stance. Simple practical fundamentals that will later be refined by the techniques learned in the forms and through Chi Shou, Drilling and Sparring. It seems to me that many Yong Chun teachers now days gives the practitioner a sharp knife and has them dull it through practice. Instead of giving them a dull rusty blade and teaching them to polish and hone it into something useful. All the old legends say that Yong Chun was created as a means to counter the more traditional Shaolin styles.

It has never been said that it was a beginners method, that Yan Yong Chun never knew any martial arts prior to learning the art or that it was to be a stand alone method. I believe that it was created to be a method of refining and elevating the traditional arts that were based upon Shuai Jiao and Qin Na theory. For me Yong Chun is a theory not an art. An art requires adherence to the dogma the instructor preaches, theory is free to be applied through experimentation to see if it "Holds Water". Something to ponder.


----------



## dlcox (Mar 13, 2015)

KPM said:


> ---Then they are an outdated textbook of techniques that seldom show up when sparring or fighting under real pressure.


 
Movements in forms are extremely ambiguous. Without a functional working knowledge of the styles theories, methodology and principles much can be misconstrued. As Joy stated on his thread, many in Yong Chun did not learn for a very long time. Many do not have an intimate knowledge of practical theoretical approach and this has led to hypothesizing about what a movement actually represents. I have seen outlandish interpretations of movements in many arts. This has led many to think that the art in question is not functional, when in fact it is most likely the teacher that doesn't have a clue. Arts like boxing and wrestling "Work" because their applications are primarily based upon GMS that is refined through work, in essence the application doesn't change it varies based upon knowledge gained through experience. There are three things that bother me with classical martial arts; one is the addition of superfluous movements that add no element of combat efficiency, simply for the sake of aesthetics. Two is tournament style fighting. Tournament style fighting employed by arts that are not primarily striking based (Many Northern CMA styles are Shuai Jiao Based and many Southern CMA styles are Qin Na based), you are not training to apply the techniques that you are learning because they are not allowed. Three is traditional arts that have an enormous amount of techniques, some have thousands of applications you have to learn in order to progress and there generally isn't any binding element that draws them together in a cohesive and understandable manner. We have long and "Fancy" forms in White Crane but the entire art is based upon 28 core movements, that cover stances, footwork, kicks, bridges, parries, punches and Yuan Gong our binding element that joins it all together. Our applications are based upon the Yuan Gong as applied to the basic movements, no need to learn thousands of techniques just 28, from which infinite combinations and applications can be derived. But in order to unlock it all you have to have a good understanding of structure, mechanics and principles of Ti, Da, Shuai and Na. This takes time and work, also known as "Gong Fu".


----------



## KPM (Mar 13, 2015)

* To me Yong Chun is a very specific art meant to deal with very specific conditions and environments. That is why I believe it is an advanced art meant to be a supplement to an art that is more GMS based. Ideally you want to be able to defend yourself with Combined Motor Skill (CMS). This is a realistic approach, this is where Boxing and Wrestling lie and why they are so effective, they are firmly based in the CMS realm and start with GMS. Yong Chun starts with FMS (Xiao Lian Tou Quan) and works its way backwards to a more GMS realm with Biao Zhi Quan, small movement to large movement. This is counterproductive in terms of learning biomechanic application. The art of White Crane that I do has many theories and techniques similar to Yong Chun, but they are not introduced until the end. We start off with big movements and large circles then gradually refine them to little movements and small circles. To me this is where Yong Chun shines as a standard for refinement of structure and mechanics, but it's a theoretical method, it's "Chasing the Taiji". It's  hypothetical, a "This is what it could potentially be" type of thing, not a "This is what it is" type of thing.*

Excellent analysis Dave!  This certainly gives me something to think about!     It occurs to me that Panantukan is set up exactly as you describe.  It starts off with a boxing base....learning gross motor skills to combined motor skills.  Then it adds in the "Filipino-specific" techniques like limb destructions, body manipulations, etc.  These are harder to pull off under pressure because they are more fine motor skills.  But the  base-line you resort back to is the boxing.   As you say, Wing Chun doesn't really teach a gross motor skill baseline to resort back to when the fine motor skills aren't working.  It also occurs to me that Alan Orr is training his guys along this track, whether he thinks of it this  way or not.  He puts a big emphasis on what he calls "glove drills."  He uses big boxing gloves.  Of course, you aren't going to pull off many fine motor skill based techniques while wearing big boxing gloves!  This is going to automatically put you in the realm of working more on gross motor skills.  This is the "Chinese Boxing" arena he talks about.  More of a gross motor skill based thing, with the later refinements coming from the more "classical" Wing Chun training.   Hmmmmmm.......the wheels are turning!  Thanks Dave!


----------



## dlcox (Mar 13, 2015)

KPM said:


> Excellent analysis Dave!  This certainly gives me something to think about!     It occurs to me that Panantukan is set up exactly as you describe.  It starts off with a boxing base....learning gross motor skills to combined motor skills.  Then it adds in the "Filipino-specific" techniques like limb destructions, body manipulations, etc.  These are harder to pull off under pressure because they are more fine motor skills.  But the  base-line you resort back to is the boxing.   As you say, Wing Chun doesn't really teach a gross motor skill baseline to resort back to when the fine motor skills aren't working.  It also occurs to me that Alan Orr is training his guys along this track, whether he thinks of it this  way or not.  He puts a big emphasis on what he calls "glove drills."  He uses big boxing gloves.  Of course, you aren't going to pull off many fine motor skill based techniques while wearing big boxing gloves!  This is going to automatically put you in the realm of working more on gross motor skills.  This is the "Chinese Boxing" arena he talks about.  More of a gross motor skill based thing, with the later refinements coming from the more "classical" Wing Chun training.   Hmmmmmm.......the wheels are turning!  Thanks Dave!



What???? You telling me after all this time that I finally got through your thick head? 

All joking aside, I'm glad you now see it from my perspective. I struggled with this aspect for years until I had my eureka moment. Chinese Boxing, Dirty Boxing, Panantukan whatever you want to call it, it's all the same concept. Every once in a while we have to re-evaluate what's in the toolbox and decide what is necessary, what is superfluous and what is fundamental to the job at hand. When loosening a nut do we really need 6 tools that essentially do the same job as a wrench but are based upon different mechanics? Or can we just use an all purpose adjustable wrench that can be manipulated to suit our needs? All martial arts require a core base from which to expound upon. I find it interesting that many arts are composed of the same Jibengong regardless of style. The stances, blocks, punches, kicks etc. are all fundamentally the same across the board, their refinement according to the style is what is different. Unfortunately many get lost in the nuances and forget to go back to basics. Root movement is the foundation upon which stylistic theory is built. This is what allows you to focus on effective combat methods, ie; boxing, wrestling, kicking etc. according to the approach of a specific style. Jujutsu's foundation is base positions, Boxing's foundation is punching, Savate's foundation is footwork etc. The root of an art dictates it's function according to Ti, Da, Shuai & Na emphasis. One would not practice Savate to learn Grappling or Boxing to learn Qin Na. Every art has a core GMS that is specific to it's methodology and tactics. Sadly with many arts this has been forgotten. The reasons for this is varied, but what it ultimately comes down to is the understanding of an arts original purpose, not it's assumed or subjective purpose.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 13, 2015)

Form is very important, drilling for the development of using the fundamental form is important, drilling vs a strongly resisting partner is important. Drilling freely vs a strongly resisting opponent who is also counter attacking is important. Drilling for development of different combinations is important, drilling vs a strongly resisting partner using specific combinations is important. All forms of training from Forms, Drills and many types of drills, and applying the moments developed from form and drilling at real time vs another important.
Even those fighting styles that don't have kata or form training still train form. Shadow boxing is all about form and movement. When a boxer works bob and weave drills they are working form and movement.
We all work forms, drills, and applications or should be.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 13, 2015)

KPM said:


> * To me Yong Chun is a very specific art meant to deal with very specific conditions and environments. That is why I believe it is an advanced art meant to be a supplement to an art that is more GMS based. Ideally you want to be able to defend yourself with Combined Motor Skill (CMS). This is a realistic approach, this is where Boxing and Wrestling lie and why they are so effective, they are firmly based in the CMS realm and start with GMS. Yong Chun starts with FMS (Xiao Lian Tou Quan) and works its way backwards to a more GMS realm with Biao Zhi Quan, small movement to large movement. This is counterproductive in terms of learning biomechanic application. The art of White Crane that I do has many theories and techniques similar to Yong Chun, but they are not introduced until the end. We start off with big movements and large circles then gradually refine them to little movements and small circles. To me this is where Yong Chun shines as a standard for refinement of structure and mechanics, but it's a theoretical method, it's "Chasing the Taiji". It's  hypothetical, a "This is what it could potentially be" type of thing, not a "This is what it is" type of thing.*
> 
> Excellent analysis Dave!  This certainly gives me something to think about!     It occurs to me that Panantukan is set up exactly as you describe.  It starts off with a boxing base....learning gross motor skills to combined motor skills.  Then it adds in the "Filipino-specific" techniques like limb destructions, body manipulations, etc.  These are harder to pull off under pressure because they are more fine motor skills.  But the  base-line you resort back to is the boxing.   As you say, Wing Chun doesn't really teach a gross motor skill baseline to resort back to when the fine motor skills aren't working.  It also occurs to me that Alan Orr is training his guys along this track, whether he thinks of it this  way or not.  He puts a big emphasis on what he calls "glove drills."  He uses big boxing gloves.  Of course, you aren't going to pull off many fine motor skill based techniques while wearing big boxing gloves!  This is going to automatically put you in the realm of working more on gross motor skills.  This is the "Chinese Boxing" arena he talks about.  More of a gross motor skill based thing, with the later refinements coming from the more "classical" Wing Chun training.   Hmmmmmm.......the wheels are turning!  Thanks Dave!


A big problem with many in the wc community is the lack of hitting and the incessant desire to trap. Hitting gross motion, trapping fine motor. Hit, hit, hit!! Traps happen because of hitting.It is not hitting is the follow up to trapping.


----------



## geezer (Mar 13, 2015)

dlcox said:


> The root of an art dictates it's function according to Ti, Da, Shuai & Na emphasis...
> 
> Every art has a core GMS that is specific to it's methodology and tactics. Sadly with many arts this has been forgotten...


 
Dave, you and Kieth have made some good points. I personally believe that within basic WC there is a very practical "gross motor skill" core. You know, simple direct strikes, kicks and footwork that can be effecive in fighting. But it's largely ignored in favor of the more subtle finesse movents trained in chi-sau. Unfortunately for the chi-sau wizard, it's that atrotphied basic stuff that will save his backside under pressure when his body is experiencing a full-on adrenaline dump.

My guess is that commercialization and the need to keep students interested and (paying) year after year has contributed to the problem. And then there is the "chasing the taichi" or "supreme ultimate" factor that Dave brought up. So many of us want to believe that if not _magic_ and_ qi _ power, then at least some supreme technical skill will save us from the messy, sweaty, bruising reality of real fist fighting.

Finally, even if you do have a firm grasp of the WC fighting basics, and default to those simple, direct and funtional moves under pressure, I fear that even some of these movements are not so functional against modern styles of fighting. There always needs to be adaptation. This is what Alan Orr seems to be working at with mixed success. To my eye, his own movements still visibly preserve the core of WC. I do not see that so much in the fighters he coaches. It seems his first priority is to train them for success in the ring, and they don't have his years of experience in WC, it doesn't show under the pressure of a bout.

OK, success in the ring must come first. I get that. And, I respect him for his efforts. Perhaps other WC people regardless of lineage, will follow and build on his work. I'd like to see that, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## KPM (Mar 13, 2015)

What???? You telling me after all this time that I finally got through your thick head? 

----My hard head does occassionally develop a soft spot and common sense gets through!  ;-)

 All martial arts require a core base from which to expound upon. I find it interesting that many arts are composed of the same Jibengong regardless of style. The stances, blocks, punches, kicks etc. are all fundamentally the same across the board, their refinement according to the style is what is different. Unfortunately many get lost in the nuances and forget to go back to basics. Root movement is the foundation upon which stylistic theory is built.

---Yes.  I think you have hit on the key point I was missing.  Its simply a matter of reviving that essential Wing Chun core and making it functional.  We need to shape our gross motor skill to that, not to the western boxing response.  We that grew up in western society have that basic boxing movement ingrained in us from watching TV, movies, kids in the neighborhood, etc.  But that wouldn't be true in other parts of the world, and certainly not in China during Wing Chun's formative years.  The "subconscious" default would have been different.

--I'm thinking that its very important to "box" with Wing Chun.  Screw any fancy technique.  Use the basic structure and power base and just "box"!  That's how one is going to make that gross motor skill "default" more Wing Chun-like.  Like Danny said, don't worry about trapping and Chi sau tricks....just hit the guy!  When you can do that reliably, then start working on those fine motor skills that Wing Chun teaches.

---Ok.  I have renewed inspiration to work on my Wing Chun!  That, and the fact that my training partners now that I am home are not ready to give up on Wing Chun!  ;-)


----------



## KPM (Mar 13, 2015)

I personally believe that within basic WC there is a very practical "gross motor skill" core. You know, simple direct strikes, kicks and footwork that can be effecive in fighting. But it's largely ignored in favor of the more subtle finesse movents trained in chi-sau.

---Yes, I think you right Steve.  And I think this is what Alan Orr works on and calls "Chinese Boxing."

My guess is that commercialization and the need to keep students interested and (paying) year after year has contributed to the problem. And then there is the "chasing the taichi" or "supreme ultimate" factor that Dave brought up. So many of us want to believe that if not _magic_ and_ qi _ power, then at least some supreme technical skill will save us from the messy, sweaty, bruising reality of real fist fighting.

---That and the fact that many people that get into martial arts do it as a hobby and a form of exercise.  They don't really want to work hard, and they don't really want to get hit.  So lots of Chi Sau and forms training suits them perfectly!  ;-)


Finally, even if you do have a firm grasp of the WC fighting basics, and default to those simple, direct and funtional moves under pressure, I fear that even some of these movements are not so functional against modern styles of fighting. There always needs to be adaptation. This is what Alan Orr seems to be working at with mixed success.

---I agree.  And some of that adaptation is likely the reason why things sometimes start looking somewhat like western boxing.  We know from FMA that if you really want to be able to defend against a knife you have to know how to use a knife.  I think we are seeing something similar in that if you really want to be able to defend against a good boxer you have to be able to move somewhat like a boxer moves.

To my eye, his own movements still visibly preserve the core of WC. I do not see that so much in the fighters he coaches. It seems his first priority is to train them for success in the ring, and they don't have his years of experience in WC, it doesn't show under the pressure of a bout.

---Again, I would have to agree.  Though some of his long-term students that have been with him for a decade preserve their Wing Chun movement much better.


----------



## geezer (Mar 13, 2015)

Here's a fairly recent video of Alan Orr doing some chi sau/gor sau with a student. It's rough, and sometimes heavy looking compared to the WT approach I train. It also seamlessly goes from a disengaged striking range, through sticking into a clinch, throws and groundwork. "WT" (or in my case VT emerging from a "WT" background) does that too, but as a kid who grew up wrestling, the tie-ups, throws, and groundwork here look more _...real and functional _to me than what I usually see in  the way my group trains. On the other hand, this_ is _how our DTE Eskrima group trains.






I really don't see why this kind of realistic, non compliant approach to chi sau couldn't be integrated into WC training regardless of lineage. Thoughts?


----------



## Danny T (Mar 13, 2015)

geezer said:


> I really don't see why this kind of realistic, non compliant approach to chi sau couldn't be integrated into WC training regardless of lineage. Thoughts?


Where as in my group we don't call this chi sao; we do train in this manner.


----------



## dlcox (Mar 14, 2015)

geezer said:


> I really don't see why this kind of realistic, non compliant approach to chi sau couldn't be integrated into WC training regardless of lineage. Thoughts?



This is very similar to my approach to Chi Shou. More of a "Pummeling" method with more sensitivity than hand fighting. I agree it translates better to realistic approach and leads into more options seamlessly. Aside from the rolling hand platform you'll notice the GMS approach that can then flow into CMS and FMS. I appreciate this approach, but then again many think my Yong Chun is weird and animalistic, so what do I know.


----------



## KPM (Mar 14, 2015)

I really don't see why this kind of realistic, non compliant approach to chi sau couldn't be integrated into WC training regardless of lineage. Thoughts?

---I agree.  I think this is how Chi Sau should be done.  There are no complicated multi-move "Chi Sau tricks" that would only work on another Wing Chun guy.   The rolling only lasts for a short time before transitioning to something else.  Chi Sau "range" is only a snapshot in time in a real exchange.  You see that in this clip.  The Chi Sau here is as much about grappling as it is about striking because that is the range they are in.   As far as this approach integrated into WC regardless of lineage....yeah, it should be!  The problem is that many lineages don't have the body structure to pull this off.  I just can't picture those guys that lean back in their stance with their weight on their heels doing this.  I think many "experts" would get a big surprise if they tried to roll with Alan or one of his better guys.  They would probably complain about  being "muscled" or "too much use of strength" or "not doing real Wing Chun" or some other non-sense.  But they would probably do it from a smashed position on the ground!  ;-)


----------



## KPM (Mar 14, 2015)

Aside from the rolling hand platform you'll notice the GMS approach that can then flow into CMS and FMS.

----I hadn't thought of this way until you started pointing these things out, but yeah......it has something of a baseline GMS approach.  That is likely why some might say it looks "crude" and why you don't see those complicated "Chi Sau tricks."


 I appreciate this approach, but then again many think my Yong Chun is weird and animalistic, so what do I know.

----"Weird and animalistic"?  Man, I really need to see your Wing Chun at some point.  ;-)


----------



## kung fu fighter (Mar 14, 2015)

geezer said:


> Here's a fairly recent video of Alan Orr doing some chi sau/gor sau with a student. It's rough, and sometimes heavy looking compared to the WT approach I train. It also seamlessly goes from a disengaged striking range, through sticking into a clinch, throws and groundwork. "WT" (or in my case VT emerging from a "WT" background) does that too, but as a kid who grew up wrestling, the tie-ups, throws, and groundwork here look more _...real and functional _to me than what I usually see in  the way my group trains. On the other hand, this_ is _how our DTE Eskrima group trains.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First off I think this is one of the most productive threads I've seen on here in a while. and While I agree that GMS is easier to pull off than FMS based on my own real life experiences, where I differ however is the need to incorporate wrestling and boxing techniques which breaks the wing chun center line principles, in my opinion this literally leaves holes in one's game. From my experience my advice is to look into other linages of wing chun, I think you'd be supprised at what you would discover. Kulo Pin sun wing chun for example has tons of GMS, no need to incorporate GMS from other arts like boxing and wrestling. Wck was never intended to address all skill sets of fighting. It was an advance system which could be learnt in a relatively short period of time to overcome other martial artist with many more years of experience and skill sets, which focused on some advance concepts and principles. If mastered, it's centerline principle for example does gives it's practioners a distinctive advantage. I like the saying MMA is the ultimate martial art, wing chun is it's counter, because wing chun is all about preventative medicine or being proactive verses the reactive approach.

Alan is using the WCK chi sao platform to develop his and his students MMA skills almost like a controlled close range sparring session, I find absolutely nothing wrong with that! However what he is doing can just as easily be done using the wrestling "Pummeling"  drill. That being said, I feel the traditional method of doing chi sao is a great tool to explore how the principles and concepts of the wing chun system comes alive under pressure in a controlled environment.  in my opinion chi sao was intended to focus on the development of certain specific wck attributes such as control, timing, the center line concept, feeling open and closed lines, intent, and momentum handling.


----------



## Brian King (Mar 14, 2015)

I do not practice the arts being discussed but have to say that I am enjoying this thread (other than lack of quotes makes following a little more difficult here and there). Hat tip and thank you to all. Very nice discussion, technical, honest, and with the motive of sharing. Thanks again.
Regards
Brian King


----------



## Kwan Sau (Mar 14, 2015)

kung fu fighter said:


> First off I think this is one of the most productive threads I've seen on here in a while



Agreed. Nice discussion fellas!



kung fu fighter said:


> From my experience my advice is to look into other linages of wing chun, I think you'd be supprised at what you would discover. Kulo Pin sun wing chun for example has tons of GMS, no need to incorporate GMS from other arts like boxing and wrestling.



I think most people perceive Duncan Leung's WC is GMS...but his WC has an vast array of san sao drills/hands that quickly ingrain reflexive GMS skill.  In fact, I was reading a blog recently that said something like Duncan's WC is the last vestige of what could be called "primitive wing chun"...   



kung fu fighter said:


> It was an advance system which could be learnt in a relatively short period of time to overcome other martial artist with many more years of experience and skill sets, which focused on some advance concepts and principles.



Nice.


----------



## kung fu fighter (Mar 14, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> I think most people perceive Duncan Leung's WC is GMS...but his WC has an vast array of san sao drills/hands that quickly ingrain reflexive GMS skill.  In fact, I was reading a blog recently that said something like Duncan's WC is the last vestige of what could be called "primitive wing chun"...  Nice.


Agreed!


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2015)

Thank you for the Alan Orr clip, not knowing who he is I had a look on his website and found on the Fight Teams page someone I've known for a long time but had lost contact with so am really pleased to have found him again. It's a interesting thread too, can't add anything but learning which is always good.


----------



## zuti car (Mar 14, 2015)

I am doing chi sao in the same manner as the guy on the clip , full strength , punches in the body are done with half of the strength and no punching in the head , When I use protective gear , then full strength punches in the body and 1\3 strength in the head .


----------



## ShotoNoob (Mar 15, 2015)

KPM said:


> it's important to note that free sparring in nearly any striking style looks like Kickboxing, that's where kickboxing came from.
> 
> ---But why is that?   The answer I have come to is that the biomechanics of boxing/kickboxing is a more natural and instinctive way to move.  You take a classical martial art (be it Wing Chun, Karate, Hung Ga, etc. ), throw it into a sparring situation and you see a version of kickboxing.  If that is what works when fighting, shouldn't THAT be what people are actually training?  Why spend all that time training the "classical" style?


|
When the 1st protagonist said the world was round, everyone said, "you can see it's flat."  So why study science, why change from what everybody's doing.
|
So from your supposition, TMA is bunk if everyone is kickboxing.  Maybe the way to beat the rough, tough kickboxer is WC?

P.S. Wasn't the origin of WC from a diminutive female developing a system to outfight larger, stronger, more aggressive male opponents.  Would Kickboxing lessons have done the trick for her????


----------

