Has Wing Chun "gone off course"?

[Steve]

Steve, you like to try and twist what I say. Please stop it. All I said was that the statement 'you can't get experience except in competition' is incorrect. That's it. Nothing more.



What change of heart? When have I ever, in any context, said or even implied that experience (from any of the various sources) was a bad idea?



That isn't what he said, either. Did you actually read either of the posts, or are you just replying based on what you think we would have said?

What he said (and I quoted it earlier...) was

Which is just categorically wrong.

Please do me a favor. If you don't understand what I've written, ask and I'll do my best to clarify. If you do understand what I've written, please respond to THAT, rather than making up positions for me that I've never supported. Please?

i think you’re being very defensive and that’s locking up your noggin.

He said you can’t accumulate fighting experience on the street. You can only accumulate ina. Ring or on a mat. You pointed out how this isn’t true and gave a few examples of other ways people accumulate experience, I agree with you, and also with @Kung Fu Wang. You each have half of it.

So, again, the question is, if a person doesn’t accumulate experience on the street, as a cop, a bouncer, a douche nozzle or in competition, how does that person gain experience? I don’t have demographic stats on everyone who trains MA But I think it’s safe to say that there are a lot of people who don’t accumulate any experience.

 

[Steve]

But his statement was that he DID take down 3 people irl, not that he was unable to. And presumably without the 20 man royal rumble you suggest is needed.

Again, I think there are two great points being made. On the one hand, Drop Bear and Kung Fu Wang are pointing out one of the great benefits of competition, which is that you can basically do it as much as you want. Because the application is essentially scheduled, you can accumulate a ton of experience. That's a strength and also a weakness.

Folks with an agenda on one side point out the strengths and ignore the weaknesses. Folks with an agenda on the other side focus on the weaknesses, but can't seem to acknowledge the strengths.

Conversely, professional experience is terrific, too. Strengths are that it is contextual, meaning that you are applying the techniques "for real" in a given context. If you are an ER nurse, and have to 'take down' douche nozzles fairly often, you are gaining real world experience doing just that. There is real value in this. It's not theoretical knowledge. The downside is that it is opportunistic and specific, meaning that if you have a quiet day, week, month or year, you aren't gaining any experience. And the experience you are gaining is limited to a single context.

I think either of these approaches is sound as a minimal approach to developing skills. The thing I thought @Dirty Dog was [finally] acknowledging is that you have to gain experience somewhere. My personal opinion is that, if I were a professional douche nozzle who needs to use my violent skills often, realistic training AND competition AND practical experience is best. Even better than this is incorporating as much diversity into both the competition and the training. As I said earlier, this is where I really admire guys like @Jow Ga Wolf and @Tony Dismukes. The former trains in one style but embraces the diversity of experiences. He seems to welcome new situations in which to apply his technique. Tony does this and also seems to be genuinely curious and interested in cross training and also values competition.

Point is, I see you guys arguing about where someone gains experience, and it truly makes my day. The larger issue I see is what that means to the folks who are not LEO, bouncers, gangbangers, douche nozzles or otherwise exposed to violence, AND who train in a style that has little or no competitive element. There are some guys who lack any experience who have managed to convince others here and in the real world that this experience is not necessary.

Tying this back to the topic at hand, as an outside observer, I see a lot of conflict between the guys who train WC who are also gaining experience somewhere (not in competition because it's WC), and the guys who train WC who are not gaining experience elsewhere. The tenor of the conversations is, "We do this because it works... adapt that because it works" vs "that's not WC... that's not how we're taught... that's poor technique."

 

[Dirty Dog]

Not terribly good volume from a training perspective.

From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.

 

[Danny T]

In the fight game, whether it be for competition or personal protection the ability to adapt is extremely important. (Unless winning or surviving is not ones goal.)
In the I only want to train a particular thing in a particular way cause I like it and don't want to change game stagnation is important. (I guess)

I think the system can remain but the individual should grow beyond and not be slave to the system. Some other opinions are different.

 

[Steve]

I think the system can remain but the individual should grow beyond and not be slave to the system. Some other opinions are different.

Related to another thread, what you say above is essentially the definition of mastery. Analysis and evaluation of the system that leads to innovation is tge essence of mastery in that system.

 

[Danny T]

Related to another thread, what you say above is essentially the definition of mastery. Analysis and evaluation of the system that leads to innovation is tge essence of mastery in that system.

I understand and won't argue against your point but will remark that the goal show be not to master the system, rather it should be to master yourself. Which is probably an impossible task because of the ever changing human condition. There should be a constant polishing and refining of one's art; that being yourself not the system.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.

I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than a punch on the head.

The Chinese in the following picture says: Brick is the best street fight weapon ...

 

[JowGaWolf]

I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than to punch on his head.

The Chinese in the following picture says: The best street fight weapon ...

I'm starting to think that 100 years ago that there were bricks just laying around in the street ready to be picked up and used as a weapon lol. My Grandfather told my dad as child, that if someone is bigger than you then pick up a brick and hit them in the head then run. lol.

I can't remember the last time I've seen a brick laying on the street. I guess they keep the bricks in the allies these days or in run downed areas in the city or country.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I'm starting to think that 100 years ago that there were bricks just laying around in the street ready to be picked up and used as a weapon lol. My Grandfather told my dad as child, that if someone is bigger than you then pick up a brick and hit them in the head then run. lol.

I can't remember the last time I've seen a brick laying on the street. I guess they keep the bricks in the allies these days or in run downed areas in the city or country.

This is why Chinese like to carry a brick in his day-pack. It's perfect legal.

A girl with a brick in her hand can scare you to death in a dark alley.

 

[drop bear]

From my perspective, three guys in three days is entirely too much volume.

See in training over the weekend I took down five guys. And more than once.

More repetition better understanding of what I am doing.

It makes the people I take down in real life easier.

 

[drop bear]

I agree that street experience can be more valuable than the ring/mat experience. All street fighters would know that to smash a brick on your opponent's head (you can't do that in the ring) is much more effective than a punch on the head.

The Chinese in the following picture says: Brick is the best street fight weapon ...

Is that some sort of secret? I have hit people with foreign objects. Hell I have done it in training. Over the weekend a girl bounced my head off a window.

I never realized how increadably street I have been training.

 

[Steve]

Is that some sort of secret? I have hit people with foreign objects. Hell I have done it in training. Over the weekend a girl bounced my head off a window.

I never realized how increadably street I have been training.

You're badass.

 

[drop bear]

Again, I think there are two great points being made. On the one hand, Drop Bear and Kung Fu Wang are pointing out one of the great benefits of competition, which is that you can basically do it as much as you want. Because the application is essentially scheduled, you can accumulate a ton of experience. That's a strength and also a weakness.

Folks with an agenda on one side point out the strengths and ignore the weaknesses. Folks with an agenda on the other side focus on the weaknesses, but can't seem to acknowledge the strengths.

Conversely, professional experience is terrific, too. Strengths are that it is contextual, meaning that you are applying the techniques "for real" in a given context. If you are an ER nurse, and have to 'take down' douche nozzles fairly often, you are gaining real world experience doing just that. There is real value in this. It's not theoretical knowledge. The downside is that it is opportunistic and specific, meaning that if you have a quiet day, week, month or year, you aren't gaining any experience. And the experience you are gaining is limited to a single context.

I think either of these approaches is sound as a minimal approach to developing skills. The thing I thought @Dirty Dog was [finally] acknowledging is that you have to gain experience somewhere. My personal opinion is that, if I were a professional douche nozzle who needs to use my violent skills often, realistic training AND competition AND practical experience is best. Even better than this is incorporating as much diversity into both the competition and the training. As I said earlier, this is where I really admire guys like @Jow Ga Wolf and @Tony Dismukes. The former trains in one style but embraces the diversity of experiences. He seems to welcome new situations in which to apply his technique. Tony does this and also seems to be genuinely curious and interested in cross training and also values competition.

Point is, I see you guys arguing about where someone gains experience, and it truly makes my day. The larger issue I see is what that means to the folks who are not LEO, bouncers, gangbangers, douche nozzles or otherwise exposed to violence, AND who train in a style that has little or no competitive element. There are some guys who lack any experience who have managed to convince others here and in the real world that this experience is not necessary.

Tying this back to the topic at hand, as an outside observer, I see a lot of conflict between the guys who train WC who are also gaining experience somewhere (not in competition because it's WC), and the guys who train WC who are not gaining experience elsewhere. The tenor of the conversations is, "We do this because it works... adapt that because it works" vs "that's not WC... that's not how we're taught... that's poor technique."

I have friends who took down three guys on the weekend and they don't train.

Pretty sure all martial arts is a scam.

 

[drop bear]

You're badass.

I rolled with a guy who swung off a rope to pass guard once.

 

[KPM]

Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."

 

[JowGaWolf]

Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."

1. Style A vs Style A is a bad idea for building use of martial arts application.
2. The weight / size was the first time I've heard that. I don't think it's a valid reason. It makes the assumption that the majority of the people taking Wing Chun are fighting people who are bigger.

Other than than those 2 things, which are universal to any fighting system. I think he's on point, but non of those reasons support the notion that "Wing Chun has gone off course."

If a person only practices Wing Chun for health, then how is that "Wing Chun gone off course."

I asked a question earlier and no one answered it.

At what point does Wing Chun "go off course."?

 

[KPM]

1. Style A vs Style A is a bad idea for building use of martial arts application.

---Yep! Something that has been pointed out multiple times. But this point seems to get ignored often. But if someone assumes that they are training martial arts application, but only train against fellow students doing the same style....is that not a way of having gone "off course"?

2. The weight / size was the first time I've heard that. I don't think it's a valid reason. It makes the assumption that the majority of the people taking Wing Chun are fighting people who are bigger.

---Not really. The assumption is that when Wing Chun was designed it didn't take into consideration "head hunters" that had knock out power in their punches. Until fairly recently it seemed like Wing Chun people always kept their focus at chest level. I've wondered in the past if perhaps there was some kind of "gentleman's agreement" back in the day that said they weren't going to hit each other in the head when "crossing hands."


Other than than those 2 things, which are universal to any fighting system. I think he's on point, but non of those reasons support the notion that "Wing Chun has gone off course."

---If you are training for martial arts application and only train against your own style, then you have "gone off course." If you are trying to be a practical fighting style and are not prepared to defend well against modern boxing type punches targeting the head, then you have "gone off course."

If a person only practices Wing Chun for health, then how is that "Wing Chun gone off course."

---Wing Chun is not Tai Chi. Even people training just for the fun of it and as a form of exercise are still typically told by their teacher that they are doing a fighting style. But if in the end they can't fight at all........

I asked a question earlier and no one answered it.

---I commented earlier that unless it is very clear what Wing Chun was originally designed for or intended for, then questions like in the OP and like yours are going to naturally come up.

At what point does Wing Chun "go off course."?

---Wing Chun has "gone off course" when it is not doing what it was designed for, or fulfilling the expectations of the people practicing it. So then the question becomes.....how accurate and legitimate are those expectations to begin with, and exactly what was Wing Chun designed for? And are people's expectations and Wing Chun's original intent the same thing, or have they diverged and evolved over time?

 

[TMA17]

Jason Korol has some thoughts on how Wing Chun has "gone off course."

Excellent video thanks for sharing. I believe this guy is absolutely correct and he nails it.

For myself, I'd like to learn WC traditionally first as a hobby and because I find it interesting. I like traditional arts, especially Kung Fu. Not just for the sake of fighting, but for the forms/movements and history behind them. The esoteric aspect of Kung Fu is what appeals to me. What one does with their WC is up to them. Guys like Orr or this guy are modifying it and that's great.

I would also add that one simply could learn boxing or MT and be done with it. But that takes the fun out of learning the unique traditional aspect of WC, which again is an esoteric art.

 

[geezer]

Problem: Integrating more realistic training into a school and organization with very traditional (i.e. artificial) training methods emphasizing WC vs. WC, chi-sau as a goal in itself rather than as a means to and end, and an authoritarian curriculum discouraging questioning and testing through sparring other stylists.

Practically minded students have probably already left in favor of boxing, grappling, and MMA gyms. The remainder are clinging to a wuxia fantasy of what kung-fu is, and they will probably leave when you introduce realistic training that pops that bubble.

So, even if the head instructor understands the problem, trying to get his WC back on-course may destroy his business. Especially, if he was trained in that same artificial way and isn't good fighter. So the situation continues, unchanged...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

what was Wing Chun designed for?

I truly believe that WC is designed for this. No other MA systems on this planet should be able to do this better than the WC system can.