# Combining Wing Chun and Aikido?



## Drasken (Mar 3, 2013)

Placed this here since it is talking about two different styles. Didn't know where else to put it.

So I talked with an old training buddy of mine and he said in the few years it's been since we trained last he has been taking instruction from a guy that teaches Wing Chun striking mixed with Aikido. Now at first I wasn't sure about this, but after about an hour of messing around and sparring I must say that the two styles seem to compliment each other nicely.
I was wondering if anyone else has heard of this blending of the two styles before and if anyone had thoughts on it. I was considering learning some more since it was really effective in our sparring session, especially since the quick strikes and simultanious defense set me up for a throw or neutralization no matter what strike I threw. I even picked up a couple things in a relatively short period of time that I used later in a spar with my buddy who trains MMA, and was just as surprised as he was at how well it worked.

Any thoughts on the subject?


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

No , no , and absolutely not.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> No , no , and absolutely not.



Lol any specifics why? Is it more of a purity of systems thing or not effective in your opinion? Very curious about this topic and honest opinions, meaning hopefully reasons given for said opinions as well if you wouldn't mind expanding on it?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Mar 4, 2013)

Drasken said:


> Lol any specifics why? Is it more of a purity of systems thing or not effective in your opinion? Very curious about this topic and honest opinions, meaning hopefully reasons given for said opinions as well if you wouldn't mind expanding on it?


Well, i cant give you 'specifics', but they both have two ideologies that you have to stick to for the arts to be effective (push/pull/using opponents weight and force, and keeping the (centerline?)) which, as far as I can tell at least theoretically oppose each other.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 4, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> Well, i cant give you 'specifics', but they both have two ideologies that you have to stick to for the arts to be effective (push/pull/using opponents weight and force, and keeping the (centerline?)) which, as far as I can tell at least theoretically oppose each other.



Aikido as I learned it was blending and moving an opponent's balance off of centerline to throw and neutralize the threat. So I see some similarities in the styles, but the philosophy of each style is different you're right. The thing is that when blending the concepts it ends up coming out on the other side as something completely new. It was an incredibly odd concept which is why I decided to ask for more opinions.
I think it is a completely new animal based off of concepts of the two arts as a straight blending probably wouldn't work at all.
Just wanted to see. Some of the stuff I picked up works rather well. But it is also possible that it was misrepresented as something it was not. I saw several Aikido techniques in the exchanges between my old friend and I, and I admit I know very little of Wing Chun other than concepts from reading about it. So it's possible it was something completely different that was presented as something it wasn't.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 4, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> Well, i cant give you 'specifics', but they both have two ideologies that you have to stick to for the arts to be effective (push/pull/using opponents weight and force, and keeping the (centerline?)) which, as far as I can tell at least theoretically oppose each other.


With that being said, might it not be possible to know how to do both?


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

Drasken said:


> Lol any specifics why? Is it more of a purity of systems thing or not effective in your opinion? Very curious about this topic and honest opinions, meaning hopefully reasons given for said opinions as well if you wouldn't mind expanding on it?



The Wing Chun stance is unique to Wing Chun , and as a result of that , the methods of both generating and overcoming force are also unique to Wing Chun.
They are not interchangeable with other methods.
In other words the Wing Chun arm structures are able to generate and withstand force because they are bolstered by the power transmitted from the Wing Chun stance.
Without the correct stance , the angles of the arms are doomed to collapse under heavy pressure from the opponent.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> The Wing Chun stance is unique to Wing Chun , and as a result of that , the methods of both generating and overcoming force are also unique to Wing Chun.
> They are not interchangeable with other methods.
> In other words the Wing Chun arm structures are able to generate and withstand force because they are bolstered by the power transmitted from the Wing Chun stance.
> Without the correct stance , the angles of the arms are doomed to collapse under heavy pressure from the opponent.



This unfortunately sounds like shortcomings of Wing Chun. However this statement assumes that Aikido is not flexible enough to adapt to another style's stance, which isn't true. I've pulled off Aikido techniques quite well and comfortably from stances such as Krav Maga's boxing like stance.
I see your point and I'm not arguing as my knowledge of Wing Chun is obviously less than your own. But I've heard of many people using Wing Chun as well as incorperating tools from other styles instead of keeping rigid to the style itself. It is possible this is just talk, but it seems to be the newthought that rigidity to one style is too limiting. So many people try to stay fluid.

I would say this is because of MMA, but it happened when Bruce Lee's books were popular as well.

So yes, I thank you for your advice. I take it to heart and will keep it in mind when looking for more info. And hope to hear more opinions as it seems this topic is highly debated. The truth of it is though that I would plan on learning Wing Chun seperately anyway and come to my own conclusion based on my training with it. And that is IF I decided to look that deeply instead of just abandoning this line of thinking as just pure curiousity and nothing more.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

Drasken said:


> This unfortunately sounds like shortcomings of Wing Chun. However this statement assumes that Aikido is not flexible enough to adapt to another style's stance, which isn't true. I've pulled off Aikido techniques quite well and comfortably from stances such as Krav Maga's boxing like stance.



It's got nothing to do with short comings of Wing Chun , the Wing Chun techniques are designed to work with the Wing Chun stance , simple as that.




Drasken said:


> I see your point and I'm not arguing as my knowledge of Wing Chun is obviously less than your own. But I've heard of many people using Wing Chun as well as incorperating tools from other styles instead of keeping rigid to the style itself. It is possible this is just talk, but it seems to be the newthought that rigidity to one style is too limiting. So many people try to stay fluid.
> 
> I would say this is because of MMA, but it happened when Bruce Lee's books were popular as well.



They might think they are doing Wing Chun when attempting to incorporate Wing Chun techniques into their own styles.
But all they are doing is a pale imitation , physically it might look the same but it definitely won't feel the same.
That is because they are missing a vital piece of the puzzle , the correct Wing Chun stance.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> They might think they are doing Wing Chun when attempting to incorporate Wing Chun techniques into their own styles.
> But all they are doing is a pale imitation , physically it might look the same but it definitely won't feel the same.
> That is because they are missing a vital piece of the puzzle , the correct Wing Chun stance.



But once again you assume it isn't the other way around. Is it not possible to execute techniques from other styles in a Wing Chun Stance? Or to switch stances during a fight if one style by itself isn't working?

Either way, I do agree that when you use concepts from many styles together you cannot truely call what you are using any of the component styles. It is at that point an eclectic combination and would be essentially a Mixed Martial Art, although not what people think of when the term is used. But it truely would be.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

Drasken said:


> *But once again you assume it isn't the other way around. Is it not possible to execute techniques from other styles in a Wing Chun Stance?* *Or to switch stances during a fight if one style by itself isn't working?*
> 
> Either way, I do agree that when you use concepts from many styles together you cannot truely call what you are using any of the component styles. It is at that point an eclectic combination and would be essentially a Mixed Martial Art, although not what people think of when the term is used. But it truely would be.



If other techniques from other styles worked properly from a Wing Chun stance then don't you think we would already be using them in Wing Chun ?

Wing Chun is a close quarters fighting system , and when engaged at close quarters with the opponent it is not a good time to have conflicting reflexes or to mess around with switching stances.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> If other techniques from other styles worked properly from a Wing Chun stance then don't you think we would already be using them in Wing Chun ?
> 
> Wing Chun is a close quarters fighting system , and when engaged at close quarters with the opponent it is not a good time to have conflicting reflexes or to mess around with switching stances.




Point taken. And I admit once again that you know Wing Chun much better than I do. I know it may not sound like it, but I do value your advice. It only strikes me as slightly odd because you are the only person that practices Wing Chun that I have talked to on this matter that is so strongly against this concept for the reasons given. Most that argue against it do so for stupid reasons that have nothing to do with the techniques of the styles themselves.

Either way, thank you for giving your opinion on this matter. If nothing else, it will aid me in further research and discussions. It will also help me de ide where to go next with my training, as I am deciding on which style to devote my time to learning, now that I'm getting back into the martial arts.


----------



## K-man (Mar 4, 2013)

There are principles in aikido that fit with all martial arts.  Whether you would choose to introduce aikido techniques into WC or whether you use the aikido principles to better understand your WC is up to you. In karate we have our different stances too and I have no trouble in using the aikido principles and the techniques in my training.

As has been said, you don't want a WC hybrid but expanding your understanding by cross training might work fine. It is really a matter of trying a little. Yoshinkan aikido may well have similar principles to WC.   :asian:


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> If other techniques from other styles worked properly from a Wing Chun stance then don't you think we would already be using them in Wing Chun ?



Not necessarily, unless you believe that Wing Chun is the be-all and end-all of Martial Arts and is totally 100% perfect for all situations.
Obviously this is not the case, so it is reasonable to wonder what non-WC techniques might work well for WC practitioners. Or what WC techniques might work well for non-WC practitioners.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

Dirty Dog said:


> Not necessarily, unless you believe that Wing Chun is the be-all and end-all of Martial Arts and is totally 100% perfect for all situations.
> Obviously this is not the case, so it is reasonable to wonder what non-WC techniques might work well for WC practitioners. Or what WC techniques might work well for non-WC practitioners.



I do not believe Wing Chun to be the be-all and end-all of martial arts.
But I do believe that it excels in the range that it was designed for and that is close quarters striking and manipulation of the opponents balance.
There is no doubt that Wing Chun is the descendant of several earlier Kung Fu systems , these earlier systems probably contained some elements of throwing and chi na similar to Aikido.

Wing Chun in it's early phase a few hundred years ago probably contained these components as well.
But in keeping with Wing Chuns minimalist approach and emphasis on efficiency a lot of techniques deemed unessential were discarded by the founders over the years.

 This was maybe because they required the use of brute strength , were not practical or violated other important Wing Chun principles.
The Wing Chun we have today is the result of being streamlined and pared down to what works within the framework of Wing Chun.

Now if people want to go around throwing chain punches from a boxing stance with boxing footwork , good luck to them.
But it's not Wing Chun , and it will not work like it does in Wing Chun.

Similarly if they want to try and do Aikido throws on people using the Wing Chun stance , go for it.
But that is not what it was designed for.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Mar 4, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> With that being said, might it not be possible to know how to do both?


I'm far less than an expert on this, and someone like mook jong man would be better to answer, or an aikido practitioner, but I think they would be awesome to know how to do both. However, they're distinctly separate, and as I said, oppose each other a bit, so you would have to do one or the other, maybe switch between them, but trying to combine the two into one system, like the instructor appears to have done, wouldn't work in theory. However, if an instructor has found a way to make the two work, and its effective, more power to him. Doubt purists of WC or aikido will be very happy about it, but if it works, it works.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 4, 2013)

kempodisciple said:


> I'm far less than an expert on this, and someone like mook jong man would be better to answer, or an aikido practitioner, but I think they would be awesome to know how to do both. However, they're distinctly separate, and as I said, oppose each other a bit, so you would have to do one or the other, maybe switch between them, but trying to combine the two into one system, like the instructor appears to have done, wouldn't work in theory. However, if an instructor has found a way to make the two work, and its effective, more power to him. Doubt purists of WC or aikido will be very happy about it, but if it works, it works.



Ive been meaning to reply again, but i decided against it. Now i will 
In my thinking, i was thinking that you could just, you know. Transition from a WC stance to an Aikido stance. It wouldnt be too hard.
But, thats more along the lines of learning both seperately. But, couldnt you learn them at the same time, albeit as seperate things, with a format in which to train them? I mean, learning to use Aikido from WC drills. Less about techniques, more about training methods.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Mar 4, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Ive been meaning to reply again, but i decided against it. Now i will
> In my thinking, i was thinking that you could just, you know. Transition from a WC stance to an Aikido stance. It wouldnt be too hard.
> But, thats more along the lines of learning both seperately. But, couldnt you learn them at the same time, albeit as seperate things, with a format in which to train them? I mean, learning to use Aikido from WC drills. Less about techniques, more about training methods.


Hmm i guess that could work, although it sounded like the instructor was training the techniques together, which IMO wouldnt work. As for transitioning, thats what I meant by switch between them, but still think the techniques from both should be separated when learning them. As I said, if the instructor figured out how to teach them together, and it works, I'm not going to argue with him...that would be like arguing with a painter that blue and red dont make purple.


----------



## geezer (Mar 4, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Wing Chun in it's early phase a few hundred years ago probably contained these components as well. But in keeping with Wing Chun's minimalist approach and emphasis on efficiency a lot of techniques deemed unessential were discarded by the founders over the years. This was maybe because they required the use of brute strength, were not practical, or violated other important Wing Chun principles.
> 
> The Wing Chun we have today is the result of being streamlined and pared down to what works within the framework of Wing Chun.



This is very well put, Mook. If more chunner's really stopped to think about this, maybe they wouldn't always be trying to add on extra techniques taken from other systems. That always struck me like buying a beautiful sports car and then covering it with cheesy stickers and chrome doo-dads from your corner auto-shop. 

On the other hand, I would beg to differ with your statement below implying that WC only works from a WC stance and posture. 



mook jong man said:


> Now if people want to go around throwing chain punches from a boxing stance with boxing footwork , good luck to them. But it's not Wing Chun , and it will not work like it does in Wing Chun.



My old Chinese sifu used to claim that WC really came down to a way of moving, ...a way of using your body to exploit your opponent's force and defeat him with maximum efficiency. For this purpose, our stance is ideal ...but not absolutely necessary. He claimed that when you reach the highest levels of proficiency (something I personally can only dream about) you can outwardly assume the appearance of a boxer, karateka, thai boxer, choy lee fut stylist, or whatever, _and still apply wing chun. 

_To prove his point he would physically mimic other styles (something he did quite well) and have us "attack" him. He would respond according to wing chun concepts and effortlessly dissolve our attacks. Afterwards, he would conclude by saying that when you are good enough, you can apply you wing chun in any form, from any position. It just works _best _as it was designed. That's why we call it a _system_, not just a style. 

Now, getting back to the OP, I'd say that some lineages of WC may share certain concepts with Aikido, although I can't say for sure as I have never trained in that art. I do know that the WC I train is "soft" and "flexible", and it abhorrs crude resistance and crashing force against force, but rather seeks to borrow and use an opponent's force. To me, these sound rather similar to some Aikido precepts. 

On the other hand, we are a practical _fighting_ system that favors very compact and efficient movements, we favor straightlines over circles, and release our strikes with great speed and explosive, yet "elastic" force to effectively annihilate our attacker. None of this seems compatible with what little I've seen and heard said of aikido.

Moreover, mastering just one of these arts is a life's work. Studying several arts can be counterproductive. I study WC and Escrima, so _yes_, I know _it's possible _to study two or more_ separate _arts, but it can also slow down you progress in each art individually. By contrast,_ combining _different arts is, in my opinion, a huge mistake.


----------



## jasonbrinn (Mar 4, 2013)

Can I just suggest that if you do combine these a possible name blending both might be......wait for it......WINDO!  Funny to me anyway.  Hey, the beauty of training is that you can combine whatever you want.  If you are asking about the validity then it becomes a matter of opinion and experience.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 4, 2013)

geezer said:


> This is very well put, Mook. If more chunner's really stopped to think about this, maybe they wouldn't always be trying to add on extra techniques taken from other systems. That always struck me like buying a beautiful sports car and then covering it with cheesy stickers and chrome doo-dads from your corner auto-shop.
> 
> *On the other hand, I would beg to differ with your statement below implying that WC only works from a WC stance and posture. *
> 
> ...



I understand what you are saying Geezer about the stance , and to a certain extent I agree with you.
Our Sigung Tsui Seung Tin has mentioned in the past that at the higher levels of Wing Chun you do not need the  horse stance anymore in order to be able to generate force.

It's a bit esoteric but in our lineage we believe that after many years of training , the stance is no longer purely physical , but has a rather large mental aspect to it in the form of a force that he calls "Nim Lik" or "Thought Force" cultivated by diligent practice of the Sil Lum Tao form.

Basically you believe you are in your stance mentally , therefore you are.
But we are talking decades upon decades of training to be able to achieve that level.

For the rest of us plebs however , we better sink our weight down and make sure we have all our ducks in a row in order to have our Wing Chun work optimally for us.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Mar 4, 2013)

.


----------



## K-man (Mar 4, 2013)

geezer said:


> . My old Chinese sifu used to claim that WC really came down to a way of moving, ...a way of using your body to exploit your opponent's force and defeat him with maximum efficiency. For this purpose, our stance is ideal ...but not absolutely necessary. He claimed that when you reach the highest levels of proficiency (something I personally can only dream about) you can outwardly assume the appearance of a boxer, karateka, thai boxer, choy lee fut stylist, or whatever, _and still apply wing chun.
> 
> _To prove his point he would physically mimic other styles (something he did quite well) and have us "attack" him. He would respond according to wing chun concepts and effortlessly dissolve our attacks. Afterwards, he would conclude by saying that when you are good enough, you can apply you wing chun in any form, from any position. It just works best as it was designed. That's why we call it a system, not just a style.
> 
> ...


I believe that the key principle of both styles, and this obviously applies across the board, is the development of core strength and the ability to disrupt your opponent's centre while maintaining your own. Aikido is the best system I have seen to achieve that as without it aikido just doesn't work.  Whether someone is prepared to put in the time and effort required to achieve a level where the aikido principles can be applied seamlessly to their training is another thing.  :asian:


----------



## Ediaan (Mar 14, 2013)

Drasken said:


> Point taken. And I admit once again that you know Wing Chun much better than I do. I know it may not sound like it, but I do value your advice. It only strikes me as slightly odd because you are the only person that practices Wing Chun that I have talked to on this matter that is so strongly against this concept for the reasons given. Most that argue against it do so for stupid reasons that have nothing to do with the techniques of the styles themselves.
> 
> Either way, thank you for giving your opinion on this matter. If nothing else, it will aid me in further research and discussions. It will also help me de ide where to go next with my training, as I am deciding on which style to devote my time to learning, now that I'm getting back into the martial arts.


I also agree with mook jong man. You can do both styles, but the foot work of Wing Chun / Tsun is unique to it.
I understand as well that both styles uses deformative action, especially when it comes to you opponent using excessive force, however, Wing Chun / Tsun is a more centre line approching and aggressive art. We don't want our opponents to be turned away from us, we want our centre to be on his centre.

It's a good idea, but unfortunately it simply cannot be amalgamated.


----------



## GaryR (Mar 15, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> No , no , and absolutely not.



Actually, yes, yes, and absolutely yes. 



			
				K-Man said:
			
		

> There are principles in aikido that fit with all martial arts.



Exactly correct. 

You should study the blend, assuming it is done well of course.  I have trained with individuals that were purists in both arts, and people that have indeed blended them--many of them instructors in their respective arts.  The blend will only serve to give you more tools, and done well will not compromise either one.  I good Aikidoka can still strike well, it's a precursor to their wonderful throws/breaks.  A good WC person knows how to trap well--often a precursor to their powerful and direct strikes.  The two do not need to conflict.  Believe it or not, you can trap, strike, and throw (and/or lock) quite well and seamlessly.  I believe it was k-man who already mentioned small-circle...Surely he understands what I am saying.

Take Xingyi for example, similar to WC in its more direct approach, and with just as powerful strikes (if not more so) sans the exact special WC stance.    Xingyi blends very well with Baguazhang.  In fact the masters tend to student swap on purpose.  Baguazhang is closer to Aikido with the use of the circle/blend.   



mook jong man said:


> "at the higher levels of Wing Chun you do not need the  horse stance anymore in order to be able to generate force.
> 
> It's a bit esoteric but in our lineage we believe that after many years  of training , the stance is no longer purely physical , but has a rather  large mental aspect to it in the form of a force that he calls "Nim  Lik" or "Thought Force" cultivated by diligent practice of the Sil Lum  Tao form.



The mind and the body work together to generate force.  Force is a distinctive equation. [SIZE=-1]Newton's 2nd Law tells us that force = mass x acceleration.  Ther[SIZE=-1]e is nothing esoteric about it, your bodies [SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]physiology/biology[/SIZE] doesn't magically change over time, nor do physics.[SIZE=-1]  An[SIZE=-1]y time you hear someone say something like the above-they are really saying, they don't know how their teacher does it, or why, but it works for that teacher, and they [SIZE=-1]will just do what they are told until the magic [SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]happens[/SIZE]. Well, there is no magic, no [SIZE=-1]"esoteric", there [SIZE=-1]are [SIZE=-1]physics and mechanics, and how you train yourself to apply them in combat.  I[SIZE=-1]f someone is telling you no, no, no, do not b[SIZE=-1]lend-well, they don't really have an understanding of the physics/mechanics of either, or in[SIZE=-1] general- [SIZE=-1]well enough to advise you on the matter. [/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]  

In the end, use your common sense, look at all your training options, and go with what appears to be the most effective. [SIZE=-1]Without seeing[SIZE=-1] the teachers, [SIZE=-1]generically and statistically[/SIZE] speaking if I had to pick, I wo[SIZE=-1]uld pick WC (though both are great arts).  But given the choice of someone who can blend the two, [SIZE=-1]hands down, go with that. No question.  

G

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]







[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE] 

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 16, 2013)

I really don't see the point of trapping someone , striking them and then throwing them or locking them.
After the trap and the strike , the person should be knocked out , there shouldn't be anything left standing to lock or throw.

I stand by my words , I don't think Wing Chun and Aikido are compatible.
In the video below you see the Aikido master at times with his back turned to the attacker , side on to the attacker , he's all over the shop.
A Wing chun person would never do this , we are always facing the opponents centerline
He also leans and bends at the waist changing posture , in Wing Chun we don't lean our back is always straight.

The angles of his arms change all the time , in Wing Chun when our limbs make contact with the opponents arms , our arms are always in the optimum angle (elbow approx two fists distance from the body) this angle only changes when we are striking.
These are only a few conflicts I can see , there are bound to be more.

I reckon trying to marry these two together your just going to end up with a mess of conflicting reflexes. 
You've got a split second to react , do I hit? , do I lock? , do I throw? , oh no too late I've already been hit.
As the great Wing Chun man , Wong Shun Leung said "If you have to think about it , it's too late".

Aikido

[video=youtube_share;-oLRA63iQtA]http://youtu.be/-oLRA63iQtA[/video]

Wing Chun

[video=youtube_share;YWjsr7Yr5tY]http://youtu.be/YWjsr7Yr5tY[/video]


----------



## K-man (Mar 16, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> I really don't see the point of trapping someone , striking them and then throwing them or locking them.
> After the trap and the strike , the person should be knocked out , there shouldn't be anything left standing to lock or throw.
> 
> I'm not sure what this comment has to do with Aikido. Trapping is not normally my first thought from an aikido perspective. I would be entering to blend with the attack and if I was striking I would hope that my strike was enough to at least upset the momentum of the attacker. (I'm not sure that even WC punches result in a KO every time.) As to throws. I had to know one for grading but apart from that, there are no 'throws'. Any demonstration of a 'throw' is more of a demonstration of Ukemi.  Locks and holds can be useful for control. Knocking people out can get you into trouble in a litigious society.
> ...


*Mook*, I'm not sure how much Aikido you have seen but the video here is nothing like the aikido we train.  Things we have in common are entering, blending and striking. The locks and holds are the same as Chi Na.  Keeping your centre, maintaining posture, always having your centre facing your opponent are the same in both. 

I'm not for one minute suggesting merging both arts into one, but if you are a skilled practitioner in one form of MA you should be able to use sound principles to help you in your primary art ... unless, of course, you believe your primary art is perfect to begin with.   :asian:


----------



## GaryR (Mar 16, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> I really don't see the point of trapping someone , striking them and then throwing them or locking them.
> After the trap and the strike , the person should be knocked out , there shouldn't be anything left standing to lock or throw.



So what you are saying here, is that every time you hit someone it will be a KO, guaranteed.  That is just delusional.  

What if your strike doesn't even land? The patty-cake needs to end as quickly as possible.  A throw right after a strike is a quick easy way to ensure it.  The throw can be just an extension of the strike, just continuing through their center after contact, on contact you should have taken their center, and throwing during the movement is just  a product of not giving it back.  Ideally, yes they should be KO'd, but if you throw in the same movement, the only harm is tossing a KO'd person as they are falling anyhow!  

A break/lock can happen even as you are trapping and striking.  This clip shows a break/lock and elbow strike follow up after intercepting two punches--assuming the first has been thwarted.  The elbow is more than enough to take someone out in a perfect world-but a throw follow up can be done nonetheless.  The movement is exaggerated in the beginning as it is showing how to apply variants of a Xingyi form.  











This was a clip of breaking down that last movement, and adding the throw.














Most of the time it is a fair assumption the first strike will not be blocked, especially if you pull them in and hammer through their center-line more (or trap more and hammer through). It is also a fair assumption that most of the time an elbow to the back of the head will KO someone.  But by tossing someone down as a part of the movement, one can be even more certain they will not get up.  At the very least it will create an opportunity to leave.  

K-Man made a great point about a litigious society.  Now, it's harder to control someone and throw, than to just KO them, but if there is opportunity to do less damage-- great.  Fortunately for two individuals not to long ago in Santa Monica I was able to toss them both down without striking them, all while the cops just watched, and in the end the guys apologized and thanked me for not hurting them.  Without knowing how to blend/redirect/throw quickly that wouldn't have happened.  The more tools one has at their disposal the better.  Assuming every punch will land, or that every punch can cause a KO is dangerous and delusional--no matter how well trained you are, or how hard you hit.  Nobody is exempt from Mr. Murphy.



			
				K-Man said:
			
		

> I'm not sure how much Aikido you have seen but the video here is nothing  like the aikido we train.  Things we have in common are entering,  blending and striking. The locks and holds are the same as Chi Na.   Keeping your centre, maintaining posture, always having your centre  facing your opponent are the same in both.



The video is also nothing like the better Aikido I have seen either.  Although I have seen Aikido like that video, I consider that to be the showman's version, or the modern "Wushu" like version to put it in Chinese terms.  



			
				K-man said:
			
		

> Trapping is not normally my first thought from an  aikido perspective. I would be entering to blend with the attack and if I  was striking I would hope that my strike was enough to at least upset  the momentum of the attacker.




Entering to blend as you strike can be faster and just as effective than trapping/striking.  





			
				K-man said:
			
		

> You've got a split second to react , do I hit? , do I lock? , do I throw? , oh no too late I've already been hit.
> As the great Wing Chun man , Wong Shun Leung said "If you have to think about it , it's too late".
> 
> That is something we all should have in common.




It certainly is.  They are all options that should be built into your conditioned responses by adrenal stress training, tactile sensitivity training and drills (think sticky hands, and well beyond), slow sparring, etc.

You probably have more in common with good Aikido than you think.

I've seen good Aikidoka stop a good WC'ers technique, and visa versa.  Learning both is not a bad idea, open your mind and empty your cup a little --it's OK to be wrong sometimes, and here you certainly are, I promise.:uhyeah:
:asian:


----------



## Drasken (Mar 16, 2013)

So, after further research I've discovered that study of both of these styles is common. This is because they share a LOT of concepts. However I also think it has to do with how Aikido is taught now.
The fact is that a lot of instructors teach aikido with very little striking involved. I started training with someone in the area that teaches the atemi as a vital part of Aikido that is often neglected. The strikes I've now been taught look very similar to WC in some respects because it is all to weak spots on the body, and very quick. But they have nothing to do with WC. The more I research O'Sensei, the more I realize how important striking really was to his Aikido for a long time.

I still think study of one style can aid in picking up the concepts of the other, but if one is taught striking in Aikido there really isn't a need to blend the 2.
I do still believe in having no fixed style however. Having a strict adherence to one style is like only having one type of screwdriver, wrench, etc. in your toolbox. You might be able to find a way to adapt your tools to a certain situation, but it's much better to have multiple tools for different situations. The key is being able to decide quickly and without much thought to figure out which tool to use for which situation.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 16, 2013)

You are assuming that we only hit once and we only use our hands
We can use a barrage of punches and kicks that will put someone down , even knees and elbows , not just the commonly seen chain punching .
Just as we have chain punching , we also have chain kicking.
A rapid series of three low kicks  to the opponents legs that can be completed in under a second.

Who are you going to use this Wing Chun / Aikido hybrid against , if you start trying to get all grabby in Chi Sau against another Wing Chun  guy , trying to put their arms in a lock they are just going to punch you in the face with the other hand.
Had a jujitsu black belt try to grab my fingers and break them once , as he went to bend my fingers back I punched him straight in the mouth with my free hand , end of story.

Wing Chun does not use Chi Na , well not offensively anyway.
We do have a few certain locks but they are  only used as a response to *ourselves being grabbed first.*
We don't try and initiate a lock by grabbing first , it's far to slow , ties up one of your arms  and will get you punched in the face by another Wing Chun guy.

At the end of the day , people can do what the hell they want.
But there are consequences , many martial arts are bloated enough as they are with too many techniques.
There's a reason in Wing Chun that  we only have the three main structures of Tan Sau , Fook Sau , and Bong Sau  , that's because they are drilled constantly and easy to remember.
We try to minimise and streamline , not bloody add to it. 

If your heads filled with hundreds of techniques to choose from , striking to locking to throwing  , it's debatable how you will respond under pressure when the **** hits the fan.

But as I said people can do what they want , I have enough to work on in my Wing Chun to last me a life time.


----------



## GaryR (Mar 16, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> You are assuming that we only hit once and we only use our hands
> We can use a barrage of punches and kicks that will put someone down , even knees and elbows , not just the commonly seen chain punching .



I don't know if this was directed at me, K-man, or someone else, but this was certainly not an assumption I made.  Far from news to me.  I have extensive experience playing with WC peeps, three of my students in the past have been WC instructors.  



mook jong man said:


> Who are you going to use this Wing Chun / Aikido hybrid against , if you start trying to get all grabby in Chi Sau against another Wing Chun  guy , trying to put their arms in a lock they are just going to punch you in the face with the other hand.  Had a jujitsu black belt try to grab my fingers and break them once , as he went to bend my fingers back I punched him straight in the mouth with my free hand , end of story.



The concept of "Cai" or pluck from Taiji can fair well occasionally in Chi Sau actually.  If done well, it can snatch you off your feet very quickly with one hand, while the other punches you in the face or whatever.  Perhaps if the Jujitsu guy had punched you in the face at the same time he bent your fingers the results would have been different?  But, I certainly wouldn't use a finger grab regardless.  That being said, the saying "don't chase a lock" is a good one. 



mook jong man said:


> If your heads filled with hundreds of techniques to choose from , striking to locking to throwing  , it's debatable how you will respond under pressure when the **** hits the fan.
> 
> But as I said people can do what they want , I have enough to work on in my Wing Chun to last me a life time.



I do agree that less is more.  Learning far too many techniques is definitely a pitfall many martial arts/artists fall into.  But learning striking, locking, and throwing does not necessitate such excessive memorization. These things should be broken down by concept/principles.  Principles of movement and manipulation.  One movement principle can yield countless variations and applications.  One need not memorize hundreds of applications to be able to manifest hundreds of applications.   

I certainly hope you live longer and pursue further knowledge. You don't have to be a technique collector, but find a good Bagua/Taiji guy to show you some two man drills at least, expand your  horizons!

G


----------



## K-man (Mar 17, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> You are assuming that we only hit once and we only use our hands
> We can use a barrage of punches and kicks that will put someone down , even knees and elbows , not just the commonly seen chain punching .
> Just as we have chain punching , we also have chain kicking.
> A rapid series of three low kicks  to the opponents legs that can be completed in under a second.
> ...



What I posted earlier ...



> *There are principles in aikido that fit with all martial arts. Whether you would choose to introduce aikido techniques into WC or whether you use the aikido principles to better understand your WC is up to you.*
> 
> As has been said, *you don't want a WC hybrid *but expanding your understanding by cross training might work fine.


----------



## K-man (Mar 17, 2013)

I've just spent a couple of hours trawling the Internet trying to find evidence of WC using locks and holds.  Despite the mention that these are in the system they do not seem o be widely taught. In fact many WC practitioners are saying they would like to perform these more effectively.   I couldn't find any video demonstrating effective WC locks.

I looked at many forum comments before I came across this ....



> *Question* ...  "Can you use Wing Chun to deal with less than 'LETHAL STREET ATTACKS"? In other words, can you use it simply to restrain someone? Are there joint locks, holds or throws in Wing Chun? How do you deal with an opponent if you want to stop them without smashing them up?"
> 
> *Answer* ...  "So in summary , no , Wing Chun does not do the restraint thing very well , a lot of restraint techniques would be contrary to the principle of minimum use of brute strength as it is seen from a Wing Chun perspective.
> 
> ...



But, from what I read and watched, cross training in Aikido may well complement your WC, with the proviso that you have he right teacher.
:asian:


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 17, 2013)

K-man said:


> I've just spent a couple of hours trawling the Internet trying to find evidence of WC using locks and holds.  Despite the mention that these are in the system they do not seem o be widely taught. In fact many WC practitioners are saying they would like to perform these more effectively.   I couldn't find any video demonstrating effective WC locks.
> 
> I looked at many forum comments before I came across this ....
> 
> ...



Yeah I said that.
You could fuse them , but to transition to that phase you are no longer using Wing Chun anymore you are using strength.
Could a slightly built woman use the techniques against a large male?

I can sweep people , or throw people from Chi Sau , been doing it for years for a bit of fun
But to get to that range I have to use quite a bit of strength to get past their elbow , lucky for me I am quite strong.

But I am also fully aware of the fact that as  I am doing it I am breaking one of the principles of my lineage and most other Wing Chun systems and that is sticking to the rule about using only the minimum of brute strength.
In the eyes of our Sigung Tsui Seung Tin he would probably consider that what I was doing was not Wing Chun anymore.

It is possible to do these things , but as I said before they contradict quite a few Wing Chun principles , primarily the one about minimum use of brute strength.
It might not be seen as using much strength by other styles  , but in our lineage Sigung Tsui truly believes the founder of Wing Chun was the  Abbess Ng Mei , a very slightly built small woman.
So of course our outlook and philosophy on Wing Chun training and techniques  will reflect this.


----------



## K-man (Mar 17, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Yeah I said that.
> You could fuse them , but to transition to that phase you are no longer using Wing Chun anymore you are using strength.
> Could a slightly built woman use the techniques against a large male?
> 
> ...


I agree 100% that if you start to use strength it can't work .. for aikido or WC.  That is why there is a synergy and perhaps why a lot of aikido may not be suitable for WC.  But we prove, every day we train, that as soon as you try to use strength against someone the same strength as you, or stronger, it is almost impossible to get the technique to work. Here i am talking of performing a given technique without atemi and against total resistance. Most aikido is not tested that way. Ueshiba was quite slight in his latter years yet he was still able to perform effective aikido. As we all get older we are going to lose strength and speed. From what I have seen and felt I know that that can be replaced with good soft technique. That is the main principle that I believe potentially ties aikido to every other martial art.   

*Mook*, from your posts over many years, I believe we are on the same page. I just think you haven't been exposed to the type of aikido I am referring to and, unfortunately, I have no video to post. You'll just have to pay us a visit sometime.    :asian:


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 17, 2013)

K-man said:


> I agree 100% that if you start to use strength it can't work .. for aikido or WC.  That is why there is a synergy and perhaps why a lot of aikido may not be suitable for WC.  But we prove, every day we train, that as soon as you try to use strength against someone the same strength as you, or stronger, it is almost impossible to get the technique to work. Here i am talking of performing a given technique without atemi and against total resistance. Most aikido is not tested that way. Ueshiba was quite slight in his latter years yet he was still able to perform effective aikido. As we all get older we are going to lose strength and speed. From what I have seen and felt I know that that can be replaced with good soft technique. That is the main principle that I believe potentially ties aikido to every other martial art.
> 
> *Mook*, from your posts over many years, I believe we are on the same page. I just think you haven't been exposed to the type of aikido I am referring to and, unfortunately, I have no video to post. You'll just have to pay us a visit sometime.    :asian:



Yes , your correct I haven't seen much Aikido outside of the Steven Seagal type in the movies or the people offering there arm out to get thrown around like a dead fish variety.
But just as there can be some very average Wing Chun shown on Youtube , I imagine it would be the same case for Aikido.
There would be a minority of people teaching the real stuff , and a whole lot more people teaching garbage.

K-man , You sound like your a good style of bloke.
If you reckon you do the real stuff then I'm apt to believe you.


----------

