Is Wing Chun being used the wrong way in fighting?

[LFJ]

You can hear them land.

The ones on the ground that do land.

 

[geezer]

The ones on the ground that do land.

Hey I looked at the clip in slo-mo like you suggested. The resolution is too poor for me to be certain. It did look to me like the so-called "tai-chi" guy caught one at 1:36 and possibly more before going to the ground, but honestly, it's hard to say for sure. You have a good eye for detail, I'll grant you that.

Anyway, what's the point? As you say, it was a horrible display for both participants. The "MMA" guy looked incredibly sloppy and the "Tai-chi" guy was just a joke. If it proves anything, maybe it's that really crappy MMA or Kickboxing is still a lot more effective than crappy fantasy martial arts?

 

[LFJ]

Anyway, what's the point? As you say, it was a horrible display for both participants. The "MMA" guy looked incredibly sloppy and the "Tai-chi" guy was just a joke. If it proves anything, maybe it's that really crappy MMA or Kickboxing is still a lot more effective than crappy fantasy martial arts?

The point was to say the self-taught MMA guy wasn't all that great either.

But, yeah, that's a point, too. This guy taught himself and still beat a guy who had a TCMA "master" and went on to create his own "Thunder Tai Chi" style.

I think it just comes down to the fighter mentality, though. Whether two unskilled guys or two highly skilled guys, the one with the stronger fighter mentality is going to smash the other most times.

Skill or style doesn't really mean much if you don't have it in you to crush someone for real. In this match, only one guy had it, and that's what decided the outcome before it even kicked off.

 

[Charlemagne]

It's very hard to know which systems actually have the potential to work and which do not due to the manner in which they are trained. One of the things I like about Matt Thornton of Straight Blast Gym fame is his approach in this regard. He calls it the "i-method".

• Introduction
• Isolation (with progressive levels of resistance)
• Integration

While I cannot say that I like or agree with everything he says, I believe this method, or something similar, would go a long way towards clearing the air in modern martial arts. He discusses the process here, and it is probably worth a listen.

 

[drop bear]

The ones on the ground that do land.

And the one that dropped the guy.

 

[LFJ]

And the one that dropped the guy.

There wasn't one.

 

[Charlemagne]

There are two WC threads that are pretty similar in regards to topic going on right now. I posted a question there that I would be interested in getting some evidence on. I don't want to derail this particular thread, but if anyone has video, please feel free to share it there. Cheers!

What was Wing Chun designed for?

 

[wingchun100]

So when and where will the first wing chun tournament be?

 

[Steve]

When I read comments like this I suspect that the author either has limited experience in WC, or has a limited notion of what WC entails. Not to be insulting, since you may be a very effective martial artist. But WC is much more than a "condiment", and if viewed that way will probably not function well. It is not a grab-bag of infighting tools to be bolted onto a generic, non-WC base!

On the other extreme, you will find many WC "believers" who will insist that WC/VT is all you need!!! That is an equally narrow and flawed perspective IMO.

My personal belief is that VT/WC is a very well integrated system of stand-up close-range fighting that can be very effective. To be a complete martial art, however, you also need to have a long range game and a good grappling game. That is to say a more JKD-like frame of mind. That's leaving aside the issue of bladed weapons and firearms which is often how people approach self-defense where I live.



Now let's be brutally honest as to why VT/WC is not more successful in fighting and or competition: I'd say it boils down to who trains it, how it's trained, and the lack of competitive testing. Let's look at each of these factors:

First, the majority of people training VT/WC are like me -- basically hobbyists who train a few days a week, are not all that talented, and have no interest in hard-core fighting.

Second, most WC/VT classes, just like mine, train a lot of drills, a lot of chi-sau, and far too little sparring to be really effective. Remember that our clientele is mostly older professionals who really don't want to get beat up, and they are being taught by me --a guy in his sixties who hasn't been a fight since he was in his twenties!

Third, The absence of a competitive arena specific to VT/WT for testing, improving and evolving the art regardless of lineage and faith-based beliefs about how our techniques "should" be done based on ideas rooted in the past.

Now many will say that such a venue already exists in the form of MMA or Sanda. But MMA has become it's own thing these days, and really isn't the ideal framework for testing individual component arts. Thats why Muay Thai, BJJ, Boxing, and so forth, still have their own competitive formats. VT/WT absolutely needs that too as one component of our training system along with the other training components we already have.

And we need fewer grandmasters and more good coaches like Alan Orr and his kind to dissect WC/VT and apply it to an MMA format as well. It may not look like traditional VT/WC but he makes it work, and does a pretty fair job of explaining how his fighters are incorporating WC concepts into their MMA, however it looks. That's a damned good start IMO.

Excellent post.

 

[Steve]

No, I agree, successful self defense is far more important than competition. I was simply trying to illustrate the point about how many Wing Chun people believe the method to be nearly infallible, yet when put to the test in competition it doesn't fair well against other trained combatants. As an art, the theorectical makeup may support such a narrative but the training and application of most teaching doesn't. This, IMO, is why it fails and gets such a bad rap. Basically it boils down to delusioned braggerts and fanboys who have no clue of actual fighting misrepresenting an art.

It's impossible to know whether the martial artist was better able to defend himself because of his training. Presuming that the outcome of any self defense encounter would have ended differently whether a person has martial arts training or not is faulty logic. Impossible to know either way, and statistically, your odds of being physically accosted are low, and if you are attacked, your chances of surviving are very high, regardless of your training. Your instincts, though, are pointing you in the right direction regarding competition.

 

[Steve]

So when and where will the first wing chun tournament be?

I would definitely attend as a spectator.

 

[moonhill99]

On another thread, Nobody Important posed the following question:

Clearly, and feel free to argue, Wing Chun as a fighting art has failed miserably when put to the test. Perhaps Wing Chun isn't supposed to look like your doing the forms when fighting, but more importantly, about learning how to refine gross motor skill to combined motor skill and fine motor skill when under duress. Is the art of Wing Chun being used wrong?

It's an old question, but one worthy of further discussion. What are your thoughts?

First who is saying it? That Wing Chun does not work? Internet trolls or the experts?

Where are the youtube videos saying it does not work? Not your Wing vs xx but wing chun used in self defense?

Show me the body cameras, street cameras and cell phone used on the street where it does not work.

Where are the testings and who doing the testings?

Second who are these wing chun fighters? Have they got punched many times? Or is this their first time getting punched?

They never got into fight before? All calm and relax in class with little body contact?

To these questions are answered how can this thread be taken into more light?

 

[moonhill99]

I also get feeling there are lot of internet trolls and people starting to believe them.

Now if you are trying to combined boxing and Wing Chun together the two don't go good because Wing Chun has different footwork and stance than boxing.

Also the way the punch is generated and the way you form the fist and strike is also different.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

First who is saying it? That Wing Chun does not work? Internet trolls or the experts?

Where are the youtube videos saying it does not work? Not your Wing vs xx but wing chun used in self defense?

Show me the body cameras, street cameras and cell phone used on the street where it does not work.

Where are the testings and who doing the testings?

Second who are these wing chun fighters? Have they got punched many times? Or is this their first time getting punched?

They never got into fight before? All calm and relax in class with little body contact?

To these questions are answered how can this thread be taken into more light?

"Nobody Important" is actually the person's username on MT.

 

[Martial D]

I also get feeling there are lot of internet trolls and people starting to believe them.

Now if you are trying to combined boxing and Wing Chun together the two don't go good because Wing Chun has different footwork and stance than boxing.

Also the way the punch is generated and the way you form the fist and strike is also different.

I've been doing WC since the 90s, and full contact cross training/sparring in WB, MT, BJJ, JKD, Arnis and a grab bag of whatever I could learn from whoever wherever for that same amount of time, and I certainly wouldn't do 'pure' wc in a sparring/combat situation. I like my teeth too much.

 

[geezer]

First who is saying it? That Wing Chun does not work? Internet trolls or the experts?

...Where are the youtube videos saying it does not work? Not your Wing vs xx but wing chun used in self defense?

Moonhill, this question I quoted was posed by the forum member "Nobody Important", so he would have to weigh in to give you a definitive answer. Still, when he referred to WC "failing miserably" when put to the test, I took it that he was referring to matches or competition such as MMA, Sanda, or style vs. style bouts, not unrecorded self-defense applications on the street.

While WC/VT/WT may be very effective when you are jumped in some dark ally or parking lot, that remains unknowable and unquantifiable, except as regards one' personal experience. Testimonials and stories of such experiences are entirely subjective and don't provide the kind objective evidence that today's skeptical audience demands.

By "testing" most people refer to some kind of competition with resisting opponents, oft repeated, and with controlled variables so that the results can be quantified and analyzed. Many feel that though imperfect, this is the best available way to objectively test efficacy. Consider the ring as a sort of petri dish to lab-test martial arts.

Of course, as you pointed out, such controlled lab tests cannot fully duplicate field results. But it's the best we can do if we want to apply the scientific method. Or we could just go along with untested theories and personal testimonials.

 

[geezer]

I also get feeling there are lot of internet trolls and people starting to believe them.

Now if you are trying to combined boxing and Wing Chun together the two don't go good because Wing Chun has different footwork and stance than boxing.

Also the way the punch is generated and the way you form the fist and strike is also different.

I don't pay attention to the hoards of internet trolls, including the occasional one popping up on this foraum, so I can't speak to that. However, I do agree with your statement about the difficulty of integrating WC/VT and modern boxing. Different structure, stance, steps, power generation ...in short, not easily combined with advantageous results.

 

[LFJ]

However, I do agree with your statement about the difficulty of integrating WC/VT and modern boxing. Different structure, stance, steps, power generation ...in short, not easily combined with advantageous results.

And perhaps most importantly, very different strategy and tactics. Like oil and water.

You really have to gut one or the other to make something functional.

 

[drop bear]

Moonhill, this question I quoted was posed by the forum member "Nobody Important", so he would have to weigh in to give you a definitive answer. Still, when he referred to WC "failing miserably" when put to the test, I took it that he was referring to matches or competition such as MMA, Sanda, or style vs. style bouts, not unrecorded self-defense applications on the street.

While WC/VT/WT may be very effective when you are jumped in some dark ally or parking lot, that remains unknowable and unquantifiable, except as regards one' personal experience. Testimonials and stories of such experiences are entirely subjective and don't provide the kind objective evidence that today's skeptical audience demands.

By "testing" most people refer to some kind of competition with resisting opponents, oft repeated, and with controlled variables so that the results can be quantified and analyzed. Many feel that though imperfect, this is the best available way to objectively test efficacy. Consider the ring as a sort of petri dish to lab-test martial arts.

Of course, as you pointed out, such controlled lab tests cannot fully duplicate field results. But it's the best we can do if we want to apply the scientific method. Or we could just go along with untested theories and personal testimonials.

Yeah. Wing chun do really well in all the fights we can't see.

I had a mate like that. Decimated in the fights nobody saw.

 

[drop bear]

I don't pay attention to the hoards of internet trolls, including the occasional one popping up on this foraum, so I can't speak to that. However, I do agree with your statement about the difficulty of integrating WC/VT and modern boxing. Different structure, stance, steps, power generation ...in short, not easily combined with advantageous results.

Have you looked at amateur boxing?