Help convince me to chun.

[avengingbeagle]

There's a Gustavo Machado gym in Va beach. WTH are you worried about WC?

Why are you so worried about if I do decide to do WC? I have plenty of reasons(quite a few covered in the OP).

I take it from your avatar that you're a grappler? If/when I do eventually get into BJJ the Machado school was already #1 on my list. Thanks though

 

[Hanzou]

Why are you so worried about if I do decide to do WC? I have plenty of reasons(quite a few covered in the OP).

I take it from your avatar that you're a grappler? If/when I do eventually get into BJJ the Machado school was already #1 on my list. Thanks though

Not worried, simply curious. It would appear that the Machado school is exactly what you're looking for; Lots of sparring, grappling and stand up training, and no katas to worry about. Seems strange that you're seeking a WC school that is more than likely going to be the polar opposite of that.

 

[Danny T]

OK, this will be a pretty long post. I will try to be specific, clear and concise. I think it will be worthwhile for myself and others like me, who are interested in wing chun but are having second doubts.

Let me start by explaining my interest in practicing Wing Chun.

1. Health & fitness - I'm looking for a hobby I can practice regularly that will help keep me in shape and up/off the couch.

2. Kung fu cinema freak - I have always loved martial arts movies. I've seen hundreds of classic Shaw Bros, Golden Harvest, independent and modern kung fu flicks. I realize there isn't a lot of Wing Chun in these movies(I'd actually probably do Hung Gar if it were near me) but that's not important. I've developed a deep appreciation and interest in Chinese culture because of this and this is a way to bridge the gap. I should state though: I'm well aware that they are just movies and not representative of reality. I still think they're awesome though! (Bonus points if anyone correlates this with my user name).

3. Self-Defense - This is actually not so important to me. I'm 30 years old and I've never been in any fights. I'm good at diffusing turbulent situations and have no problem looking like a "pussy" if it means avoiding a conflict. HOWEVER: If I'm going to invest a lot of time training in a "martial art", I expect it to pay some dividends in this area. It's also a nice insurance policy in the event that something unavoidable happens.

4. Longevity - I would like to engage in something I can practice as long as I'd like and not have to worry about excessive injury, brain trauma, Body breaking down, etc.

5. Something I can practice alone - although I plan on making classes regularly, I don't like the idea of being dependent on them. I was originally set on taking BJJ but I don't like the idea of needing someone to practice with. I've got bags/pads/etc at home and can always practice forms alone.

So far, Wing Chun seems to tick all the boxes. I had pretty much convinced myself to sign up until spending all day yesterday reading threads on bullshido...

In addition to being so persistent and savage in their critique of wing chun, a lot of the arguments seemed to resonate with me. Most prominently:

1. No "proof" of effectiveness - why are there little to no videos of guys using wing chun techniques to win or even be competitive fighting against other styles while executing what they practice/teach. Why are there little to no WC practicioners in MMA? Where are the full contact WC tournaments that don't end up looking like poor kickboxing matches?

2. Lack of sparring - It seems the vast majority of gyms are not focused on sparring, if they include it in the curriculum at all. Is it even debatable that you don't have to fight to learn how to fight? I don't think so. It seems a lot of the gyms that do spar are doing it infrequently and without full contact, no head punching, etc.

3. Forms: Are they worth the focus they seem to be given? - "siu lim tao is the basis of everything, it's all there". I hear this a lot and I see how it works but is it time efficient? Would I not be better off practicing my bong sau against a live opponent? Etc. Why not get straight to the matter instead of these esoteric forms? What's the advantage?

4. "He does this, I do this"! - We all know the videos. I understand the purpose of drilling the technique before you try to implement it against an opponent(to make sure form is correct and what not) . There just seems to be soooo much of this. What's worse is the guy who you're reacting to is usually throwing some half hearted punch, with poor/unrealistic technique.

5. Is the system fundamentally flawed? - Sure, a lot of Wing Chun sounds nice in theory but does it work in practice? If it does; is this really the easiest/most effective means to the end?

A) It's advertised as being simplified, stripped down, efficient, etc. If that's true a person with 6 months training should be equal to or greater than a boxer with 6 months training(provided similar physique, weight, etc). However, the opposite seems to be true.

B) Not putting any shoulder or hips into punches - Why does seemingly every other system advise the opposite of this? I'm not saying it doesn't work but again: is this really the quickest/most efficient way of doing things?

C) Short range/Infighting - again sounds great but why do we never see WC guys close the gap and get in close against boxers and the like?

D) Trapping/blocking - Even the critics admit some WC trapping techniques seem effective but is there an unrealistic emphasis placed on it? What about the blocking component? This is perhaps most troubling/counterintuitive to me: the idea is to stand within a boxers preferred range(unless/until the gap is bridged) and parry all their shots right? Would it not be easier/more efficient to stay out of range and/or move out of the way, waiting for an opportunity to move within your preferred range? It seems the more shots you take, the more likely it becomes one gets through to you.

E) "Complete system" - I know there are elements of clinching, takedowns and grappling but unless you can stuff a wrestler, stay alive on the ground with a BJJ guy(at least until you can get back up) or shed a Muay Thai clinch, then I'm sorry... It's just not. I'm fine with cross training some BJJ to supplement the Chun, let's just call a spade a spade.

6. "You never see real Wing Chun because it's too deadly, man" - I'm not really gonna touch on this but suffice to say: I'm shocked at how much this comes up as a serious response. I think anyone being objective knows that BJJ could be just as deadly, along with judo, Muay Thai, etc. These martial arts were all adapted to their current sport forms. Wing Chun could do the same.

7. Lineage wars/hero worship/politics/infighting - This is obviously not unique to Wing Chun but it seems to be pretty exaggerated here. I guess this is a minor gripe but it's worth a mention. As an outsider looking in, it was so prevalent it became confusing. Not really all that appealing to someone looking to get involved.

Just to be clear: I'm no fighting expert. These are just things I've heard over and over that make sense to me. I'm not trying to bash WC, I'm just looking for some level headed, objective answers. As I stated before: I WANT to love wing Chun, I really do. I'm just naturally skeptic and I have a hard time taking things at face value. As stated before, if I put the work in I want to get something worthwhile out.

Sorry for the length! I'm sure this is boring/redundant and you've heard and answered it all before but I appreciate your insight! Thank you very much!

Not going to address everything you posted.
I train in and instruct Muay Thai, Pekiti-Tirsia Kali, Combat Submission Wrestling, MMA, and Wing Chun. Have boxed and also trained in some Karate systems. As to training WC; it can be a very good experience and you may do very well. It really depends upon how you train. I really enjoy wc. Muay Thai is a proven fighting sport but I have seen some terrible muay thai instructors and practitioners. BJJ is a proven grappling system yet I've seen poor BJJ practitioners. Boxing is a proven fighting system and again there are a lot of poor boxers. Same can be said of wc.

As to the effectiveness of wc, for me though I am a muay thai instructor and have had several excellent nak muays I still train and practice wc. Though I am a mma coach and have had several excellent high level mma fighters I still train and practice wc. Why do I continue with wc? Because with my knowledge and experience in fighting systems and fighting I see the effectiveness and practicality of wc. Another aspect of the martial art you said you were looking for was longevity. I am in my 60's and still practicing wc and gaining new perspectives even today. The biggest problem with most wc I've seen is the lack of any real pressure testing and practice.

Like geezer already said find a school, visit and watch the training, speak with some of the practitioners and the instructors, train for 6 months then make your decision as to if wc is for you.

 

[avengingbeagle]

Why are you so worried about if I do decide to do WC? I have plenty of reasons(quite a few covered in the OP).

I take it from your avatar that you're a grappler? If/when I do eventually get into BJJ the Machado school was already #1 on my list. Thanks though

Haha, I know you're not "worried". I just wanted to reuse the same word as you because you know, it's a very internet thing to do.

Although I love following BJJ and I will certainly learn one day, I'd like to start with a striking art first(just cause), in addition to the points made in my first post.

 

[Eric_H]

My 2c
If you're young enough to do it still, Muay Thai is a great striking art, I'd start there if i had it to do all over again. WC is hard to be good at, there aren't a lot of things common between the schools and really no competition outlet outside of bare knuckle that lets you play it's strengths.

 

[jks9199]

I'm in the VA beach area. There are a few schools in the area. The front runner for me was Gorden Lu's school, VB Wing Chun.

Really though, whichever one spars the most is probably the route I'll take.

Why? Whatva r e your qualifications to assess whether a school spars enough? Do you know and understand the methods and reasons involved in their training? Do your goals include spending time in a ring or dueling? Do you realize why I included dueling?

Each style and school has a method and theory that shapes their training. When you choose to train in that style, you accept that methodology and place your trust in the teachers. If you can't do that, you might want to reconsider training there.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Tez3]

There is a reason I posted my criteria in selecting a martial art first. Everybody else seemingly ignored that part, went straight to the second part and just assumed WC wasn't for me because of it.

This was a great post and just the kind of balanced and realistic reply I was looking for. Thanks a lot man.

No, 'everybody' didn't. I said go look, see for yourself if you like it train, if you don't find something else. I don't know if WC is for you, nobody does, I don't know if BJJ is for you either. You won't know until you actually go and find out. It's simple really, you are asking a bunch of people who don't know you something that is actually quite personal to you, your training. The only answer is to find out for yourself. have a look at as many places as you need to, keep an open mind and enjoy seeing how others train. You will find the place that suits you if you persevere.

 

[wckf92]

...It really depends upon how you train...

Wisest response so far IMO.

Regardless of the art trained...

 

[Hanzou]

Haha, I know you're not "worried". I just wanted to reuse the same word as you because you know, it's a very internet thing to do.

Although I love following BJJ and I will certainly learn one day, I'd like to start with a striking art first(just cause), in addition to the points made in my first post.

The Machado school also offers boxing and Muay Thai classes.

 

[PiedmontChun]

A lot of the OP's points sound like hang-ups based on reading about WC but limited personal experience in it. OP, find a WC school near you and check them out. There is good WC, bad WC, and likely plenty that falls somewhere in the middle. Even as an outsider- what you see will tell you a lot about if it is what you are looking for.
But to answer the points that stood out to me the post from the OP:
1) Forms (done correctly) are very important. They teach and practice the very structure you need for any of the movement used, and it reinforces principles of the art as well. Esoteric? More like secrets hidden in plain view. And good for solo practice.
2) On the subject of solo practice...... I would liken WC to BJJ in the sense that it takes regular contact and feedback to develop the sensitivity and reflexes that make WC work, just like how BJJ guys roll constantly. If someone is looking for something to practice at home on their own with limited class time, I would not recommend WC. I don't say this to denigrate other arts at all, but a "harder" striking art like some Karate styles or TKD can likely be practiced solo (in addition to some actual instruction of course) since at lower levels there is much less emphasis on any kind of yielding or deflection. Even boxing might be a better fit since so much of that is working combinations on a heavy bag solo. Its a lot harder to practice the nuances of good WC without a partner.

 

[Flying Crane]

If you need to be convinced to train this or that, then you should do something else. Something about this or that will not be a good match for you.

 

[Marnetmar]

Okay, here goes:

1. The problem lies in the issue you addressed in #2. The fact is, WC schools have a tendency to either not spar at all, or spar very lightly. In addition, we have a tendency to not train realistically, and thus a lot of sparring situations will be presented as WC vs WC rather than WC vs another style. A major component of not sparring realistically also lies in misrepresenting or, at least, misunderstanding how a more conventional fighter I.E a boxer actually fights and how their body mechanics actually work. I'm sure you've probably seen the inside Tan Sau response to a hooking punch. The WC guy's understanding of a hooking punch in this case is simply that a guy is swinging his arm in an arc, when in reality, a boxer will be using his entire body to perform a hook punch, and movement of the actual arm is a minor part of executing the hook punch. Thus, the aforementioned inside Tan technique might work against an untrained street brawler, but it couldn't possibly happen against someone who knows how to throw a proper hook punch unless you outweighed them -- Your structure is as strong as your bodyweight.

2. See #1

3. WC schools do have a tendency to make the forms seem more cryptic and mysterious than they actually are. However, the forms are still an important component.

The reason why is because WC's forms aren't shadow-fights against an imaginary opponent as one might find in a more traditional kung fu style. Rather, they act as your encyclopedia of the tools that one uses, their proper shape and alignment, etc. In other words, they are important to practice because they contain the material that is required to learn Wing Chun. However, learning Wing Chun and executing Wing Chun are two different things, and people seem to not realize this.

4. Yep

5. I wouldn't say the system itself is fundamentally flawed, but rather that the way it's trained is fundamentally flawed.

A) This is because WC never spars

B) I don't see why WC can't put hips into punches. We always lock are hips into our structure. However, the reason we don't use our shoulder isn't because using the shoulder is bad, but because we simply have a different way of generating force. We lead our strikes with the elbow (think of it as a piston). This allows us to better get our full bodyweight behind a strike.

C) Once again, because WC never spars

D) I wouldn't say that the idea here is to parry all their shots, but rather charge in and bind them up before they can pose a threat. In regards to trapping, the issue is that WC schools tend to use it as a means rather than as an end.

E) People who say WC is a complete system are lying to themselves. It wasn't designed for grappling and such, so why would it be a complete system?

6. Yeah, this is a pretty common logical fallacy among the TMA circles. The fact is, there aren't any "dirty" techniques found in WC or any other TMA explicitly that aren't in arts like Muay Thai, Judo, etc.

7. I think this stems primarily from the Bruce Lee phenomenon of the 1970s. It was made known that WC was Bruce's first art, so naturally a lot of instructors wanted a piece of that pie since it meant big money. If you had the "real" WC, you could be more like Bruce Lee, if not better than him!

TL;DR

I don't think that WC by itself is flawed, but it needs to make major changes in its mentality and how it's trained. That doesn't mean that it's utterly hopeless, however; folks like Robert Chu, Philip Bayer, Alan Orr and Eddie Chong are on the right path, IMO. We just need more instructors like them. In addition, I've successfully used WC to save my *** enough times to say that, once the BS is separated from it, it's a good system -- but the other side of that is the fact that a mugger/untrained street brawler is far different from a trained fighter.

However, just because of that doesn't mean that you must train it. If you can't find a good WC school, then stop wasting your time and train in another more tried-and-proven art like MT or BJJ.

Also, in regards to Bullshido, I tend to stay away from them and look to sites like Sherdog instead in regards to critique on various martial arts and MMA training. Sherdog seems to be more fond of critical analysis than Bullshido and thus will have more folks like Hanzou who will point out the honest strengths and weaknesses of various styles, while Bullshido threads tend to devolve into "______DO/JITSU IS FOR NERDS AND PUSSIES" pretty quickly. I still give them major props for fraud busting though.

 

[donald1]

I can think of two good ones:

Is it hard? Yes if you do it right you will get tired. You will most likley get bruises too. And classes are usually taken very serious from start to end. Its hard work.
But that will get you to my first point is.
Its worth it. If you stick with it and give it your best over time you will improve

There is a lot of things you can learn and even some good habits you can pick up along the way

 

[guy b.]

I'm really sorry if I offended you by asking about the martial art you practice(and I'm being sincere here). Maybe I'm completely uninformed and NONE of the questions I've asked have any validity? Fine. Thing is, it doesn't hurt to ask. I'd just like to hear the response from those who would know best. No harm, no foul

You haven't offended me, I just think you shouldn't waste your time with wing chun based on what you have revealed about yourself on this thread. It doesn't sound right for you.

 

[Treznor]

3. Forms: Are they worth the focus they seem to be given? - "siu lim tao is the basis of everything, it's all there". I hear this a lot and I see how it works but is it time efficient? Would I not be better off practicing my bong sau against a live opponent? Etc. Why not get straight to the matter instead of these esoteric forms? What's the advantage?
The point of the forms is to practice the ideal positioning / energy of techniques (which is why they're practiced SLLLLOOOOOWWWWLLLLYYYYY).
If you were to only practice against a live opponent, you'd not have the time to ensure your structure is correct and would therefore develop bad technique more easily.

4. "He does this, I do this"! - We all know the videos. I understand the purpose of drilling the technique before you try to implement it against an opponent(to make sure form is correct and what not) . There just seems to be soooo much of this. What's worse is the guy who you're reacting to is usually throwing some half hearted punch, with poor/unrealistic technique.
If you've read / been told about a 'response based' Wing Chun, I'd start looking at other clubs / lineages... The whole point of WC is that it's a concept based art... You use the right technique for the right situation... NOT just because a certain type of attack is coming in.

 

[avengingbeagle]

Okay, here goes:

1. The problem lies in the issue you addressed in #2. The fact is, WC schools have a tendency to either not spar at all, or spar very lightly. In addition, we have a tendency to not train realistically, and thus a lot of sparring situations will be presented as WC vs WC rather than WC vs another style. A major component of not sparring realistically also lies in misrepresenting or, at least, misunderstanding how a more conventional fighter I.E a boxer actually fights and how their body mechanics actually work. I'm sure you've probably seen the inside Tan Sau response to a hooking punch. The WC guy's understanding of a hooking punch in this case is simply that a guy is swinging his arm in an arc, when in reality, a boxer will be using his entire body to perform a hook punch, and movement of the actual arm is a minor part of executing the hook punch. Thus, the aforementioned inside Tan technique might work against an untrained street brawler, but it couldn't possibly happen against someone who knows how to throw a proper hook punch unless you outweighed them -- Your structure is as strong as your bodyweight.

2. See #1

3. WC schools do have a tendency to make the forms seem more cryptic and mysterious than they actually are. However, the forms are still an important component.

The reason why is because WC's forms aren't shadow-fights against an imaginary opponent as one might find in a more traditional kung fu style. Rather, they act as your encyclopedia of the tools that one uses, their proper shape and alignment, etc. In other words, they are important to practice because they contain the material that is required to learn Wing Chun. However, learning Wing Chun and executing Wing Chun are two different things, and people seem to not realize this.

4. Yep

5. I wouldn't say the system itself is fundamentally flawed, but rather that the way it's trained is fundamentally flawed.

A) This is because WC never spars

B) I don't see why WC can't put hips into punches. We always lock are hips into our structure. However, the reason we don't use our shoulder isn't because using the shoulder is bad, but because we simply have a different way of generating force. We lead our strikes with the elbow (think of it as a piston). This allows us to better get our full bodyweight behind a strike.

C) Once again, because WC never spars

D) I wouldn't say that the idea here is to parry all their shots, but rather charge in and bind them up before they can pose a threat. In regards to trapping, the issue is that WC schools tend to use it as a means rather than as an end.

E) People who say WC is a complete system are lying to themselves. It wasn't designed for grappling and such, so why would it be a complete system?

6. Yeah, this is a pretty common logical fallacy among the TMA circles. The fact is, there aren't any "dirty" techniques found in WC or any other TMA explicitly that aren't in arts like Muay Thai, Judo, etc.

7. I think this stems primarily from the Bruce Lee phenomenon of the 1970s. It was made known that WC was Bruce's first art, so naturally a lot of instructors wanted a piece of that pie since it meant big money. If you had the "real" WC, you could be more like Bruce Lee, if not better than him!

TL;DR

I don't think that WC by itself is flawed, but it needs to make major changes in its mentality and how it's trained. That doesn't mean that it's utterly hopeless, however; folks like Robert Chu, Philip Bayer, Alan Orr and Eddie Chong are on the right path, IMO. We just need more instructors like them. In addition, I've successfully used WC to save my *** enough times to say that, once the BS is separated from it, it's a good system -- but the other side of that is the fact that a mugger/untrained street brawler is far different from a trained fighter.

However, just because of that doesn't mean that you must train it. If you can't find a good WC school, then stop wasting your time and train in another more tried-and-proven art like MT or BJJ.

Also, in regards to Bullshido, I tend to stay away from them and look to sites like Sherdog instead in regards to critique on various martial arts and MMA training. Sherdog seems to be more fond of critical analysis than Bullshido and thus will have more folks like Hanzou who will point out the honest strengths and weaknesses of various styles, while Bullshido threads tend to devolve into "______DO/JITSU IS FOR NERDS AND PUSSIES" pretty quickly. I still give them major props for fraud busting though.

Hey! Thanks for this excellent post! This is exactly what I was looking for and thank you for addressing the questions individually, I know it was a lot to ask at once.

Do you practice wing Chun? If so, do you cross train any other systems? How long have you practiced WC? I'm curious because you seem to agree with a lot of the assertions but also give a fair representation to why they are the way they are.

I never doubted WC could be effective. My concern was a) how long it would take to attain a basic proficiency b) if it were ideally suited towards certain people (lightweight, short, non-muscular, etc), or If it could easily work for anyone. c) if it took MORE personal evaluation than other systems. As in "this technique doesn't work for me, I'll drop it and add this".

Finally, what criteria would you look for in selecting a school? You mentioned a list of guys that are advancing the art, what are they doing that I should look for?

Thanks again for the excellent response.

 

[avengingbeagle]

A lot of the OP's points sound like hang-ups based on reading about WC but limited personal experience in it. OP, find a WC school near you and check them out. There is good WC, bad WC, and likely plenty that falls somewhere in the middle. Even as an outsider- what you see will tell you a lot about if it is what you are looking for.
But to answer the points that stood out to me the post from the OP:
1) Forms (done correctly) are very important. They teach and practice the very structure you need for any of the movement used, and it reinforces principles of the art as well. Esoteric? More like secrets hidden in plain view. And good for solo practice.
2) On the subject of solo practice...... I would liken WC to BJJ in the sense that it takes regular contact and feedback to develop the sensitivity and reflexes that make WC work, just like how BJJ guys roll constantly. If someone is looking for something to practice at home on their own with limited class time, I would not recommend WC. I don't say this to denigrate other arts at all, but a "harder" striking art like some Karate styles or TKD can likely be practiced solo (in addition to some actual instruction of course) since at lower levels there is much less emphasis on any kind of yielding or deflection. Even boxing might be a better fit since so much of that is working combinations on a heavy bag solo. Its a lot harder to practice the nuances of good WC without a partner.

You're exactly right about my hang up's being due to limited experience. That's why I came to ask people with wing Chun experience for their thoughts.

I agree with your assertion about checking out a school and making a judgment for myself. However, fact of the matter is: I've been fooled before. I have no experience with TMA(only boxing) so I don't have a real standard to access certain things. Despite this, I still think you're right.

Also, in regards to solo practice: I mean as a supplement to classes. Of course you need tactile feedback from a partner but If I do something, I commit to it. Meaning, I'd like to practice in some capacity every day. Whether it's forms/stances, punching or whatever. It seems WC would be fine, in this regard.

 

[avengingbeagle]

If you need to be convinced to train this or that, then you should do something else. Something about this or that will not be a good match for you.

This was poor wording on my behalf and I regret having used this title. Fact is, I was already convinced. The title should have read something more like "how would you respond to these criticisms of WC?".

 

[PiedmontChun]

This was poor wording on my behalf and I regret having used this title. Fact is, I was already convinced. The title should have read something more like "how would you respond to these criticisms of WC?".

Ok, well in that case, I'll throw my thoughts in and be more specific.

2) Kung Fu Cinema - Wing Chun is not pretty. Some movies out there include recognizable Wing Chun techniques in fighting for sure, but always dramatized and more "flashy" for effect. With that said, every now and then I execute something against a classmate and my giddy inner 12 year old self thinks "wow, that felt like kung fu". In an SD situation, I think it would end up looking pretty scrappy though, and I'm ok with that.

3. Self-Defense - I believe in WC/WT/VT as effective for SD as any other art trained effectively. The fact that it does not rely on strength or speed alone, and emphasizes nuances of angle, structure, and efficiency stripped of any unnecessary movement means you are developing skill that narrows that gap against a bigger opponent, or even allows you to borrow their force.

4. Longevity - see #3. Skill in WC can increase with time even as speed or strength might decrease.

5. Something to practice alone - There is plenty to work on solo: forms, footwork, hitting a wall bag, working the dummy at later stages. Contact and training time with people more skilled than you is critical though.

Your other concerns:
1) No "proof" of effectiveness, why are there little to no WC practicioners in MMA? Where are the full contact WC tournaments that don't end up looking like poor kickboxing matches? - That's a good question and likely a huge thread in itself. There are some guys employing WC concepts in MMA competitive contexts. I just don't personally think WC was made to trade punches and kicks with an opponent, with gloves on. Putting gloves on renders a lot of WC's movements cumbersome and blurs a lot of the precision that is trained. Also, there are lots of great arts you don't see in the UFC; that doesn't mean they aren't effective for their intended purpose. Competitive rule sets tend to favor fights going to the ground, which means cross training in a grappling art is pretty much required for entry in that world. I think WC has more sophistication and a longer learning curve than MT or kickboxing for example, so a competitive fighter is going to choose a striking art that they can reach proficiency in the fastest while developing proficiency in grappling, while still at the peak of their athleticism.

2. Lack of sparring - WC schools could definitely spar more, but that's probably true of a lot of TMAs.

3. Forms: Are they worth the focus they seem to be given? - The forms are building blocks of the system, emptied of direct application context. It does amaze me when I learn an entire new application or use of a movement within the form, something done 1000's of times but then a lightbulb goes on where I look at it differently. There's a lot of depth in those empty hand forms.

4. "He does this, I do this"! - We all know the videos. I understand the purpose of drilling the technique before you try to implement it against an opponent(to make sure form is correct and what not) . There just seems to be soooo much of this. What's worse is the guy who you're reacting to is usually throwing some half hearted punch, with poor/unrealistic technique. - You have to learn techniques, underlying principles, timing, etc somehow, and it needs to be in a relaxed manner. The pitfall is never ramping up the intensity or applying more pressure, getting stuck in that trap. But just because you are 3-6 months in and no one is full power punching you in the face expecting you to deal with it, doesn't mean the training is lacking. YouTube videos are not a realistic depiction of how someone teaches or train. Some of the best Sifus in the world don't even bother with broadcasting themselves out there, while plenty of hacks do just that.

5. Is the system fundamentally flawed? - Seems like a loaded question.

A) It's advertised as being simplified, stripped down, efficient, etc. If that's true a person with 6 months training should be equal to or greater than a boxer with 6 months training(provided similar physique, weight, etc). However, the opposite seems to be true - Its simple, but that doesn't mean its easy. Your body doesn't want to move in the most efficient manner. You have to train and work hard to fight in a relaxed way using the most economical movement, and to build reflex response where you can respond quickly.

B) Not putting any shoulder or hips into punches - Why does seemingly every other system advise the opposite of this? I'm not saying it doesn't work but again: is this really the quickest/most efficient way of doing things? We do utilize the hip, and adduction of stepping to increase power of strikes, but we don't "commit" to most strikes. The shoulder is not loaded since a vertical fist punch uses the elbow like a piston, like previously mentioned.

C) Short range/Infighting - again sounds great but why do we never see WC guys close the gap and get in close against boxers and the like? Closing the gap on a boxer seems to be a very difficult thing, but if any art is going to do it, WC can. An opponent trying to throw feints, committed strikes, or trying to keep you at bay with long range kicks..... WC is all about closing the gap in these situations. Some guys think they can just chain punch thru anything and close the gap, so don't listen to arrogant people who act likes its easy.

D) Trapping/blocking - Even the critics admit some WC trapping techniques seem effective but is there an unrealistic emphasis placed on it? What about the blocking component? This is perhaps most troubling/counterintuitive to me: the idea is to stand within a boxers preferred range(unless/until the gap is bridged) and parry all their shots right? Would it not be easier/more efficient to stay out of range and/or move out of the way, waiting for an opportunity to move within your preferred range? It seems the more shots you take, the more likely it becomes one gets through to you - This might be overly simplistic, but if you consistently take the shortest most efficient route to meet an attack, while simultaneously attacking, it will overwhelm an opponent, or force them to withdraw from you, then which you would follow. Trapping happens, but its not a technique you do for the sake of itself.

E) "Complete system" - A true grappling system like BJJ, wrestling, or even Judo would complement WC well, in my opinion. Some advertise WC as "complete", and it is complete, for what it does. That's not a weakness. Very few arts attempt to be "complete" in the sense of covering ever scenario for every fighting range.

6. "You never see real Wing Chun because it's too deadly, man" -This is mostly marketing. There are some brutal strikes and dirty tactics within it though.

7. Lineage wars/hero worship/politics/infighting - Yeah the politics suck and the WC world is fragmented as a result, but that's not unique to WC whatsoever. Different WC lineages do vary in how the system is taught, for sure. I think people from different lineages would get along better touching hands and learning from each other than fighting thru the internet though.

 

[avengingbeagle]

Ok, well in that case, I'll throw my thoughts in and be more specific.

2) Kung Fu Cinema - Wing Chun is not pretty. Some movies out there include recognizable Wing Chun techniques in fighting for sure, but always dramatized and more "flashy" for effect. With that said, every now and then I execute something against a classmate and my giddy inner 12 year old self thinks "wow, that felt like kung fu". In an SD situation, I think it would end up looking pretty scrappy though, and I'm ok with that.

3. Self-Defense - I believe in WC/WT/VT as effective for SD as any other art trained effectively. The fact that it does not rely on strength or speed alone, and emphasizes nuances of angle, structure, and efficiency stripped of any unnecessary movement means you are developing skill that narrows that gap against a bigger opponent, or even allows you to borrow their force.

4. Longevity - see #3. Skill in WC can increase with time even as speed or strength might decrease.

5. Something to practice alone - There is plenty to work on solo: forms, footwork, hitting a wall bag, working the dummy at later stages. Contact and training time with people more skilled than you is critical though.

Your other concerns:
1) No "proof" of effectiveness, why are there little to no WC practicioners in MMA? Where are the full contact WC tournaments that don't end up looking like poor kickboxing matches? - That's a good question and likely a huge thread in itself. There are some guys employing WC concepts in MMA competitive contexts. I just don't personally think WC was made to trade punches and kicks with an opponent, with gloves on. Putting gloves on renders a lot of WC's movements cumbersome and blurs a lot of the precision that is trained. Also, there are lots of great arts you don't see in the UFC; that doesn't mean they aren't effective for their intended purpose. Competitive rule sets tend to favor fights going to the ground, which means cross training in a grappling art is pretty much required for entry in that world. I think WC has more sophistication and a longer learning curve than MT or kickboxing for example, so a competitive fighter is going to choose a striking art that they can reach proficiency in the fastest while developing proficiency in grappling, while still at the peak of their athleticism.

2. Lack of sparring - WC schools could definitely spar more, but that's probably true of a lot of TMAs.

3. Forms: Are they worth the focus they seem to be given? - The forms are building blocks of the system, emptied of direct application context. It does amaze me when I learn an entire new application or use of a movement within the form, something done 1000's of times but then a lightbulb goes on where I look at it differently. There's a lot of depth in those empty hand forms.

4. "He does this, I do this"! - We all know the videos. I understand the purpose of drilling the technique before you try to implement it against an opponent(to make sure form is correct and what not) . There just seems to be soooo much of this. What's worse is the guy who you're reacting to is usually throwing some half hearted punch, with poor/unrealistic technique. - You have to learn techniques, underlying principles, timing, etc somehow, and it needs to be in a relaxed manner. The pitfall is never ramping up the intensity or applying more pressure, getting stuck in that trap. But just because you are 3-6 months in and no one is full power punching you in the face expecting you to deal with it, doesn't mean the training is lacking. YouTube videos are not a realistic depiction of how someone teaches or train. Some of the best Sifus in the world don't even bother with broadcasting themselves out there, while plenty of hacks do just that.

5. Is the system fundamentally flawed? - Seems like a loaded question.

A) It's advertised as being simplified, stripped down, efficient, etc. If that's true a person with 6 months training should be equal to or greater than a boxer with 6 months training(provided similar physique, weight, etc). However, the opposite seems to be true - Its simple, but that doesn't mean its easy. Your body doesn't want to move in the most efficient manner. You have to train and work hard to fight in a relaxed way using the most economical movement, and to build reflex response where you can respond quickly.

B) Not putting any shoulder or hips into punches - Why does seemingly every other system advise the opposite of this? I'm not saying it doesn't work but again: is this really the quickest/most efficient way of doing things? We do utilize the hip, and adduction of stepping to increase power of strikes, but we don't "commit" to most strikes. The shoulder is not loaded since a vertical fist punch uses the elbow like a piston, like previously mentioned.

C) Short range/Infighting - again sounds great but why do we never see WC guys close the gap and get in close against boxers and the like? Closing the gap on a boxer seems to be a very difficult thing, but if any art is going to do it, WC can. An opponent trying to throw feints, committed strikes, or trying to keep you at bay with long range kicks..... WC is all about closing the gap in these situations. Some guys think they can just chain punch thru anything and close the gap, so don't listen to arrogant people who act likes its easy.

D) Trapping/blocking - Even the critics admit some WC trapping techniques seem effective but is there an unrealistic emphasis placed on it? What about the blocking component? This is perhaps most troubling/counterintuitive to me: the idea is to stand within a boxers preferred range(unless/until the gap is bridged) and parry all their shots right? Would it not be easier/more efficient to stay out of range and/or move out of the way, waiting for an opportunity to move within your preferred range? It seems the more shots you take, the more likely it becomes one gets through to you - This might be overly simplistic, but if you consistently take the shortest most efficient route to meet an attack, while simultaneously attacking, it will overwhelm an opponent, or force them to withdraw from you, then which you would follow. Trapping happens, but its not a technique you do for the sake of itself.

E) "Complete system" - A true grappling system like BJJ, wrestling, or even Judo would complement WC well, in my opinion. Some advertise WC as "complete", and it is complete, for what it does. That's not a weakness. Very few arts attempt to be "complete" in the sense of covering ever scenario for every fighting range.

6. "You never see real Wing Chun because it's too deadly, man" -This is mostly marketing. There are some brutal strikes and dirty tactics within it though.

7. Lineage wars/hero worship/politics/infighting - Yeah the politics suck and the WC world is fragmented as a result, but that's not unique to WC whatsoever. Different WC lineages do vary in how the system is taught, for sure. I think people from different lineages would get along better touching hands and learning from each other than fighting thru the internet though.

Thanks for the reply. I enjoyed it a lot. I can definitely see how gloves would hamper a lot of WC techniques.

In a combat situation are you supposed to square off with an opponent? No, right? I've heard people criticize WC for this but every sparring video(and every WC-centric king fu movie I've seen haha) they do not do this.

Do you have any advice at all on what to look for when visiting/picking a school?

Thanks again.