Are there major flaws in wing chun?

[Kung Fu Wang]

Can somebody tell me if this arguing about which lineage is best and which lineage sucks is only in wing chun or is it the same problem in all martial arts?

In the Shuai Chiao (Chinese wrestling) system,

- Some people use "hip bouncing" in hip throw. Some people use "waist lifting" in hip throw.
- Some people sweep with the "edge of the foot". Some people sweep with the "bottom of the foot".
- Some people use their "upper leg" to bounce on their opponent's upper leg. Some people use their "lower leg" to bounce on their opponent's upper leg.
- Some people use "shin bite" on their opponent's lower leg. Some people use "scoop" on their opponent's ankle.
- ...

In SC, people believe that dragon has 9 sons. They all look different. One of it's son looks like turtle.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Personally, I feel there are huge holes in Ip Man derived WC.

There are holes in many MA systems. The traditional format such as to use:

- non-resistance "partner drill" for skill developing,
- full resistance "sparring/wrestling" for skill testing.

is not that easy to develop any individual skill. There is a training step missing between "partner drill" and "sparring/wrestling".

 

[Punchy]

Personally, I feel there are huge holes in Ip Man derived WC. It's why I ended up switching out of it and why I think you see the guys doing arguably the best with it have had to mix it with other styles.

What do you see as its shortcomings?
Do you think it was just in his HK teaching or even with Fotshan era as well?

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

No style can be everything.... And those that try are going to lose something.

My view on does wing chun have holes (in at least its stand up approach) is that it depends what your wing chun focus is. If you look at wing chun as an engine of force generation concepts and ideas, as I tend to do, then you can be very flexible in the way you apply the techniques. My own view is that wing chun was never meant to be this system of moves against different moves. It is a principle based system. You are not meant to jump into a cage with it and hold your man sau wu out with a straight arm while standing still.

One of my teachers is a lady that has never done any grappling before. I have a blue belt in BJJ but haven't practiced for years. As a bluebelt, you can pretty much have your way with whitebelts or people that haven't trained in grappling before. Even guys with a huge weight advantage. We put the mats down and decided to have a roll. And while I was able to tap her a lot, I was shocked at how hard I had to work considering she had no grappling experience. Some moves didn't work like they would on most people and she seemed to be learning and adapting quickly to what I was doing. My sense was that if she learned BJJ she would pick it up super quickly. In chi sao she has an incredibly strong structure and is very hard to do anything with. This is the benefit of taking a force approach to wing chun. It has cross over value into other scenarios and arts.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

MA not only include what kind attack that you will use on your opponent, it also includes how you will deal with your opponent's attack.

If you ask a boxer how will he deal with a foot sweep, he may not have answer for it. This is why we should look at fighting from all different angles and not just from an angle from one particular style.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Apparently you have moved in some pretty positive and enlightened martial arts circles, because I've seen and experienced the same kind of extreme factionalism you mentioned in many other martial arts besides Wing Chun. For example, back in grad school, a friend of mine from New Orleans was working on his black belt test in Japanese Shotokan under some famous old Japanese sensei named Nakayama or something. To keep up his training while in school here in Arizona, he attended a dojo run by another famous old Japanese sensei named Koyama. When one sensei found out that he was training with the other (I forget which was which --this was back in the 80s) he was asked to leave the dojo! I've seen similar feuds in Kempo, TKD, ...even Tai Chi and Aikido for goodness sake.

So it really depends on the people involved. We've got a lot of good people on this forum. We shouldn't let a few contentious individuals ruin this forum. Just ignore them and keep contributing in a positive way.



No argument really. What you see is, after all, a demo! It's a showy attempt designed to illustrate a concept through exaggeration, not to teach a specific technique.

When one sensei found out that he was training with the other (I forget which was which --this was back in the 80s) he was asked to leave the dojo!

What you see is, after all, a demo! It's a showy attempt designed to illustrate a concept through exaggeration, not to teach a specific technique. Ahhh got ya. Either way he was still right and he just made same adjustments that other systems make, which is to add forward movement. Striking in the air requires that the strike uses either forward, upward, or circular movement in order to pull of the strike while in the air.

 

[geezer]

...Either way he was still right and he just made same adjustments that other systems make, which is to add forward movement. Striking in the air requires that the strike uses either forward, upward, or circular movement in order to pull of the strike while in the air.

Yeah. In the air ...on the ground. Different situations, but the same laws of physics apply.

In one of his clips, I believe Alan Orr stated that punching power comes from dropping, rising, pressing forward, or turning. Or, I might add, a combination of the above. So dropping and falling = downward diagonal force, rising and turning = upward spiraling force, etc. Pretty simple really. And pretty universal. I find that works for what I do in Escrima as well. I imagine it should work fo Jow Ga too?

 

[Chester Wright]

If you are referring to the problems of Wing Chun as a Combat Art these are my thoughts.

We have several people in our dojo that have backgrounds in Wing Chun. A lot of great concepts, however concepts don't win fights. Practicing forms and Chi Sau doesn't prepare you for actual combat.
There are several videos on YouTube of Wing Chun practitioners that stepped into MMA Cages only to find that they were very ill prepared for a fight, one of the most famous videos was of a Wing Chun Practitioner in my area that took on a guy that smoked him inside of a minute.

Even while sparring the guys in my dojo that have a heavy Wing Chun background they get tagged a lot and taken down even more, in fact the Wing Chun disappears almost entirely from them.
There are several Martial Arts out there that their primary focus of training is self perfection, this is a far cry different than those that train for self preservation, and different still from sporting martial arts. Wing Chun follows along the line of self perfection.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

No matter how good striker you are, what can you do if you are taken down and never have chance to even throw your first punch?

The question are, how much training time have you spent on

1. not to be taken down? You will need to train some take down resistance skill.
2. after be taking down, you will have ability to get back up? You will need to train some ground skill.

But again, everything that can be said has already been said in "WC anti-grappling" threads. There is no need to repeat that again.

 

[geezer]

There are several Martial Arts out there that their primary focus of training is self perfection, this is a far cry different than those that train for self preservation, and different still from sporting martial arts. Wing Chun follows along the line of self perfection.

Some Wing Chun. Perhaps most these days. Not a bad thing, but that was certainly not the intent of it's developers over the generations.

Wing Chun can be a very useful art for "self-preservation", and if trained in a more pragmatic and aggressive way than is the rule these days, (with plenty of sparring) it can be a useful component in MMA training. Alan Orr's boys and others have shown that. But it isn't the whole package. You need to cross-train and be good at long range and on the ground too.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The 1st day when I learned the "hip throw", I asked my teacher, when I use my right arm to wrap around my opponent's waist, how can I prevent him from using his left hand to punch on my head?

From a striker point of view, the grappling art also has flaws in it. This is why when I use "hip throw", I like to use under hook instead. If I have never looked at this issue from a striker point of view, I will never appreciate the power of the "under hook" that I can use it to disable my opponent's striking ability.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yeah. In the air ...on the ground. Different situations, but the same laws of physics apply.

In one of his clips, I believe Alan Orr stated that punching power comes from dropping, rising, pressing forward, or turning. Or, I might add, a combination of the above. So dropping and falling = downward diagonal force, rising and turning = upward spiraling force, etc. Pretty simple really. And pretty universal. I find that works for what I do in Escrima as well. I imagine it should work fo Jow Ga too?

I agree with Alan Orr. Generating punching power from dropping, rising, pressing forward, and turning are basic foundations for Jow Ga as a fighting system is very mobile. The main punches makes use of dropping or rising, pressing forward, and turning all together at the same time. All of the punches would be weak if we aren't able to tie those actions into the strike. I can't think of one punching or kicking technique that doesn't use any of those methods.

 

[wckf92]

...punching power comes from dropping, rising, pressing forward, or turning. Or, I might add, a combination of the above. So dropping and falling = downward diagonal force, rising and turning = upward spiraling force, etc. Pretty simple really. And pretty universal.

All of which are in the forms!

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Look at those two guys though. Was there any question who would win? Seasoned and athletic MMA fighter from Russia verses random wing chun dude.

 

[Wing Chun Auckland]

Yep to the above. But the sinking, rising, and turning etc doesn't always have to be visible.
In CST when we do the punch structure test from SNT, we need to think of all the force vectors in mind which includes the intention of turning. You can intend all those things without physically doing them and it adds to the power of your punch.

 

[LFJ]

Looks like your standard Wing Chun guy to me. Goes running straight in.

Has all the nifty techniques. No fighting strategy.

 

[Juany118]

Lineage means little (unless your instructor points to the Yip Man videos, of a guy on his death bead, as a way to do things.)

What matters is mind set and skill. There are a few ways to handle what the video shows us. If your instructor teaches you to be locked in a straight line from your center to the opponent's center then flood that freaking center balls out. Say "I can be touched but if I move swiftly and viciously enough I will overwhelm." I don't prefer this method BUT I know some teachers teach it and it is the mind set I know is the only way to make it work... 100% commitment to charging into that center.

The other way has ready been answered, zoning. I picture a triangle on the ground. I am at the point, my opponent at the base, he is coming in to the point and I move in but either on an angle to the left or right, always striking from my center to the opponent's but, again, if I commit and move swiftly, I am not inside his center.

 

[LFJ]

The other way has ready been answered, zoning. I picture a triangle on the ground. I am at the point, my opponent at the base, he is coming in to the point and I move in but either on an angle to the left or right, always striking from my center to the opponent's but, again, if I commit and move swiftly, I am not inside his center.

That sounds like a Boxing Triangle Theory.

VT Triangle Theory is opposite; working from base to point, as the training stance establishes and the dummy form trains. This way we are cutting in and cutting off the opponent's ability to face, rather than just evading them.

 

[Juany118]

That sounds like a Boxing Triangle Theory.

VT Triangle Theory is opposite; working from base to point, as the training stance establishes and the dummy form trains. This way we are cutting in and cutting off the opponent's ability to face, rather than just evading them.

Thing is, as a point of physics they are the same. If I see myself as the point and move to the side in this scenario, the opponent still moved towards me as well as they are attacking, the gap is closed. Who is at the point and the base is a matter or semantics really. In the end the gap is closed, the attacks are unleashed and you are not in the "kill zone" of the opponent but they are still in yours.

Two theories ending in the same result because biomechanics and fight dynamics are independent of the theories of the various Martial Arts styles. Each style simply comes up with a different way to address the same dynamics. If my opponent doesn't charge in the way I am the triangle stops being a equilateral triangle and becomes "tighter" because I am still closing, the actual type of triangle it's not set in stone.

Your enemy may close the gap, he may retreat. In seeing myself as the "point" or fulcrum, for my mind at least it is easier to adapt to his movement. He is planted or closing, it works in my mind. He retreats because his main goal is to not be arrested, the "base" of the triangle becomes a lot narrower because I am still closing the gap. He is moving iinto attack, I have an equilateral triangle. I suspect you see the exact same dynamic using your concept because in the end all martial arts reach the same conclusion, the difference is symantics.

PS what you tied to it modern Boxing it is used by many Martial Arts, some Wing Chun teachers have taught it forever. Kali used it to kill Magellan etc. Biomechanics and fight dynamics are what they are... Modern Boxing is simply the latest to apply the same principles bipedal life forms have since time immemorial. In the end, regardless of what way you point the triangle, the result is the same IF you apply the correct mind set.

 

[LFJ]

Moving forward but evading out along an angle is obviously different from moving forward and cutting in along an angle. The direction of body mass momentum and the resulting position and effect on the opponent aren't the same.

Simply moving out of the opponent's "kill zone" does nothing to stop them from refacing. VT tactics are to cut into the opponent's attacks and cut off their ability to reface while sustaining attack on them. Triangle footwork on the dummy cuts directly in from the flanks, baseline to point, with full body mass behind the attacks.