Grappling and Wing Tsun.

[WC_lun]

I think some people get into the mind set of this or that. Steve, you stated grappling is "grounded in solid bio-mechanical principles." This also true of good Wing Chun as well. I believe this is true of any decent martial arts training. It is also key in being able to appreciate what a person from another martial art, or perspective, is doing to work thier system. If a person's structure is weak, it will be taken advantage of by a good grappler, striker, whatever. It is refreshing that our discussion in this thread has mostly started from that understanding.

 

[Eric_H]

One arm's plenty for a competent grappler. A common... very common, technique is called the arm drag. First part of this video shows pretty clearly how quickly a wrestler will close the distance as well as get to your side:

I'm catching back up from 3 pages ago, there's been a lot of good discussion since I last checked in!

Our Kiu Sao Chi Sao platforms (not tan/bong/fook) are meant to deal with exactly these kind of challenges (as well as executing them too). FWIW, what is being demoed here isn't vastly different from animal style kung fu tactics.

All in all, if you can read the leverage of the arm in a superior way to your opponent, you will be able to apply your chosen technique and strategy, be it punch, pull, or bridge.

 

[hjb wing chun]

Okay, so I've been doing WT just shy of a decade, but I've been wrestling for 20 years.

I've noticed more and more that many WT/WC guys and gals just do not care about or understand ground/fighting or grappling.

So my question is, what are you doing to make up for this? Are you cross-training? Do you teach your students anti-grappling techniques? Do you incorporate grappling techniques into your curriculum? Or is this something that you aren't doing anything about, but want to? And lastly, what grappling techniques in particular are you utilizing or do you find useful?

Would love to see where this topic goes ya'll!

All the best,

Jeff (Sifu Panda)

I think this is a necessary area for all modern Wing Chun guys to learn. Especially since grappling and MMA is so common now. My background taught us not to go to the ground for multiple reasons. Do I like to grapple? Man, it's a blast, it's just not WC. From the ground, you can't fight 2 or more people, it's not consistent with using less to do more, etc. All this said, I try to work WC against takedowns on a regular basis. In fact, I now teach a proper fighting stance by trying to grab the students torso (grappler takedown to the waist) while they keep their hands in place. From there, after they learn some basics, I not only teach them to use basics against punching, but against kicks, as well as the grappling takedown. I think it is unrealistic to only train against punches around the four corners area. Much better, in my opinion, to teach someone early how to counter a wide variety of moves, i.e. boxing, kickboxing, grappling, etc.

Another one of my opinions is that a great deal of "WC versus" moves are unrealistic. Only teaching someone to tan da against a jab is going to get them beat up. The same applies when using WC against a grappler. Each engagement is different, I think it is just the most important that you work against a realistic attack. Sure, start with the slow, stiff zombie punch to let them learn the move, but definitely pick up the heat to force the hands to be correct under pressure. Teaching someone to immediately close distance and engage centerline without telegraph is a much better concept to teach first, and have tan da as one of many tools to use. What I see a lot of guys do is teach moves instead of concepts. I think it's much wiser to teach them basics, and then just come after them, including the grappling takedown, and allow them to use what works for them. People are usually afraid that their instructor is going to get mad if they don't do sissy hits, so I just keep telling them to hit harder and engage more until they are neutralizing my attack.

I do, however, think that even if you're taken to the ground, there is still plenty you can do. If someone has me in the mount, first thing I am going for is the groin, and when they guard that, they're going to get multiple bil tzes and sats to the throat. The guard, for me, is just bringing their centerline real close so I can pound on it. Still don't understand why this concept is not brought up more. I guess cause so many think that MMA is the only real fighting realm now. The reason we don't see strikes to the groin and throat while the attacker is in the mount is because it's illegal in MMA. Why? Because you can really hurt someone; and that's why I would do it. But WC is not a tournament sport, it's me stopping someone who is in the wrong, i.e. home invader at night, rapist, etc.

Going to post some videos soon to explain concepts.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I think this is a necessary area for all modern Wing Chun guys to learn. Especially since grappling and MMA is so common now. My background taught us not to go to the ground for multiple reasons. Do I like to grapple? Man, it's a blast, it's just not WC. From the ground, you can't fight 2 or more people, it's not consistent with using less to do more, etc. All this said, I try to work WC against takedowns on a regular basis. In fact, I now teach a proper fighting stance by trying to grab the students torso (grappler takedown to the waist) while they keep their hands in place. From there, after they learn some basics, I not only teach them to use basics against punching, but against kicks, as well as the grappling takedown. I think it is unrealistic to only train against punches around the four corners area. Much better, in my opinion, to teach someone early how to counter a wide variety of moves, i.e. boxing, kickboxing, grappling, etc.

Another one of my opinions is that a great deal of "WC versus" moves are unrealistic. Only teaching someone to tan da against a jab is going to get them beat up. The same applies when using WC against a grappler. Each engagement is different, I think it is just the most important that you work against a realistic attack. Sure, start with the slow, stiff zombie punch to let them learn the move, but definitely pick up the heat to force the hands to be correct under pressure. Teaching someone to immediately close distance and engage centerline without telegraph is a much better concept to teach first, and have tan da as one of many tools to use. What I see a lot of guys do is teach moves instead of concepts. I think it's much wiser to teach them basics, and then just come after them, including the grappling takedown, and allow them to use what works for them. People are usually afraid that their instructor is going to get mad if they don't do sissy hits, so I just keep telling them to hit harder and engage more until they are neutralizing my attack.

I do, however, think that even if you're taken to the ground, there is still plenty you can do. If someone has me in the mount, first thing I am going for is the groin, and when they guard that, they're going to get multiple bil tzes and sats to the throat. The guard, for me, is just bringing their centerline real close so I can pound on it. Still don't understand why this concept is not brought up more. I guess cause so many think that MMA is the only real fighting realm now. The reason we don't see strikes to the groin and throat while the attacker is in the mount is because it's illegal in MMA. Why? Because you can really hurt someone; and that's why I would do it. But WC is not a tournament sport, it's me stopping someone who is in the wrong, i.e. home invader at night, rapist, etc.

Going to post some videos soon to explain concepts.

If I'm mounted on someone with a low mount there's really no way for them to reach my groin. If I'm mounted on someone with a high mount and they try attacking my groin I'm not going to even attempt guarding my groin - I'm just going to give them a concussion. From the mount the top person has a much better angle on smashing the bottom person's head than the bottom person has for attacking the groin.

In general, I'm a fan of attacking the groin and the throat, but the bottom of the mount is not the best place to try it.

BTW - the ban on groin attacks in MMA is relatively recent. The early UFCs allowed groin shots. So did early Brazilian vale tudo matches. So did many, many Gracie challenge matches and street fights. Check the footage. You won't find any examples of someone escaping the mount with groin shots, and it's not because all those guys were too stupid to know that getting hit in the groin can hurt.

None of this is commenting on the general applicability of Wing Chun to self-defense. I'm just saying that countering the mount with groin or throat strikes from the bottom is a decidedly sub-optimal tactic and will not pay off well as often as you might think.

 

[hjb wing chun]

Sorry, brother, but I respectfully disagree. Also, I am not calling anyone's technique stupid. I just think the mount has weaknesses that are usually not exploited. The farther you lean over in the mount, the more your groin is protected, but the closer you bring the throat and face in to be hit. Today, the mount is a position taught primarily for sport fighting. My premise is not based with sport fighting in mind, but fighting to stay alive. I am friends with an MMA fighter who is healing from a bout who said he would work with me to see if what I am saying is right or wrong. I just think that most MMA grappling trains with rules in mind; similar to boxing. There is nothing wrong with that, but it's not the same when you consider eye exposure, throat exposure, groin exposure, etc. If my buddy proves me wrong, so be it; maybe we will both learn something. Also, if you're elbow is up to crush the top of my head, then it's not defending your throat.

I hope you understand I am not trying to dog out anyone's art, I have spend hours wrestling, boxing, and so forth, but Wing Chun is my favorite. And what I have noticed is that most people have learned against specific styles, and have not had a chance to defend against techniques unorthodox to what they know by someone who knows what they're doing. I would include Wing Chun guys in this, too. Most Wing Chun guys don't train against real hooks and uppercuts, just the stiff zombie punch, etc. Likewise, the few guys I have worked with that know grappling are typically surprised when I do something they haven't trained against, i.e. eye, throat, groin.

On the subject of groin shots in the UFC, we used to watch UFC's on pay-per-view when the UFC's were still in single digits. Two of my instructors met Dan Severn. I am familiar with Royce, Shamrock, Abbott, Kimo, etc, etc, etc. We used to go over what they did, what was good, bad, and so forth. Also, the early UFC fights allowed groin shots, but gave fines for them. They didn't end the match, you just didn't want to pay the money. If you watch Joe Son get beat by Keith Hackney in one of the early UFC's, you can hear the referee fine him. So Hackney won after punching Son in the groin a few times, but he had pay; so that's not good business. So they really didn't want you to do it. The UFC was created to showcase grappling, which it did a great job of. But when you take away groin, eye, and throat shots, that's the majority of what we train in Wing Chun, not to mention that they use gloves. Bare-knuckles hurt a lot worse.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Let us know how your experiments with your MMA friend turn out. I'm very much in favor of that sort of open-minded experimentation.

I do agree that grapplers who train only for sport can be taken by surprise when an opponent steps outside of those confines. I train for self-defense, so I've tried to explore how eye pokes, groin attacks, hair pulling, head butts, biting, and so on can affect my technique. I will say that it forces you to play a much tighter game compared to what you can get away with in a sportive context.

 

[mook jong man]

It's a lot safer to do a bridge and roll rather than stuff around trying to get someone in the groin.
To hit them in the groin you have to take your hands away from defending your head and leaving you open to headbutts , elbows and God knows what.

 

[WingChunIan]

having read the thread through from start to finish, I would say that it shows why wing chun loses 90% of the time when matched with grappling. Its because wing chun guys train with compliant partners and have wonderful theories about "i'd simply do this, or i'd simply do that" truth is you won't simply do anything because the other fella isn't going to let you. To be able to use wing chun against grappling you have to practise wing chun against grappling. Trying to knee someone who is shooting for a single or double leg takedown is asking to be dumped on your backside, it can work but it is a very low percentage move. If it was so easy all of the karate and MT guys would have done it in the early UFC matches. Wing Chun isn't inferior or superior to grappling arts it is simply a different approach but it is the way that it is trained in 90% of classes across the world that makes a difference. If two proponents train with equal intensity then the match becomes a question of individual skill (and a bit of luck) and if the fight starts standing then the Wing Chun practitioner has an advantage, but one that can disappear rapidly and once it goes to the ground the grappler has a huge advantage.

*percentages are only to illustrate the point I'm not claiming that they are accurate.

 

[hjb wing chun]

Tony: I will plan on posting a video (or videos). May be teaching at a gym soon, and I want teach stand up vs grappling (and visa versa on request, if necessary) as part of my curriculum. Am also interested in taking some grappling so I can talk about it with hands on knowledge. i am comfortable on the ground, but have never taken Ju-Jitsu before; so i'm looking forward to that

I would agree with that, Ian. I watched numerous MMA fighters who were considered the best takedown artists; they always shoot when the other guy is off balance/in recovery (i know i would). i think that teaching someone to knee someone in the face while someone else is shooting has a very small margin of error. when i shoot with firearms, i go for center mass; i do the same with fighting. any punch, kick, etc, that is completely negated if it's off by 2 inches is not a good one to throw, in my opinion. i worked out with a friend, and we tried to shoot on each other; what we came up with as most effective was to drive your jon tau (fighting stance hand) into the space between their neck and shoulder, and as the shoot moves forward, moot sau (some call it gum sau, i think) to the back of the head. this ends up pushing their face toward the ground. for anyone wanting a translation: push the guy's head toward the ground with a stiff arm as he shoots; his body is not as fast as your hand...don't care how fast anyone is. my buddy is brand new to wing chun, and when he saw how effective this was against my shooting at him, he thought i was joking. but i explained to him that if i didn't bring both hands in front of me as he pushed my face toward the ground that my nose was going to get smashed.

i am trying to take the idea to step 2 and 3 and figure out which strikes are most effective once the shoot is negated. i have some ideas, like: bottom of fist to back of the head, once slowing him down push his chin against his chest, step on his back, etc. we will continue working this regularly. there is also an opening for head manipulation, but we didn't really learn that when i trained wing chun. i was always told, we don't teach any groundfighting because we don't go to the ground. i think it's one of the first things someone should learn to fight against, though

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

"anti-grappling",

If you can run faster than your opponent, nobody will be able to throw you. Nobody will be able to strike you either. The fast running is "anti-everything".

The problem for "anti- ..." is for the rest of your life, you will only be good at "anti- ..." and you will never be good at "...".

 

[Punchy]

If you can run faster than your opponent, nobody will be able to throw you. Nobody will be able to strike you either. The fast running is "anti-everything".

The problem for "anti- ..." is for the rest of your life, you will only be good at "anti- ..." and you will never be good at "...".

I would say just the opposite. By learning to use WT/WC/VT against what your opponent is trying to do, rather than fight the way he is dictating, you will be good at "....."

 

[Punchy]

BTW, "anti" means to oppose or go against. Doesn't this approach sound more logical than trying to juggle a half dozen different training methods?
If I spend a couple of hours in a boxing gym every week and then try to outbox a golden gloves boxer....I lose.
Same as if I try to outwrestle a BJJ guy or even a high school wrestler....they win.
Better to stick to what you do best and use it to your advantage.

 

[Danny T]

BTW, "anti" means to oppose or go against. Doesn't this approach sound more logical than trying to juggle a half dozen different training methods?
If I spend a couple of hours in a boxing gym every week and then try to outbox a golden gloves boxer....I lose.
Same as if I try to outwrestle a BJJ guy or even a high school wrestler....they win.
Better to stick to what you do best and use it to your advantage.

Absolutely!! Now stop it. It makes too much sense.

Learn their game to know and understand it; Not to play it.

 

[geezer]

Absolutely!! Now stop it. It makes too much sense. Learn their game to know and understand it; Not to play it.

Do whatever you feel like, just be honest with yourself about your limitations. The widespread emergence of "anti-grappling" programs in WC is proof that WC is vulnerable to grappling. In an ideal world, all WC guys could also be expert grapplers, and expert long range kickers, expert marksmen, really good at quantum physics, and maybe do brain surgery on the side. Maybe we could broker world peace too.

In the real world, there is only so much most of us can and choose to do. If WC is your main thing and you don't have the time or inclination to get that BJJ black belt, then anti grappling may be the best solution at hand. Just don't drink the kool-aid and start believing that with just that you can take on anybody!

 

[WingChunIan]

Do whatever you feel like, just be honest with yourself about your limitations. The widespread emergence of "anti-grappling" programs in WC is proof that WC is vulnerable to grappling. In an ideal world, all WC guys could also be expert grapplers, and expert long range kickers, expert marksmen, really good at quantum physics, and maybe do brain surgery on the side. Maybe we could broker world peace too.

In the real world, there is only so much most of us can and choose to do. If WC is your main thing and you don't have the time or inclination to get that BJJ black belt, then anti grappling may be the best solution at hand. Just don't drink the kool-aid and start believing that with just that you can take on anybody!

Fair comments, but if you do go and spend time getting that BJJ black belt so that you have a first rate ground game don't ***** and moan when you get sparked standing up because you haven't honed your Wing Chun sufficiently. It's swings and roundabouts. The only definite is if you never practise fighting from the ground against a resisting opponent and / or if you never train to defend takedowns, whatever approach you choose you are asking for trouble.

 

[Steve]

Fair comments, but if you do go and spend time getting that BJJ black belt so that you have a first rate ground game don't ***** and moan when you get sparked standing up because you haven't honed your Wing Chun sufficiently. It's swings and roundabouts. The only definite is if you never practise fighting from the ground against a resisting opponent and / or if you never train to defend takedowns, whatever approach you choose you are asking for trouble.

A couple years of earnest training in BJJ wouldn't get you a black belt, but it would certainly provide a solid foundation, and sufficient context to do what you guys seem to be trying to do.

 

[Vajramusti]

Fair comments, but if you do go and spend time getting that BJJ black belt so that you have a first rate ground game don't ***** and moan when you get sparked standing up because you haven't honed your Wing Chun sufficiently. It's swings and roundabouts. The only definite is if you never practise fighting from the ground against a resisting opponent and / or if you never train to defend takedowns, whatever approach you choose you are asking for trouble.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically agree with Ian....with some twists.
Important to develop the right structural integrity in wing chun , which can defeat the take downs while attacking .
If you do end up on the ground a good sense of wing chun structure and dynamics can get you out of trouble.
Of course it depends on proper instruction, practice and conditioning.

I know that there are skeptics on this kind of thinking- but there are skeptics on almost anything on the net.

 

[jeff_hasbrouck]

there is no such thing as "anti grappling", you have to learn "grappling" concepts and principles in order to stay on your feet against a grappler trying to take you down. this is why i always say that wing chun fighters are really grapplers in disguise, but our objective is to use the grappling concepts of how to handle pressure to stay on our feet and knock them out rather than take the person down to submit them.

all wing chun is on a conceptual level is "how to handle pressure" and "problem solving". this is the exact same concept for grapplers. but if you focus on "techniques" and stray away from "concepts", this is IMO where people get confused and don't see the two being the same thing.

When you said "No such thing as anti-grappling", I honestly think that statement is a little more than silly. Anti-(anything) is the counter action of the "thing". Anti-grappling would be considered striking. And basically by ignoring this information and valuable way of looking at things, your curbing your own process and ability to learn in my opinion. But hey, ya'll do as you please, I am by no means a master, but from a personal point of view I try not to discount anything, no matter how rediculous it seems.

And if you wouldn't mind explaining "IMO", as I have no clue to what you are referring.

All the best in your training,

Jeff

 

[jeff_hasbrouck]

if someone is shooting low i would knee him in the face as he was shooting, otherwise you can spread your legs wide to take away his targets....
if they do grapple me to the ground, first of all you failed....but i will pound the back of his head or go for his eyes.... grapplers don't practice against eye thrusts.

No but they practice against getting pummeled, knee'd, kicked and everything else under the sun. When are the collective WT/WC families get their heads outta their asses and learn that Grapplers are our MOST dangerous opponents!?

 

[Flying Crane]

We have to accept that there may not be any target available for striking , so a better option would be to control their head by placing downward pressure on it so that it slows there forward drive and takes the head out of alignment with the rest of the body which will reduce there ability to generate power.

I know I'm late to the discussion here, and not a wing chun guy. I trained for a few brief years, several years ago, but no longer.

Anyway, the comment you make above, here's something to think about: if you can control the head by placing downward pressure on it, then the head is an available target for a strike. Drive an elbow straight down into the back of the head or back of the neck. or punch down to the back of the head. Or strike the side of the head with a hooking punch or horizontal elbow. Or...

make sense?