# The Wing Chun fighting stance explained



## DaveB (Dec 7, 2018)

I've heard it theorise that chun was actually inspired by 18th or 19th century boxing. Am I alone in seeing the similarities?


----------



## Christopher Adamchek (Dec 7, 2018)

A good video  
I havent heard anything about your claim, but many older fighting styles had more similarities than differences.
We are all human afterall.


----------



## Denoaikido (Dec 7, 2018)

That was a good video. I learn something new everyday here thanks again for sharing.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 7, 2018)

There isn't really much in wing chun that isn't included in boxing. Except for the obvious like kicks.

But you will see hand trapping and vertical fists and all sorts of tactics utilized.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 8, 2018)

drop bear said:


> There isn't really much in wing chun that isn't included in boxing. Except for the obvious like kicks.
> 
> But you will see hand trapping and vertical fists and all sorts of tactics utilized.


Well, since Lomanchenko you see that stuff.


----------



## KPM (Dec 8, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Well, since Lomanchenko you see that stuff.




No.  I remember Alexis Arguello was a very "center-line oriented" fighter and punched very straight with almost a vertical fist.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 8, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Well, since Lomanchenko you see that stuff.


Some of Lomenchenko's stuff looks like what Aikido would be if it was boxing. (I'm not sure what that statement even means.)


----------



## Eric_H (Dec 12, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I've heard it theorise that chun was actually inspired by 18th or 19th century boxing. Am I alone in seeing the similarities?



Yeah, an art that can be traced back at least as far as 1850, and by legend mid 1700's would certainly be influenced by something that came 100-200 years later in a foreign country... 

The mechanics of power delivery and weight distribution are entirely different. Any influence Boxing would have had on WC would be since the 1960's.


----------



## yak sao (Dec 12, 2018)

Not too farfetched of a theory if you consider the possibility of western sailors who may have had some boxing experience, encountering some Chinese boxers in the southern ports of China.

Could the art we now know as WIng Chun be a mix of an earlier Hakka art perhaps, with western boxing influence?....not saying it is, but again, not so out in left field.

Also, Western boxing is every bit as old as the Chinese arts. It's been around since the ancient Greeks.


----------



## KPM (Dec 14, 2018)

I think the idea that Wing Chun was derived or influenced by "old school" boxing via Merchant Marines sailing to southern China is an interesting idea, but total BS.   Karl Godwin is the author of that theory from way back.   Here is his old article:

Black Belt


----------



## geezer (Dec 15, 2018)

KPM said:


> I think the idea that Wing Chun was derived or influenced by "old school" boxing via Merchant Marines sailing to southern China is an interesting idea, but total BS.   Karl Godwin is the author of that theory from way back.   Here is his old article:
> 
> Black Belt


Hi KPM, please post more ...we miss you! Anyway, regarding ^^^ I'd say it was not so much "BS" as simply an unsupported hypothesis from back in the days when there was a whole lot less information about Wing Chun available, aside from each lineage's own unreliable oral traditions.

Certainly, the similarity of the postures between old time bare-knuckle Western boxers and old time southern Chinese bare-knuckle boxers ....especially Wing Chun fighters, was something we all noticed. Funny how people didn't look first at the simplest and most obvious explanation which is, IMO, that similar physical activities (namely Eastern and Western stand-up bare knuckle boxing styles) would likely resemble each other out of pure necessity.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 15, 2018)

geezer said:


> Hi KPM, please post more ...we miss you! Anyway, regarding ^^^ I'd say it was not so much "BS" as simply an unsupported hypothesis from back in the days when there was a whole lot less information about Wing Chun available, aside from each lineage's own unreliable oral traditions.
> 
> Certainly, the similarity of the postures between old time bare-knuckle Western boxers and old time southern Chinese bare-knuckle boxers ....especially Wing Chun fighters, was something we all noticed. Funny how people didn't look first at the simplest and most obvious explanation which is, IMO, that similar physical activities (namely Eastern and Western stand-up bare knuckle boxing styles) would likely resemble each other out of pure necessity.



That was my thinking, but then everyone told me the wing chun guard and stance sucked and they needed to use a modern boxing guard. Also blocking is impossible. And high kicks don't work...


----------



## drop bear (Dec 15, 2018)

DaveB said:


> That was my thinking, but then everyone told me the wing chun guard and stance sucked and they needed to use a modern boxing guard. Also blocking is impossible. And high kicks don't work...



You can either make it work or you can't. Historically validated doesn't really count.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 15, 2018)

drop bear said:


> You can either make it work or you can't. Historically validated doesn't really count.


^^^^^ This!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 15, 2018)

DaveB said:


> everyone told me the wing chun guard and stance sucked and they needed to use a modern boxing guard. ...


The boxing guard is not better than the WC guard. It's trade off.

Boxing guard:

PRO:

- Both arms have same reach.
- Protect center from outside in.
- Easy to use double downward circles to separate opponent's arm and obtain the center.

CON:

- Center line is exposed.
- t's easy for your opponent to use double upward circles to separate your arms and obtain your center.

WC guard:

PRO:

- Center is well protected.
- Protect center from inside out.
- Easy to use double upward circles to separate opponent's arm and obtain the center.

CON:

- 1 long arm and 1 short arm.
- It's easy for your opponent to push your leading arm and jam your back arm.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> You can either make it work or you can't. Historically validated doesn't really count.


How does that work?

Historically validated means it not only works, but according to the logic of competition, that it is the best position for the circumstances, ie bare knuckle.

Whether or not I can use it in the here and now is thus a reflection on me and my skills, not the method.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

DaveB said:


> How does that work?
> 
> Historically validated means it not only works, but according to the logic of competition, that it is the best position for the circumstances, ie bare knuckle.
> 
> Whether or not I can use it in the here and now is thus a reflection on me and my skills, not the method.



Then we go train with the guy who can make the method work.

Who would that guy be?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 16, 2018)

DaveB said:


> How does that work?
> 
> Historically validated means it not only works, but according to the logic of competition, that it is the best position for the circumstances, ie bare knuckle.
> 
> Whether or not I can use it in the here and now is thus a reflection on me and my skills, not the method.


It could also mean that the style (or understanding of it) has degraded since the time when it was applied. Or that historical application was exaggerated.

We always have to allow for those possibilities, and look for ways to validate in the here and now.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> There isn't really much in wing chun that isn't included in boxing. Except for the obvious like kicks.
> 
> But you will see hand trapping and vertical fists and all sorts of tactics utilized.


lol.. looks more like Jow Ga Kung Fu to me.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Then we go train with the guy who can make the method work.
> 
> Who would that guy be?



Me. My friend Sai. Sai's sifu. Sifu Mark Phillips.... There are more martial artists than just famous combat sportsmen.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 16, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Me. My friend Sai. Sai's sifu. Sifu Mark Phillips.... There are more martial artists than just famous combat sportsmen.


But at that point it's not historically validated, it's modernly validated. Historically validated would mean because a famous guy could use it 100 years ago, that proves it's good. Which isn't the case.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> But at that point it's not historically validated, it's modernly validated. Historically validated would mean because a famous guy could use it 100 years ago, that proves it's good. Which isn't the case.



No.  I did ask for modern context.

And I will use the gravies as an example.

We could look at the first UFCs that had almost no rules and suggest that because gracie jujitsu dominated it has been shown that GJJ is the best system for no rules fighting.

Historically proven.

And of course because a pure GJJer would get ground up and spit out in a 2018 ufc match. That the rules have changed the success ratios unnaturally.

And so we would say. Ok kron Gracie. You manhandle kabib Nurkumurkamurka and you will be validated in a modern context.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Me. My friend Sai. Sai's sifu. Sifu Mark Phillips.... There are more martial artists than just famous combat sportsmen.



Who has he fought that was any good?


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> It could also mean that the style (or understanding of it) has degraded since the time when it was applied. Or that historical application was exaggerated.
> 
> We always have to allow for those possibilities, and look for ways to validate in the here and now.



Agreed, but if we decide that the system doesn't work because there are YouTube videos representing around 0.00001% of wingchun exponents, or even because we've proved that 98% of schools don't train in a realistic manner, then we are making faulty assumptions and equally flawed conclusions.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Who has he fought that was any good?



Frank. Frank's awesome.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 16, 2018)

I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.


----------



## KPM (Dec 16, 2018)

I think we can look at percentages as well.  Plenty of BJJ guys are able to make their method work.  Not just Royce Gracie.  That shows that the method itself is good because a good percentage of BJJ guys can make it  work, not just Royce Gracie or one of his brothers.  Same goes for Boxing, or Kickboxing.  You might find a Wing Chun guy here and there that can make it work.  But percentage-wise?.....The percentages just don't look good for Wing Chun and just about any other "Traditional" martial art in a modern context.  You might have an occasional guy here and there in Wing Chun or some other TCMA that just has raw talent and could make ANYTHING work!  But percentage-wise the success rate just hasn't been very good.  And as Gerry pointed out....its hard to know in a historical context just how many of those stories are a bit exaggerated.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Frank. Frank's awesome.



And here is the issue.





If your level is far above the level of the people you are applying you can get away with a lot more.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> No.  I did ask for modern context.
> 
> And I will use the gravies as an example.
> 
> ...


I was actually thinking about the gracies when I said that. And I _*think*_ that we're saying the same thing, but I just want to clarify.

 To me, the gracies are still historically valid, not modernly valid. It proves that, once upon a time (25 years ago), GJJ was a very effective system. That could because it's really an effective system, because people didn't know how to counteract it, or that they had some trick people hadn't figured out yet. In order for me to care if it's still valid, I would want it to be both historically valid (even just 5+ years ago), and modernly valid. The modern valid proves that it's effective right now, and the combination of modern and historical validity shows that it's not a one-trick pony, or that people just haven't gotten used to it yet. As long as 95% of techniques are still allowed, the rules shouldn't come into play, IMO.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> And here is the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've seen him get away with similar stuff against equally match opponents.  I like the one at 2:39.  I was waiting for him to drop the elbow, like in professional wrestling lol.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> I was actually thinking about the gracies when I said that. And I _*think*_ that we're saying the same thing, but I just want to clarify.
> 
> To me, the gracies are still historically valid, not modernly valid. It proves that, once upon a time (25 years ago), GJJ was a very effective system. That could because it's really an effective system, because people didn't know how to counteract it, or that they had some trick people hadn't figured out yet. In order for me to care if it's still valid, I would want it to be both historically valid (even just 5+ years ago), and modernly valid. The modern valid proves that it's effective right now, and the combination of modern and historical validity shows that it's not a one-trick pony, or that people just haven't gotten used to it yet. As long as 95% of techniques are still allowed, the rules shouldn't come into play, IMO.



Correct.

And look there is modern bare knuckle. And that is growing as a sport. We can take modern examples. 

Which I was dragged kicking and screaming out of my beliefs on this
 But I had to talk to bare knuckle fighters first.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 16, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> I've seen him get away with similar stuff against equally match opponents.  I like the one at 2:39.  I was waiting for him to drop the elbow, like in professional wrestling lol.



Does it less though. 

The thing is if all he fought were those guys. That would be his killer method. 

There are guys at my gym I could old timey box or chun. But I wouldn't do that fighting for sheep stations.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Does it less though.


Lol  that's because he's smart. He can't get away with too many times so he doesn't push his luck, knowing that fighters at the same level will pick it up quickly.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 16, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.


I suspect the biggest error a classical art (okay, actually its proponents) can make, in regards to fight effectiveness, is to focus on differentiating the art. If something works, it should be considered whether it fits within the system, and only rejected if it’s out of scope (big kicks for BJJ, perhaps) or the system has or can incorporate a reasonable alternative. Or, perhaps, if the thing is effective but not in a situation deemed likely enough (multiple attackers wielding pasta tongs).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 16, 2018)

KPM said:


> I think we can look at percentages as well.  Plenty of BJJ guys are able to make their method work.  Not just Royce Gracie.  That shows that the method itself is good because a good percentage of BJJ guys can make it  work, not just Royce Gracie or one of his brothers.  Same goes for Boxing, or Kickboxing.  You might find a Wing Chun guy here and there that can make it work.  But percentage-wise?.....The percentages just don't look good for Wing Chun and just about any other "Traditional" martial art in a modern context.  You might have an occasional guy here and there in Wing Chun or some other TCMA that just has raw talent and could make ANYTHING work!  But percentage-wise the success rate just hasn't been very good.  And as Gerry pointed out....its hard to know in a historical context just how many of those stories are a bit exaggerated.


And I’d go so far as to argue the problem is universal enough to cause questioning of the types of training methods that are common in (and those commonly excluded from) those styles.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 16, 2018)

drop bear said:


> And here is the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agreed. I can get away with some pretty...um, pretty stuff against people who aren’t yet well trained. Much of that pretty stuff won’t work reliably against someone with skill who really tries to stop me.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 17, 2018)

drop bear said:


> And here is the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As a 4-stripe blue belt, I once rolled with a group of fresh white belts and made it a point to take their backs and RNC each and every one of them. They thought I was a legit bad ***. Little did they know that a few hours later I tried those same back takes with my buddy who is a brown belt and he flicked me away like an insect every time.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 17, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> As a 4-stripe blue belt, I once rolled with a group of fresh white belts and made it a point to take their backs and RNC each and every one of them. They thought I was a legit bad ***. Little did they know that a few hours later I tried those same back takes with my buddy who is a brown belt and he flicked me away like an insect every time.



Yeah. The good old one armed guard pass is a great example. But it takes too much explaining.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 18, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.


Alan Orr's fighters have had some success.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 18, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Alan Orr's fighters have had some success.



I don't really see much out of what Alan Orr does that resembles Wing Chun. Looks like standard MMA striking and grappling to me. He even uses the boxing guard.


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 18, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.


Not everything is about Mma you know. Probably about 90% of people who do martial arts don't give a crap about Mma at all


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Not everything is about Mma you know. Probably about 90% of people who do martial arts don't give a crap about Mma at all



Probably.

Despite that, MMA and NHBs are some of the best fight labs that we have. 

If someone is saying that the Wing Chun fighting stance and guard is equal to the standard kickboxing stance and guard, we should be seeing professional fighters using it instead of the standard kickboxer variety.

We don't. There's a reason for that.


----------



## KPM (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Probably.
> 
> Despite that, MMA and NHBs are some of the best fight labs that we have.
> 
> ...



I've become fairly convinced over the years that Wing Chun was intended to be more of an "ambush" or "self defense" method than a "squaring off" and "fighting/sparring" method.  Its what you do when you find an attacker right in your face by surprise.  Then the stance and the guard starts to make a bit more sense.  The close-range emphasis and near total lack of a long range game starts to make more sense.  Dismal failures in sparring with someone that knows what they are doing start to make more sense.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

KPM said:


> I've become fairly convinced over the years that Wing Chun was intended to be more of an "ambush" or "self defense" method than a "squaring off" and "fighting/sparring" method.  Its what you do when you find an attacker right in your face by surprise.  Then the stance and the guard starts to make a bit more sense.  The close-range emphasis and near total lack of a long range game starts to make more sense.  Dismal failures in sparring with someone that knows what they are doing start to make more sense.



That's definitely an interesting theory, and it makes sense given how WC operates. I'd be interested in seeing if WC practicioners share that view.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Probably.
> 
> Despite that, MMA and NHBs are some of the best fight labs that we have.
> 
> ...



Yes, there is. People do what they know. Only the exceptional few innovate, and then only in directions that they know to do so.

My contention is that the classical bare knuckle guard (also seen used by old time karateka) is a different but not inferior method. So if MMA folk learn one way to fight that doesn't use x method, they won't spontaneously develop x that they don't understand.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Yes, there is. People do what they know. Only the exceptional few innovate, and then only in directions that they know to do so.
> 
> My contention is that the classical bare knuckle guard (also seen used by old time karateka) is a different but not inferior method. So if MMA folk learn one way to fight that doesn't use x method, they won't spontaneously develop x that they don't understand.



I disagree. In the realm of professional fighting, people do what works within context of the rules. MMA guys especially are looking for any possible advantage in the fight game, and they don't have time to mess with less effective tactics. Take Alan Orr for example; his entire gym is supposedly based off of using WC tactics in MMA. The problem is that if you look at him and his fighters, their striking and stance looks indistinguishable from the striking found in other MMA fighters.

The older methods are definitely inferior. Modern fighters across the board would destroy fighters from a century ago. Hell, modern fighters would destroy fighters from 20 years ago. Like all things fighting evolves, fighters get better and martial arts should evolve alongside them.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> I don't really see much out of what Alan Orr does that resembles Wing Chun. Looks like standard MMA striking and grappling to me. He even uses the boxing guard.



If someone had never done BJJ, would you expect them to recognize the why/how of positions, transitions, and submissions?


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

I don't dispute either the evolution of fighting or the superiority of modern fighters.

But knowledge doesn't just blossom out of thin air. Fighters go to a gym and get taught one way to do things. 

If they are never taught an extended centre guard or how to use it they will not just magically start doing it. Nor are they likely to spend the time and energy  retraining themselves for a method they don't understand; especially if they are swayed by wing chun beatdown videos.

I'm sure if a few guys started using the chun guard and dominated in MMA other fighters would pick it up, but coming up with it and training in such a way as to make use of it, that's not happening.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

Martial D said:


> If someone had never done BJJ, would you expect them to recognize the why/how of positions, transitions, and submissions?



You don't need to actually do an art to recognize its stances and techniques. Orr doesn't use the WC guard or stances because he *knows* that it is a disadvantage in MMA.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I don't dispute either the evolution of fighting or the superiority of modern fighters.
> 
> But knowledge doesn't just blossom out of thin air. Fighters go to a gym and get taught one way to do things.
> 
> ...



The problem is that the few guys who did use the chun guard got smashed in MMA. So until what you describe happens, stating that the Chun guard is equal to proven methods like the boxing or even muay thai guard is a dubious statement.

Hence the difference between modern styles and traditional styles. If WC was a modern style, they would dump an ineffective guard and adopt an effective guard.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> The problem is that the few guys who did use the chun guard got smashed in MMA.


I assume you are talking about the WC guard like this, One arm almost extend and another hand is next to the elbow joint. IMO, if the back hand can move to the wrist area (similar to the rhino guard), the back hand will almost have the same reach as the front hand, that will solve 1 long arm and 1 short arm problem.

This traditional WC guard can protect the chest area more that the head area. It's not like the boxing guard, or the rhino guard that you can hide your head behind it. So when your opponent attacks your head like a mad man, this traditional WC guard won't do you much good.

There are only limited number of effective guards:

1. Boxing guard that both hands are close to your head. You protect both sides but leave your center open.
2. WC guard that has 1 hand near by your opponent and 1 hand close to yourself. You protect your center but leave both sides open.
3. Rhino guard that has both hands near by your opponent and you can hide your head behind it. You protect your center, at the same time you also protect both sides.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I assume you are talking about the WC guard like this, One arm almost extend and another hand is next to the elbow joint. IMO, if the back hand can move to the wrist area (similar to the rhino guard), the back hand will almost have the same reach as the front hand, that will solve 1 long arm and 1 short arm problem.
> 
> This traditional WC guard can protect the chest area more that the head area. It's not like the boxing guard, or the rhino guard that you can hide your head behind it. So when your opponent attacks your head like a mad man, this traditional WC guard won't do you much good.
> 
> ...



Yeah that's the one. While the boxing guard certainly has flaws, it's modified form in competitive MA has proven its effectiveness. Additionally boxing's attributes (footwork, clench, evasiveness, simplicity) help sure up any holes in the guard itself.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah that's the one. While the boxing guard certainly has flaws, it's modified form in competitive MA has proven its effectiveness. Additionally boxing's attributes (footwork, clench, evasiveness, simplicity) help sure up any holes in the guard itself.


Agree! The boxing mobility footwork has fixed the weakness of the boxing guard (expose the center). Also to expose the center is a good way to invite your opponent to punch between your arms so you can interrupt his punch with hooks from both sides. This is why I have always believed that the hook punch is the best counter for the straight punch.

May be to add the hook punch into the WC system is the best solution. But the WC guard is not suitable for double hooks.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I don't dispute either the evolution of fighting or the superiority of modern fighters.
> 
> But knowledge doesn't just blossom out of thin air. Fighters go to a gym and get taught one way to do things.
> 
> ...



That is not really how a MMA gym works


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> The problem is that the few guys who did use the chun guard got smashed in MMA. So until what you describe happens, stating that the Chun guard is equal to proven methods like the boxing or even muay thai guard is a dubious statement.
> 
> Hence the difference between modern styles and traditional styles. If WC was a modern style, they would dump an ineffective guard and adopt an effective guard.



Except its not been proven an ineffective method. Again, if the chun guard is ineffective because people got beaten while using it, then the boxing guard is doubly ineffective as many more people lost using it. Those boxers lost because they were punched, so clearly their guard failed.

Come on people, think critically before we all end up living on rafts, its not that hard. Look at the problem and just consider the causes that got you there. And don't stop at the first one. 

Wing chun guy loses fight NOT= Wing chun sucks OR elements that (in your untrained eye) make Chun suck.

WHY? Because individual's train to win fights and a better opponent does NOT= a better style. No rocket science involved.

Drop Bear asked if any chun guys have fought anybody good using the chun guard. 
The question he should have asked is have we seen any chun fighters with comparable training to their MMA opponents?

Strength, speed, stamina, number of punches thrown, number defended, time sparring  etc etc etc

That is the only question that matters and until it's been answered in the affirmative we can't even begin to examine fighting style.

Wing chun and it's various components may all be useless but right now it is not even remotely proven.

Please FLG think deeper.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 19, 2018)

The

- boxing guard is used to punch through your opponent's side doors (outside arms).
- WC guard is used to punch through your opponent's front door (between arms).

Both guards are suitable for different purposes. The question is whether you understand the weakness of your guard and seal up the hole that you have created.

IMO, if a WC guy has not fought against a boxer, he problem won't expect right hook, left hook that come through both sides of his center line.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Except its not been proven an ineffective method. Again, if the chun guard is ineffective because people got beaten while using it, then the boxing guard is doubly ineffective as many more people lost using it. Those boxers lost because they were punched, so clearly their guard failed.



The difference is that the boxing guard was defeated by other boxing guards. Essentially, a person using boxing got beat by another person using boxing. When that happens, that's the individual, not the guard itself.

In the case of the WC guard, we have multiple examples of people using it against the boxer guard and failing miserably due to inherent weaknesses within the guard itself, and the system of techniques surrounding it. Again, how do we know that it is ineffective? Because professional Wing Chun fighters dont even use it. Hell, when the Chinese developed Sanda the used western boxing over their native martial arts for a reason. Professional fighting is  a results driven industry, not a theory based industry.



> Come on people, think critically before we all end up living on rafts, its not that hard. Look at the problem and just consider the causes that got you there. And don't stop at the first one.
> 
> Wing chun guy loses fight NOT= Wing chun sucks OR elements that (in your untrained eye) make Chun suck.



Yeah, nobody said Wing Chun sucks. I simply said that the guard they use is archiac and not equal to the modern boxing guard that just about every professional fighter uses.

People do martial arts for different reasons. If you want to learn WC, that's fine. However, if someone asked me what the best and most effective striking art to take was, I couldn't in good faith suggest WC to them.



> WHY? Because individual's train to win fights and a better opponent does NOT= a better style. No rocket science involved.



It isnt only about winning fights, it's about what people who fight for a living utilize as well. Clearly the two are related though; If some WC exponent emerged on the scene and was ripping professional fighters apart with Wing Chun, there would be no argument. Since that has NEVER happened, and appears that it will NEVER happen, we're having this discussion.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> The difference is that the boxing guard was defeated by other boxing guards. Essentially, a person using boxing got beat by another person using boxing. When that happens, that's the individual, not the guard itself.
> 
> In the case of the WC guard, we have multiple examples of people using it against the boxer guard and failing miserably due to inherent weaknesses within the guard itself, and the system of techniques surrounding it. Again, how do we know that it is ineffective? Because professional Wing Chun fighters dont even use it. Hell, when the Chinese developed Sanda the used western boxing over their native martial arts for a reason. Professional fighting is  a results driven industry, not a theory based industry.
> 
> ...


----------



## drop bear (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Except its not been proven an ineffective method. Again, if the chun guard is ineffective because people got beaten while using it, then the boxing guard is doubly ineffective as many more people lost using it. Those boxers lost because they were punched, so clearly their guard failed.
> 
> Come on people, think critically before we all end up living on rafts, its not that hard. Look at the problem and just consider the causes that got you there. And don't stop at the first one.
> 
> ...



You are suggesting that because there is one branch of culture that leads to martial art mediocrity. That their isn't more elements that also contribute.

So you may not find the level of athleticism in training.

You may not have the talent pool or level of individual competence.

And you may have a system that is not efficient.

You can't suggest your system works because of a failure in other areas of development. That is silly.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 19, 2018)

I mean ok. Let's look at this simply.

If someone has a school with ten great fighters an two duds it is probably those two individuals just are not very good.

If someone has a school and nobody can fight. It is probably the teacher. 

If there are multiple schools with multiple teachers. It is probably the system.

The larger a sample size we look at the less likely it is to be the individual.

Or am I missing something.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

drop bear said:


> You are suggesting that because there is one branch of culture that leads to martial art mediocrity. That their isn't more elements that also contribute.
> 
> So you may not find the level of athleticism in training.
> 
> ...



I'm suggesting that you need to rule out other factors before you place blame on the one spot.

Earth-shattering concept, I know!


----------



## DaveB (Dec 19, 2018)

drop bear said:


> I mean ok. Let's look at this simply.
> 
> If someone has a school with ten great fighters an two duds it is probably those two individuals just are not very good.
> 
> ...



It's not for reasons previously discussed,  but ok let's say that's true.

Show me.

Not the 3 or 4 vids on YouTube. Show me school after school where no one can fight to a level appropriate for their training in one style. Show me this large sample size???

Because if such a study existed where each student in a multitude of schools was tested on fighting appropriate to training (and yes you do need that part), I wouldn't be arguing against it. But you are suggesting evidence that doesn't exist but which you assume is there based on a few YouTube clips.

You've made my point for me. The work required to make your claim has not been done so we can't make the claim.

Simple. Logic.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 19, 2018)

DaveB said:


> It's not for reasons previously discussed,  but ok let's say that's true.
> 
> Show me.
> 
> ...



Well. We have mma. Where we can see schools success.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

DaveB said:


> It's not for reasons previously discussed,  but ok let's say that's true.
> 
> Show me.
> 
> ...



So again, why do professional fighters avoid using the WC guard and WC in general even when they market themselves as WC fighters?


----------



## Martial D (Dec 20, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> You don't need to actually do an art to recognize its stances and techniques. Orr doesn't use the WC guard or stances because he *knows* that it is a disadvantage in MMA.



Well no. Machida and Wonderboy don't do katas in the cage either.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 20, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> So again, why do professional fighters avoid using the WC guard and WC in general even when they market themselves as WC fighters?


Do they not?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Well no. Machida and Wonderboy don't do katas in the cage either.



Yes, for the exact same reason. When I did karate there was a definite disconnect between what we were training and how we actually fight. I can only imagine a similar disconnect exists within WC as well.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Do they not?



That isn't a fight video. 

It should also be noted that the Iron Wolves gym isn't exactly lighting the MMA world on fire.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 20, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Except its not been proven an ineffective method. Again, if the chun guard is ineffective because people got beaten while using it, then the boxing guard is doubly ineffective as many more people lost using it. Those boxers lost because they were punched, so clearly their guard failed.
> 
> Come on people, think critically before we all end up living on rafts, its not that hard. Look at the problem and just consider the causes that got you there. And don't stop at the first one.
> 
> ...



So wait. Your argument is that all the testing and trials that have come before now involving people using classical WC don't count? There is already a lot of data in. It's all pretty one sided.

Here's the thing..styles only ''work" when they are tailored to the actual conditions of two human beings Fighting..which is a fairly specific set.

You can't expect to bend the reality of what a fight is to conform to your style. That's backwards.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't write off WC..quite the opposite in fact. I think it's a gold mine of useful principles and techniques, driven by solid concept.

And this, in my eyes, is the problem with 'most' modern WC. Too many people have forgotten (grandmasters included) that it is a concept driven fighting system rather than a set of immutable and specific moves and positions.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 20, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Yes, for the exact same reason. When I did karate there was a definite disconnect between what we were training and how we actually fight. I can only imagine a similar disconnect exists within WC as well.


It sure does, at least from the perspective of a 20+ year WC guy that trains with MMA guys.

I threw out the classic stance and guard ages ago. That's about when it started working


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

Martial D said:


> It sure does, at least from the perspective of a 20+ year WC guy that trains with MMA guys.
> 
> I threw out the classic stance and guard ages ago. That's about when it started working



As you should. You simply can't expect a martial concept from hundreds of years ago to work in a modern context when fighting has evolved. This is why saying that the WC guard is equal to the ever-evolving Boxer guard is a laughable proposition.


----------



## wckf92 (Dec 20, 2018)

Interesting discussion so far. 
I am assuming you all are talking about the "classical/typical/traditional" WC guard where most WC'ers stand there like a statue trying their best to imitate Donnie Yen in the YM movies?

Do the WC'ers here feel that is the ONLY WC "guard"?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 20, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Do the WC'ers here feel that is the ONLY WC "guard"?


I will say yes - the dropping elbow is at the center of your chest. As fat as I know, no other MA stile use that guard.


----------



## wckf92 (Dec 20, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I will say yes - the dropping elbow is at the center of your chest. As fat as I know, no other MA stile use that guard.



You actually think (or can actually execute/place) your elbow at the center of your chest??? Holy cow!!! Impressive!


----------



## PiedmontChun (Dec 20, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Interesting discussion so far.
> I am assuming you all are talking about the "classical/typical/traditional" WC guard where most WC'ers stand there like a statue trying their best to imitate Donnie Yen in the YM movies?
> 
> Do the WC'ers here feel that is the ONLY WC "guard"?



You hit the nail on the head with that last sentence. The WC guard is moveable and adaptable, contrary to some preconceptions.

In WC training, strikes are often kept to the neck / chest / below, and the guard might be kept a bit lower in keeping with that. In legitimate sparring, _which should be done_, strikes to head might be fair game depending on the school. The guard adapts and might be higher, but elbows still in, because that's an important aspect of the guard where you protect the centerline from the inside outward. And hands still open versus closed fist, for many reasons. Also, what if you are sparring a taller / shorter person? Again, the guard adapts.

In a hypothetical defense situation, I'm not going to square up with a guy and using an obvious guard like a kung fu movie. When I see some "Wing Chun versus Blank system" video on YouTube with a guy shuffling around in a super narrow stance and super rigid hands pointed forward in front of him, I cringe and feel like they have already lost. Its like they have a great starter toolbox, but have not figured out how to make the tools work for them versus being bound by them. And I don't say that from some position of expertise or authority, because I am certainly not.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 20, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> You actually think (or can actually execute/place) your elbow at the center of your chest??? Holy cow!!! Impressive!


I don't like to place my elbow at my center line. I don't mind to move my both elbows away from my center as long as my hands can seal up the center. My opponent's punch has to pass my wrist gate before reaching to my elbow gate.



PiedmontChun said:


> The guard adapts and might be higher, but elbows still in, because that's an important aspect of the guard where you protect the centerline from the inside outward. And hands still open versus closed fist, for many reasons.


You don't need "elbows in" to protect your center line. If you keep fists in but elbows out, it can protect your head better. For example the WC Bong Shou can be used to protect your head nicely.

You can keep 2 loose fists instead of open hands.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

PiedmontChun said:


> In a hypothetical defense situation, I'm not going to square up with a guy and using an obvious guard like a kung fu movie. When I see some "Wing Chun versus Blank system" video on YouTube with a guy shuffling around in a super narrow stance and super rigid hands pointed forward in front of him, I cringe and feel like they have already lost. Its like they have a great starter toolbox, but have not figured out how to make the tools work for them versus being bound by them. And I don't say that from some position of expertise or authority, because I am certainly not.



It should be noted that a lot of the guys in those videos are Wing Chun instructors.

Here's one such example:


----------



## DaveB (Dec 20, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Yes, for the exact same reason. When I did karate there was a definite disconnect between what we were training and how we actually fight. I can only imagine a similar disconnect exists within WC as well.



Hmmm, so your saying the training might impact on the fighting?? 


Martial D said:


> It sure does, at least from the perspective of a 20+ year WC guy that trains with MMA guys.
> 
> I threw out the classic stance and guard ages ago. That's about when it started working



What was it about the extended guard that didn't work for you?

Have you also dropped blocking?


----------



## DaveB (Dec 20, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> It should be noted that a lot of the guys in those videos are Wing Chun instructors.
> 
> Here's one such example:


I give up, our species is doomed.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 20, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Hmmm, so your saying the training might impact on the fighting??



Of course.

WHAT your system is teaching is also important.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 20, 2018)

When your opponent uses boxing guard, his center is exposed.







If you can move in and extend your

- left arm between his right arm and his head,
- right arm between his left arm and his head,

you will dominate his "front door". So boxing guard is not perfect.






The WC guard will make the above "front door entry" very difficult.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 20, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Hmmm, so your saying the training might impact on the fighting??
> 
> 
> What was it about the extended guard that didn't work for you?
> ...


Good questions.

First, the WC guard sits about sternum level, both hands lined up with center. In theory, you move fast enough from there to stop incoming strikes along the centerline to close to trapping/chi sau range and beat them at the short game. This is problematic for many reasons.

1) your hands are only covering the center of your upper body. From here any strike hits you if you don't move.

2) from 1. This hand positioning not only requires that you be significantly faster than your opponent, you also need to be able to read his strikes before he throws them. Unless you are a superhuman, this isn't realistic

3) even if you are somehow that fast, anything coming on a curved line requires you to shift your body position/centerline to stop, which requires you to be even more superhuman, especially if you get two in a row from opposite sides.

4) the strikes you can throw from there are extremely limited, and lack the sort of power you can get elsewise.

5) the stance is quite rooted for a system that requires slick and quick entries to work.

Now as for 'blocking', yes and no. I keep my hands high so I am covered, and 'block' by either using a short pak sau/parry or by rolling my shoulders up into a 'hair comb ' cover. This combined with foot movement, head movement, slips and weaves. The best 'block' imo is making him miss.

If you mean, do I throw my arm out to meet his arm...no...never.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 20, 2018)

Martial D said:


> do I throw my arm out to meet his arm...no...never.


You don't have to throw your arm to meet your opponent's arm. When you punch your opponent's head, if he blocks, your arm will meet his arm.

You let the fish to swim toward your bait.


----------



## DaveB (Dec 21, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Good questions.
> 
> First, the WC guard sits about sternum level, both hands lined up with center. In theory, you move fast enough from there to stop incoming strikes along the centerline to close to trapping/chi sau range and beat them at the short game. This is problematic for many reasons.
> 
> ...



Fair enough. I've never trained with anyone who held their guard as low as in the image above. I have to wonder if that wasn't an effect of old age that was copied across generations.

I agree about the stance as well, largely because the way you use an extended guard is with distance management. Mobility is key to the method. However, I suspect that the staff form and wooden dummy forms are meant to expand on this aspect of the art.

The stance and footwork of the staff form is completely different and a good lesson in mobility.


----------



## wckf92 (Dec 21, 2018)

DaveB said:


> However, I suspect that the staff form and wooden dummy forms are meant to expand on this aspect of the art.
> 
> The stance and footwork of the staff form is completely different and a good lesson in mobility.



...and the BJD form


----------



## KPM (Dec 21, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Good questions.
> 
> First, the WC guard sits about sternum level, both hands lined up with center. In theory, you move fast enough from there to stop incoming strikes along the centerline to close to trapping/chi sau range and beat them at the short game. This is problematic for many reasons.
> 
> ...



Good points about the classic Wing Chun guard.  And I'll point out about that last part....you just described a version of "Wing Chun Boxing"!


----------



## KPM (Dec 21, 2018)

DaveB said:


> Fair enough. I've never trained with anyone who held their guard as low as in the image above. I have to wonder if that wasn't an effect of old age that was copied across generations.
> 
> .



The image of Ip Man is pretty standard practice.  Augustine Fong used to hold his guard even lower.  It is more of just a "preparatory position"  before going into action than any kind of real "guard."  Because as John has pointed out, it doesn't really "guard" against anything other than a strike directly down the center.  And I don't think it was intended to!  Wing Chun tends to be a fairly aggressive method, you shouldn't just be standing still waiting for the opponent to do something and then passively receive strikes when he does!  Hence Wing Chun doesn't really use a "guard" in the same way as Boxing.  You simply put your hands out in front ready for action, and then go straight in to take the initiative.  And this fits with what I noted before about Wing Chun being an "ambush" style and not a "stand and exchange" style.  

When you look at the forms of most martial arts, they "strike poses" or assume guards and ready positions during the forms.  Wing Chun forms are not like that.  Where do you ever see a "guard position" in any Wing Chun form? Some have said that the move during the 1st section of the dummy form where you shoot your hand out to go between the dummy arms is the using the Wing Chun guard. But I don't think so.  Again, having the hands out if front is just a convenient place to start from.  Granted, William Cheung's dummy form is different because he pauses between each section.  When you pause, you have to leave your hands somewhere!  And again its just a convenient place for your hands to be when preparing for action.  I don't think its any more than that.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 21, 2018)

DaveB said:


> I give up, our species is doomed.



What's the problem? We have Wing Chun instructors getting embarrassed and there's next to no counter examples. What's worse, these situations reinforce preconceived notions of the art itself.

Please keep in mind, there's nothing wrong with this happening if you're not promoting your art as something akin to the fighting arts. If you're promoting this MA as a spiritual pursuit, or something that isn't fighting-based, then there isn't a problem with your instructors getting pummeled in challenge matches, or the art being absent from MMA almost entirely.

When you start saying that WC is right there with Boxing and Bjj, then you need to start producing results.


----------



## Martial D (Dec 21, 2018)

KPM said:


> Good points about the classic Wing Chun guard.  And I'll point out about that last part....you just described a version of "Wing Chun Boxing"!


LOL. You could call it that..although I wouldn't. (Although if we are strictly boxing that's EXACTLY what you'd call it I suppose)

What I do could reasonably be called wing Chun Thai boxing or kickboxing I guess, but with grappling.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 21, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> he WC guard will make the above "front door entry" very difficult.


but it opens the side doors.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 21, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> but it opens the side doors.


Agree! The WC guard make the "separate hands - separate arms away from the body" difficult to apply.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 21, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! The WC guard make the "separate hands - separate arms away from the body" difficult to apply.


When one space opens another closes.  It's only natural


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 22, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> When one space opens another closes.  It's only natural


The extended WC guard is like a spear that can drill a hole through the boxing guard. WC guys should try to use it to the maximum.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 23, 2018)

Eric_H said:


> Yeah, an art that can be traced back at least as far as 1850, and by legend mid 1700's would certainly be influenced by something that came 100-200 years later in a foreign country...
> 
> The mechanics of power delivery and weight distribution are entirely different. Any influence Boxing would have had on WC would be since the 1960's.



'Boxing' has been around in UK and Europe for millennia, the ancient Greeks did boxing as did the Romans and Egyptians. The East India Company btw were in China from the early 17th century CE, the Europeans there since the 16th century CE. There has been recent evidence too that the ancient Greeks were in China.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-alexander-the-great-marco-polo-a7357606.html

 Now whether the two styles share anything in common or not I'll let others discuss but your dates are wrong. European involvement in China goes back to the 16th century CE, at least, may well be further back.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 23, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Well. We have mma. Where we can see schools success.


If they compete. Most do not. It’s a reasonable assumption that those who don’t compete are less capable than those who do, but it doesn’t set an objective standard for competence.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 23, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> It should be noted that a lot of the guys in those videos are Wing Chun instructors.
> 
> Here's one such example:


The reach difference in that one is pretty extreme. It exacerbates the difficulty of using straight WC against a competent fighter, making the WC look worse.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 23, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> The reach difference in that one is pretty extreme. It exacerbates the difficulty of using straight WC against a competent fighter, making the WC look worse.


That's my favorite video.  They pick the guy with 8 foot arms to spar against lol.  

Even though it looks bad you can still see some concepts  that are true regardless.  When you punch straight then you are open on the sides.  When you punch circular then you are open in the middle.  The Wing Chun practitioner didn't understand this and as a result ate a lot of punches from the side.  There are some other things that the WC practitioner didn't understand as well.  The long reach is an advantage and disadvantage.  If a person is good at getting inside of that range then the long reach becomes a disadvantage.  The Winch Chun Practitioner didn't know how to do this.  

From what I've seen and heard from discussion here.  It seems there are 2 main types of Wing Chun Practitioners.  

Those who strictly limit "What Wing Chun should be"
Those who are willing to go beyond those limits "To show what Wing Chun Principles can be/"
There is a documentary somewhere on Youtube that shows the difference between the footwork within the 2 Wing Chun perspectives.

For me personally.  Not sure I would try to highlight Jow Ga against someone with such a long reach advantage.  I notice that they didn't  do kicks in that video and that only gives the guy with a longer reach more of an advantage


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 23, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> The reach difference in that one is pretty extreme. It exacerbates the difficulty of using straight WC against a competent fighter, making the WC look worse.


Every time that we discuss WC chain punches, I like to put up this clip.








JowGaWolf said:


> When you punch straight then you are open on the sides.


In order for your opponent to punch through your side doors,

- his right arm has to go through the left side of your left arm, and
- his left arm has to go through the right side of your right arm.

This will give you a perfect opportunity to separate his arms away from his head. You can then occupy his front door.

IMO, the WC system may only emphasize the center line theory as a striking art. It doesn't address the "front door control" from the throwing art point of view.

Here is an example when a wrestler controls his opponent's front door. When your arm can separate your opponent's arms away from his head, you will have many advantages.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 23, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> The reach difference in that one is pretty extreme. It exacerbates the difficulty of using straight WC against a competent fighter, making the WC look worse.



Wing Chun is supposedly designed for smaller fighters against larger fighters with a size and reach advantage, so the WC instructor should have been in his wheelhouse against the boxer. Instead we see a catastrophic failure from start to finish.

Not a good look anyway you slice it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 23, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Wing Chun is supposedly designed for smaller fighters against larger fighters with a size and reach advantage, so the WC instructor should have been in his wheelhouse against the boxer. Instead we see a catastrophic failure from start to finish.
> 
> Not a good look anyway you slice it.


He looks like someone who never dealt with round punches (as KFW pointed out, that's a visible weakness in the traditional guard). He might have done a bit better if he could have gotten inside, but he wasn't equipped to make that move from as far away as was necessary to overcome those long arms.

This is an area where an overly-limited view of WC probably makes weaknesses into gaps. And when you add the reach advantage, nearly all weaknesses become even weaker.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 23, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> He looks like someone who never dealt with round punches.


This is the problem when people only look MA from his own MA style point of view.

- WC guys fight against WC guys.
- TKD guys fight against TKD guys.
- Wrestlers fight against wrestlers.
- Judo guys fight against Judo guys.
- ...

The chance that you will have to fight against someone from your own school is very small.

When we discuss grabbing, Taiji guys may say that they don't grab. Since their opponent may grab on them, they still have to train how to deal with it.

The problem is if your teacher only has trained one MA system, how will he be able to teach you dealing with other MA systems?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 23, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> If they compete. Most do not. It’s a reasonable assumption that those who don’t compete are less capable than those who do, but it doesn’t set an objective standard for competence.



You are either basing it on something or basing it on nothing. 

People who compete are more capable than those who don't. 

It is a system that works.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 23, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Every time that we discuss WC chain punches, I like to put up this clip.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This only works if you don't punch.  If you punch with that hand then you give up that ability to do this.
My comment is in reference into the opportunity for someone to put me in at head lock.  Also hooks don't travel horizontally.  If you get a diagonal hook that comes at an angle then you won't have that opportunity.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 23, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> This only works if you don't punch.  If you punch with that hand then you give up that ability to do this.
> My comment is in reference into the opportunity for someone to put me in at head lock.  Also hooks don't travel horizontally.  If you get a diagonal hook that comes at an angle then you won't have that opportunity.


Agree! to fully test the

- "anti-grappling", you have to find a good grappler.
- "anti-striking", you have to find a good striker.

People said that when you test

- "anti-grappling", you have to mimic a good grappler.
- "anti-striking", you have to mimic a good striker.

But IMO, if you can mimic a good grappler (or striker), you are already a good grappler (or striker).

Can you mimic yourself as float like a butterfly, sting like a bee? I truly don't think I can.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 23, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! to fully test the
> 
> - "anti-grappling", you have to find a good grappler.
> - "anti-striking", you have to find a good striker.
> ...



yep.  it's a common mistake.

This looks like a bee, but it will never attack like a bee and it will never have a bee's strategy






This is a bee, so if you have to test something that will be used deal with a bee attack then.  You gotta find the real thing.  It may not be the most skilled bee in the hive, but it's still a bee.  If I want to test my skills against a grappler then I need to find a grappler.    But so may school do like you stated.  Mimic.





[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 23, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> If you get a diagonal hook that comes at an angle then you won't have that opportunity.


The following clip is similar to the WC

- left Tan Shou with right punch, followed by
- right Tan Shou with left punch.

- Your opponent uses right hook punch at you.
- You use left hand to block his right punching arm, use right hand to push on his right shoulder. (This is similar to WC Left Tan Shou with right face punch).
- This will let your right side door complete open.
- When your opponent uses left hook punch at your right, you use right arm to wrap his left arm (This is similar to WC right Tan Shou with left face punch), and ...

What do you think about the successful rate of this move? Do you think this training has any combat value?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 23, 2018)

drop bear said:


> You are either basing it on something or basing it on nothing.
> 
> People who compete are more capable than those who don't.
> 
> It is a system that works.


Not completely competing is not équivalent to basing it on nothing. 

People who are going to compete probably typically push themselves to a higher level of functional competence. That certainly seems true of some forms of competition.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 24, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What do you think about the successful rate of this move? Do you think this training has any combat value?


Do be honest I have no idea.  Maybe against a long hook hook that is similar to what is shown, but a shorter hook will probably get through.  The problem with hooks is that they can be like a pick axe




Even if you block the arm of the pick axe you will still get the metal.  Hook punches are like this.  If the hook is long then that will be you best choice for trying that move.  I also know know what is the follow up move when the person tries to back out.   For example, if a person feels that their arm is caught then their natural reaction may be to duck and pull backwards in order to free their arm.  If that happens then it may take away your opportunity to grab the head.

Hard to say  you would have to try it with a variety of hook punches.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 24, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> yep.  it's a common mistake.
> 
> This looks like a bee, but it will never attack like a bee and it will never have a bee's strategy
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


Neither of them are bees, the one you said was a bee is a wasp.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 24, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> Neither of them are bees, the one you said was a bee is a wasp.


Tez corrects me once again. Change Bee to Wasp


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 24, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> He looks like someone who never dealt with round punches (as KFW pointed out, that's a visible weakness in the traditional guard). He might have done a bit better if he could have gotten inside, but he wasn't equipped to make that move from as far away as was necessary to overcome those long arms.
> 
> This is an area where an overly-limited view of WC probably makes weaknesses into gaps. And when you add the reach advantage, nearly all weaknesses become even weaker.



That's sort of my point; WC is supposedly designed to deal with these situations and it has failed in that purpose consistently. What does that say about the system in question's strengths are actually glaring weaknesses.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 24, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> That's sort of my point; WC is supposedly designed to deal with these situations and it has failed in that purpose consistently. What does that say about the system in question's strengths are actually glaring weaknesses.


I think what you are talking about is an exaggeration of Wing Chun fans and not the reality of it.  You have to separate the two. Even professional fighters sometimes have difficulty in getting on the inside.  I've sparred and have had real street fights against someone with longer limbs and I don't ever remember it being easy.  I also remember understanding clearly the disadvantage I was in.  There was not magic bullet, to get me inside.  Just a lot of footwork.  

The only real problem with Wing Chun is with the students who make the assumptions that an opponent is going to punch like Wing Chun Class mates.  If you are a Wing Chun student, non wing chun students don't spar like this.





If you are a Wing Chun Student then this is what you have to be able to apply your Wing Chun to.





It's not the system.  It's the student in the second video is getting better Wing Chun application training.  

In terms of fighting someone with a longer reach.  I've been unfortunate to be smaller than most people I spar against, since starting martial arts so I had no choice but to learn.  But this isn't the norm for most people.  Most schools wouldn't even match up students with that much of a disadvantage as what they Wing Chun guy had with reach.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 24, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> That's sort of my point; WC is supposedly designed to deal with these situations and it has failed in that purpose consistently. What does that say about the system in question's strengths are actually glaring weaknesses.


I don't have any experience with WC to draw from, but what I've seen looks like it could work as part of a complete package. I don't know if some styles of WC have that complete package.

It's probably less efficient than a boxing approach, but "less effective" isn't the same as "ineffective". I'd need to experience sparring with some WC folks to get a better feel. I missed one of my chances when one of our MT brethern was in the area this year - we got into discussing and playing with other areas and never got around to sparring.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 24, 2018)

WC is a CMA system. All CMA has both striking art and grappling art. Boxing is a 100% striking art. Should a WC guy think about how to use his grappling skill to deal with his opponent's striking skill?

Should a WC guy think about how to obtain a clinch instead of thinking about how to exchange punches with his boxer opponent?

For example, to use WC

- Tan Shou to set up arm wrap. The left Tan Shou and right punch, right Tan Shou and left punch is a good combo to be used in the grappling art.
- Fu Shou to set up a reverse head lock (guillotine).
- Bon Shou to hide your head during clinch.
- ...

IMO, the future direction of the WC system is not to move toward 100% striking art but to enhance the grappling art within the WC system. The same logic should also apply to the other CMA systems such as Taiji, XingYi, long fist, preying mantis, Baji, ...


----------



## drop bear (Dec 24, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> That's sort of my point; WC is supposedly designed to deal with these situations and it has failed in that purpose consistently. What does that say about the system in question's strengths are actually glaring weaknesses.



It requires a certain type of fighter as well. Which is the bit I don't like.

Mike Tyson pressure fights so therefore I can.

I mean that sounds right doesn't it?






One of the other issues there is people look at fighters like Tyson and think that is just an awesome way to bash a guy. Who would want to be a boring counter fighter? 

But to actually do it is a different story.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 24, 2018)

IMO, WC is not the only MA system that may have problem to deal with boxing. Almost all CMA systems also have this problem.

We should use kicking and grappling to deal with boxing. We should not use punching to deal with boxing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 24, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, WC is not the only MA system that may have problem to deal with boxing. Almost all CMA systems also have this problem.
> 
> We should use kicking and grappling to deal with boxing. We should not use punching to deal with boxing.


One of my instructors was a golden gloves boxer before he got into JMA, and had to use his ability as a LEO (as an aside, he also taught DT). He often said, "If they want to box, I'll grapple. If they want to grapple, I'll box." This, from a guy who in his mid-60's was still stepping into the ring with new academy trainees to show he could out-box them.


----------



## wtxs (Dec 24, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Then we go train with the guy who can make the method work.
> 
> Who would that guy be?




The mighty Grandmaster Hendrix.  Wish you all a joyous holiday!


----------



## KPM (Dec 25, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, WC is not the only MA system that may have problem to deal with boxing. Almost all CMA systems also have this problem.
> 
> We should use kicking and grappling to deal with boxing. We should not use punching to deal with boxing.



In general, IMO western boxing is the pinnacle of development in striking arts.  So you learn to play their game if you want to be successful striking with them, or you don't play their game at all....as John notes.   Put a good Boxer against a good Wing Chun guy (or any TCMA) and they both have the same amount of training, and I'll put my money on the Boxer every time.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 25, 2018)

JowGaWolf said:


> Tez corrects me once again. Change Bee to Wasp



Both bees and wasps are very useful creatures, there are many different species of both however due to actions of certain governments ( and Presidents) bees may die out and then we are going to be very very sorry. Wasps are also useful though people seem to hate them.


----------



## geezer (Dec 26, 2018)

KPM said:


> In general, IMO western boxing is the pinnacle of development in striking arts.  So you learn to play their game if you want to be successful striking with them, or you don't play their game at all....as John notes.   Put a good Boxer against a good Wing Chun guy (or any TCMA) and they both have the same amount of training, and I'll put my money on the Boxer every time.



Does that mean you have abandoned your work developing a "Wing Chun Boxing" or are still working on a fusion of Western Boxing and TCMA using some WC concepts?

One traditional WC concept I've found useful that really works well from a WC back-weighted stance is using the front leg as a straight-on leg check or stop-kick to your opponent's front leg. Sort of a leg-jab to the shin or knee striking with the bottom of the foot. From a WC perspective it copes with the boxer's longer reach and makes it harder for a boxer to punch with their weight going forward onto the lead leg. It's also a way to distract a boxer and make an opening for moving in close.

WC used this way is much like Jon Jones' "Oblique Kick" in MMA. The WC stance helps keep the body back out of the way.

youtube john jones stop kick - Bing video


----------



## KPM (Dec 26, 2018)

geezer said:


> Does that mean you have abandoned your work developing a "Wing Chun Boxing" or are still working on a fusion of Western Boxing and TCMA using some WC concepts?
> 
> One traditional WC concept I've found useful that really works well from a WC back-weighted stance is using the front leg as a straight-on leg check or stop-kick to your opponent's front leg. Sort of a leg-jab to the shin or knee striking with the bottom of the foot. From a WC perspective it copes with the boxer's longer reach and makes it harder for a boxer to punch with their weight going forward onto the lead leg. It's also a way to distract a boxer and make an opening for moving in close.
> 
> ...



Put what you just described with western boxing hands and you have a primary strategy/method from Savate!


----------



## geezer (Dec 26, 2018)

KPM said:


> Put what you just described with western boxing hands and you have a primary strategy/method from Savate!



On the other hand, when used with Wing Chun hands, the spine is typically kept more vertical, rather than leaning back as you extend the kick in savate, with the objective being to jam your opponent's offense so you can enter using WC hands.

So Keith, what about the second question? Are you still developing your WC Boxing, or are you moving away from the WC aspects altogether?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2018)

geezer said:


> On the other hand, when used with Wing Chun hands, the spine is typically kept more vertical, rather than leaning back as you extend the kick in savate, with the objective being to jam your opponent's offense so you can enter using WC hands.
> 
> So Keith, what about the second question? Are you still developing your WC Boxing, or are you moving away from the WC aspects altogether?



What wing chun aspect isn't contained within boxing. 

I mean ok. Kicks, hand shapes.


----------



## KPM (Dec 26, 2018)

geezer said:


> On the other hand, when used with Wing Chun hands, the spine is typically kept more vertical, rather than leaning back as you extend the kick in savate, with the objective being to jam your opponent's offense so you can enter using WC hands.
> 
> So Keith, what about the second question? Are you still developing your WC Boxing, or are you moving away from the WC aspects altogether?



Taking a break from Wing Chun and focusing on Bowie Knife and Spanish Navaja right now.  But I will say that the punching art I am moving towards is much more like Panantukan.  Much more free-flowing than Wing Chun.  Something I've been picking up from Marcaida Kali.  He uses the multiple sinawali patterns with the sticks to create a flowing defensive and offensive response with the empty hands.  Its pretty instinctive and straight-forward when you've worked the sinawali patterns enough.  At this point I doubt I'll be doing much Wing Chun in the future.  I've been burned once too often and, in my aging years, finally learned my lesson!  Far too many small-minded and petty people involved in Wing Chun.  Present company excluded, of course!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2018)

geezer said:


> Does that mean you have abandoned your work developing a "Wing Chun Boxing" or are still working on a fusion of Western Boxing and TCMA using some WC concepts?
> 
> One traditional WC concept I've found useful that really works well from a WC back-weighted stance is using the front leg as a straight-on leg check or stop-kick to your opponent's front leg. Sort of a leg-jab to the shin or knee striking with the bottom of the foot. From a WC perspective it copes with the boxer's longer reach and makes it harder for a boxer to punch with their weight going forward onto the lead leg. It's also a way to distract a boxer and make an opening for moving in close.
> 
> ...


I use this sort of approach in sparring, too. I've had reasonable success with it, and I tend to prefer hand striking at a range that's only slightly longer than what I understand to be optimal for WC striking, so I'd expect it to be as useful for WC. That back-weighted stance might even give it an advantage over my usage.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2018)

KPM said:


> Taking a break from Wing Chun and focusing on Bowie Knife and Spanish Navaja right now.  But I will say that the punching art I am moving towards is much more like Panantukan.  Much more free-flowing than Wing Chun.  Something I've been picking up from Marcaida Kali.  He uses the multiple sinawali patterns with the sticks to create a flowing defensive and offensive response with the empty hands.  Its pretty instinctive and straight-forward when you've worked the sinawali patterns enough.  At this point I doubt I'll be doing much Wing Chun in the future.  I've been burned once too often and, in my aging years, finally learned my lesson!  Far too many small-minded and petty people involved in Wing Chun.  Present company excluded, of course!


My (rather brief) exposure to FMA stick work had a similar impact on my approach to striking. My stick skills are mediocre, but I've integrated what I understand from them into some of my approach to my primary art. The flow in the stick transitions fits nicely with some of the more accessible "aiki" principles.


----------



## geezer (Dec 27, 2018)

KPM said:


> Taking a break from Wing Chun and focusing on Bowie Knife and Spanish Navaja right now.  But I will say that the punching art I am moving towards is much more like Panantukan.  Much more free-flowing than Wing Chun.  Something I've been picking up from Marcaida Kali.  He uses the multiple sinawali patterns with the sticks to create a flowing defensive and offensive response with the empty hands.  Its pretty instinctive and straight-forward when you've worked the sinawali patterns enough.  At this point I doubt I'll be doing much Wing Chun in the future.  I've been burned once too often and, in my aging years, finally learned my lesson!  Far too many small-minded and petty people involved in Wing Chun.  Present company excluded, of course!



The FMA I've done has had a huge effect on my Wing Chun to the point where I am no longer in agreement with a lot of the teachings of my WC association ...and yet I've still been paying them steep monthly dues. Go figure. 

On the plus side I finally got promoted to "4th Level Technician" last summer and got a nice certificate ...which is stowed away in a drawer somewhere. I know I'll never reach the next rank and that's fine with me. Maybe I should try something new at this point? Just thinking out loud you know.

At any rate must say I've really enjoyed learning from your own eclectic MA journey as you have shared it on this forum.


----------



## yak sao (Dec 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> The FMA I've done has had a huge effect on my Wing Chun to the point where I am no longer in agreement with a lot of the teachings of my WC association.



Steve, what are some things that FMA does that you prefer over VT?


----------



## geezer (Dec 27, 2018)

yak sao said:


> Steve, what are some things that FMA does that you prefer over VT?


It's more about the way I do some of the movements. I think what I do is good VT, but it differs from some of the way my association teaches it. Sometimes I can explain my take on an empty hand movement better by comparing it to how I use a stick or blade. But the real problem is that the association way is authoritarian ...their way is the right way.

Sometimes it's almost like a religion. And sometimes I like to think for myself even if I'm wrong. The system of Escrima I do (coming from Latosa concepts and Torres DTE) encourages that. VT not so much.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 27, 2018)

geezer said:


> It's more about the way I do some of the movements. I think what I do is good VT, but it differs from some of the way my association teaches it. Sometimes I can explain my take on an empty hand movement better by comparing it to how I use a stick or blade. But the real problem is that the association way is authoritarian ...their way is the right way.
> 
> Sometimes it's almost like a religion. And sometimes I like to think for myself even if I'm wrong. The system of Escrima I do (coming from Latosa concepts and Torres DTE) encourages that. VT not so much.


This is one of the reasons I'm not in an association. There are some things I want to do my way, even if I don't think it's inherently better. Some of them I think are better, at least for the way I teach. None of that is really good for an association that's looking for unity. I was invited to rejoin the association a year or two ago, but can't seem to explain to them how different some of my work is.


----------



## KPM (Dec 27, 2018)

*On the plus side I finally got promoted to "4th Level Technician" last summer and got a nice certificate ...which is stowed away in a drawer somewhere. I know I'll never reach the next rank and that's fine with me. *

---As long as you've been doing Wing Chun....and they make it that difficult to move up in their organization?  I say "screw 'em!"  
Wing Chun is NOT that complicated!  I truly believe it was designed to be a more "streamlined" version of TCMA.  I see no reason why the curriculum would be dragged out over decades!  

*Maybe I should try something new at this point? Just thinking out loud you know.*

---Absolutely!  Even if you end up coming back to Wing Chun you will do it with a new perspective and new insights.  But be aware....all the petty and small-minded people won't approve!  

*At any rate must say I've really enjoyed learning from your own eclectic MA journey as you have shared it on this forum.*

---Thanks Steve!


----------



## yak sao (Dec 27, 2018)

Yeah I've got to say I really enjoy just kind of doing things my way. I'm still associated with my sifu, but it's very much a live-and-let-live relationship.

I think there comes a time when WC, or whatever MA you are practicing has to become your own. It's hard to do that when you are made to walk in lockstep with everyone else.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 28, 2018)

Nice to see that Wing Chun debates are still going.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2018)

Transk53 said:


> Nice to see that Wing Chun debates are still going.


Do they ever stop?


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Do they ever stop?



Just hope that they are healthy these days, and not about my Wing Chun is bigger than yours kind of thing.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Dec 28, 2018)

Transk53 said:


> Nice to see that Wing Chun debates are still going.


As long as we don't get into the following arguments:

- First you need to develop the "snake engine".
- We don't do this.
- Your WC is not pure.
- What you do is against the WC principles.
- WC is not only for fighting. If you want to learn how to fight, get yourself a gun.
- People have used WC to beat up MMA guys for years. If you can't use WC in MMA, you haven’t learned your art.
- ...


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> As long as we don't get into the following arguments:
> 
> - First you need to develop the "snake engine".
> - We don't do this.
> ...



Absolutely,

Henrick popped up on Facebook too. Agree with you, I probably tried to wind you up previously, but despite that I always found you to be a good source of information.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> As long as we don't get into the following arguments:
> 
> - First you need to develop the "snake engine".
> - We don't do this.
> ...


You left out "you don't understand WC, that's clear because you don't understand my vague posts".


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 28, 2018)

As I have learnt along the way, Wing Chun itself has evolved In the minds of hearts of many. I myself have a more combat orientated style for the modern age. IMHO, through experience of defending myself etc, those that stick to doctrine is fine, but in the modern age, that doctrine has shifted fundamentally, the tenants of Wing Chun were written ages ago, and back then a baseball bat wasn't anyway near, but a baseball bat could still cap your knee cap if you don't know a effective front kick to alter the body to direct it to your defensive elbow to deflect and strike with your other elbow then withdraw to go in again. Sorry but the so called authentic Wing Chun isn't going to work in the 21st century, without opening yourselves to new techniques to compliment. This VT and etc is going to do anything but get you beat up. Members may well disagree, but I would wager you don't what a fight is. Just my personal take, no offence intended.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 28, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> You left out "you don't understand WC, that's clear because you don't understand my vague posts".



It's nice to see that you in a respectful way, are open to the vague posts that generally amount to same. I like that about you, however vague it maybe, you have an open mind fella


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2018)

Transk53 said:


> It's nice to see that you in a respectful way, are open to the vague posts that generally amount to same. I like that about you, however vague it maybe, you have an open mind fella


Thanks. I'm pretty capable of vague posts, myself, and I like when folks both educate me and challenge my current notions.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 29, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Thanks. I'm pretty capable of vague posts, myself, and I like when folks both educate me and *challenge* *my* *current* *notions*.



Welll put, the emboldened bit struck me as I started my current Wing Chun school. It is unorthodox with changes made to the first form especially. It challenged my notions of Wing Chun.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 29, 2018)

Transk53 said:


> Welll put, the emboldened bit struck me as I started my current Wing Chun school. It is unorthodox with changes made to the first form especially. It challenged my notions of Wing Chun.


I took some time (about 15 years) to examine my own views of my primary art, training is some other arts - both closely related and not - and re-formed most of my approach to the art. Some of the best help I got in that was from people stating views I hadn’t considered, or that I had come to a contrary conclusion to. More to the point, hearing their reasoning (and that of folks I agreed with) helped me change some of my views and reinforce others.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 29, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> I took some time (about 15 years) to examine my own views of my primary art, training is some other arts - both closely related and not - and re-formed most of my approach to the art. Some of the best help I got in that was from people stating views I hadn’t considered, or that I had come to a contrary conclusion to. More to the point, hearing their reasoning (and that of folks I agreed with) helped me change some of my views and reinforce others.



Yes will no doubt that I will be doing a lot of reasoning, especially stance wise. It in class that I first noticed that my footwork was getting compromised. Especially a weakness down my left side. Hopefully it will improve.


----------



## geezer (Dec 29, 2018)

Transk53 said:


> Welll put, the emboldened bit struck me as I started *my current Wing Chun school. It is unorthodox with changes made to the first form especially. *It challenged my notions of Wing Chun.



Please say more!


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 29, 2018)

geezer said:


> Please say more!



In a nutshell this Wing Chun, our way – Wing Chun UK Self Defence


----------

