# American Kenpo or Wing Chun? Help me Decide Which Style to Study!



## Carpathian

Hey, everyone! This is my very first post on MartialTalk so I would like to start off by saying hello and that I look forward to interacting with you all. Now, on to the main point of this post.  I studied Karate when I was younger (Kyokushinkai & Matsumura Shorin Ryu) but I ended up not sticking with it because of school and school related sports taking up most of my time.  Long story short I have just recently graduated from college and am looking to get back into studying the martial arts!  I took a lot of time researching what styles are offered in my area and I also took the time to research the credibility of the individuals that teach in my area.  Given my research I have boiled it down to two options: Wing Chun or American Kenpo.  The reason I would like to study Wing Chun is because I like its emphasis on speed, technique, and just its overall scientific feel. On the flipside American Kenpo is attractive to me because it is a hybrid of karate and kung fu and was constantly updated by Ed Parker during his lifetime in order to make it more and more combat effective in the street.  Now, I can study Wing Chun for about 125 bucks a month or I can take the American Kenpo classes for about 60 bucks a month.  The cheaper Kenpo classes are really screaming out to me but I am still pretty torn between the two.  So, basically, I am looking for some help in deciding which style I should study.  I realize that no style is "better" than another, it is entirely based on the fighter him/herself.  What I am looking for is something that will suit me best.  I will try to give as much information as possible in regards to my body type/what I am looking for in a martial art.

Profile:
-22 years old
-150lbs
-5'10''(height)

Strengths:
-Speed
-Timing
-Quick Thinking

What I am Looking For:
-Discipline
-Physical Fitness
-Street Effectiveness


I realize this is kind of a massive block of text and that I am asking quite a lot from this community.  Its just that I am taking this very seriously and want to choose something that suits me and will be enjoyable to me for long term study! Any and all help is GREATLY appreciated and I hope to hear from you all soon.  Thank you very much!


----------



## jezr74

Can you try both first? This may have the biggest influence in your decision.

Most places will allow for some free introductory classes, our do both for a month and get a feel for what's up your alley.


----------



## jezr74

Welcome to MT too BTW.


----------



## yak sao

Welcome back to MA and welcome to the forum.
I'm a WC guy, so you know which one I would pick. But what it truly comes down to is not which "style" fits you best, but which school fits you best.

Try to schedule a time to go in and watch what's going on, watch how the classes go, do you see yourself fitting in easily? Do you like the instructor? These things will help determine your longevity.
Hope it works out for you either way you decide.


----------



## Buka

Welcome to the forum, bro.

I have a feeling you're going to watch a bunch of classes in both places and make the right decision as to what fits you. You can always change later if you want. Go have fun!


----------



## Argus

Do some research on both before hand. Talk to the instructors, and observe their classes. I'm very skeptical and discerning when it comes to martial arts schools, as there's a lot of inauthentic stuff out there, to put it nicely.

All that said, I'm quite fond of Wing Chun, but have no experience in Kenpo. The two styles are rather different though. If you go with Wing Chun, it is a very subtle art, and one that is based not on speed, but efficiency. As a general rule, less is more. That can make it a little tough to get the hang of in the beginning. As far as your profile is concerned, it seems like you would be physically fit for Wing Chun, but chasing after "speed" can be counter productive. For us, speed merely results from short, efficient, and direct movement, so slowing down and refining that movement is advantageous. Also, Wing Chun is probably not the best choice for Physical Fitness, if that is a high priority. After all, we try to use as little movement as is necessary. Not to say that you won't work up a sweat, but you won't get the same cardio that you would in some arts or sports.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Argus said:


> Do some research on both before hand. Talk to the instructors, and observe their classes. I'm very skeptical and discerning when it comes to martial arts schools, as there's a lot of inauthentic stuff out there, to put it nicely.
> 
> All that said, I'm quite fond of Wing Chun, but have no experience in Kenpo. The two styles are rather different though. If you go with Wing Chun, it is a very subtle art, and one that is based not on speed, but efficiency. As a general rule, less is more. That can make it a little tough to get the hang of in the beginning. As far as your profile is concerned, it seems like you would be physically fit for Wing Chun, but chasing after "speed" can be counter productive. For us, speed merely results from short, efficient, and direct movement, so slowing down and refining that movement is advantageous. Also, Wing Chun is probably not the best choice for Physical Fitness, if that is a high priority. After all, we try to use as little movement as is necessary. Not to say that you won't work up a sweat, but you won't get the same cardio that you would in some arts or sports.


Sounds like it is based on speed to me, but I do kenpo.


----------



## Blindside

Instructor over style, a bad instructor will provide crap skills out of a great system.


----------



## J W

Welcome to MT. 

I've trained both Wing Chun and American Kenpo. I only trained in Kenpo for about one year before switching to Wing Chun a few years ago. It's probably obvious which one I prefer, but I'm not going to try to sway you that way. Just because it's a better fit for me doesn't necessarily mean it would be for you, too. 

There's a lot of contrast between the two. The methods used to teach the material are quite different, so which one you prefer may ultimately depend on your learning style. I agree with the others here, go to both schools and take as many intro classes as they'll let you. Hang out and watch. Talk to the students. More than likely one will start to click with you over the other.


----------



## Flying Crane

I trained in both, and no longer do either.  I think they were simply not a good match for me.

Try them out, go with the best teacher, but also recognize that any system doesn't automatically work as well for everyone.  There needs to be a sense of it being a "good fit" for you, physically, mentally, etc.  It's gotta be something that makes sense to you as a system and as a method.  So try them out and see what you think.  If you like one, stick with it.  if you like neither, look elsewhere.


----------



## Marnetmar

If you're looking for speed, quick thinking, etc. I'd say Wing Chun as that's partially the whole point of it. As far as physical fitness goes, probably Kenpo. Discipline and street effectiveness are really going to depend on the school, not the art.


----------



## Carpathian

Thank you for all of the great input, guys! I'm definitely going to schedule some observations/tutorial courses with both instructors to see how I feel about them.


----------



## Blindside

Marnetmar said:


> As far as physical fitness goes, probably Kenpo.



Clearly you have never seen a gathering of Kenpo seniors....


----------



## arnisador

The important thing is sticking with it. If money is apt to be an issue for you, go with the cheaper AK because you'll be able to keep doing it long after you would've had to have dropped WC. I often advise people to study the closest art to them--you just can't drive 45 min. to class then another 45 min. home after work three nights a week for long, for most people. I would absolutely try both, because *the particular instructor makes more difference than anything I'm going to write below*.

I'm not a fan of AK, which seems to me to substitute analysis for (an art developed from long) experience. Ed Parker could really rock but his system, to me, seems overthought and overfull ("analysis paralysis". Most of the AK people I've met seem too programmed to go with their prepared technique set and insufficiently able to change in response to what the opponent is doing. In fairness, I haven't studied it personally, and I do know people who do this system who are good--but I've met far too many who are too robotic, and too wed to only one way of viewing things, and it's left me with a negative view of the system.

I have studied some WC. I like it a lot--which only means that it fits me. It's a smaller system that really flows with the reality of the fight. I think it's among the very best close-range, one-on-one, punching-focused systems out there, but classical WC lacks responses for other self-defense situations, in my opinion. Many people have "opened it up" a bit and gotten a broader but still focused system. If the instructor is very traditional, I'd want to add another art if my goal was self-defense. I have come over the years to believe that a system with fewer techniques is usually advantageous compared to one with too many technqiues.


----------



## Touch Of Death

arnisador said:


> The important thing is sticking with it. If money is apt to be an issue for you, go with the cheaper AK because you'll be able to keep doing it long after you would've had to have dropped WC. I often advise people to study the closest art to them--you just can't drive 45 min. to class then another 45 min. home after work three nights a week for long, for most people. I would absolutely try both, because *the particular instructor makes more difference than anything I'm going to write below*.
> 
> I'm not a fan of AK, which seems to me to substitute analysis for (an art developed from long) experience. Ed Parker could really rock but his system, to me, seems overthought and overfull ("analysis paralysis". Most of the AK people I've met seem too programmed to go with their prepared technique set and insufficiently able to change in response to what the opponent is doing. In fairness, I haven't studied it personally, and I do know people who do this system who are good--but I've met far too many who are too robotic, and too wed to only one way of viewing things, and it's left me with a negative view of the system.
> 
> I have studied some WC. I like it a lot--which only means that it fits me. It's a smaller system that really flows with the reality of the fight. I think it's among the very best close-range, one-on-one, punching-focused systems out there, but classical WC lacks responses for other self-defense situations, in my opinion. Many people have "opened it up" a bit and gotten a broader but still focused system. If the instructor is very traditional, I'd want to add another art if my goal was self-defense. I have come over the years to believe that a system with fewer techniques is usually advantageous compared to one with too many technqiues.


A lot of what makes up for the high numbers of Kenpo techniques is simply position variances: Right to Right: Left to Left; Right to Left; Left to Right; ect. Then you add in the number of attacks: Is it a kick; is it a punch; is in linear or circular; is it left or right. These simple variances make up for huge numbers and are actually repetitions of the same thing.
Sean


----------



## Flying Crane

arnisador said:


> T
> 
> I'm not a fan of AK, which seems to me to substitute analysis for (an art developed from long) experience. Ed Parker could really rock but his system, to me, seems overthought and overfull ("analysis paralysis". Most of the AK people I've met seem too programmed to go with their prepared technique set and insufficiently able to change in response to what the opponent is doing. In fairness, I haven't studied it personally, and I do know people who do this system who are good--but I've met far too many who are too robotic, and too wed to only one way of viewing things, and it's left me with a negative view of the system.



I find myself largely in agreement with Arnisador's comments here, based on my own years in the Tracy branch of kenpo, having reached the rank of Shodan, as well as my observations of other branches (mostly Youtube), and reading many discussions here and on the sister site Kenpotalk.com.  I found the curriculum to be cumbersome and unwieldy, organized and presented in a way that ultimately I realized did not make sense to me.  The discussions I've read and on occasion taken part in, make me feel like it can be heavily over-thought and over-complicated.  Ultimately, for me, it is not a good match and not something that is useful to me.



Touch Of Death said:


> A lot of what makes up for the high numbers of Kenpo techniques is simply position variances: Right to Right: Left to Left; Right to Left; Left to Right; ect. Then you add in the number of attacks: Is it a kick; is it a punch; is in linear or circular; is it left or right. These simple variances make up for huge numbers and are actually repetitions of the same thing.
> Sean



And Sean's comments show how this all really depends on the person.  As I said, for me it's a system that doesn't work well and doesn't make sense.  But other people find it completely useful and logical.  They see a logic and a sense in it that I cannot, so for them it's a good match and a good pursuit.

As I said above, no system is equally good for every person.


----------



## arnisador

Flying Crane said:


> I
> And Sean's comments show how this all really depends on the person.



...and instructor! Yes, I know very well that there are strong Kenpo players out there, and viewing the differences as positional variants may be one way a student and/or instructor reduces the "search space" for the next move.




> As I said above, no system is equally good for every person.



...though with an instructor who takes the coach role rather than the transmitter-of-tradition model, most will work fairly well for most people.


----------



## Touch Of Death

arnisador said:


> ...and instructor! Yes, I know very well that there are strong Kenpo players out there, and viewing the differences as positional variants may be one way a student and/or instructor reduces the "search space" for the next move.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...though with an instructor who takes the coach role rather than the transmitter-of-tradition model, most will work fairly well for most people.


All one need do is logically return to a point of reference (Strength), and let fly at the target array that is available. Pattern recognition is good, but good and safe habits are better. Its like defensive driving, the less you have to think about what you are doing the better; so, while techniques are the bread and butter of the art; because that is what most people practice and are drawn to, they are, in my opinion, simply a business model, and it is what is supposed to be common about them is actually where the art lies. This concept is also delivered with sets and forms, but they aren't as exciting for the student. Undisciplined sparring can be almost worthless, unless you are, in fact, trying to work on doing kenpo, and or a specific lesson from kenpo.


----------



## Hanzou

If those were my only two options, I'd choose Wing Chun.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

Wing Chun!

Seriously though, and personal bias aside, I'd echo the sentiments already expressed and suggest observing/trialling both and then making your decision.

There's also some excellent tips on here when it comes to choosing a school to check out before you go.


----------



## Carpathian

I've looked more into the school that offers the Wing Chun courses and I think that is the route that I am going to go with.  Also, this school has a Sanshou program that is taught right after the Wing Chun class on Thursdays so I think I am going to pick that up as well.  It seems like Wing Chun and Sanshou would be great cross training and would compliment each other very nicely! Let me know what you guys think.


----------



## Argus

I'm not sure if they will compliment eachother, as WC's body mechanics and principles are unique. But it's definitely a good idea to train them both for perspective as long as you don't get them confused -- which can be a real issue.

I'm a proponent of diversifying your training -- not because I think that cross-training is all that, but because it provides useful insight and perspective.


----------



## Carpathian

I just meant that they would compliment each other in the sense that Sanshou could teach me take downs and submissions which are areas that Wing Chun doesn't necessarily focus on.  Also, Sanshou would help me with foot work.  The majority of my training would be centered around Wing Chun, though.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Carpathian said:


> I've looked more into the school that offers the Wing Chun courses and I think that is the route that I am going to go with.  Also, this school has a Sanshou program that is taught right after the Wing Chun class on Thursdays so I think I am going to pick that up as well.  It seems like Wing Chun and Sanshou would be great cross training and would compliment each other very nicely! Let me know what you guys think.


Fine!  But if you ever want to learn to fight, come see us.


----------



## Argus

Carpathian said:


> I just meant that they would compliment each other in the sense that Sanshou could teach me take downs and submissions which are areas that Wing Chun doesn't necessarily focus on.  Also, Sanshou would help me with foot work.  The majority of my training would be centered around Wing Chun, though.



Ah, didn't mean to come off negatively. It absolutely would be useful, I think!

I wish I could learn some Chin-Na personally, but I'll be doing good to find a place to continue my Wing Chun at this rate. If you live in an area with a diversity of arts, take advantage of all the opportunities given to you


----------



## Carpathian

Oh, I didn't take it negatively at all! Just felt like I should clarify


----------



## arnisador

Good luck! It's been my experience that the term "Sanshou" is used somewhat broadly here in the U.S.--I'll be curious to hear what you;re learning.


----------



## yak sao

Touch Of Death said:


> Fine!  But if you ever want to learn to fight, come see us.



tsk tsk


----------



## Xue Sheng

Carpathian said:


> I've looked more into the school that offers the Wing Chun courses and I think that is the route that I am going to go with.  Also, this school has a Sanshou program that is taught right after the Wing Chun class on Thursdays so I think I am going to pick that up as well.  It seems like Wing Chun and Sanshou would be great cross training and would compliment each other very nicely! Let me know what you guys think.



I have trained both and I do not think they compliment each other, they have very different ideas about fighting. Nothing wrong with either but if I were you I would pick one and go with it for awhile before I started the other.


----------

