# ground fighting in wing chun



## drummingman (Oct 27, 2006)

i know that i keep asking about this in a bunch of styles.the reason is because to me it seems that a system is not really complete without ground self defense.
so,does wing chun have ground fighting in it?
by the way,check out this website of a place near me that teaches this style.its got a ton on info on it,except for answering the question im asking here. http://www.shaolinkungfucenter.com/main.html
please let me know what you think of this school.


----------



## monji112000 (Oct 27, 2006)

The short answer is no.


 Ip man didn't teach any Ground fighting, and I am pretty sure any mainland versions do not have ground fighting.


 People have add what little ground fighting they know and created hybrid systems. A example is Emin Bonzepe, he was a student of leung Ting, who was a student of leung shueng, who was a student of Ip man. Emin what he learned from leung Ting and his previous experience with Turkish oil wrestling and combined it. I have heard of other teachers like Kamon who mixes BJJ and wing chun. I know of another guy who has wrestling as a background who mixes it with Wing Chun. This is very common to do in any style/culture, since people travel and experience many things.


 I would generalize that most cases what happens is that you get a watered down version of both styles. Its very hard to learn one style of fighting, and to master a style takes a life time. Realistically most people don't have to time to master two styles in one life time,prob not even one.  


 But, many people are happy just practicing different arts.(nothing wrong with that) I believe its realistic to say that one could focus on one main art, and dabble in a side art. JMO


----------



## Shogun (Nov 4, 2006)

The school in which my Gracie Jiu-jitsu instructor operates out of is in fact, a WingTsun school. It seems that the grappling is something being added at different levels by different WT/WC instrcutors. recently, a WT student was going over "anti-grappling" with another student. he was explaining to the lower level student about takedown defense. now, there is nothing wrong with teaching someone this, but was acting as if it would work against any wrestler. not to be a jerk, but I later trained with him some takedowns in the Jiu-jitsu class, and as a wrestler, repeatedly put him on his back over and over.  his excuse was he could of dropped "one" elbow to my body. now....don't get me wrong it MIGHT work but in all honesty I've fallen off quads and been ran over, fallen 10 stairs off my skateboard and hit my head, and watched people hit by cars before, and all situations involved nothing more that a sore body the next day. no instant death, knock out, or even much of a reaction. so in your opinion, is it harmful to teach takedown defenses as if everybody is the same? barfighter, thug, geeky kid, and champion wrestler alike? or what. maybe I just don't get it.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 4, 2006)

drummingman said:


> ... it seems that a system is not really complete without ground self defense. so,does wing chun have ground fighting in it?...



Hello again drummingman.

It seems that there are a lot of people that think the Gracie family invented ground fighting.  But they got it from Judo, which grew out of Jujutsu.  So as discussed in various other threads, there was ground fighting in Japan long before anyone ever heard of the Gracies and probably for centuries before they were even born.  Then on to Okinawa.  We discussed the Chinese origins of Goju Ryu and the ground work of that style, as well as the Chinese influence on Okinawan karate in general.

Now here were are talking about Wing Chun (Wing Tsun) - another old Chinese art - and the ground fighting.  There answer here is a resounding YES, there is ground fightin in WC/WT.  The next question: Is it something new?  NO.
I went to a series of Wing Tsun seminars conducted by seniors of Leun Ting long before there was Brazilian Jujutsu in this country.  One of the things that was stressed was the different ranges of fighting - including grappling and ground fighting.

You are correct in your thinking that every complete system will include grappling and ground fighting.  Wing Chun should be counted as a complete system.  The problem here, just as with so many arts, is finding a qualified instructor who can either teach the whole system himself or is still connected to a senior who can come to the school and fill in the gaps.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 4, 2006)

I'm getting some rather rude, unsigned rep negatives because of this post.
I'd like to just address the general attitude expressed, which is quite common about ground fighting.

As stated before, the Gracies did not invent ground fighting.  But every time someone addresses the issue of ground fighting in ancient arts, some one comes along and says that stole the idea from the gracies or BJJ or some other grappling style.  This is just ignorant.

Others say "my teacher did not learn ground fighting in that style, therefore it does not exist".  Again, in more cases than not, this is an ignorant attitude.

Going back to my own early training, I was one of the seniors for a number of years, and also among the group of most dedicated students.  Often times I was the only one at class that night, and very often one of only a couple that bothered to show up.  It was on these nights, Sensei would show us things and say "don't show this to the others.  If they wanted to know, they would have been here".  Now, some 20 years later, I am teaching things that my juniors never saw.  They may now be saying "He didn't get that from Sensei, so he must have got it from BJJ".  But that would be a very foolish and ignorant statement on thier part.

Now Ip Man may not have taught ground fighting to everyone in the general classes.  But to come here and claim that he never taught anyone ground fighting is mighty bold.  How do you know what he did and did not teach to private students or at times when only 1 or 2 students showed up for class?  The answer to that is that there is no way for you to know.  All you have is your teacher saying "If it existed I would know it, therefore it does not exist".

Wing Chun is a very well thought out system that includes all ranges of fighting.  It was developed in China and used as defense against other martial arts which included grappling.  So the "anti-grappling" is also not anything new.


----------



## Journeyman (Nov 4, 2006)

I ran across a reference on the web that Ron van Clief was the earliest American student of Leung Ting.  Anyone know how advanced van Clief is in Wing Chun/Wing Tsun?  

 Regarding some of the other martial arts, it's mainly the non-live training methods and/or de-emphasising of groundfighting to the point of near uselessness that prompts criticism.  The origins of BJJ are well-known. I don't know why acknowledging its Japanese roots would bother people. There's even the old joke that BJJ means "Basically Just Judo".


----------



## drummingman (Nov 5, 2006)

there is a wing chun school in my area that i e mailed and they said that they do not teach the ground part of wing chun.he said that there is no ground fighting in wing chun.i guess he was wrong.


----------



## ed-swckf (Nov 5, 2006)

drummingman said:


> there is a wing chun school in my area that i e mailed and they said that they do not teach the ground part of wing chun.he said that there is no ground fighting in wing chun.i guess he was wrong.


 
You are both talking in absoloutes.  You say he is wrong, he says there is no ground fighting.  you both seem to strive to grasp a solid answer and explanation but whats the actual question you are answering?  If you are on the ground using something learnt in wing chun does it become something else?  Wing chun won't teach you BJJ thats much is true, but if you are tripped or slip in an attack it doesn't mean your wing chun has been exhausted and you can do nothing until you are back on your feet.


----------



## arnisador (Nov 5, 2006)

drummingman said:


> he said that there is no ground fighting in wing chun.



That's correct. The book "Complete Wing Chun" is a good reference in this regard.

Of course, if a particular instructor adds it, that's great.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 5, 2006)

I never heard of this author.  What qualifies him to write this book and say it is the complete system?

Here's one of the reviews from Amazon.com

"The title of the book should be Incomplete rather than Complete Wing Chun. The writing on the Yip Man chapter is based on the author's biased opinion rather than objective information. The authors gave three or four version of Wing Chun history which only shows their lack of academic research. Proprigating myths and legends without coming up with thesis will only add more confusions to the wing chun world."

Hardly sounds like a reliable source.


----------



## arnisador (Nov 5, 2006)

They didn't want to call it "Complete" and were disappointed when the publisher did so. But, it is fairly comprehensive.



KOROHO said:


> Hardly sounds like a reliable source.



The book, or Amazon's anonymous reviews?


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 5, 2006)

The book seems to be unreliable.
Who is this guy and what makes him the world's authority on Wing Chun?

Just because Amazon does not require names to be used does not invalidate this persons review.  To me, the review that clearly points out major flaws in the book, is carries more weight than some unkown author coming along and decalring himself to be the final authority on the art.

I would say that if he did not address ground issues, then it can not be "Complete Wing Chun".  

I would suggest passing on this book and look for something by someone who is an authority on the art.


----------



## Cthulhu (Nov 5, 2006)

I think some people thing Yip Man Wing Chun is the "be all end all" of Wing Chun.

Cthulhu





arnisador said:


> They didn't want to call it "Complete" and were disappointed when the publisher did so. But, it is fairly comprehensive.
> 
> 
> 
> The book, or Amazon's anonymous reviews?


----------



## Jade Tigress (Nov 6, 2006)

Mod. Note. 
Please, keep the conversation on topic..

Pamela Piszczek
MT Moderator


----------



## monji112000 (Nov 6, 2006)

its a simple question, and it has a simple answer.

Its common knowledge that Ip man didn't teach "ground-fighting". Just ask some of his Disciples. Other of his STUDENTS, and STUDENTS of his STUDENTS have started to add it into their "style". I have read allot about main land China Wing Chun, and I have never heard of anything related to Ground fighting. SURE eye gouging is talked about, but not in a tactic or strategy for the ground. Its not a bold statement, its a fact that can be verified if you take the time like I have.

I give complete respect to the Gracie family, and other ground fighting arts. 

I am not saying you can't use ideas of Wing Chun to fight on the ground. I am saying its wasn't taught by Ip man. Its most probably not originally in the main land version. 

Any ground fighting has been ADDED within recent years. 


I am not stating that these adaptions are good or bad. Its a personal choice, I don't claim to know whats best for other people.

A general statement that ground Fighting exists in Wing Chun, is false. 

If you want to learn how to wrestle go to a wrestler not a boxer.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> I never heard of this author. What qualifies him to write this book and say it is the complete system?


 
Chu specializes in combat application with a focus on the *Yip Man Wing Chun Kuen* system as taught by Hawkins Cheung and the *Yuen Kay-San* and *Gulao Wing Chun Kuen* systems as taught by Kwan Jong-Yuen. He's a direct disciple of Hawkins Cheung, which makes him one generation away from Yip Man.

It's also worth adding that his book is an excellent piece of research into many of the various forms of wing chun, and that's what is meant by "Complete," in the title.



			
				ed-swckf said:
			
		

> If you are on the ground using something learnt in wing chun does it become something else? Wing chun won't teach you BJJ thats much is true, but if you are tripped or slip in an attack it doesn't mean your wing chun has been exhausted and you can do nothing until you are back on your feet



Seems sensible enough to me......


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 6, 2006)

Now I'm really convinced it's a worthless book.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> Now I'm really convinced it's a worthless book.


 
Seems sensible enough to me....


----------



## arnisador (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> Now I'm really convinced it's a worthless book.



You have many opinions on a book that you claim not to have every beheld.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 6, 2006)

Well like I said.  It is very incomplete and gets poor reviews.
There are only 2 people here supporting the book: You who I know nothing about,  and another who I have an extremely low opinion of.

Based on my experience with very well known Wing Chun teachers and other reviews of the book I am reccomending that those interested in Wing Chun spend thier money on a book by an authority on the subject.  The reviews of this book indicate that the author has little to no knowledge of the history of the art.  He has confused myths with facts.  Given this, there is no reason to put any faith in what he says about the technique.

I don't need to waste my money on a seemingly worthless book to prove my point.  That's what reviews and the publishing of pages to leaf through is for.

I stahnd with the original review that I posted, "Complete Wing Chun" does not even come close to being an authoratative source on the subject.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 6, 2006)

"A feeble attempt by their own admission into the History of the Art Of Wing Chun,let alone any credible first hand documents or proof.Most professors in China would discount this charitable attempt of humor. To manipulate the masses as the author is clearly demonstrating himself as an authority.Is at the very least criminal. In the foreward they claim no reference or footnotes. They also are taking that to the next step as if to say,on one hand this is the truth, and yet on the other claiming they are not sure. The author attempts yet again to manipulate the facts...Not that any were found. Yes we can all tell stories.
I would have likened to see this in the FICTION section of the library. One must remember to be more questioning and observant.
At best they allowed themselves to be caught up in story telling and have done little to present the hard facts. They have also left out many other stylists within the same art. I find that to be misleading and a Definative Lack of knowledge of the art they proclaim to know so well. Very contradicting."

Plus, I forgot to ask of those who offer this sad piece of work as the bible of WIng Chun:  Is there anything in here that says there is no ground fighting in Wing Chun, or that Wing Chun ideas can not be applied to ground work?


----------



## elder999 (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> Plus, I forgot to ask of those who offer this sad piece of work as the bible of WIng Chun: Is there anything in here that says there is no ground fighting in Wing Chun, or that Wing Chun ideas can not be applied to ground work?


 
It's one thing to quote a reveiew, and another to quote it without provenance-which "known authority" on wing chun are you quoting there.

As for your "already low opinion" of me-it's neither here nor there-I merely offered what was my opinion of the book. For what it's worth, I'm somewhat in agreement with you. I'd point to where I've quoted you above, and point out that there is a different between Wing Chun having groundfighting, and applying Wing Chun principles on the ground, the latter of which I have said (just a few posts ago) sounds sensible to me. 

And, not to be didactic, but others have pointed out that Yip Man aught no groundfighting. Indeed, the entire curriculum consists of  siu lum tau, chum kiu, bui gee, loo dim boon kwan,  and bot chum do along with the mook yan jong and chi sau. WHile there is _grappling_ almost throughout, and a variety of principles that can be successfully applied on the ground-in fact,lately I've been noticing a lot of biu gee from my guard or when I'm mounted- there is no groundfighting per se.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 6, 2006)

"WHile there is _grappling_ almost throughout, and a variety of principles that can be successfully applied on the ground-in fact,lately I've been noticing a lot of biu gee from my guard or when I'm mounted"

This seems to be telling me that there IS groundfighting. 

Just because someone doesn't take you by the hand and show you all the possible ways to apply the conecepts that they teach you, does not mean there are definite limits set.

If the only way to get "ground fighting" from Wing Chun is to take a different art and mix it in, then I would say there is no groundfighting.  But if you can get on the ground and execute techniques without violating the principles of Wing Chun, then you are doing Wing Chun only on the ground instead of standing up.

If you are "seeing the Wing Chun" in the grappling, then maybe you have learned something.

I never was really able to bunkai karate kata until after I learned Jujutsu.  Then I learned to look at the kata a different way and found a lot of grappling on my own, including ground work.  The same for Taichi.  I learned a form and used what I learned in other arts, primarily Aikido and Hakko Ryu, to discern the applications. A little bit of knowledge and some applied thinking can go a long way.


----------



## ed-swckf (Nov 6, 2006)

these threads always go to the dogs.  Wing chun can be used standing up, sitting down, on the ground or even in the sky free falling.  I think the communication within this thread is becoming poor and we are taking ground fighting to understandably mean a different bag of tools then the regular wing chun stuff.  I don't think anyone can dispute that its possible to use many fighting arts in ground positions whilst they are traditionally trained standing.  

As for the book, it gives recognition and provides insight to less popular branches of wing chun which is a good thing.  How many books offer this on the market?


----------



## arnisador (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> Plus, I forgot to ask of those who offer this sad piece of work as the bible of WIng Chun:  Is there anything in here that says there is no ground fighting in Wing Chun, or that Wing Chun ideas can not be applied to ground work?



You might wish to peruse it at a bookstore (it's still available) to see. It lists the full curriculum of many styles of WC. None include groundfighting.

But, that book was but one example. I know of no book or video on WC groundfighting; not even Joseph Smith's, which has more than usual standing grappling. When I studied WC, the instructor advised studying BJJ so as to cover that angle. WC is good at what it does...which, according to my instructor at the time (last year), was standing close-in fighting.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 6, 2006)

I seriuosly doubt that it lists the full curriculum of all Wing Chun.  
Plus, does it specifically state that there is no ground fighting ever?  Does it say that you can never take these principles and apply them to the ground?  Did Yip Man tell his students to go train with someone else if they wanted to learn a complete martial art?

Sure, Wing Chun is primarily a standing art.  That is because people most often fiht standing up.  If you know how to fight standing up, then you don't need to go to the ground.  I'd much rather put my attacker on the ground and stay standing myself.  
But that does not mean there is no ground fighting in the arts I teach.  

Never have I been taught 2 joint locks and have been told "This one is for standing and this one is for on the ground".  Take, the elbow - it only bends one way.  Bend it the other way and it causes pain as it hyperextends.  This works standing or on the ground.  It's sad that you can learn a standing arm bar from one guy then have to leave the school and pay someone else to show you how to do the same armbar on the ground.


Grappling is grappling, whether you call it Wing Chun or BJJ.
Like Elder999 said, he can see the applications of the Wing Chun forms in his ground fighting.  
I don't see any sense in saying "when I do this technqiue standing it's Wing Chun, when I do it on the ground it's BJJ".  Wing Chun is Wing Chun no matter where you are.

It may have taken someone to study another style to learn how to apply the concepts from Wing Chun, but they were there all along.


----------



## monji112000 (Nov 6, 2006)

KOROHO,


> "WHile there is grappling almost throughout, and a variety of principles that can be successfully applied on the ground-in fact,lately I've been noticing a lot of biu gee from my guard or when I'm mounted"
> This seems to be telling me that there IS groundfighting.


 
How do you define grappling?
Wikipedia does as follows:
Grappling refers to the gripping, handling and controlling of an opponent without the use of striking, typically through the application of various grappling holds and counters to various hold attempts.

If you consider a lop sao, or a controlling hand as grappling then sure Wing Chun has grappling.  But you are talking about chokes, locks, and other BJJ,MMA,wrestling moves.. no it doesn't.  People have added them in from other styles.



> Just because someone doesn't take you by the hand and show you all the possible ways to apply the concepts that they teach you, does not mean there are definite limits set.
> If the only way to get "ground fighting" from Wing Chun is to take a different art and mix it in, then I would say there is no groundfighting. But if you can get on the ground and execute techniques without violating the principles of Wing Chun, then you are doing Wing Chun only on the ground instead of standing up.


that's true no one is defining limits per say, but honestly unless you have some background in wrestling or any ground skill you will be very limited in what you can do. 

its like telling someone who is a master a chess to be successful in the business world. of course you can use 100% of your chess mastery.. but unless you have some basic skill to work with.. you won't be "good" or successful in the business world. If you don't know economics, ect.. your chess skills will never translate. BUT, if you have a MBA and you are a master chess tactician.. you are probably going to be a force to fear in the Business world.

Basic eye/neck gouging and basic covering is one thing. But to pretend that you can protect yourself 90% of the time in a ground situation is a very different thing.

People train their whole life to master this type of fighting.. you think that someone can just fluff through it?

Its like a wrestler pretending he can just fluff his way through boxing/stand up striking.. its just no that simple.


being able to avoid going to the ground is cover in Wing Chun, and can be suplimented easily with basic wrestling skills. JMO
:soapbox:


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 6, 2006)

drummingman said:


> i know that i keep asking about this in a bunch of styles.the reason is because to me it seems that a system is not really complete without ground self defense.
> so,does wing chun have ground fighting in it?
> by the way,check out this website of a place near me that teaches this style.its got a ton on info on it,except for answering the question im asking here. http://www.shaolinkungfucenter.com/main.html
> please let me know what you think of this school.



No, there is no Ground work in Wing Chun.  Some people want there system to be everything to everyone, those people tend to come across as rather insecure in what they are doing.  No system is "complete", No system is "Best for everyone" and anyone that tells you otherwise is either lieing, or failing to grasp reality.

The truth is we all train for different reasons, with different goals and different interests.  Different systems specialize in different things, just like being in school.

If Math is important too you, taking a liberal arts degree is probably not the best route.  If you want to go into Engineering, you should probably not enroll in Fine arts.

Different arts for different goals, no system does everything.  And IMO systems would be much better off in focusing on what they do well, not trying to encorporate everything with a "Yeah, well we got that too so " attitude.

Wing Chun does certain things very well, other things moderatley well, and others not at all.  Ground fighting is generally on the list of "not at all." Same for every reputable system out there.

Follow your interests, chances are you will never "need it" anyways.  Unless of course your lifestyle dictates it (LEO, Security, etc.) in which case you probably know exactly what you need from talking to others in the same situation already.


----------



## MJS (Nov 6, 2006)

_*Mod. Note.*_* 
Please, return to the original topic.

-Mike Slosek
-MT Super Moderator-*


----------



## bcbernam777 (Nov 7, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> No, there is no Ground work in Wing Chun.  Some people want there system to be everything to everyone, those people tend to come across as rather insecure in what they are doing.  No system is "complete", No system is "Best for everyone" and anyone that tells you otherwise is either lieing, or failing to grasp reality.
> 
> The truth is we all train for different reasons, with different goals and different interests.  Different systems specialize in different things, just like being in school.
> 
> ...



Ah Mr Green, I knew you wouldn't be too far away


----------



## bcbernam777 (Nov 7, 2006)

Koroho, you seem to be trying to get a rise out of people or something? You talk about sources in Wing Chun, Who are they???? As for ground fighting, the answer is simple, there is no formalised gr4ound fighting in Wing Chun, there are however a number of principles, in particular from the Bui Jee that can be utilised in a ground fighting situation. Where do I get my source from. My Sifu is Fung Ping Bor i.e. Derek Fung direct student of Yip Man's.


----------



## KOROHO (Nov 7, 2006)

bcbernam777 said:


> there are however a number of principles, in particular from the Bui Jee that can be utilised in a ground fighting situation.



I agree with you.  There are principles that can be applied on the ground.
But when they are applied, people say "That's not Wing Chun, it's Brazilian Jujutsu or Turkish Wrestling".  Which I think is just ignorant.

The bottom line is, from the very first time I ever experienced Wing Chun, I understood there to be ground fighting and that was long before any one in this country ever heard of the gracies.

I learned some Wing Tsun from a group of Leung Ting's people, including Emin Boztepe, at a string of seminars the group held over the course of a year.  Plus I have been to various other seminars with others from other associations.  It was Emin that first put out the idea of ground fighting when he was discussing the various ranges of fighting.  Other groups teach the same forms, so I always assumed if one group has ground fighting then the others do to.

I supposed Wing Chun could have ended up like Okinawan Karate with some people being taught applications of the forms (bunkai) and others not.  There are all sort of people who claim there is no grappling or ground techniques in Karate kata.  And they are just as plain wrong as those who disagree with you saying there is not in Wing Chun.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Nov 7, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> I agree with you.  There are principles that can be applied on the ground.
> But when they are applied, people say "That's not Wing Chun, it's Brazilian Jujutsu or Turkish Wrestling".  Which I think is just ignorant.
> 
> The bottom line is, from the very first time I ever experienced Wing Chun, I understood there to be ground fighting and that was long before any one in this country ever heard of the gracies.
> ...



There are a number fo very important points here:

*What is Wing Chun??*

1# to some it is simply a collection of techniques and principals.

2# to others it is a group of forms and nothing more

3# To others its is a principal in itself, a way of thinking that expresses itself in a fighting situation (I belong to this thrid group)

*What is Ground Fighting??

*To me ground fighting is a range that is available to every art, be it okinowan, be it kempo, be it Tai Chi, now although there are some arts that deal almost exclusivly with ground fighting, ground fighting is not exclusive to those arts. 

The goal of a Martial Artist is to transcend the limitations of his own art, to lay hold on its fundamental expression, and learn how to adapt that into a fighting situation. If you look at your art purely in this manner you will loose long term, but if you learn how to lay hold of the essence of the art, and run with it, you will find that whether or not it is kicking, striking, Trapping, grappling, or ground range, you are able to take the tools and principals that you have extracted from your art and utilise them in this situation. Sure it may not be as effective as BJJ in that range, but that does not discount its effect.

Arguments such as WC is ineffective in Ground fightning (and even if this thread did not start in that vein it will get there) are moot, of course its effective, the question is not whether its effective, the question is its degree of effectiveness, when compared with specialist arts such as BJJ. But that is only one aspect, there is another.

In terms of the ground, each art has different goals and strategies wheree the ground is concerned, and it is in light of those goals that the art trains. For example in Wing Chun the goal is to control the fight so that you do not end up on the ground. Why? Because to truely be in control you must stay on your feet (unless you have the luxury of fighting one person only [a rarity in todays world] but if you end up on the ground there are a number of factors that you should take into consideration; Terrain (I dont like rolling around on broken glass); Possibility of multiple opponants When you go to ground there are a number of unkowns, that you need to be on guard against, thats why the goal in Wing Chun is stay  of the ground, this is why the stance is meant to be developed properly, and the sui lum tao is so vitally important, many people underestimate the true nature of the SLT, but maybe that is a good thing. However if, if, you do end up on the ground then you must be prepared to do what you must _to get back on your feet not stay on the ground._ Now BJJ may have a different goal, but that is BJJ, not Wing Chun.


----------



## Sidi Kurtis (Nov 7, 2006)

^^ Well Put!


----------



## PeaceWarrior (Nov 7, 2006)

How come the only threads that get attention in Wing Chun have to do with groundfighting.  I dont see any threads on "how to deal with punches" in the grappling or jujitsu forums...

  Cant we just talk about Wing Chun?  Sure some grappling would be a good thing to know, but if thats what is important to you, then maybe you should take a class for grappling?


----------



## drummingman (Nov 8, 2006)

wow.you all have covered a lot of ground (no pun intended) since i last checked in.
as someone who does not know anything about wing chun it does seem to me that all a person would have to do to make wing chun apply to the ground is parctice it on the ground to see what works.do you thing that a wing chun school/teacher would be cool with people doing that in their dojo? im speaking generally,i know that not every techer is the same.
it does seem strange that no wing chun techers have fleshed out ground fighting using the moves from wing chun.i think that would make for some interesting material.i say the same for every style of stand up fighting.it would be cool to see what those styles would look like on the ground.what i mean is not changing the moves drastically for the ground approach but just making whatever modifications that would need to be made to make the stand up techniques work on the ground.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Nov 8, 2006)

PeaceWarrior said:


> How come the only threads that get attention in Wing Chun have to do with groundfighting.  I dont see any threads on "how to deal with punches" in the grappling or jujitsu forums...
> 
> Cant we just talk about Wing Chun?  Sure some grappling would be a good thing to know, but if thats what is important to you, then maybe you should take a class for grappling?



Amen to that :soapbox:


----------



## drummingman (Nov 8, 2006)

the reason why i asked about ground fighting in wing chun is because i did not know if it existed or not.being new to the martial arts i was just trying to get some info.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Nov 8, 2006)

PeaceWarrior said:


> How come the only threads that get attention in Wing Chun have to do with groundfighting. I dont see any threads on "how to deal with punches" in the grappling or jujitsu forums...
> 
> Cant we just talk about Wing Chun? Sure some grappling would be a good thing to know, but if thats what is important to you, then maybe you should take a class for grappling?


 
Nice post and very good advice!


----------



## MJS (Nov 8, 2006)

drummingman said:


> the reason why i asked about ground fighting in wing chun is because i did not know if it existed or not.being new to the martial arts i was just trying to get some info.


 
I wouldn't take anything personal.  The problem is, is that many times, a thread turns into a heated, non-productive argument, often leading to a number of off topic posts, as well as art bashing, which takes away from the original intent of the thread.  Here are some other threads on a similar topic, regarding grappling and WC.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33437

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39194

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33953


----------



## drummingman (Nov 8, 2006)

thanks man.i did not take the comment personal.i just wanted to let peacewarrior know why i made this thread.it's because im such a newbe to the martial arts in general.thats why i've made a bunch of threads in a lot of different places asking so much about styles and what not.
i am looking into wing chun in my area.has anybody ever head of sifu randy williams? here is the link to the school http://www.virginia-wingchun.com
let me know what you all think.


----------



## PeaceWarrior (Nov 8, 2006)

drummingman said:


> thanks man.i did not take the comment personal.i just wanted to let peacewarrior know why i made this thread.it's because im such a newbe to the martial arts in general.thats why i've made a bunch of threads in a lot of different places asking so much about styles and what not.
> i am looking into wing chun in my area.has anybody ever head of sifu randy williams? here is the link to the school http://www.virginia-wingchun.com
> let me know what you all think.



Hey man, thats cool, we are all learning  I hope I didnt sound harsh. 

I have heard of Randy Williams, I believe I have heard my Sifu talk about him. If I remember right, he is pretty high level instructor and if you study with him you will get *Real* wing chun. If you have the chance to train there, JUMP ON IT, I doubt youll find anything better in the same area. 

You should start a new thread, I think this one is about out of gas


----------



## ed-swckf (Nov 8, 2006)

KOROHO said:


> I agree with you. There are principles that can be applied on the ground.
> But when they are applied, people say "That's not Wing Chun, it's Brazilian Jujutsu or Turkish Wrestling". Which I think is just ignorant.


 
What people?  Is that people within this discussion? or is it something you could provide sources for? or is it just people's opinions you have been exposed to over a period?


----------



## ed-swckf (Nov 8, 2006)

bcbernam777 said:


> There are a number fo very important points here:
> 
> *What is Wing Chun??*
> 
> ...


 
I consider myself onder the 3rd definition also and i agree with the content of this post.


----------



## Shogun (Nov 9, 2006)

wow cool someone gave me a negative point on my post. now, as far as I know, I was simply recalling my exp. and not attacking anyone. ...


----------



## Shogun (Nov 9, 2006)

Oh, and if anyone has ever listened to the gracie's talk, they WANT grappling to be added.

I think (even as a GJJ guy) its a bold statement to say there is NO grappling in WC, there is probably grappling in EVERY martial art. after all it is part of fighting, that can't be argued. its just when certain schools are doing very obvious BJJ/shootfighting etc in there curriculum. 

another thing I hear is how similar BJJand other grappling styles are to the stand-up concepts of WC. sure they may look the same, but honestly there is only so many ways you can move the human body. just because reach behind the sofa looks the same as a breast stroke doesnt mean they are the same.


----------



## drummingman (Nov 12, 2006)

i just read a good article in kung fu magazine on ground fighting using wing chun.if you can check it out.it was good.


----------



## Si-Je (Nov 22, 2006)

Koroho is correct.
Sifu Emin Boztepe started the whole Wing Tsun ground fighting techniques, and principles.  This was almost 10 years ago.  It helped to cause the rift between him and Leung Ting.  Unfortunately, not every school utilizes these techniques in their training.  And the WT groundfighting is nothing like BJJ.  It's basically striking on the ground, there's very little "grappling" or grabbing the opponent on the ground.  Their are joint locks and such, but these are present in WT's stand up techniques already.  Many people don't understand the anti-grappling, and won't even try it.  They have already made up their minds one way or the other. 

I didn't think it was such a big deal when I started WC training with my teacher and husband.  He was a student and SiHing of Emin's for 4-5 years.  I just thought that it was part of WT.  
But, traditionally, it's not.  It is a new development in the art and very controversial.  People say, that's not wing chun, becuse it doesn't fit into what they know and think of as wing chun.  As my teacher and his teacher say, wing chun is an ever evolving and changing art.  It was designed to adapt and so should the students. 
I've trained a bit and used the WT groundfighting in some sparring, and it works for me great.  The concepts and principles are still there in the groundfighting (and to me, that's the important part) we utilize chi sau while mounted by a striking opponent, or a grappling one it works whether they grab your wrists, arms, or try to strike you.  We utilze the basic stance to keep the "grappler" out from between your legs or what they call a "guard", so you can roll them off you easier, and keep them from choking you out or armbaring you.
I had a kid pick me up from his "mount" position and try to arm bar me while standing up, I simply let him pick me up off the ground and climbed up him as he tried to armbar, thus he couldn't armbar.  His other option, put me back on the ground, or have me hanging on him all day, plus he just really helped me get back to my feet again.  There wasn't a whole lot he could do to me.  You stay relaxed (a grappler loves a stiff and resisting opponent, makes the techiques easier), you flow with the opponents energy, you maintain centerline, you use yap gar and such with the legs, chi sau with the arms. etc.


----------

