How Wing Chun is supposed to look...in my book

[Reeksta]

In your previous response.

Where? Please quote me exactly where I state that a wing chun practitioner finds it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one

 

[Hanzou]

Where? Please quote me exactly where I state that a wing chun practitioner finds it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one

Unfortunately I'm posting from a phone, and it's not letting me copy what you wrote in that post.

Are you saying that you aren't arguing that WC is more designed for self defense and not for competitive fighting?

 

[Transk53]

Why are you quoting your self?

Because it is easier this way to add a frame of reference. @Hanzou already knew about the previous post. Hence I reiterated my post. Simples.

 

[Reeksta]

Are you saying that you aren't arguing that WC is more designed for self defense and not for competitive fighting?

I'm saying that you've accused me of stating that a wing chun practitioner would find it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one and I would like you to quote where I wrote that. Otherwise I would like you to admit to your mistake. Btw, funny how your phone has allowed you to quote anything else you've wanted to but not this eh?

 

[Hanzou]

I'm saying that you've accused me of stating that a wing chun practitioner would find it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one and I would like you to quote where I wrote that. Otherwise I would like you to admit to your mistake. Btw, funny how your phone has allowed you to quote anything else you've wanted to but not this eh?

Yes, it's very funny. However, let me try paraphrase what you wrote earlier;

You said your sifu would correct you if you attempted to do a grappling movement against a puncher because the person you're fighting might have a knife. This was also stated after you pointed out that some arts are better for 1:1 fights than others.

So essentially, a WC exponent should perform better against a knife wielding assailant on the street than a skilled yet unarmed fighter in the ring. After all, beating the knife wielding mugger is what you guys train for right?

 

[Transk53]

So essentially, a WC exponent should perform better against a knife wielding assailant on the street than a skilled yet unarmed fighter in the ring. After all, beating the knife wielding mugger is what you guys train for right?

Er no. You learn Wing Chun because of an interest in Kung Fu.

 

[J W]

Wow, did this thread go off the rails. Marnetmar shared a video of Hawkins Cheung that he found interesting, and it quickly devolved into that ol' "Wing Chun (or lack thereof) in MMA" debate.

I think we can end this whole silly thing by simply agreeing that:

Hanzou and one or two others are of the belief that MMA is the best test we have of a martial art's effectiveness in one-on-one combat, and since WC hasn't fared too well in the MMA world they believe it is unproven. (Fine, they can believe that if they'd like, doesn't really affect my training.)

No one else here really agrees with that. We believe it is a worthwhile, effective art, regardless of how it is (or isn't) used in the MMA world. We have no need to defend it. (For me, whether or not a martial art finds success in the MMA arena is completely irrelevant.)

A BJJ practitioner questioning the validity of WC in the WC forum because it isn't used much in MMA in a topic that had nothing to do with MMA is probably not the most appropriate place for this discussion. Would've probably made more sense to start a new topic in the MMA forum titled "Why don't certain arts find success in MMA?" or whatever.

This thread could've been better spent discussing Wing Chun and Hawkins Cheung.

...or we can keep going round and round with this tired old argument. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go practice my Siu Nim Tau (hope I'm not wasting my time!).

 

[Tez3]

Wow, did this thread go off the rails. Marnetmar shared a video of Hawkins Cheung that he found interesting, and it quickly devolved into that ol' "Wing Chun (or lack thereof) in MMA" debate.

I think we can end this whole silly thing by simply agreeing that:

Hanzou and one or two others are of the belief that MMA is the best test we have of a martial art's effectiveness in one-on-one combat, and since WC hasn't fared too well in the MMA world they believe it is unproven. (Fine, they can believe that if they'd like, doesn't really affect my training.)

No one else here really agrees with that. We believe it is a worthwhile, effective art, regardless of how it is (or isn't) used in the MMA world. We have no need to defend it. (For me, whether or not a martial art finds success in the MMA arena is completely irrelevant.)

A BJJ practitioner questioning the validity of WC in the WC forum because it isn't used much in MMA in a topic that had nothing to do with MMA is probably not the most appropriate place for this discussion. Would've probably made more sense to start a new topic in the MMA forum titled "Why don't certain arts find success in MMA?" or whatever.

This thread could've been better spent discussing Wing Chun and Hawkins Cheung.

...or we can keep going round and round with this tired old argument. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go practice my Siu Nim Tau (hope I'm not wasting my time!).

Spot on post!
WC is only the latest style to have received the 'it doesn't work in the cage so it's pants' treatment, I imagine when this thread has finally run out of steam, the next style will have already been picked out for the 'versus MMA' treatment. We've already had Aikido trashed, funnily enough using all the same arguments. Bets on for the next style to be bashed?

 

[Reeksta]

Yes, it's very funny. However, let me try paraphrase what you wrote earlier;

I didn't ask you to paraphrase me. I asked you to quote where I actually said that a wing chun practitioner would find it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one. I will ask one last time: are you able to do this, yes or no?

 

[drop bear]

I'm not sure if you are asking me or not. I would say that I don't think you have to do MMA at all, I do though and I do TMA as well, I can see the best of both worlds however Hanzou has constantly throughout the forum on various threads stated that the only way to test your art is in the cage, that MMA is the best, in fact probably the only way to train these days. He states often too that if your art doesn't 'work' in the cage then your art is rubbish. Comments like 'TMAs haven't changed for centuries' as a put down aren't conducive to understanding and having a proper conversations on martial arts. Disrespecting a fighter because he assumes that the fighter's record means he's a bad fighter is not the way we do things in MMA or TMA, so I'm assuming Hanzou has a better record fighting better fighters. If one is going to constantly tell other martial artists their style is useless and cannot compete in the cage one needs to back up what one says in my opinion or perhaps one should listen instead to what those martial artists are telling them about their art

mma does attract incredibly talented fighters though. Guys who i imagine would have been great wing chun men had they chosen to pursue that route.

it is just there is more money,greater fame,and a better challenge.

 

[Transk53]

Here is a short vid with defending against a knife. Anyway, I would think that most MA will have some kind of weapon defense.

 

[drop bear]

I didn't ask you to paraphrase me. I asked you to quote where I actually said that a wing chun practitioner would find it easier to defend themselves from an armed opponent than an unarmed one. I will ask one last time: are you able to do this, yes or no?

sigh. Ok then do they find it easier to defend against one unarmed opponent or multiple armed ones?

because it kind of becomes the horns of the dilemma here. If one guy is easy. Then mma should be a walk in the park. If two guys with knives are easy. Then mma should still be a walk in the park.

and if you want to defend wing chun from this sort of argument then possibly a different strategy might be in order.

it would at least save you getting upset.

 

[Transk53]

He's not getting upset fella. More to do with the fact that the tread went to the dogs, and that @Hanzou will not answer a simple question.

 

[ballen0351]

If one guy is easy. Then mma should be a walk in the park. If two guys with knives are easy. Then mma should still be a walk in the park.
.

Because it doesn't fit in the rules. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand.

Why do you care if it works or not? If people are happy training in a style and have no desire to "test it" in a manner that you find acceptable why do you care. Your so worried about proving how great your "style" is and how bad everyone else's is. Your like the little kid trying so hard to sit at the adult table

 

[Reeksta]

sigh. Ok then do they find it easier to defend against one unarmed opponent or multiple armed ones?

because it kind of becomes the horns of the dilemma here. If one guy is easy. Then mma should be a walk in the park. If two guys with knives are easy. Then mma should still be a walk in the park.

and if you want to defend wing chun from this sort of argument then possibly a different strategy might be in order.

it would at least save you getting upset.

You know what, I'm just gonna quote myself to save the hassle of typing it out again

What I'm saying is that arts like wing chun train for a wider range of scenarios and discourage it's practitioners from certain courses of action which could get you into trouble if your opponent has a weapon or some friends with him. As Tez mentioned, it's a different mindset, with different tools, for a different set of objectives. However, some of those things a WC practitioner trains not to do make perfect sense if you take away those variables.
For example, my sifu dislikes when I slip punches and duck underneath for a takedown. His logic is that, if the opponent had a knife that I hadn't seen, then he could easily slice me with it as he retracted his arm. This makes sense from a self defence perspective but if I'm limiting my responses in this way, then in a situation where there's no risk of weapons or multiple opponents, I'm naturally at a disadvantage compared to someone who has trained without limiting their options in this way and who has trained specifically for the situation we are currently in.
It's a compromise.

I'm not saying anything is 'easy' am i? I'm merely pointing out that if you train more specifically for certain situations, you will be better in those situations than someone who trains more generally. This is simply the nature of time managment, surely?

 

[drop bear]

Because it doesn't fit in the rules. I'm not sure why that's so hard for you to understand.

Why do you care if it works or not? If people are happy training in a style and have no desire to "test it" in a manner that you find acceptable why do you care. Your so worried about proving how great your "style" is and how bad everyone else's is. Your like the little kid trying so hard to sit at the adult table

i did not post on whether wing chun makes people happy. I am sure it does.

but then the conversation turned to why you don't see it in mma which interests me. It is not about proving anything is greater or lesser than anything else.

and i will repeat this for the adult table.

you do see wing chun concepts in mma.

 

[Steve]

While that is a fair point Tez, you can still see Boxing, Bjj, Wrestling, Muay Thai, and even TKD influences in modern MMA fighters. I have yet to see any recognizable CMA influences in modern MMA.

And when I say "standard MMA hand techniques" I'm talking about hand techniques that are pulled mainly from Boxing, and Muay Thai.

Cung le was a reasonably effective mma'ist and his striking was strongly rooted in San shou.

Once again, it's not the techniques, but the training model, which includes practical feedback. San shou is cma trained for competition. As a result, the cma remains recognizable under pressure.

Competition isn't the only form of feedback in training, but it's certainly an effective one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

You know what, I'm just gonna quote myself to save the hassle of typing it out again

I'm not saying anything is 'easy' am i? I'm merely pointing out that if you train more specifically for certain situations, you will be better in those situations than someone who trains more generally. This is simply the nature of time managment, surely?

correct. So from a mma perspective you don't see many mmaers become professional boxers. Because their boxing is not good enough.

 

[Hanzou]

A BJJ practitioner questioning the validity of WC in the WC forum because it isn't used much in MMA in a topic that had nothing to do with MMA is probably not the most appropriate place for this discussion. Would've probably made more sense to start a new topic in the MMA forum titled "Why don't certain arts find success in MMA?" or whatever.

Well we should remember how all of this began.

I simply said that fighting in a ring or a cage is a better example than a demonstration. Its important to note that I'm not the only person who said that. Reeksta then tried to show all the MMA fighters who supposedly use WC in their training. The thread went from there.

 

[Mephisto]

Spot on post!
WC is only the latest style to have received the 'it doesn't work in the cage so it's pants' treatment, I imagine when this thread has finally run out of steam, the next style will have already been picked out for the 'versus MMA' treatment. We've already had Aikido trashed, funnily enough using all the same arguments. Bets on for the next style to be bashed?

I nominate ninjutsu! We could replace wc vs MMA with wc vs any other competitive style to keep it interesting if you're getting tired

mma does attract incredibly talented fighters though. Guys who i imagine would have been great wing chun men had they chosen to pursue that route.

it is just there is more money,greater fame,and a better challenge.

I'd also say that the top tier of wc guys would make good MMA fighters also, and they'd be better equipped to deal with an aggressive opponent.

Here is a short vid with defending against a knife. Anyway, I would think that most MA will have some kind of weapon defense.

The video actually shows a valid FMA knife defense but it adds a few extra motions that don't accomplish anything, maybe when I get to my home computer I can break it down. The problem with his slashing technique defense is he executes several slashes than pauses the one intended to be defended against he doesn't even attempt to simulate a continuous attack. He could have offered seversl attacks at a controlled and even pace but he throws some short out of range slashes than enters with the same attack given in the other techniques.