Is Wing Chun being used the wrong way in fighting?

[wingchun100]

The Aikidoka did a decent job entering to get out of the power zone for those TKD kicks - he needs some close-in tools once he gets there, though. I'd be interested in seeing if his guard improves if he faces someone who throws more punches.

I agree. I was just being silly. lol

 

[DanT]

Too many seem to think that no one fights or trains MMA outside of the UFC and other elite shows, and that everyone that trains MMA or has an MMA fight is a full time professional fighter.

I train at an MMA gym in Sydney. I know a One FC title holder and another guy with multiple national level belts. Both work full time at jobs outside martial arts.



Harsh.

I think it was Jocko Willink and Joe Rogan who were talking about the "killer nerds" (something like that) who train jiu jitsu. Nothing wrong with being intelligent. Is there?

Nothing wrong with working a full time job, but I guarantee you he's training minimum 5 days a week.

Nothing wrong with intelligence, I've always been a straight A student, I'm talking about "wing chun nerds" who like talking rather than training. I'm sure you know what I mean.

 

[DanT]

Wing Chun works if you master the techniques, understand the concepts, and train hard. Otherwise it sucks.

 

[Martial D]

Actually, there's a ton of stuff not captured on video. Don't let the amount of video that exists fool you. As far as I know, about 5 minutes of my entire training and teaching time has made it to video. The cops I know have only had a tiny fraction of what they do show up on video (body cams capture what's around them, not what they do). The bouncers I've known, there was video of some of what they did (from security cameras), but it only survived until those videos were overwritten.

We see a lot of videos of fights, and some of attacks, but in the US attacks rarely happen where there are cameras. In some countries (and in some areas of some cities in the US), there are more mounted cameras to capture some of that. Since many attacks don't happen around witnesses, those don't make it onto a smartphone. What makes it on phones, for the most part, is where someone was being obnoxious enough that people decided to start videoing before the action started.

This is starting to border on religious belief isn't it?

You'd rather believe in hidden killers for which we have no evidence than see the reality of what the evidence we do have tells us. That's your perogative I suppose.

I just hope, as I always do in these moments, that those sorts of beliefs don't get you or someone you love hurt or killed one day.

 

[Martial D]

Your assertion is that because you have never seen Aikido work, it does not work. It is very easy to hide behind Russels teapot as “I don’t have to prove I’m right, because the burden of proof does not lie with the denier”.

The flip side though is that you are asking us to believe that in all the time Aikido has existed and of all the millions of people that have trained in it, not one has ever successfully been able to use Aikido. I cannot believe that is the case.


Nor can I believe that the The Senshusei Course, which was originally created to train Tokyo Riot Police, would have been done so if the art did not work. No Police organisation would ask it’s members to train 7 hours a day five day a week for 11 months (or however long it is) for an art which has no merit.

One out of millions is not the best hit rate.

It makes sense for cops, who maybe could use some of those standing joint locks in their repertoire of cop moves to subdue people, or maybe, just maybe there is some teacher of aikido that has modified it enough that it works in combat. (While staying well hidden) Maybe.

Maybe Bigfoot is real. Maybe a teapot' orbits the sun. I can't say for sure.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yet, it pretty much is. Since you have DB on ignore(he is one of my fav posters here, go figure), he posted a video of 'russels teapot'. Are you familiar with that particular thought experiment?

It's certainly relevant here.

Nope, and don't care.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yet, it pretty much is. Since you have DB on ignore(he is one of my fav posters here, go figure), he posted a video of 'russels teapot'. Are you familiar with that particular thought experiment?

It's certainly relevant here.

I've never found a video of you eating breakfast, or taking a dump. Why has that not been posted? My conclusion is that you never eat breakfast and never take a dump.

 

[Martial D]

I've never found a video of anybody eating breakfast, or taking a dump. Why has that not been posted? My conclusion is that nobody never eat(s) breakfast and never take(s) a dump.

Fixed for accuracy.

 

[wingchun100]

Wing Chun works if you master the techniques, understand the concepts, and train hard. Otherwise it sucks.

Hmm...sounds a lot like other martial arts styles I know.

By that I mean every single one I have ever heard of.

 

[Flying Crane]

Fixed for accuracy.

Nope. You.

 

[geezer]

I've never found a video of you eating breakfast, or taking a dump. Why has that not been posted? My conclusion is that you never eat breakfast and never take a dump.

Fixed that....

Breakfast:

Dump:

 

[Juany118]

This is partly OT, but bear with me - I have a point that pertains to WC, I think. (Or I'm just rambling. Always a possibility.)

One of the issues I see with that Aikidoka's responses is that I don't see the "jujutsu" (as Kondo Katsuyuki would refer to it) from Daito-ryu - something I don't see trained in most of mainline Aikido (I expect it shows up more in Yoshinkan, possibly in Shotokan/Tomiki). I see him trying to apply the "aiki-jujutsu", which happens at a fairly specific timing. When he misses that timing, he just keeps dragging into the same technique. With just a couple of close-in techniques and some practice on the non-aiki side of the techniques, he would have had a much easier time of a couple of points in that.

So, how does this apply to WC? Well, much of Aikido has a very heavy focus on the single principle of aiki. Aiki takes precedence in at least most of the training I've seen in their mainline - precedence over effectiveness. It becomes an absolute, rather than "best, when available". So, they practice using attacks that make it available, and work to find ways to make it available in other attacks. From some of the discussions I've seen on WC, it seems perhaps some of this same process has happened in that art. There seems to be an absolutist approach to some of the principles.

The principles are guidelines on how the art works, but should not restrict from alternatives. I don't know the WC principles well enough to use one as an example, but you guys can probably translate this to your art. When I'm teaching NGA, aiki is still a primary principle. It's still "best, when available". But I also teach force-on-force options (hard blocks that jam the momentum, big strikes) and push-pull responses (more Judo-style). Why? At the very least, they are fixes for when you screw up. Equally importantly, sometimes they are better answers than the "aiki" answer. They still fit within the overall principles of the art, but the "aiki" principle doesn't get to dictate our every response. Effectiveness is the primary principle.

Again, back to WC and the discussion at hand. Competition and/or sparring between lineages can bring some of this to the fore. People see a grappling move from a line that sees WC as grappling. The folks who grapple more occasionally see a striking sequence or tactic that defeats them, and they adjust. And someone who trained in something else (as well as their WC), brings in a different step, stance, posture, or punch. It's not purely WC, but it fits nicely, and someone else decides they like it. Effectiveness starts to help evolve how WC is used, and how the principles are implemented.

Again, all this is just my view from the outside, based on what I've heard discussed in this thread and the couple dozen others I've been involved in.

First agree on the review of the Aikidoka having what I would call a shallow tool box. As an example there was a point where he was basically set up perfectly to lock the opponent's leg for a tap out. Instead he added a few extra steps to do the same arm lock he did time and again.

I would also agree that this shallow tool box is true of some Lineages of WC as well. Some expect the following to just "happen".
1. If you attack properly the attacks alone will be a defense. Punches become tan saus, or your counter punches are so effective that your opponents attack does nothing.
(Can this work yes but that can't be your only thought to defense)
2. You do not need to seek a superior position. Your attacks will put the enemy in an inferior position.

(Again this can work but to rely on it exclusively? Nope)

 

[KPM]

Wing Chun works if you master the techniques, understand the concepts, and train hard. Otherwise it sucks.

But do a search for almost any video of Wing Chun guys sparring and you would be lead to think otherwise!

 

[Juany118]

This is starting to border on religious belief isn't it?

You'd rather believe in hidden killers for which we have no evidence than see the reality of what the evidence we do have tells us. That's your perogative I suppose.

I just hope, as I always do in these moments, that those sorts of beliefs don't get you or someone you love hurt or killed one day.

No you can actually logic it out tbh.

Combat is one of the ultimate engines of Darwinism. When we are looking at many TMAs (Wing Chun included) we see arts that existed in combat or combat like situations (no rules competitions) for well over a century. If they didn't work then these arts wouldn't still be around, similar to why we no longer use muzzle loading rifles on the battlefield.

For newer arts (say Judo and the various flavors of Aikido) we need to look at how close they are to their core art and did that core art work? Both Judo and Yoshinkan Aikido are only a step or two removed from their Jujutsu roots. As such it is not out of the realm of belief to say they would work. It's when you get further away from those roots, such as the very Aiki heavy Schools of Aikido that are closer to O'Sensei's "final vision" where the questions arise and you know what, most Aikido Sensei's in my area recognize this. Let me explain.

You will not find an honest "Aiki heavy" Sensei who says "yes if you are looking for a competitive martial art or a quick and direct form of self defense I am your guy." They not only know but take pride in the fact that they are teaching the enlightened Art that Ueshiba taught in the end with the purpose of Spiritual Cultivation as the primary goal. There is a reason these people half jokingly call the Yoshinkan School students "evil Aikidoka". I think it is best exemplified in an article entitled "The trouble with Aikido..." 47. The trouble with aikido

Other people look at Shioda Gozo, my friend continued, the late master of Yoshinkan style aikido. Videos of him depict a very short, wiry little man who could toss big, burly judo players around at will. It looks like fakey stuff on cursory examination. But if you take apart his technique, he had incredible timing, balance and sense of space. And his aikido was scary. If you weren’t ready as an uke, you could really hurt yourself because the force he generated in your disbalancing was very strong. I can see Shioda sensei easily dislocating wrists or knocking people out when their bodies slammed into the mat.

THAT kind of aikido was truly both an art and martial, at the same time. It was beautiful, but carried with it a sense of “martial”-ness. It was not that far removed from its budo roots...

It's really not unlike Karate really, there is no "Aikido" just as there is no "Karate" there are, last I checked 16 or 17 different styles of Aikido at this point. Yoshinkan Aikido, Shodokan Aikido, Yoseikan and Yoshokai come to mind immediately.

The problem is illustrated in the stereotype and how it relates to the quote above. When most people think Aikido they think of an effortless art that is designed not to inflict injury as that is what O'Sensei sought near the end of his life. You walk into a Yoshinkan or Yoshokai dojo though and wonder why you need to do so much ukemi, then see people getting dropped HARD and fast and you will say "this isn't for me" and you see these "hard" forms of Aikido at few and far between schools.

 

[Martial D]

Nope. You.

Now you are getting ridiculous. Again, you disingenuously toggle between specifics and generalities.

And again you have ignored my points in favour of passive aggressiveness.

I'm not saying there is no evidence for any specific person doing x, (which is also true) but that there is no evidence of x happening at all. This is why your analogy was dishonest, and why I fixed it for you.

 

[KPM]

I recall the old saying...."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

 

[Martial D]

No you can actually logic it out tbh.

Indeed you can, such as;

Combat is one of the ultimate engines of Darwinism. When we are looking at many TMAs (Wing Chun included) we see arts that existed in combat or combat like situations (no rules competitions) for well over a century. If they didn't work then these arts wouldn't still be around, similar to why we no longer use muzzle loading rifles on the battlefield.

And like firearms, unarmed combat has also evolved. Meanwhile most TMAs remain sequestered and crystalized in their dojos and lineages, generations removed from real world combat application. It's been a very long time since TMAs were used for anything resembling war, and I personally believe the training received by those warriors would look little to nothing like what we have today.

 

[Juany118]

I recall the old saying...."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

That's why I said a teapot in space is a bad analogy. We understand cosmology and that we have launched no teapots into the asteroid belt's orbit. What we debate here is anecdotal experience. They are very different things.

 

[Martial D]

I recall the old saying...."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Old, and false if you are to remain scientific.

Most scientific theories read something like- If X is true, we should expect to see Y and Z. If Y and Z can not be found, X is most likely not true.

 

[geezer]

But do a search for almost any video of Wing Chun guys sparring and you would be lead to think otherwise!

OK, I've got the day off (too much time on my hands) so I'm off to search for the absolute worst WC sparring video I can find on Youtube. Something embarrassingly awkward, stupid and unrealistic. If I find something good (i.e. really, really bad) I'll post it and then see if anybody can top it! Wish me luck.