Is it Wing Chun?

[jeff_hasbrouck]

This is what REAL wing tsun looks like.

Ok so the fella isn't using the on-guard stance. WHO CARES? If you don't see the wing tsun (chun) in this you apparently don't know very much about it.

Principals and theories guide wing tsun, not "looking" like your doing it correctly. This is how I fight, I don't always use the YGKYM. One of the only good idea's I got from my old sifu was that you need to be "DYNAMIC" with your WT.

Fighting isn't fixed; We KNOW this to be true. So why do we fix our positions?

It's true, the stance combined with the PROPER footwork is the only way to maximize your WING CHUN effectiveness, but being effective in a certain style doesn't mean your going to win a fight. I could care less if MY WT looks like WT or not.

It is my belief people shouldn't even know what they are looking at when you see a WT fight. It is quick, gruesome and over before anybody knows whats going on. There is no such thing as a 10 minute fight in the real world. You'll see 10 minute boxing matches, but in a REAL fight you wont see it go past 3 minutes ever.

So the guy doesn't use Pak/lap/tan/bong? He is 100% correct. I just posted in another forum how to deal with chain punches and it was to use "cutting" punches like the feller in this video does.

This is some of the most application based WT/WC i've seen on youtube. I want to give this guy the biggest F'in highfive!

 

[jeff_hasbrouck]

What is nhb grappling? Never heard those two terms used together like that.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

NHB is "No Holds Barred". Basically when someone says NHB, no matter what they are refferring to, it means there is no rules.

In the grappling perspective, this was back in the day when rules were starting to get established where you couldn't use certain holds (neck wrench, chokes, intentional bone breaks) and throws (Slams, supplay (suplex), gut wrench).

When they use the word "Barred" they are referring to "barring" something from being utilized.

NHB nowadays is mostly un-common. Today it is only used in an open challenge match, and they are so rare that you barley see them. Basically, its a straight up street fight. You can gouge eyes, break bones, hit the throat and intentionally try to seriously harm/kill your opponent.

 

[geezer]

This is what REAL wing tsun looks like.

Ok so the fella isn't using the on-guard stance. WHO CARES? If you don't see the wing tsun (chun) in this you apparently don't know very much about it.

Actually, in my case it's that I don't see very much! Some people have a much better eye for taking in and analyzing stuff. When I first watched clips of Alan's fighters, I didn't see much WC. So having him break it down in this clip was really helpful. Also, the amount of WC his fighter's apply varies. According to some of his posts elsewhere, some had already trained and fought using other styles, and haven't been with him that long. WC takes time to integrate.

Interestingly, a guy I train Eskrima under actually learned some WT from me back in the 80's. He took a seminar or two with LT and used to travel to the Bay area to train with Latosa and some of his guys. He also has broad experience in boxing, ju-jutsu, wrestling and just plain fighting. Now, much older, he runs an MMA gym and has produced some promising local fighters. Anyway, he insists that he still uses a lot of WC concepts in what he does. Not as much as Alan Orr, but similar. I don't always see it, but when he breaks it down, I have to agree. A lot of the concepts are there.

 

[WingChunIan]

Before I start I'll say what Alan always says, what he does IS WING CHUN ACCORDING TO HIS LINEAGE no one outside that lineage has a right to comment,there is no copyright on the term Wing Chun and if somebody wanted to they could call their flower arranging method Wing Chun. Aside from that I'm going to go against the grain here because people who constantly spout off about Wing Chun being a concept based system are IMHO deluded. All martial arts are concept based, they each have a set of concepts, principles and rules that govern the way they fight, move, strike etc they also consist of techniques that have been built up around those concepts. If the techniques are not important to your Wing Chun then you would only ever need go to a handful of lessons because the concepts can all be learned and memorised quite quickly. Practising the techniques without the concepts is equally futile (and ultimately not wing chun) which is why students need to constantly refer back to them. So performing MT (for example) techniques whilst adhering to Wing Chun principles (many of which are not unique to wing chun btw) does not make it wing chun, if the same principle is contrary to those found in MT then one would of course have to ask if it is still MT.
The idea passed on by Ip Man and then WSL of not being bound by the system, relates to fighting. When you are fighting, you are fighting if the opportunity presents itself to hit the assailant with a nearby object and it is appropriate to do so then you do what ever it takes, does that mean that hitting someone with a bin lid is wing chun - no, not even if you adhered to every concept in the book, but it is fighting.

 

[Eric_H]

This is what REAL wing tsun looks like.

Ok so the fella isn't using the on-guard stance. WHO CARES? If you don't see the wing tsun (chun) in this you apparently don't know very much about it.

Principals and theories guide wing tsun, not "looking" like your doing it correctly. This is how I fight, I don't always use the YGKYM. One of the only good idea's I got from my old sifu was that you need to be "DYNAMIC" with your WT.

Fighting isn't fixed; We KNOW this to be true. So why do we fix our positions?

It's true, the stance combined with the PROPER footwork is the only way to maximize your WING CHUN effectiveness, but being effective in a certain style doesn't mean your going to win a fight. I could care less if MY WT looks like WT or not.

It is my belief people shouldn't even know what they are looking at when you see a WT fight. It is quick, gruesome and over before anybody knows whats going on. There is no such thing as a 10 minute fight in the real world. You'll see 10 minute boxing matches, but in a REAL fight you wont see it go past 3 minutes ever.

So the guy doesn't use Pak/lap/tan/bong? He is 100% correct. I just posted in another forum how to deal with chain punches and it was to use "cutting" punches like the feller in this video does.

This is some of the most application based WT/WC i've seen on youtube. I want to give this guy the biggest F'in highfive!

My friend, you are so far out in left field, I don't even think you can see home plate.

I didn't bring up fixed positions, you did. WC has certain structural rule sets, with full capacity to be dynamic. From what I see, they are violating many of them.

"There is no such thing as a 10 minute fight in the real world" - and how many "real fights" (LOL at this dick measuring term btw) have you been in to prove this metric? Or is your research mostly limited to youtube?

 

[geezer]

Before I start I'll say what Alan always says, what he does IS WING CHUN ACCORDING TO HIS LINEAGE no one outside that lineage has a right to comment...

As you say, people have a right to call what they do whatever they want. If what they do gets attention, others will comment. For better or worse that's their right. And as long as long as folks maintain common courtesy, avoid obscenity, personal attacks, threats and other unacceptable behavior, their comments are welcome here ...as far as I know.

All martial arts are concept based, they each have a set of concepts, principles and rules that govern the way they fight, move, strike etc they also consist of techniques that have been built up around those concepts. ...Practising the techniques without the concepts is equally futile (and ultimately not wing chun) which is why students need to constantly refer back to them....

I have to say you make a good point here, Ian. You have to have both form and content, technique and concept, or you have nothing. I think everybody here recognizes that. But certainly some approaches to training put more emphasis on one than the other. Typically a concept heavy approach would work best when directed at experienced martial artists who already have developed good technique, but wish to achieve a higher level of performance. Some famous trainers specialize in this approach.

Personally, I started this thread largely in response to some pretty knee-jerk reactions against Alan Orr's work adapting WC to the ring. But on this forum he's received a lot of support overall. So I'm not sure why you seem put out. If the occaisional, ...or not-so-occaissional stupid comment bothers you, I'm surprised you frequent internet forums at all. :uhyeah:

 

[jeff_hasbrouck]

Actually, in my case it's that I don't see very much! Some people have a much better eye for taking in and analyzing stuff. When I first watched clips of Alan's fighters, I didn't see much WC. So having him break it down in this clip was really helpful. Also, the amount of WC his fighter's apply varies. According to some of his posts elsewhere, some had already trained and fought using other styles, and haven't been with him that long. WC takes time to integrate.

Interestingly, a guy I train Eskrima under actually learned some WT from me back in the 80's. He took a seminar or two with LT and used to travel to the Bay area to train with Latosa and some of his guys. He also has broad experience in boxing, ju-jutsu, wrestling and just plain fighting. Now, much older, he runs an MMA gym and has produced some promising local fighters. Anyway, he insists that he still uses a lot of WC concepts in what he does. Not as much as Alan Orr, but similar. I don't always see it, but when he breaks it down, I have to agree. A lot of the concepts are there.

Geez,

All ***-kissin aside, you really make me think (in a positive manner) about the differeing of WT.

I plainly see the WT coming from this feller, but then again, I might just have that specifically analytical mind.

Honestly I don't like the "Latosa" stick fighting method. I much more like the Sayok (look it up on youtubel) method because it is much more realistic (to me) and seems more legitimate.

Anyways, I've been up for about 26 hours and probably talking out of my southern orifice for the most part lol. So all the best, and thanks for giving me yet another point of view to look at!


All the best!


jeff

 

[jeff_hasbrouck]

My friend, you are so far out in left field, I don't even think you can see home plate.

I didn't bring up fixed positions, you did. WC has certain structural rule sets, with full capacity to be dynamic. From what I see, they are violating many of them.

"There is no such thing as a 10 minute fight in the real world" - and how many "real fights" (LOL at this dick measuring term btw) have you been in to prove this metric? Or is your research mostly limited to youtube?

Eric,

I certainly was not singling you out, by any means; I just saw the video and thoguht into my own brain for the counter arguments I have heard a zillioion times.

Personally I have been in over 20 street fights, with 15 of those actually being when I knew WT.

I was not critisizing your knowledge, experience or opinion! I'm not even aware that I replied to one of your comments; and if I did, honestly from my heart I meant no offense. Honestly I agree with mostly you say. However;

I believe that street fighting is totally different from the kwoon to the street.

I completely agree with the video that it is more effective to punch rather than to deflect.

Again my sincerest apologies if you thought I was in any way bashing your point of view; I do however have quite the bit of practical expeince (mainly coming from my big loud-mouth that seems to always get me in trouble) lol.

My comments were simply advocating this fellers cause. I can't emphasize enough that I wasn't actually arguing against anyone on the forum!

All the best,

Jeff

 

[Cyriacus]

"There is no such thing as a 10 minute fight in the real world"

I dont know which of you said that, but neither of you have seen two drunk middle aged men rolling around too exhausted to lift their arms. It went on for ages and it was sorta funny.

 

[Harm0nys0ul]

I took a look at that video and a few more videos from Alan Orr, and I would state yes it is Wing Chun. Alan Orr's Wing Chun is Wing chun at it's most basic. A German Wing chun instructor shows this very well; Grandmaster Kernspecht developed a Lat Sao program that is the basic drills in Kernspecht lineage, is very similar to what Alan Orr calls advanced application of Wing Chun.
It is a very effective application of Wing Chun, there is no doubt about that.
Basically AlanOrr is focusing on the application of the Wing Chun punch and making it as effective as possible, yes without a doubt that is Wing Chun.
There is many ways to be effective in Wing Chun, and for a lot of people, the best way to be effective in Wing Chun is to simplify it to it's most basic, there is no problem with that, that is still Wing Chun. You don't need to be the most complex martial artist you only need to be effective in a fight.
So to end, yes what Alan Orr is doing is still Wing Chun, it is not advanced but it is effective, and that is all Wing Chun needs to be, is effective, anyway you decide to use it.

 

[geezer]

It's hard to compare Kernspecht and Orr, as their objectives seem so very far apart. In one of his monthly essays on his EWTO website, Kernspecht has stated that WT had no place in sport competition. Orr, by contrast is keenly focused on applying WC to the ring. I don't think that makes his WC "more basic" ---at least not in the sense of being rudimentary or unsophisticated. Rather, he has to compress the essence of WC movement, feel, and energy into a very constricted format, bound by rules, wearing gloves and dealing with very real and heavy opposition.

That doesn't seem "basic" to me. I think I'd prefer a word like "restricted" to describe the context he's working in.

 

[shaolin_al]

I think everyone here is somewhat right in their own way. For me the only wing chun I have been exposed to have all shared what Eric_H spoke of about structure and rules. But we have to consider the difference we are talking about is why no one is agreeing. It all depends on if you are just discussing some concepts from a system or if you are talking about wing chun as a style/system as a whole. I agree that you can borrow techniques from many styles and modify them to your own way of fighting, even if it is for sport. It could be a tiger claw here, a tan sao here etc.. whatever you want to take from. Just taking techniques from a style and mixing them together with your other stuff and still calling it that style is not always correct. The thing about wing chun is that it is constantly changing whether we like how it changes or not, wing chun is very dynamic and it is being changed to fit a modern/sport approach, that is why it is important for each of us to carry it on to others how we would like to see it be passed on. Me personally I like to stick to the traditional with a mix of modern. My sifu geezer has always taught me to use what works while staying within the system I am learning. I have never seen a reason to need to do otherwise. Thank you to everyone for making this a great thread.

 

[WingChunIan]

As you say, people have a right to call what they do whatever they want. If what they do gets attention, others will comment. For better or worse that's their right. And as long as long as folks maintain common courtesy, avoid obscenity, personal attacks, threats and other unacceptable behavior, their comments are welcome here ...as far as I know.



I have to say you make a good point here, Ian. You have to have both form and content, technique and concept, or you have nothing. I think everybody here recognizes that. But certainly some approaches to training put more emphasis on one than the other. Typically a concept heavy approach would work best when directed at experienced martial artists who already have developed good technique, but wish to achieve a higher level of performance. Some famous trainers specialize in this approach.

Personally, I started this thread largely in response to some pretty knee-jerk reactions against Alan Orr's work adapting WC to the ring. But on this forum he's received a lot of support overall. So I'm not sure why you seem put out. If the occaisional, ...or not-so-occaissional stupid comment bothers you, I'm surprised you frequent internet forums at all. :uhyeah:

I'm not put out at all its just a pet peeve that people always seem to see Wing Chun from one extreme or another either they say its a principle based art and the techniques don't matter or they adopt a position of trying to police what Wing Chun is. There is so much variety across the various lineages of wing chun that the reality is all anyone can comment on is whether something is correct for a given lineage.

 

[Argus]

I'm not very far along in my training, but I have mixed feelings about what Alan presents.

I would say that he uses WC to compliment other training/systems used in the ring, and some of the principles of Wing Chun are present some of the time. I do agree strongly that Wing Chun is a principle-based system, and that the way a technique looks, or even is performed can change drastically and still be valid. He also makes some good points, I think, about Wing Chun being "a training system." However, when you start hard blocking way off the center and chasing hands, as appears to be the case at times, I would say that you're getting outside the principles of the system. A lot of what he does looks like "big man fighting" to me, if you will, and I honestly doubt if someone of my small weight and stature could deal with pressure in the same way that he does.

There's another issue that might also be relevant, though. The problem with most competitive fighters is that they train to "win." The goal of winning in competition, and learning and coming to understand how to use one's art effectively, however, are not one in the same. If you just want to learn to win in the ring, it's much easier to learn something simple and very effective; arts like Boxing and Muay Thai are easily applicable, very practical, and very effective, and it's a much more efficient use of your time to learn to do those well than it is to learn to apply a traditional system such as Wing Chun.

You reap what you sow. There are plenty of Wing Chun practitioners who learned to use their art combatively without sacrificing its integrity; Lok Yiu, Wong Shun Leung, Hawkins Cheung, and Duncan Leung, to name a few. But I think in all cases, they were more interested in understanding and learning to apply their art than they were in winning competitions. And in all cases, they trained exceptionally hard; as hard as any professional ring fighter trains today.

 

[Dummy]

Greetings Martial Talk, my first post woot!

My thoughts on the video are simple and if you really think about it Alan is just taking from wing chun what he feels would be effective in the "ring" against other martial artists. He's finding what works for him or in this case his fighters. The angles and basic principles of WC still apply.

Now for the body types i stand firmly on the belief that any body type ectomorph , endomorph or mesomorph when trained correctly can benefit from building a strong frame and developing power in the "Go" muscles , whether the individual is 5ft 5" or 6ft 2" Strength training is a must in any form of self defense. What i mean to say is that it isn't necessary for a shorter fighter to be quick and not be as powerful.

Regards
Dummy

 

[qwksilver61]

Can anyone really explain borrowing? unless you have actually experienced "borrowing" and not being weak as a rag doll,also not letting your structure break down and holding on to the center line at all cost,absorb energy all the way down to your legs...if your opponent is too large,give way, re-direct and give it all you got...of course when all else fails throat cutting hands ,palms,eye piercing,leg play ie;calf/ knee to ground,knees, kicks.yes.. size is a factor.but if you had no choice? it would be tough indeed,hey that's just reality.......has anyone here honestly had their *** kicked? I have.sometimes being on top does not mean you have won the fight! as far as styles,believe the earlier poster could be right,it depends on the individual and how hard they have trained.BTW congrats Geezer! I see you have stayed the course.Jealous, wish I could train with the Webb (Sifu that is!)

 

[geezer]

BTW congrats Geezer! I see you have stayed the course.Jealous, wish I could train with the Webb (Sifu that is!)

Thanks. But to be honest, I've spent a fair bit of the last few years recovering from injuries and having to take some breaks from training. But yeah, I'm in it for the long haul. I may never get to the top of the mountain and be a "master", but I enjoy the path I'm on. As for training with Sifu Webb, why not? He's holding a "Summer-camp" at the Austin HQ on July 20-21. I'm going along with a couple of students. Looks like I may be teaching a short FMA seminar while I'm there ...at least if my knee is ready (I just had minor arthroscopic surgery). Anyway, airfares are still pretty reasonable if you shop around and lock in a ticket soon. Check out the NVTO webpage and PM me if you'd like.

Now regarding borrowing the force, Sifu Webb does it nicely. As far as having your butt kicked, I've had mine kicked more than a few times. Unless you are a natural born champ that's gotta happen, right? :wink1:

 

[Punchy]

. As far as having your butt kicked, I've had mine kicked more than a few times. Unless you are a natural born champ that's gotta happen, right? :wink1:

I'd say even natural born champs got their butts kicked a great deal. They just kept getting back up.

 

[Xue Sheng]

On any given day there is always someone who could be better, faster, smarter, stronger or luckier so getting your butt kicked is bound to happen from time to time