# What is neo-historical Wing Chun?



## shrtstrk1 (Mar 4, 2018)

Hi guys, I've made a new channel to explore the neo-historical model of Wing Chun. Sorry for the poor quality video but it's my first.






I was wondering if there was any interest here in developing a model of WC by translating the historical evidence into modern science and putting it in the world of mixed martial arts, like was done with HEMA.

For historical evidence I'm primarily dependent upon what Hendrik Santos has presented, and I am wondering if anyone is familiar with his research. I'm really interested in discussing how the historical evidence can be used to reconstruct a model of WC, and am interested in making a slack or discord channel if people are interested.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 4, 2018)

shrtstrk1 said:


> Hi guys, I've made a new channel to explore the neo-historical model of Wing Chun. Sorry for the poor quality video but it's my first.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, I read your post, and watched your video.

I'm sorry in advance if what follows this sentence seems harsh.

1: You say the '''lineage model" needs to go, and instead Wing Chun should be standardized. You cite judo and BJJ as arts that are more ''modernized" because they don't have lineages, and that because we can learn from the internet and YouTube as well as visit other schools we shouldn't either.

There are a lot of problems with these claims

-a lineage is simply a progression of people teaching each other. How will anyone learn without being taught?
-Judo and BJJ both have teaching lineages. Where did you get the idea they didn't?
-You can't learn WC or any other martial art off YouTube.
-Who is the authoritive regulatory body that can enforce anyone to adopt whatever it is you are selling?
-There isn't exactly a WC school on every corner.

2: You claim current WC practitioners are universally unaware of it's true history and instead only know legends and fables about it.

-This claim seems a bit ridiculous. What evidence do you have to support it?



3: You claim that knowing the proper history would somehow make the art more effective for mma.

-How? Even if nobody knew a single thing about the history of WC, that wouldn't change it's application.

Frankly, it seems to me like you should YouTube less and actually train WC if you want to understand it.


----------



## KPM (Mar 5, 2018)

shrtstrk1 said:


> Hi guys, I've made a new channel to explore the neo-historical model of Wing Chun. Sorry for the poor quality video but it's my first.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry.  Don't have 14 minutes to listen to your clip.   But I tend to agree with Martial D.   First, what makes you so sure that Hendrik's constructed history is the "true" history of Wing Chun?   Hendrik has made a lot of suppositions and leaps of  faith in "connecting the dots" between various old documents and sources he has used.   Second, modern HEMA has been successful because there ARE historical documents that show what the system originally was like....complete with illustrations and fairly detailed descriptions. Wing Chun has nothing that even comes close to that!  And HEMA has also been successful because it lends itself to tournament play, and because they essentially did the same thing back in the "fechtschule" days. 

A better approach would be to forget about any history from further back than about 100 years or so.   Look at the strong points of Wing Chun and the shared concepts & techniques that are pretty universal across most versions.  Then explore how to functionalize this for modern fighting in competition format.  Explore what actually works a good percentage of the time.  I think what you would come up with is a version of "Wing Chun Boxing."      That would be your "neo" or "modern" version of Wing Chun.


----------



## jlq (Mar 5, 2018)

Mr. Santo's research has led to him concluding a lot of stuff which is far removed from from what these sources can factually support.

It really is a shame that due to the language barrier, it is not possible for most people to actually check those sources and look into the veracity of certain claims and speculation made - and that people believe in rather abstruse theories and conclusions about the history of Wing Chun...

In short, none of the historical manuscripts about Chinese martial arts (General Qi Jiguan's treatise, nor the Kuen Geng Kuen Fa Bei Yao, etc.) have anything particular to do with Wing Chun. There is no real "trace"or link, just a few rather common terms found in Chinese martial arts.

So, whatever material you can find there (the old generals 32 postures and the various techniques illustrated in the Kuen Geng, f.ex.) are not an expression of how Wing Chun was practiced or even supposed to be (the techniques in both of these manuscripts are not a "style", but a collection of moves from many different arts, the authers had practiced or found worthy to be included).

If you want to "reconstruct" those few moves - given that they are very simple and basic - and apply them in an MMA setting, that is fairly easy if you apply the "tripple I-method" as formulated by Mr. Matt Thornton many years ago. 

But if your goal is to "functionalize" Wing Chun, to make it fit for the ring/modern sportive competition, I suggest you work with what we actually know Wing Chun to be, as it was passed on from the times of Leung Zhan.

As far as your term "Consensus Wing Chun" goes, you might have to modify that as well. What different people believe Wing Chun to be is sometimes very far apart...



And no, there is definitely no consensus that Wing Chun must have the three forms, etc. Some branches have one form, some three, some ten and some even twelve!!!


----------



## geezer (Mar 5, 2018)

Was it just me or was that "video" fourteen plus minutes of talk and no visuals -- just audio and blackness? 

And regarding re-creating some supposed "historical WC" why bother when we have many extant lineages and besides, unlike HEMA, the "historical" stuff is too vague and uncertain to work from.
WC is supposed to be efficient and effective. That's easy to work on. The best way to improve WC would be to have more open competitions to test and refine what works regardless of lineage ...not by delving through Hendrick's arcane _theories! _


----------



## jobo (Mar 5, 2018)

I'm not sure its possible to make WC MMA ready, WC is just WRONG, its certainly wrong to fight fast and mobile opponent in MMA, its even more wrong to fight fast and mobile opponents that throw you to the floor and choke you.

there was a thread i remember where the guy was on about wing Chun boxing, which a) looked a lot better and b) looked so unlike wing Chun, that it was hard to say it had anything much in common with it all.

the problem is the fundamentals are wrong, if you change the fundamentals , then its not wing chun any more.

has wing chun always been wrong or could you with a time machine, get a good fighting system, i suspect that it can't always have been so bad or it wouldn't have caught on in the,first place, . But with out the time machine its impossible to ether know or revive from the,dead


----------



## Buka (Mar 5, 2018)

Welcome to MartialTalk, Shrtstrk1. Hope you enjoy it, bro.


----------



## geezer (Mar 6, 2018)

jobo said:


> I'm not sure its possible to make WC MMA ready, WC is just WRONG...
> ...the problem is *the fundamentals are wrong*, if you change the fundamentals , then its not wing chun any more...



Actually, I didn't even know that you knew much about WC, Jobo! ...So the "fundamentals are wrong".  Maybe you have a different idea about what the WC "fundamentals" are than I do?

I think of the_ fundamentals_ as working on efficiency and directness, and in trying to stay relaxed --not opposing force if you can evade, deflect, or best, use it to your advantage. I'd also put _adaptability_ up there on the list. So when I see the varied and adaptive approaches that people like Alan Orr, Mark Phillips, ...our own KPM and others use to express these concepts, I see that as WC. Whether it looks like old photos of Yip Man ....or Donnie Yen in a movie not withstanding.


----------



## jobo (Mar 6, 2018)

geezer said:


> Actually, I didn't even know that you knew much about WC, Jobo! ...So the "fundamentals are wrong".  Maybe you have a different idea about what the WC "fundamentals" are than I do?
> 
> I think of the_ fundamentals_ as working on efficiency and directness, and in trying to stay relaxed --not opposing force if you can evade, deflect, or best, use it to your advantage. I'd also put _adaptability_ up there on the list. So when I see the varied and adaptive approaches that people like Alan Orr, Mark Phillips, ...our own KPM and others use to express these concepts, I see that as WC. Whether it looks like old photos of Yip Man ....or Donnie Yen in a movie not withstanding.


the question was, can you make WC suitable to be competative in MMA, my answer is NO, ITS fundamentaley unsuitable.

is any one,seriously suggesting that it is even remotely possible to turn WC in to an MMA art?


----------



## geezer (Mar 6, 2018)

jobo said:


> ....is anyone, seriously suggesting that it is even remotely possible to turn WC in to an MMA art?



Nope. Not me, anyway.

On the other hand, I've seen _elements_ of WC incorporated into the MMA format, locally by a coach named Martin Torres and abroad by Alan Orr. And you are right, when WC is applied in MMA it doesn't look a lot like old school WC. But that's true for other traditional arts that have contributed to the MMA mix as well.

My real gripe is that I don't like seeing WC put into a "traditional" straightjacket and be told that it has to conform to a narrowly defined _appearance_. That's why I enjoy seeing people work with the material creatively. If what they do is practical and effective, good on them!

BTW I didn't always feel this way. Either I'm growing up ...or more likely, growing senile.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 6, 2018)

jobo said:


> the question was, can you make WC suitable to be competative in MMA, my answer is NO, ITS fundamentaley unsuitable.
> 
> is any one,seriously suggesting that it is even remotely possible to turn WC in to an MMA art?


Wing Chun alone? No.
Boxing is a part of MMA...can Boxing stand alone in MMA, No it can't. BJJ is in MMA...Today can BJJ stand alone in MMA, No it can't. I have guys who fight in MMA having trained in Wing Chun and Wrestling. I have a couple of boxers (16 & over 20 pro fights) who has been training wc with me. They are constantly amazed at how much it has enhanced their inside and clinch prevention game. There is far more to wc than standing with one's arms extended out in front in an old world boxing guard or doing a bunch of cycling vertical punches. It is unfortunate but most of what we see in movies and youtube is beginner and intermediate level wc.


----------



## KPM (Mar 6, 2018)

geezer said:


> Nope. Not me, anyway.
> 
> On the other hand, I've seen _elements_ of WC incorporated into the MMA format, locally by a coach named Martin Torres and abroad by Alan Orr. And you are right, when WC is applied in MMA it doesn't look a lot like old school WC. But that's true for other traditional arts that have contributed to the MMA mix as well.
> 
> ...



I agree Geezer!  With the "elements of Wing Chun" part, not the senile part.     But here is my gripe......when people are clearly "adapting" their Wing Chun or using "elements of Wing Chun" on a boxing base and then claim...."but its just Wing Chun!"   When people start using a boxing high cover and say "no, its pure Wing Chun from the 3rd section of the BJ form!"  When people start throwing roundhouse kicks swinging from the hips and say "this is just momentum handling taught in the BJ form!"  When people start using evasive head movement and bobbing from boxing and say "this isn't boxing, this is just common sense fighting!  Everyone knows you have to move your head!"

My gripe is that people are clearly doing a version of relatively poor "Wing Chun boxing" when put under pressure, but when this is pointed out to them they say...."but real Wing Chun doesn't look like Wing Chun when applied!"

What I'm suggesting is not to put "traditional" Wing Chun in a straightjacket.  What I'm suggesting is that people need to start being honest about what they are doing and admit that what they are doing is a Wing Chun/Boxing hybrid....because this is what works!   When people start admitting that this is an evolution of Wing Chun that is actually occurring, then more people will start actually consciously working on it.  There is room for both "classical" Wing Chun and versions of "Wing Chun Boxing."   And as Jobo pointed out, "classical Wing Chun" is just plain inappropriate and not very successful in a competition setting.

So there!  Rant over!


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 6, 2018)

I like Paul Rackemann’s approach.  He sees it similarly to KPM.  He teaches his students one year of boxing first, then adds on WC.  Boxing is the base.  Some do it at the same time but he found that waiting a year was best. 

There are unfortunately too many robotic WC people out there that just look ridiculous.  My Sifu said after a good year or so, you should lose that rigidness and it becomes your own style.  Guys like Adam Chan, Justin Och and Tony Watts come to mind in terms of making WC look more fluid and dynamic.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 6, 2018)

Danny T said:


> Wing Chun alone? No.


Whenever people wanted to compete in Sanda tournament in Taiwan, they would learn Chinese wrestling just the part that they could catch their opponent's kicking leg and then took them down. If you don't know how to do that, you will miss a lot of opportunity. IMO, WC guys don't train this area enough.


----------



## Danny T (Mar 6, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Whenever people wanted to compete in Sanda tournament in Taiwan, they would learn Chinese wrestling just the part that they could catch their opponent's kicking leg and then took them down. If you don't know how to do that, you will miss a lot of opportunity. IMO, WC guys don't train this area enough.


You are correct in many do not.
I learned a long time ago that catching the opponent's kick was one possible application for the Lau Sao movement.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 6, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> I like Paul Rackemann’s approach.  He sees it similarly to KPM.  He teaches his students one year of boxing first, then adds on WC.  Boxing is the base.  Some do it at the same time but he found that waiting a year was best.
> 
> There are unfortunately too many robotic WC people out there that just look ridiculous.  My Sifu said after a good year or so, you should lose that rigidness and it becomes your own style.  Guys like Adam Chan, Justin Och and Tony Watts come to mind in terms of making WC look more fluid and dynamic.


I actually think boxing basics make a nice base to a lot of arts.


----------



## Trondyne (Aug 24, 2021)

Wing Chun is just waiting for anyone to bother using it in MMA...  The "truth" lol is that because of where WC comes from and how it's trained and several other problems there are just far too many people who can't fight and "train WC"...

This is the first problem: Most people who train Boxing want to box, most people who train BJJ want to roll, MT same, they all *want to fight*....  Most people training WC *do not *want to fight....they want to do, often times really weak drills and forms, often under a really poor teacher who also can't fight, and then hope that somewhere down this path they learned how to fight...

As an example Bruce Lee went to Wing Chun to improve his fighting....  He was already fighting...not hoping to become a fighter later without fighting....

Wing Chun deals with long range, medium range, has straight strikes, curved strikes, elbows and several leg attacks from the inside and a type of clinch fighting....  99.99% of students never get there...

As far as real fighting goes WC can certainly do it if it has a driver...there are some who have done WC in MMA from some WC schools to various degrees....


----------



## geezer (Aug 28, 2021)

Trondyne said:


> Wing Chun is just waiting for anyone to bother using it in MMA...  The "truth" lol is that because of where WC comes from and how it's trained and several other problems there are just far too many people who can't fight and "train WC"...
> 
> This is the first problem: Most people who train Boxing want to box, most people who train BJJ want to roll, MT same, they all *want to fight*....  Most people training WC *do not *want to fight....they want to do, often times really weak drills and forms, often under a really poor teacher who also can't fight, and then hope that somewhere down this path they learned how to fight...
> 
> ...


The WC system certainly has a lot to contribute to a fighter's arsenal. Assuming....

1. You have a group of young, athletic guys that want to fight _and _want to use WC.

2. You have some good coaches who are qualified to train these fighters WC ...and_ all the other stuff _(grappling, long range kicking etc.) that they will also need.

3. You have opportunity for these guys to test out their stuff with a lot of other people from a lot of gyms.

Frankly, I haven't encountered any place where I live where these three conditions are met. Most fighters want to be successful. I mean, who fights to lose, right? As tough as competition is, it's gotta be a lot tougher if you _lose _most of the time. 

As things stand now, a fighter's best chance of getting good _fast_ is to go to a good MMA gym and train hard. That kinda leaves WC out of the picture. Except for a very few guys who are already good and like to experiment with "unconventional approaches" on the side.

Please post back and prove me wrong. After decades in WC, I'd like to see it gain more prominence, but I just don't see that happening.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Aug 28, 2021)

Trondyne said:


> Wing Chun is just waiting for anyone to bother using it in MMA...



Elements of Wing Chun have been part of MMA since before the first UFC event.


----------



## Svarog (Sep 19, 2021)

jlq said:


> It really is a shame that due to the language barrier, it is not possible for most people to actually check those sources and look into the veracity of certain claims and speculation made - and that people believe in rather abstruse theories and conclusions about the history of Wing Chun...


I live in Taiwan and I have checked Hendrik's "original" "kuen kuit" with Chinese language teachers . Their concussion is that "kuen kuit" is written by non native Chinese speaker who speaks modern mainland Chinese.  In short it is a forgery.


----------



## Svarog (Sep 19, 2021)

shrtstrk1 said:


> Hi guys, I've made a new channel to explore the neo-historical model of Wing Chun. Sorry for the poor quality video but it's my first.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are no written documents about wing chun before 1950's. There are maybe few photos from republican period (early 1940's), but those have to be confirmed and properly dated by professionals. No other artefacts connected to wing chun exist.  Those are the facts about wing chun historical evidence. Of course this doesn't mean we don't know anything about  history pf the art but it is far from what is hendrik's story.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Elements of Wing Chun have been part of MMA since before the first UFC event.



Were they present in the first UFC events? The only one I recall was a WC practitioner getting his face turned into hamburger a few seconds after the opening bell.


----------



## geezer (Sep 19, 2021)

Hanzou said:


> Were they present in the first UFC events? The only one I recall was a WC practitioner getting his face turned into hamburger a few seconds after the opening bell.


When he said "elements" I believe he was referring to WC-like techniques or strategies included in certain fighter's arsenals, and was not referring to particular fighters.

I have seen some fighters effectively use techniques that are in the WC arsenal ....but of course these same techniques are also found in many other fighting systems. Personally, I don't know of many fighters who claim to have taken techniques specifically from WC, but then I don't follow MMA closely.

It still seems to me like Boxing, Muay Thai, and BJJ/grappling are still the primary sources for functional MMA. Again, I'm pretty ignorant about this, so feel free to educate me!


----------



## geezer (Sep 19, 2021)

BTW the _face into hamburger_ technique is also not specific to WC. Unfortunately many TMA systems teach that!


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2021)

geezer said:


> When he said "elements" I believe he was referring to WC-like techniques or strategies included in certain fighter's arsenals, and was not referring to particular fighters.
> 
> I have seen some fighters effectively use techniques that are in the WC arsenal ....but of course these same techniques are also found in many other fighting systems. Personally, I don't know of many fighters who claim to have taken techniques specifically from WC, but then I don't follow MMA closely.
> 
> It still seems to me like Boxing, Muay Thai, and BJJ/grappling are still the primary sources for functional MMA. Again, I'm pretty ignorant about this, so feel free to educate me!



That would be the correct assessment.  While I would personally enjoy seeing more systems enter MMA to mix things up a bit, the Kickboxing/BJJ/Wrestling paradigm remains dominant, and I see no indication of it ever changing.

People falsely believe that MMA-oriented folks are hostile towards traditional martial arts like Kung Fu. Quite the opposite really; most of us grew up on Bruce Lee and Kung Fu movies and would LOVE to see an MMA fighter enter the octagon and do some Mantis hooks, Monkey tumbling, or Tiger Claws and find some success. I'd be a very happy man to see someone fight like Donnie Yen in those Ip Man movies. Again, at this point I have my doubts, but I am still hopeful.

In short, get your stuff together and join us on the other side!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2021)

geezer said:


> When he said "elements" I believe he was referring to WC-like techniques or strategies included in certain fighter's arsenals, and was not referring to particular fighters.


I started to train "1 step 3 punches" since I was 11. It was very similar to the WC chain punches.

I first started with 3 straight punches. I then mixed straight punches with circular punches. Later on I realized that I was training principles. After I understood that, the term "style" no longer have any meaning to me.

When I throw jab-hook-uppercut combo, what MA style do I train? Is it important? It's not important.

In the following clip, whether he uses the WC chain punches principle or not is not important. Principle has no style boundary.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 19, 2021)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I started to train "1 step 3 punches" since I was 11. It was very similar to the WC chain punches.
> 
> I first started with 3 straight punches. I then mixed straight punches with circular punches. Later on I realized that I was training principles. After I understood that, the term "style" no longer have any meaning to me.
> 
> ...



The difference is that Vitor can pull it off, and a WC exponent seemingly can't. So wherever Vitor picked this up from (I'm going to guess Boxing), it's safe to assume that's where you should go to properly learn the method.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 19, 2021)

Hanzou said:


> The difference is that Vitor can pull it off, and a WC exponent seemingly can't. So wherever Vitor picked this up from (I'm going to guess Boxing), it's safe to assume that's where you should go to properly learn the method.


From a WC guy's point of view, a fight should look like this.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Sep 19, 2021)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> From a WC guy's point of view



Imaging tying snake and crane and dragon together.

Endless possibilities, you might break a stick and invent a whole new way of fighting.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 19, 2021)

Hanzou said:


> Kickboxing/BJJ/Wrestling paradigm remains dominant, and I see no indication of it ever changing.


This may be the result of the rule set to a certain extent.  Some of the most effective techniques in other arts are not allowed in MMA so those arts are naturally not represented.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 20, 2021)

isshinryuronin said:


> This may be the result of the rule set to a certain extent.  Some of the most effective techniques in other arts are not allowed in MMA so those arts are naturally not represented.



What effective techniques do you feel are omitted? The first few UFCs only had rules against biting, and BJJ, Kickboxing and wrestling still dominated it.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Sep 20, 2021)

Hanzou said:


> Were they present in the first UFC events?


Yes.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 20, 2021)

Oily Dragon said:


> Yes.



Where?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Sep 20, 2021)

Hanzou said:


> Where?


All over the place.


----------

