# Internal, grappling in Wing Chun



## Katsu Jin Ken (Sep 10, 2004)

have a couple questions actually.

First, do any of your schools have grappling incoorperated into Wing Chun?  If so could you give some examples. 

Also, does schools try to incoorperate some of the more internal MA type of things into your Wing chun training?

thanks in advance,


----------



## ed-swckf (Sep 10, 2004)

Katsu Jin Ken said:
			
		

> have a couple questions actually.
> 
> First, do any of your schools have grappling incoorperated into Wing Chun? If so could you give some examples.
> 
> ...


mine don't involve grappling but we do wing chun on the floor, i do a bit of grappling external to the club.

we touch on a few different aspects of internal kung fu we also use auto suggestion.


----------



## spatulahunter (Sep 11, 2004)

at our school we will take a lock if it is there and convenient but we do not search for locks like a jujutsu practitioner would


----------



## Katsu Jin Ken (Sep 11, 2004)

thats how we are at my school also Spat, "locking, seizing, controlling, striking, countering, taking down,.............all indictations of good flow" 

also, "if its their take it, if its not, move on"

i dunno who said them.


----------



## Hung Fa Moose (Sep 11, 2004)

At my school, both grappling and anti-takedowns are taught making use of the earth line of wing chun. We learn how to stay on our feet against grapplers shooting for our waists or legs, as well as how to get out of headlocks, chokes, bear hug and the like.


We also incorporate internal chi gung development and cultivation into our training through exercises such as jaam Jong (Standing Structure) and some forms, such as Fa Kuen and Sup Yuht Kuen. 


Steve


----------



## arnisador (Dec 5, 2005)

Speaking of internal...the first form in Wing Chun strongly reminds me of Goju-ryu's Tensho kata, which is the softer (more internal) counterpart of Sanchin. Does anyone know if there is a connection?


----------



## Jan sing sang (Dec 11, 2005)

> Katsu Jin Ken wrote:
> *mine don't involve grappling but we do wing chun on the floor*


 
Could you explain how exactly you train your wing chun for use on the floor? Maybe you could describe one situation in which this could be seen?

thanx,


----------



## ed-swckf (Dec 11, 2005)

Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> Could you explain how exactly you train your wing chun for use on the floor? Maybe you could describe one situation in which this could be seen?
> 
> thanx,


 
You somehow quoted the wrong person there!!  But anyway, if you understand wing chun to be a concept and principles martial art there are many ways for you to use it on the floor.  You can use all the contact reflexes from contact as trained in chi sau, for example if someone is on top of you and striking down you use your arms to make contact, you can use your back/shoulders as a base to turn on for evasion.  Thats one scenario, the truth is you really don't want to go down but if you train for worst case everything else seems much easier.  Basically the priciple is simple and is very similar to wing chun on your feet.


----------



## Jan sing sang (Dec 11, 2005)

> ed-swckf wrote:
> *You somehow quoted the wrong person there!!*


 
Yeah, sorry for that. My bed. (I actually almost did it again )

I understand what you are trying to say. I agree that you can apply the principles and concepts and have use of the things you have learnt through wing chun on ground fighting but only to a certain degree. I still think that once you end up on the floor it is not really wing chun anymore beacuse wing chun relays on it's structure which can not be maintained if you are for example on your back.


----------



## ed-swckf (Dec 11, 2005)

Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> Yeah, sorry for that. My bed. (I actually almost did it again )
> 
> I understand what you are trying to say. I agree that you can apply the principles and concepts and have use of the things you have learnt through wing chun on ground fighting but only to a certain degree. I still think that once you end up on the floor it is not really wing chun anymore beacuse wing chun relays on it's structure which can not be maintained if you are for example on your back.


 
Nah, its still wing chun if i bong sau and lap sau an incomming attack weather i'm stood up or stood on my head.  Bui tze is a form that is used when you have failed to maintain your structure, yet all the techniques applied within are wing chun techniques, but by the logic you employ they aren't wing chun as structure has been lost.  Wing chun would ideally love you to continually have complete control over your structure at all times during an altercation but the simple fact is its not a very likely thing to train for, hence the idea of the bui tze form for emergency techniques.  

You can still incorperate a lot of wing chun structure on the floor and a good understanding of triangulation will help with that, a lot of schools will at times play with chi sau whilst being sat down, this looses the footwork but its still valid.  I mean if you are caught wrong footed or off balance when you initiate your attack/defence is that still not wing chun?  If its only wing chun when it is picture perfect to forms then wing chun would become a rather less practical form of self defence.


----------



## Jan sing sang (Dec 11, 2005)

> ed-swckf wrote:
> *Bui tze is a form that is used when you have failed to maintain your structure, yet all the techniques applied within are wing chun techniques, but by the logic you employ they aren't wing chun as structure has been lost.*


 
This is not what I meant. Biu tze (among other things) teaches you some tehniques that work only in some specific situations when you have lost your structure but some other non BT tehniques that would work in "normal" situations would not work in this other situations when the structure is lost. Of course biu tze techniques are wing chun beacuse they take in to consideration this specific situations and deal with them in the best posibble way (I dont know Biu tze so I really would not go into details). What I meant is that in order for wing chun tehnuiques to work they need to have the neccesary structure behind it. (same thing applys to biu tze techniques even dough the neccesary structure in that situation may not be the same as it is for let's say SLT tehniques). It is this structure that makes possible that we can redirect the incoming force if it is stronger than ours. If it works only beacuse I am stronger than my opponent than it is INMHO not wing chun. I basicly think that wing chun technuiques as they are applyed standing up could not be used while on the ground. It depends on the point of view will you consider something wing chun or not. We could say that it is, beacuse you are using things that are a part of wing chun system and on the other hand we could say they aren't beacuse they can not work in the same way as they would standing up (or we could say as they were intended to work). I agree you can have much use of the skills you gained by wing chun training such as sensitivity in your arms and strong punches from short distance, if you end up on the ground. 
I am not sure if I managed to succesfully wrote what I'm trying to say. Please take in to consideration that english is not my mothertongue so I have some troubles expresing my thoughts.



> ed-swckf wrote:
> *You can still incorperate a lot of wing chun structure on the floor and a good understanding of triangulation will help with that*


 
Could you please explain what you mean under triangulation?

thanx,


----------



## ed-swckf (Dec 11, 2005)

Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> This is not what I meant. Biu tze (among other things) teaches you some tehniques that work only in some specific situations when you have lost your structure but some other non BT tehniques that would work in "normal" situations would not work in this other situations when the structure is lost.


 
Bui tze teaches you some techniques that don't rely on the structure you mentioned initially.  If you can use wing chun techniques and wing chun principles on your back how exactly is it not wing chun?




			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> Of course biu tze techniques are wing chun beacuse they take in to consideration this specific situations and deal with them in the best posibble way (I dont know Biu tze so I really would not go into details).


 
Yes they are wing chun but they don't rely on the same structure as wing chun would optimumly work with.  Its recovery from mistakes, if you made a mistake and end up on the floor and use wing chun techniques and principles to recover and protect yourself how is that not wing chun?




			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> What I meant is that in order for wing chun tehnuiques to work they need to have the neccesary structure behind it. (same thing applys to biu tze techniques even dough the neccesary structure in that situation may not be the same as it is for let's say SLT tehniques). It is this structure that makes possible that we can redirect the incoming force if it is stronger than ours.


 
And why can you not have that structure when laying on your back, you have contact with the floor, what makes you think redirecting force is not possible on the floor?




			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> If it works only beacuse I am stronger than my opponent than it is INMHO not wing chun. I basicly think that wing chun technuiques as they are applyed standing up could not be used while on the ground.


 
Who said anything about you needing to be stronger to make it work, i'm slim 5'7" and train with some big guys and i can utilise wing chun on the floor against these big strong guys without relying on strength.  So are you logically saying what i am suggesting is wing chun as it doesn't rely upon my being stronger than the opponent.  And why do you think that wing chun techniques could not be used on the ground?  What qualifys that?



			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> It depends on the point of view will you consider something wing chun or not. We could say that it is, beacuse you are using things that are a part of wing chun system and on the other hand we could say they aren't beacuse they can not work in the same way as they would standing up (or we could say as they were intended to work).


 
The thing is its not just techniques that are being used on the floor it is the underlying concepts and principles of wing chun that are applied and that make wing chun work on the floor.  Throwing a simple shape up such as bong sau or tan sau is a very small part of it, its being able to understand the principles behind each technique and utilise that under rather realistic conditions.  Things are not going to work in the same way you trained them in a real situation, there will be differences, and what you do may not look anything like what you have ever trained before but in principle it is wing chun, the techniques aren't as important as the principles you train.  And this is what is used to make wing chun work, on the floor or in any other situation when you need to defend yourself.




			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> I agree you can have much use of the skills you gained by wing chun training such as sensitivity in your arms and strong punches from short distance, if you end up on the ground.
> I am not sure if I managed to succesfully wrote what I'm trying to say. Please take in to consideration that english is not my mothertongue so I have some troubles expresing my thoughts.


 
These skills are aided by the principles behind them which can transcend onto the floor if needs be, hopefully they never need to be used at all.  Your English is good but i don't agree with what you have said, it could be a case of misinterpretation via language barriers but i sincearly hope you take what i have said and thing it through.





			
				Jan sing sang said:
			
		

> Could you please explain what you mean under triangulation?
> 
> thanx,


 
Triangulation is a large subject in wing chun, one that should start to be covered from day one, do you study wing chun?  If so i feel you should havce a grasp over some of the fundamentals if not i can illustrate it in basic terms?


----------



## Jan sing sang (Dec 15, 2005)

> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *Bui tze teaches you some techniques that don't rely on the structure you mentioned initially.*


 
Yes, but they still rely on some structure and this structure is taken into consideration. If there would be no structure behind the motion the technique just wouldnt work. Do you agree?



> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *If you can use wing chun techniques and wing chun principles on your back how exactly is it not wing chun?*


 
The real question is if you can use it or not. I always start from a position that the opponent is much stronger than me. If it can work under that condition than it's wing chun. You say it works for you so i guess it works. I found that certain aspects of wing chun helps when you are on the floor but my wing chun can not work in the same way and with the same idea as it does while I'am on my feet. I suppose it could be from my lack of knowledge or skill so untill i finish the whole system i'll stay openminded considering this topic. 



> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *Yes they are wing chun but they don't rely on the same structure as wing chun would optimumly work with.*


 
Yup.That's the egzact thing i said in my earlier post. 



> Originally Posted by me
> *in order for wing chun tehnuiques to work they need to have the neccesary structure behind it. (same thing applys to biu tze techniques even dough the neccesary structure in that situation may not be the same as it is for let's say SLT tehniques).*


 


> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *Its recovery from mistakes, if you made a mistake and end up on the floor and use wing chun techniques and principles to recover and protect yourself how is that not wing chun?*


 
Again, if it works if the opponent is stronger, it's wing chun.





> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *And why can you not have that structure when laying on your back, you have contact with the floor, what makes you think redirecting force is not possible on the floor?*


 
Because of the lack of mobility, space and power. Power comes from structure. It means that in order to produce power (or gung) you have to use your body as a whole. Power should come from the ground through the legs. If the force is still to great you can not redirect the force but only your body in relation to the incoming force, you can not do that if you are on the floor. One of the wing chun principles is "if he withdraws i follow, if he advances i withdraw" (in free translation). How can i withdraw if I am lying on my back? 



> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *And why do you think that wing chun techniques could not be used on the ground? What qualifys that?*


 
Answered in short above



> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *Throwing a simple shape up such as bong sau or tan sau is a very small part of it, its being able to understand the principles behind each technique and utilise that under rather realistic conditions. Things are not going to work in the same way you trained them in a real situation, there will be differences, and what you do may not look anything like what you have ever trained before but in principle it is wing chun, the techniques aren't as important as the principles you train.*


 
Training a technique is different than using a technique. Shape of a technique becomes irrevelant in the end. All techniques seamingly look the same even dough in their essence they are different. But still, for one to be able to come to this level he must first train the techniques in the same way as they are presented in the forms. The techniques without principles are nothing, the principles without the techniques are nothing. 



> Originally Posted by ed-swckf
> *Triangulation is a large subject in wing chun, one that should start to be covered from day one, do you study wing chun? If so i feel you should havce a grasp over some of the fundamentals if not i can illustrate it in basic terms?*


 
To me triangulation is just a word in foreign language who's meaning i do not understand.  I would be thankfull if you could illustrate it in some basic terms so I'll know what you are talking about. If it is a fundamental part of wing chun i should know something about it beacuse i do train wing chun even dough probably not as long as you. You have finished the biu tze? Can i ask how long are you training wing chun? 

thanxs


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 15, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Speaking of internal...the first form in Wing Chun strongly reminds me of Goju-ryu's Tensho kata, which is the softer (more internal) counterpart of Sanchin. Does anyone know if there is a connection?


 

Of course  southern chinese arts>>>> okinawa.
Or to be more specific southern white crane  heavy influence on okinawan arts. Sanchin is derived from the southern chinese arts that share similiarities in theory and practice although not exactly the same.
Look at bai mei, southern mantis and wing chun and the sanchin stance, and also some of the movements. I dont have the time to get detailed but with minimal effort you can find the connections.


----------



## arnisador (Dec 15, 2005)

Yes, but I was looking for something that more specifically connected a Chinese version of Tensho to Wing Chun.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Dec 16, 2005)

In my opinion grappling has no place in Wing chun, and there is already internal training in Wing chun, from the very start.


----------



## 7starmantis (Dec 16, 2005)

bcbernam777 said:
			
		

> In my opinion grappling has no place in Wing chun, and there is already internal training in Wing chun, from the very start.



In this sense, what is the Wing Chun practitioners weapon if found on the ground with a grappler? 

7sm


----------



## ed-swckf (Dec 16, 2005)

bcbernam777 said:
			
		

> In my opinion grappling has no place in Wing chun, and there is already internal training in Wing chun, from the very start.


 
In the sense of grappling like BJJ and arts that share similaritys, i would agree, it has no place in the teaching of wing chun.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Dec 17, 2005)

7starmantis said:
			
		

> In this sense, what is the Wing Chun practitioners weapon if found on the ground with a grappler?
> 
> 7sm



*THE REASONS WHY WE CAN AVOIND GOING TO GROUND

*If trained properly the Wing Chun practicioner does not go to the ground, I think I have posted the reasons why before, but basicaly for the following reasons we dont have to end up on the ground:

A) firstly the Wing Chun practicioner developes a well developed root, this being the Sui Lum Tao energy, the problem is that a lot of Wing Chun Schools simply do not develop their students in this aspect of Wing Chun, in so doing they rob their students on what is realisticly the essence of its effectiveness, 

B) the other reasons they shouldn't go to the ground is quite simple, they move, I dont know why it is but so many students have no real world footwork, their feet are dead, they have no conception of fighting distance, or timing, or of the basic principals of true mobilolty in a real world situation

C) another aspect is the rotational power of the Chum Kui, I have had people try to tackle me before, and utilised the rotation of the Chum Kui, they always without exemption would shoot out the other direction, it was a fundamental case of using their force against them. 

Now a couple of practical reasons why you would not want to go to the ground:

A) if you go rolling around the ground with someone you can end up with a nasty supries in your back, e.g. broken glass etc, or you could end up rolling around on some nasty terrain, bitchamun, concrete, rocks etc, etc.

B) If you do go to the ground you have no idea if the oponant has a couple of mates waiting around the corner, in that case you definitly dont want to go to the ground.
*
IF YOU DO GO TO THE GROUND

*The goal of Wing Chu is to not go to the ground, but if you do end up on the ground then you can still utilise enough of the principles in Wing Chun, even on the ground, to get you out of trouble, and get you back on your feet, you can still utilise the proper structure, the use of the centreline, the CK and BJ energy, the elbow line, etc etc to regain control, even on the ground.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 23, 2005)

bcbernam777 I feek you make a few contradictions here.



> If trained properly the Wing Chun practicioner does not go to the ground, I think I have posted the reasons why before, but basicaly for the following reasons we dont have to end up on the ground:


 Are you saying only improperly trained WC practitioners will ever go to the ground or be taken to the ground? That is liken to only improperly trained drivers will ever get into an vehicle accident. Honestly now, you dont really believe this do you? First you state does not go to the ground, then you explain why we dont have to end up on the ground. There is a large difference between Does not go to the ground and we dont have to end up on the ground.





> A) firstly the Wing Chun practicioner developes a well developed root, this being the Sui Lum Tao energy, the problem is that a lot of Wing Chun Schools simply do not develop their students in this aspect of Wing Chun, in so doing they rob their students on what is realisticly the essence of its effectiveness,


 This I agree with however, this still will not stop the practitioner from never ever go to the ground. So what happens if you do go to the ground? What do you call it? Laying on your back or sitting on your opponent WC? I happen to call it grappling because it denotes the range of combat we are in whether standing or on the ground.

You can certainly utilize WC in all grappling situations just as you can in a standing grappling situation. It can be called whatever you wish it is still grappling or maybe we could agree to call ground chin na, the art of seizing or grasping the opponent.





> B) the other reasons they shouldn't go to the ground is quite simple, they move, I dont know why it is but so many students have no real world footwork, their feet are dead, they have no conception of fighting distance, or timing, or of the basic principals of true mobilolty in a real world situation


 Now you say shouldnt go to the ground, before you stated, does not go to the ground. Which is it?
And yes mobility is a great deterrent to being taken down however it isnt 100% failsafe.




> C) another aspect is the rotational power of the Chum Kui, I have had people try to tackle me before, and utilised the rotation of the Chum Kui, they always without exemption would shoot out the other direction, it was a fundamental case of using their force against them.


 Again, I agree this is a very good move which is use in many other arts as well as WC but isnt foolproof. Even great athletes get tackled in football and rugby. We accept that as a part of the game. They work very hard at not getting caught or tackled but it still happens. I dont believe the average WC practitioner has any more ability than them. So there is a strong possibility of being taken down also.




> Now a couple of practical reasons why you would not want to go to the ground:
> 
> A) if you go rolling around the ground with someone you can end up with a nasty supries in your back, e.g. broken glass etc, or you could end up rolling around on some nasty terrain, bitchamun, concrete, rocks etc, etc.
> 
> B) If you do go to the ground you have no idea if the oponant has a couple of mates waiting around the corner, in that case you definitly dont want to go to the ground.


 This I also agree with, I dont want to go to the ground, but this still contradicts your previous statement of the properly trained WC practitioner does not go to the ground.





> The goal of Wing Chu is to not go to the ground, but if you do end up on the ground then you can still utilise enough of the principles in Wing Chun, even on the ground, to get you out of trouble, and get you back on your feet, you can still utilise the proper structure, the use of the centreline, the CK and BJ energy, the elbow line, etc etc to regain control, even on the ground.


 Ahh, now the goal is not to go to the ground. Again a contradiction of the statement,  WC practitioner does not go to the ground. I agree that you can utilize many WC principles on the ground and should be able to once properly trained in doing so in that environment. The principles of WC can be utilized in all aspects and arenas of combat. But if the practitioner isnt familiar with that aspect then they will have a difficult time performing there. 

I have had the pleasure of training in WC for almost 2 decades. I have utilized it standing, kneeling, with weapons, and on my back. Now Im not the greatest or even close to be a great martial artist so maybe it takes more training on my part but being able to use the WC principles in a ground position took me quite some time to become proficient at it. As to a WC practitioner not going to the ground, you have never really worked against a non stopping opponent of equal ability then. It is easy to sidestep and redirect an attackers energy, 
1. when you know it is coming and then they stop, not continuing the attack
2. they are only committed partially to attacking you.
3. they are not as advanced as you or are considerable weaker than you.

Take someone with the same training as you and have them attack you fully committed to taking you to the ground once they are able to. I believe you or any other practitioner will have their hands full in not going to the ground. Now this not to say I want to go to the ground for I dont and do a lot of training to prevent it if possible. But, I am also realistic and acknowledge want can happen and am willing to training for that possibility. WC is a great system for learning about yourself, your body and how to use is all distances of fighting. I am certain you train from long distance (no contact) to bridging to very close right up to the point of the opponent or you being able to grasp the other. I'm also certain you work takedowns on the opponent, what happens if you are takendown? You must train in that environment for it is different.

Danny Terrell


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 23, 2005)

I see this has become a UFC thread or I have jsut turned it into one. LOL

Anyway
1- alot MORE people now focus on fighting on the ground and taking people to the ground ( not necessarily a good thing) but its been getting great hype for years now
2- I THINK that if you have moderate to minimal training in ground fighting against someone with no experience you have a good advantage whereas if you have some standup training ( in punching/ striking) you have a greater chance  still losing to an inexperienced person.
3- Bottom line is wing chun like MOST systems are based on taking out your oppenent b4 it goes tothe ground. In a fight anything can happen.
4- Often by the time a fight "goes " to the ground one person isnt fighting anymore they are just taking a beating, not being submitted
5- If you are half unconscious by the time you hit the ground it may not matter much what you know if you cant execute it
6- If you want to grapple learn bjj, sombo, or judo - always try to go to the experts


----------



## Danny T (Dec 25, 2005)

> I see this has become a UFC thread or I have jsut turned it into one. LOL


 No I dont believe so. Getting taken to or falling to the ground is simply something that happens in fighting. If not in a sport environment where the referee stops the action and the participants stand up again then the fighter must learn to use his/her abilities on the ground. That is all I am saying. UFC has nothing to do with it. Having the principles and being able to apply them in one environment doesn't mean you can automatically apply them and execute the applications properly in another.



> Anyway
> 1- alot MORE people now focus on fighting on the ground and taking people to the ground ( not necessarily a good thing) but its been getting great hype for years now.


True but still important to get on the ground and experience it.





> 2- I THINK that if you have moderate to minimal training in ground fighting against someone with no experience you have a good advantage whereas if you have some standup training ( in punching/ striking) you have a greater chance still losing to an inexperienced person.


Murphys law; What can go wrong will go wrong is always in effect. I dont care how good you are, strange things happen in combat.





> 3- Bottom line is wing chun like MOST systems are based on taking out your oppenent b4 it goes tothe ground. In a fight anything can happen.


 True also BUT, as you state; in a fight anything can happen. So do you dismiss it and give lip service to your training or do you acknowledge it and train for that possibility.





> 4- Often by the time a fight "goes " to the ground one person isnt fighting anymore they are just taking a beating, not being submitted


 And if this is you do just take the beating, get hurt seriously, maybe die or do you fight back. Learning to fight on the ground isnt about submitting. Submission fighting is about submitting.





> 5- If you are half unconscious by the time you hit the ground it may not matter much what you know if you cant execute it


Again true however, do you just let the other person take your life? Or do you train for the possibility of getting knocked silly and fight through it. If you are knocked out you are in grave danger. The same for stand up fighting. With that as a guide why learn stand up. It wont help you if you get caught and are knocked down or thrown down.





> 6- If you want to grapple learn bjj, sombo, or judo - always try to go to the experts


If you want to learn BJJ or Sombo, or Judo then by all means go to them and learn. However if you want to learn to use your skills on the ground you must get on the ground and learn to use them. That said you must learn to use them against someone who is trying to keep you down and prevent you from getting up again. You must use your skills against someone who really works to tackle you or take you down and keeps you down.. You do not have to learn the whole BJJ grappling game but you had better get on the ground and experience what you can do before being there and realizing functioning in that environment is different than being on your feet.

Danny


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 25, 2005)

Danny T said:
			
		

> No I don&#8217;t believe so. Getting taken to or falling to the ground is simply something that happens in fighting. If not in a sport environment where the referee stops the action and the participants stand up again then the fighter must learn to use his/her abilities on the ground. That is all I am saying. UFC has nothing to do with it. Having the principles and being able to apply them in one environment doesn't mean you can automatically apply them and execute the applications properly in another.
> 
> True but still important to get on the ground and experience it.
> #When I say UFC its a general term since the ufc helped create a big boost for mma and ground fighting
> ...


 
b


----------



## Danny T (Dec 26, 2005)

brothershaw said:
			
		

> You for the most part agreed with what I said although not quite how I said it.


 
Yes, I agree for the most part. Many people are into ground work because it is what is happening. Others are against it because it is what is happening.

I am into it simply 'because' it happens. It happens in reality and that is what I was stating. I don't care how good you are staying on your feet if you fight enough you will eventually find yourself on the ground. I also don't feel one needs to necessarily training in a known 'ground art' to learn to survive on the ground. Especially if one is already proficient in another art which trains the practitioner to feel and use their body, such as Wing Chun. What one needs to do is get on the ground and train against someone trying to prevent them from getting up. Can you learn faster by training within a ground art. Certainly, but you don't have to train their way to learn to survive on the ground. Just as you don't need to train under any one art or a particular system to learn to be a good stand up fighter. What you have to do is train in that type of environment and in a similar way a real opponent would be trying to fight you. If it is on the ground I don't care if it is BJJ, Sombo, catch as catch can, or whatever. The human body is the human body. Some training systems expound certain aspects of fighting and not others even if the principles can be applied in all of them. 

All I was stating was, in order to be a proficient fighter on the ground, even if you know the principles of fighting standing up, you must get on the ground and use the principles there against a resisting person. I say the same for weapons work. You want to be proficient against weapons you must train against an opponent trying to attack you in the manner someone would actually attack if they had that weapon. We do it for stand up empty hand but refuse to challenge ourselves in other environments. 

Ever try fighting with roller skates? It's not exactly the same as being on ice but sure makes shifting your weight around and power punching different. Ever try fighting on sand, in the water, under the water, in a boat in waves, in a strong wind, on gravel, in mud, in the dark, in the woods, in a jungle, on rocky terrain, or whatever? It all changes what you do and how you do it. What works well in the gym on a nice hardwood or matted floor is quite different in the real world. You want to be proficient in the environment you are in? Then train there and in the manner you would actually have to fight if that were reality. Don't pin your life on principles you haven't used or proven yourself. Just because the principles are there doesn't mean you can use them in real time applications.

Danny.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Dec 29, 2005)

bcbernam777 I feek you make a few contradictions here.

Quote: 
If trained properly the Wing Chun practicioner does not go to the ground, I think I have posted the reasons why before, but basicaly for the following reasons we dont have to end up on the ground: 

Are you saying only improperly trained WC practitioners will ever go to the ground or be taken to the ground? That is liken to only improperly trained drivers will ever get into an vehicle accident. Honestly now, you dont really believe this do you? First you state does not go to the ground, then you explain why we dont "have" to end up on the ground. There is a large difference between "Does not go to the ground" and "we dont have to end up on the ground.

*You need to add in the words "the goal of Wing Chun is not to go to the ground" with all due respect please quote me in context, and no i am not saying only improperly trained WC practicioners will ever go to the ground, but let me say this, you would be hard pressed to find a Wing Chun practioner who has been training properly for 20 plus years who could be taken to the ground, the zenith of Wing Chun is to not be taken to the ground, we reach for perfection through our training.*



Quote: 
A) firstly the Wing Chun practicioner developes a well developed root, this being the Sui Lum Tao energy, the problem is that a lot of Wing Chun Schools simply do not develop their students in this aspect of Wing Chun, in so doing they rob their students on what is realisticly the essence of its effectiveness, 

This I agree with however, this still will not stop the practitioner from never ever go to the ground. So what happens if you do go to the ground? What do you call it? Laying on your back or sitting on your opponent WC? I happen to call it grappling because it denotes the range of combat we are in whether standing or on the ground.

You can certainly utilize WC in all grappling situations just as you can in a standing grappling situation. It can be called whatever you wish it is still grappling or maybe we could agree to call ground chin na, the art of seizing or grasping the opponent.


*No this energy alone will not which is why you need to combine it with the other energies of the Chum kui and the Bui Jee. I have yet to find someone who can take me to ground onn a one on one situation, the dynamics may change in a multiple oponannt situation, so this is something I must as a practioner facotr into my training. Yes as I said towards the end if yu do go to the ground then Wing Chun does contain answers to the problem, however this should only ever be the exception rather than the rule.
*

Quote: 
B) the other reasons they shouldn't go to the ground is quite simple, they move, I dont know why it is but so many students have no real world footwork, their feet are dead, they have no conception of fighting distance, or timing, or of the basic principals of true mobilolty in a real world situation 

Now you say "shouldnt go to the ground", before you stated, "does not go to the ground". Which is it?
And yes mobility is a great deterrent to being taken down however it isnt 100% failsafe.

*The "art" doesnt go to the ground, the practioner shouldn't go to the ground by being in harmony with the art. It is if properly combined with timing, an understanding of the proper fighting distance, a full range of mobility options, reaction, and total sensory perception, again it cimes down to training.
*

Quote: 

C) another aspect is the rotational power of the Chum Kui, I have had people try to tackle me before, and utilised the rotation of the Chum Kui, they always without exemption would shoot out the other direction, it was a fundamental case of using their force against them. 

Again, I agree this is a very good move which is use in many other arts as well as WC but isnt foolproof. Even great athletes get tackled in football and rugby. We accept that as a part of the game. They work very hard at not getting caught or tackled but it still happens. I dont believe the average WC practitioner has any more ability than them. So there is a strong possibility of being taken down also.

 
*the key word you used was "*average" *the reason why Bruce was such a superb Martial artist was not by natural ability but because he pushed himself beyond the "average" bounds
*
Quote: 
Now a couple of practical reasons why you would not want to go to the ground: 

A) if you go rolling around the ground with someone you can end up with a nasty supries in your back, e.g. broken glass etc, or you could end up rolling around on some nasty terrain, bitchamun, concrete, rocks etc, etc.

B) If you do go to the ground you have no idea if the oponant has a couple of mates waiting around the corner, in that case you definitly dont want to go to the ground. 

This I also agree with, I dont want to go to the ground, but this still contradicts your previous statement of "the properly trained WC practitioner does not go to the ground.

*Doesn't = Art; Shouldn't = Practioner*

Quote: 
The goal of Wing Chu is to not go to the ground, but if you do end up on the ground then you can still utilise enough of the principles in Wing Chun, even on the ground, to get you out of trouble, and get you back on your feet, you can still utilise the proper structure, the use of the centreline, the CK and BJ energy, the elbow line, etc etc to regain control, even on the ground. 

Ahh, now the "goal" is not to go to the ground. Again a contradiction of the statement, " WC practitioner does not go to the ground. I agree that you can utilize many WC principles on the ground and should be able to once properly trained in doing so in that environment. The principles of WC can be utilized in all aspects and arenas of combat. But if the practitioner isnt familiar with that aspect then they will have a difficult time performing there. 

*Then they need to train*

I have had the pleasure of training in WC for almost 2 decades. I have utilized it standing, kneeling, with weapons, and on my back. Now Im not the greatest or even close to be a great martial artist so maybe it takes more training on my part but being able to use the WC principles in a ground position took me quite some time to become proficient at it. As to a WC practitioner not going to the ground, you have never really worked against a non stopping opponent of equal ability then. It is easy to sidestep and redirect an attackers energy, 
1. when you know it is coming and then they stop, not continuing the attack
2. they are only committed partially to attacking you.
3. they are not as advanced as you or are considerable weaker than you.

Take someone with the same training as you and have them attack you fully committed to taking you to the ground once they are able to. I believe you or any other practitioner will have their hands full in "not going to the ground." Now this not to say I want to go to the ground for I dont and do a lot of training to prevent it if possible. But, I am also realistic and acknowledge want can happen and am willing to training for that possibility. WC is a great system for learning about yourself, your body and how to use is all distances of fighting. I am certain you train from long distance (no contact) to bridging to very close right up to the point of the opponent or you being able to grasp the other. I'm also certain you work takedowns on the opponent, what happens if you are takendown? You must train in that environment for it is different.

*Of course you will have your hands full, but this is why you train and train and train, dailly, hourly, minute by minute, finding your answers inside of the way instead of trying to attach another way which contradicts the former way. *

*I did not contradict myself it is just you misunderstood what it was I was trying to express*


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 30, 2005)

Heres the thing

a)THe 99.9% of fights go to the ground arguement (an exageration) was so strong, the counter arguement bemcae I dont go to the ground/ you cant take me to the ground

b)At the same time a basically "unskilled" person can tackle just about anybody  and especially if they dont practice against it take the average person to the ground even if they have some training.

c)So now add in a person figures I go for the takedowns and learn to do them even and I can bypass having to trade blows/ use footwork against somebody who while standing can take me out.

So for some people  C is a great option/ smart option,

Me I dont believe A, and I try to learn some ground stuff for the people who generally fall into the B and C category.  Although I prefer wing chun by far.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Dec 30, 2005)

the essential problem with grappling is that it utilises an energy that is contradictory to wing chun, even the supposed chi-na in wing chun does not utilise the same energy as grappling


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 31, 2005)

bcbernam777 said:
			
		

> the essential problem with grappling is that it utilises an energy that is contradictory to wing chun, even the supposed chi-na in wing chun does not utilise the same energy as grappling


 

That may be true but if you learn more than one style you have to know to turn certain things  off and not combine things as opposed to trying to do 2 different styles with the same energy/ intent.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Dec 31, 2005)

brothershaw said:
			
		

> That may be true but if you learn more than one style you have to know to turn certain things  off and not combine things as opposed to trying to do 2 different styles with the same energy/ intent.



This is the major problem I find with many modern Wing Chun teachers who combine their wing Chun with BJJ and Thai Kickboxing. They do this because of the supposed "holes" in the system, but if a practicioner looks into the system, he will actually find the answers to the problem within the system himself without the need to create some type of hybrid system which actually does their students a greater diservice


----------



## brothershaw (Dec 31, 2005)

Yes but also no.
Things shouldnt be combined with a mishmosh.

However learning how to defend against things isnt magical. Just because the stuff is in the forms etc doesnt mean you will know how to use it, or just because your teacher can do it you can do it.

Its similiar to people and knife defenses some of the knife defenses they think are great a filipino martial artist would say it would never really work, because the fma guy trains more realistically against knife as opposed to other styles.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Jan 1, 2006)

brothershaw said:
			
		

> Yes but also no.
> Things shouldnt be combined with a mishmosh.
> 
> However learning how to defend against things isnt magical. Just because the stuff is in the forms etc doesnt mean you will know how to use it, or just because your teacher can do it you can do it.
> ...



So the key is more realistic training, under proper instruction, so as to utilise the principles in a more realistic setting


----------



## brothershaw (Jan 1, 2006)

Yes.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 1, 2006)

bcbernam777 said:
			
		

> *I did not contradict myself it is just you misunderstood what it was I was trying to express *


 
Ok, I misunderstood your Doesn't = Art; Shouldn't = Practioner.
I still believe strongly you still must train in the environment you are fighting in. That doesnt mean a WC person must do BJJ or Sambo or whatever.

I dont feel the goal of Wing Chun is to not go to the ground. I believer the goal of Wing Chun (the system) is to destroy the opponent in the most direct, and economical fashion the practitioner can. If you happen to find yourself on the ground then Wing Chun (the system) does have the answers BUT the practitioner must get on the ground and train there.

Danny


----------



## Danny T (Jan 1, 2006)

> *bcbernam777*This is the major problem I find with many modern Wing Chun teachers who combine their wing Chun with BJJ and Thai Kickboxing. They do this because of the supposed "holes" in the system, but if a practicioner looks into the system, he will actually find the answers to the problem within the system himself without the need to create some type of hybrid system which actually does their students a greater disservice





> *brothershaw,* Yes but also no.
> Things shouldnt be combined with a mishmosh.
> 
> However learning how to defend against things isnt magical. Just because the stuff is in the forms etc doesnt mean you will know how to use it, or just because your teacher can do it you can do it.
> ...




YES!! Absolutely and the settings must be in the different environments one may find themselves in. Standing on different surfaces, on the ground, with weapons, against multiple opponents and the attacks must be hard committed and continued attacks against you. Not a one or two punch, kick attacks while you perform multiple counter attacks and take downs. 

Danny


----------

