Leung Ting?

[Phil Elmore]

I've not seen their work, so I couldn't compare them. My opinion is based only on what I've seen. Why do people do things differently? Why do they make mistakes? Who knows?

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

Some people in here said that the Leung Ting lineage lack sparring, well how come?!. If they really lacked it, how those Sifus learned how to fight and control their situations?!!!.

I am only telling what I was told by brazilian practitioners of the WT system. I suppose that in all organizations the top notch guys will spar to improve, but I also suppose many big martial arts organizations will not allow their students to spar because they don´t want to scare little Johnny (or, in the case of Brazil, little João) away.

Also, in Brazil, WT folks are constantly made fun of because of their anti-grappling curriculum. This is the land of BJJ and of Judo (every boy does at least one year of judo here, don´t ask me why): in brazilian martial arts forums, AND in person, speaking the words "anti-grapple" immediately labels you as a fool.

This is also helped by the fact that sometimes the WT guys themselves will post pictures of their anti-grappling online. I just can´t find any right now, though.

 

[yipman_sifu]

I am only telling what I was told by brazilian practitioners of the WT system. I suppose that in all organizations the top notch guys will spar to improve, but I also suppose many big martial arts organizations will not allow their students to spar because they don´t want to scare little Johnny (or, in the case of Brazil, little João) away.

Also, in Brazil, WT folks are constantly made fun of because of their anti-grappling curriculum. This is the land of BJJ and of Judo (every boy does at least one year of judo here, don´t ask me why): in brazilian martial arts forums, AND in person, speaking the words "anti-grapple" immediately labels you as a fool.

This is also helped by the fact that sometimes the WT guys themselves will post pictures of their anti-grappling online. I just can´t find any right now, though.

Well, The Gracies had influenced the Brazilian martial arts. If you would like to know somwthing about Wing Chun in general, it is a pure self-defence system, which can be used in street encounters and real hard situations. The BJJ that you are talking about is very effective in its competition form e.g: UFC. I personally spent most of my time talknig about this issue. A BJJ vs Wing Chun who will win?. Well BJJ proved that it is the best in submission fighting without hurting opponents.

I mean that if I am a Wing Chun guy fighting in the UFC against a BJJ. There is a possibility of 80% that I am gonna lose, because I am regulated by certain rules e.g(no hits to graons, neck, ribs,etc..), These rules will allow the Grappler to take me down while he could stand a punch or two due to the fact that I am punching him to a non sensitive area in which he could get hit.

An exception of that was Beimo, Legends like master Wong Shun-Leung had fought in regulated street fights that contained the same rules regarding the sensitive areas, but was still victorious and won most of his fights in the first seconds only.

Now in the street, a trained Wing Chun fighter will always have the upper hand due to many facts.
1) the floor of the street is harmful to the grappler for grappling
2) The wing Chun trainer can hit anywhere
3) Don't expect that a trained Wing chun trainer will wait to be grappled to start anti-grappling techniqeus. A trained Wing chun guy is very fast and he can punch very fast in a certain place in the body.

Sifu Emin Boztepe challenged the Gracies a couple of years ago in a street fight (not in the ring), and no one challenged him until our day. he said that among all the fights he had, he was never grappled down by any grappler.

 

[Flying Crane]

In reading thru this thread, it seems to me that what has become most highlighted are the inherent problems with Empire Building in the martial arts. While I don't know how big William Cheung's organization is, I do understand that Leung Ting's is quite large, with many members.

Empire Building consists of growing an organization to a size where one can no longer effectively keep control over standards and quality among members. While those at or near the top in the empire may in fact be extremely good (Leung Ting and his top students, for example), the further one moves down the pecking order, the worse the instructors and students tend to become. Of course there are always exceptions to this, but in general I think it is pretty consistent.

This is because when a group grows to this size, the material has to be presented in a way that is easiest for the masses to digest, because what has become important to the empire is growing membership, which translates into money. Bring as many people in as possible, and don't give them anything that they might struggle to understand, because that might scare them off. Inevitably, the material itself, as well as the presentation of the material degrades and the next generation has lower skill than the last. The top people are no longer able to supervise all the training, so standards slip and the system becomes sloppy.

Members of Leung Ting's organization are not students of Leung Ting. They are students of "Joe Sifu" who studied under "Jeff Sifu" who studied under "Frank Sifu" who studied under "Mark Sifu" who studied under Leung Ting. Unless one trains directly and regularly under Leung Ting, one is not truly his student. Membership in his Empire and belonging to his lineage does not make one his student, nor guarantee in any way a certain level of quality or skill, either high or low.

Personally, I would like to see an end to Empire Building. Talented sifus (as I assume Leung Ting is, tho I have never met him so I cannot say for sure) should focus on teaching their own students, and making sure their understanding of the art and their skill is the best it can be. In this way, these students can in turn pass on their skill and knowledge to the next generation. But when they are ready to do that, they should no longer be part of someone's empire. They should be ready and capable of standing on their own. Of course they should still respect their teachers, and even continue their own training if possible, but they should really be independent.

When someone becomes a teacher within someone else's empire, that often means they have completed a certain program. But completion of a program is no guarantee that they have developed the skill and knowledge to be a talented martial artist, or teacher. This is a more subtle development, and often cannot truly be done within the confines of an Empire.

Just thought I'd add my two cents.

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

Well, The Gracies had influenced the Brazilian martial arts. If you would like to know somwthing about Wing Chun in general, it is a pure self-defence system, which can be used in street encounters and real hard situations. The BJJ that you are talking about is very effective in its competition form e.g: UFC. I personally spent most of my time talknig about this issue. A BJJ vs Wing Chun who will win?. Well BJJ proved that it is the best in submission fighting without hurting opponents.

I mean that if I am a Wing Chun guy fighting in the UFC against a BJJ. There is a possibility of 80% that I am gonna lose, because I am regulated by certain rules e.g(no hits to graons, neck, ribs,etc..), These rules will allow the Grappler to take me down while he could stand a punch or two due to the fact that I am punching him to a non sensitive area in which he could get hit.

An exception of that was Beimo, Legends like master Wong Shun-Leung had fought in regulated street fights that contained the same rules regarding the sensitive areas, but was still victorious and won most of his fights in the first seconds only.

Now in the street, a trained Wing Chun fighter will always have the upper hand due to many facts.
1) the floor of the street is harmful to the grappler for grappling
2) The wing Chun trainer can hit anywhere
3) Don't expect that a trained Wing chun trainer will wait to be grappled to start anti-grappling techniqeus. A trained Wing chun guy is very fast and he can punch very fast in a certain place in the body.

Sifu Emin Boztepe challenged the Gracies a couple of years ago in a street fight (not in the ring), and no one challenged him until our day. he said that among all the fights he had, he was never grappled down by any grappler.

First of all, I am not talking exclusively about BJJ or the Gracies; I was talking about grappling in general. There is no such thing as anti grappling, for the same reasons that there is no such thing as anti striking.

In Brazil, kids are regularly taught judo, same as american kids are taught wrestling. So most people here know grappling trash when they see it: and anti grappling, particularly the kind taught by the WT (considering the pics I saw), is trash. So anti-grapplers are rightfully made fun of here.

Second of all, you presume too much about the Wing Chun system and, most of all, you presume too much about "the wing chun guy".

Your rules argument is really no argument at all. If you can´t strike his throat, he can´t strike your throat; and why are the Beimo fights an exception to your "WC does not go well with rules!" argument? If Wong Shun Leung managed to fight and win with rules, so should you.

So please don´t give me that silliness. If one man managed to make WC work without resorting to eye gouging, all men should be able to do it.

Or have you not heard of dirty moves learned by grapplers which are not used in competitions? Grapplers limit themselves too; strikers who do not practice Wing Chun limit themselves in competitions, and still win (Muay Thai fighters frequently win important competitions without using their elbows, which is a huge limitation to the fighter). Wing Chun is not special in that sense, because WC does not consist solely or mainly of eye gouging or throat strikes. So there is no good reason for it not to be represented in competitions.

Now, let´s pick apart your hypothetical "WC vs Grappler in Tha Street!" arguments.

1) Ever heard of throws? Grapplers know throws. If you suffer a throw in a street, with concrete pavement, you can die right there, or at least suffer some broken ribs - there is a nice way to throw someone, and there is a mean way. Grapplers, therefore, LOVE concrete pavements. Also, concrete pavements are not "harmful" to grapplers. Unconfortable, yes, but who cares about confort when life and limb are at stake? Also, if it is unconfortable for me, it is also unconfortable for you.

2) So can the grappler. Grapplers, as opposed to many strikers, do not hide their heads in the sand. They will learn a good striking style to compliment their game. I was a judoka: how do you think I ended up learning Wing Chun and, later, Muay Thai? Because I knew judo was not enough. BJJ guys are also directed to striking gyms to compliment their games.

Also, maybe you did not know, but BJJ guys know some very dirty wrist locks, easily applicable on the ground. They do not use it because they are being nice to you. I know that, because I have been tapped out by a few. Grapplers have their own brand of dirty tricks, and you would do well to remember that.

3) What the hell is that supposed to mean anyway? Yes, a trained WC guy is fast. So is a trained kickboxer, boxer, MT guy, or taekwondo practitioner. Wing Chun does not offer miracles, same as all arts.

As for Emin, I believe you are not telling the whole story. As far as I remember, he was challenged to fight in a police district, and refused.

And finally, I am not talking from the point of view of a grappler. I left judo close to ten years ago. But I took some BJJ classes, I did some Vale Tudo training, and I know both the value and the limitations of grappling arts first hand. I, therefore, do not underestimate them, which is what you are doing - essentially, you believe strikes to vital points will save you from a grappler.

Well, they won´t. Good footwork and grappling will save you from a grappler: nothing else will, at least nothing else in the unarmed combat department.

 

[Flying Crane]

Well, they won´t. Good footwork and grappling will save you from a grappler: nothing else will, at least nothing else in the unarmed combat department.

While I think you make some excellent points here, I'm not sure I can agree completely with this last one. I don't know anything about Leung Ting's anti-grappling curriculum, so I am not speaking in reference to that, nor in reference to anything specifically. However, I do believe that a skilled striker could defeat a skilled grappler, without resorting to grappling. To believe that the only way to defeat a grappler is to become better at grappling than that grappler, I think just doesn't make sense. To understand grappling, for a striker, is certainly a good idea, but just because someone may be a striker doesn't mean they are automatically doomed if they ever go up against a grappler. I really believe it all comes down to the better practitioner, whatever his style may be. Any art has its inherent strengths and weaknesses. The person who is best able to utilize his arts strengths while protecting against the weaknesses, and at the same time avoid the opponent's strengths and exploit his weaknesses will win. Just my thoughts.

 

[barriecusvein]

Well, they won´t. Good footwork and grappling will save you from a grappler: nothing else will, at least nothing else in the unarmed combat department.

i dont agree with this. if grappling was the only way to beat grappling then why do people still train in striking styles? surely people in things like UFC would have stopped training striking styles because they are redundant.

but this has not happened. almost everyone in these competitions trains in multiple styles, typically something like BJJ and kickboxing. the grapplers 'compliment their game', as you said, with some form of striking. why compliment something that can only be defeated by itself?

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

While I think you make some excellent points here, I'm not sure I can agree completely with this last one. I don't know anything about Leung Ting's anti-grappling curriculum, so I am not speaking in reference to that, nor in reference to anything specifically. However, I do believe that a skilled striker could defeat a skilled grappler, without resorting to grappling. To believe that the only way to defeat a grappler is to become better at grappling than that grappler, I think just doesn't make sense. To understand grappling, for a striker, is certainly a good idea, but just because someone may be a striker doesn't mean they are automatically doomed if they ever go up against a grappler. I really believe it all comes down to the better practitioner, whatever his style may be. Any art has its inherent strengths and weaknesses. The person who is best able to utilize his arts strengths while protecting against the weaknesses, and at the same time avoid the opponent's strengths and exploit his weaknesses will win. Just my thoughts.

A fair point - I am afraid I have not expressed myself correctly, my apologies. What I will say applies equally to your observation, Barriecusvein.

See, I do not believe grappling is unbeatable, nor do I believe only a grappler will defeat a grappler. I am afraid I gave that impression with my last post, but that was not my intention at all.

What I do believe is that a striker will be extremely vulnerable to a grappler if he doesn´t know anything about grappling; for the very same reasons, a grappler who can´t strike at all is vulnerable to a striker. The difference, in strategical terms, of course, is that the exclusive grappler needs only to get lucky once, bringing the striker to the ground, while the striker needs a KO - and a KO is much harder to perform than a throw or a tackle, experience in events such as UFC and Pride demonstrate that.

That, IMO, is the greatest advantage of grapplers, one which I, as a strike, try my best to be aware of at all times.

That does not mean striking is irrelevant, however. I train Muay Thai, I would not practice something I did not believe in!

A striker does not need to become better at grappling than a grappler. He can still remain primarily a striker and beat the grappler senseless. What he needs are the skills necessary to allow him to fight back the grappler´s tactics, so he can utilize his striking potential to the fullest.

In practice, he needs to learn the skills necessary to 1) avoid getting taken to the ground 2) avoid getting tapped out/choked out/broken into little pieces while on the ground, and 3) get up fast if he does get taken to the ground.

My point is, those skills are grappling skills.They are not anti-grappling, that does not exist. In my experience, people mentioning anti-grappling are either trying to fool you or have been fooled themselves.

So a striker needs to know grappling. He doesn´t need to become Rickson Gracie, but, then again - look at Wanderlei Silva. A striker who can and will grapple if necessary, but whose primary strategy is to strike! That is my goal (OK, OK, one has to set his hopes up high).

I hope I have made myself clear this time.

 

[Flying Crane]

A fair point - I am afraid I have not expressed myself correctly, my apologies. What I will say applies equally to your observation, Barriecusvein.

See, I do not believe grappling is unbeatable, nor do I believe only a grappler will defeat a grappler. I am afraid I gave that impression with my last post, but that was not my intention at all.

What I do believe is that a striker will be extremely vulnerable to a grappler if he doesn´t know anything about grappling; for the very same reasons, a grappler who can´t strike at all is vulnerable to a striker. The difference, in strategical terms, of course, is that the exclusive grappler needs only to get lucky once, bringing the striker to the ground, while the striker needs a KO - and a KO is much harder to perform than a throw or a tackle, experience in events such as UFC and Pride demonstrate that.

That, IMO, is the greatest advantage of grapplers, one which I, as a strike, try my best to be aware of at all times.

That does not mean striking is irrelevant, however. I train Muay Thai, I would not practice something I did not believe in!

A striker does not need to become better at grappling than a grappler. He can still remain primarily a striker and beat the grappler senseless. What he needs are the skills necessary to allow him to fight back the grappler´s tactics, so he can utilize his striking potential to the fullest.

In practice, he needs to learn the skills necessary to 1) avoid getting taken to the ground 2) avoid getting tapped out/choked out/broken into little pieces while on the ground, and 3) get up fast if he does get taken to the ground.

My point is, those skills are grappling skills.They are not anti-grappling, that does not exist. In my experience, people mentioning anti-grappling are either trying to fool you or have been fooled themselves.

So a striker needs to know grappling. He doesn´t need to become Rickson Gracie, but, then again - look at Wanderlei Silva. A striker who can and will grapple if necessary, but whose primary strategy is to strike! That is my goal (OK, OK, one has to set his hopes up high).

I hope I have made myself clear this time.

yup, agreed!

 

[barriecusvein]

I hope I have made myself clear this time.

aah i see what your getting at now, and agree with it.

 

[yipman_sifu]

A fair point - I am afraid I have not expressed myself correctly, my apologies. What I will say applies equally to your observation, Barriecusvein.

See, I do not believe grappling is unbeatable, nor do I believe only a grappler will defeat a grappler. I am afraid I gave that impression with my last post, but that was not my intention at all.

What I do believe is that a striker will be extremely vulnerable to a grappler if he doesn´t know anything about grappling; for the very same reasons, a grappler who can´t strike at all is vulnerable to a striker. The difference, in strategical terms, of course, is that the exclusive grappler needs only to get lucky once, bringing the striker to the ground, while the striker needs a KO - and a KO is much harder to perform than a throw or a tackle, experience in events such as UFC and Pride demonstrate that.

That, IMO, is the greatest advantage of grapplers, one which I, as a strike, try my best to be aware of at all times.

That does not mean striking is irrelevant, however. I train Muay Thai, I would not practice something I did not believe in!

A striker does not need to become better at grappling than a grappler. He can still remain primarily a striker and beat the grappler senseless. What he needs are the skills necessary to allow him to fight back the grappler´s tactics, so he can utilize his striking potential to the fullest.

In practice, he needs to learn the skills necessary to 1) avoid getting taken to the ground 2) avoid getting tapped out/choked out/broken into little pieces while on the ground, and 3) get up fast if he does get taken to the ground.

My point is, those skills are grappling skills.They are not anti-grappling, that does not exist. In my experience, people mentioning anti-grappling are either trying to fool you or have been fooled themselves.

So a striker needs to know grappling. He doesn´t need to become Rickson Gracie, but, then again - look at Wanderlei Silva. A striker who can and will grapple if necessary, but whose primary strategy is to strike! That is my goal (OK, OK, one has to set his hopes up high).

I hope I have made myself clear this time.

Ok, you have to know the strategy of Grapplers, but common sence states that puching, kicking is much more faster than those hugs, takedowns, and chokes. I mean that those Grapplers spent alot of their time just sticking themselves to the grapple, although there are strikes they posses as you said. This silly way of sticking to the Grappling style is what is not sence. Wing Chun always refered to a system of fighting that you can use anything if nesseccery. That's why there was such a five distance strategy created for all distances.

Please tell me if the world has changed in a way that grappling an opponent is faster than stricking?.

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

Ok, you have to know the strategy of Grapplers, but common sence states that puching, kicking is much more faster than those hugs, takedowns, and chokes. I mean that those Grapplers spent alot of their time just sticking themselves to the grapple, although there are strikes they posses as you said. This silly way of sticking to the Grappling style is what is not sence. Wing Chun always refered to a system of fighting that you can use anything if nesseccery. That's why there was such a five distance strategy created for all distances.

Please tell me if the world has changed in a way that grappling an opponent is faster than stricking?.

Punching and kicking are indeed faster than a takedown or a throw. They are also, however, less likely to immediately result in a significant disadvantage to the adversary - as I said, it is much easier to bring someone to the ground with a single tackle than to KO someone with a single punch or kick, and events such as Pride and UFC have demonstrated that.

As for grapplers sticking only to grappling, that would be true only for the very first UFCs, wouldn´t it? At that time grappling was indeed a "novelty" (as if judo, wrestling and jiujitsu did not exist before, but what the hell), so grapplers managed to surprise many kung fu fighters, karateka, and kickboxers with their game.

Nowadays, it would be suicide to do that sort of thing at Pride. Today, AFAIK, there are no exclusive grapplers or exclusive strikers at those events - as I said, some fighters, like Silva, are primarily strikers, while others, like Minotauro, are primarily grapplers, but no one of them is foolish enough to believe they can stick to just one range of fighting.

As for Wing Chun incorporating this five distance strategy - that would be the Wing Tsun/Leung Ting method, wouldn´t it? The idea may be good, but, sadly, the WT organization has decided to bury its head deep in the sand regarding grappling, so they, instead of searching for a good grappling program, created a frankenstein monster of weird grappling strategies and what they think would work, and decided to sell the whole thing as anti-grappling.

AFAIK, Wing Chun is a striking system. Its theories and strategies, not to mention techniques, are geared towards striking; it is unreasonable to demand more of it than what it actually offers. But it seem sthe WT organization has worked oh so hard to "apply WT principles to groundfighting", as if such a thing made sense. Boxing can´t be applied on the ground, neither can Muay Thai, etc.

 

[yipman_sifu]

Punching and kicking are indeed faster than a takedown or a throw. They are also, however, less likely to immediately result in a significant disadvantage to the adversary - as I said, it is much easier to bring someone to the ground with a single tackle than to KO someone with a single punch or kick, and events such as Pride and UFC have demonstrated that.

As for grapplers sticking only to grappling, that would be true only for the very first UFCs, wouldn´t it? At that time grappling was indeed a "novelty" (as if judo, wrestling and jiujitsu did not exist before, but what the hell), so grapplers managed to surprise many kung fu fighters, karateka, and kickboxers with their game.

Nowadays, it would be suicide to do that sort of thing at Pride. Today, AFAIK, there are no exclusive grapplers or exclusive strikers at those events - as I said, some fighters, like Silva, are primarily strikers, while others, like Minotauro, are primarily grapplers, but no one of them is foolish enough to believe they can stick to just one range of fighting.

As for Wing Chun incorporating this five distance strategy - that would be the Wing Tsun/Leung Ting method, wouldn´t it? The idea may be good, but, sadly, the WT organization has decided to bury its head deep in the sand regarding grappling, so they, instead of searching for a good grappling program, created a frankenstein monster of weird grappling strategies and what they think would work, and decided to sell the whole thing as anti-grappling.

AFAIK, Wing Chun is a striking system. Its theories and strategies, not to mention techniques, are geared towards striking; it is unreasonable to demand more of it than what it actually offers. But it seem sthe WT organization has worked oh so hard to "apply WT principles to groundfighting", as if such a thing made sense. Boxing can´t be applied on the ground, neither can Muay Thai, etc.

I just past by the Grappling section in this forum. If you read their articles, you will realize that they admit to some extent that BJJ depends about 90% in take downs, only little strikes. Bear in mind that a good fighter is rarely to be found in ground fights. Of course it is very important to know how to fight in all situations, but still srikes to sensitive areas is fatal, especially if you are trained.

Any how, lets just forget about this. Just tell me what do you think is the best Wing Chun lineage to train within in these days. If I travelled to the states in L.A, I would go for Sifu Gary Lam. They say he is excellent and was one of the tops as a disciple of the legend Wong Shun-Leung. What do you think about him?.

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

I just past by the Grappling section in this forum. If you read their articles, you will realize that they admit to some extent that BJJ depends about 90% in take downs, only little strikes. Bear in mind that a good fighter is rarely to be found in ground fights. Of course it is very important to know how to fight in all situations, but still srikes to sensitive areas is fatal, especially if you are trained.

Any how, lets just forget about this. Just tell me what do you think is the best Wing Chun lineage to train within in these days. If I travelled to the states in L.A, I would go for Sifu Gary Lam. They say he is excellent and was one of the tops as a disciple of the legend Wong Shun-Leung. What do you think about him?.

A good fighter can be taken to the ground if he doesn´t know grappling, and even if he does, it can happen. Crocop is a good fighter. And strikes to sensitive areas are low percentage techniques - you don´t want to trust your well being to a low percentage technique, specially when you can actually learn another range of fighting appropriate to the danger you face.

As for Wing Chun lineages, I have only experienced Lee Shing and Thomas Lo first hand, although I have trained with one guy who did a couple of years of Moy Yat.

If I had to choose, I would pick Hung Fa Yi - I have no experience with it, but I have been corresponding with one of their brazilian sifus, and he has repeatedly stated that they not only spar hard and often, specially with people from other styles, but they also teach jabs, crosses, and hooks - AND, they do not advocate any of that anti-grappling silliness.

 

[Phil Elmore]

Grappling and groundfighting skills are important components of self-defense training. They are not the totality of self-defense training. A lot of the endless MMA/UFC/NHB-type arguments revolving around grappling are the result of elevating a component of training to the pinnacle of training, which simply isn't the case. Most of the time I think this is the result of real and earnest enthusiasm for what the student is learning (say, BJJ, but it could be something else). Enthusiasm is great but it often overrides common sense.

 

[yipman_sifu]

Grappling and groundfighting skills are important components of self-defense training. They are not the totality of self-defense training. A lot of the endless MMA/UFC/NHB-type arguments revolving around grappling are the result of elevating a component of training to the pinnacle of training, which simply isn't the case. Most of the time I think this is the result of real and earnest enthusiasm for what the student is learning (say, BJJ, but it could be something else). Enthusiasm is great but it often overrides common sense.

You said it, just important components, not the full self-defence. There is no such full self-defence, that what the Gongsau Wong always said about fighting. Never expect that you will win a fight with no bruises, blood, scars, ....etc.

Just check the signature, its there.

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

Grappling and groundfighting skills are important components of self-defense training. They are not the totality of self-defense training.

No one here ever denied that. Yes, some people are incredibly stupid when it comes to defending grappling, same as other insist striking is all you need.

My point is, there is no such thing as anti-grappling, for the same reasons that there is no anti-striking. You either learn how to strike or grapple, or you don´t.

 

[yipman_sifu]

No one here ever denied that. Yes, some people are incredibly stupid when it comes to defending grappling, same as other insist striking is all you need.

My point is, there is no such thing as anti-grappling, for the same reasons that there is no anti-striking. You either learn how to strike or grapple, or you don´t.

I personally liked Wing Chun because you can do everything. In boxing, you are limited in using hands and punches above the waist. In Grappling, you must think of a strategy to grapple then apply locks and whatever.
We once had a ground figthing in a WT class, it was like a spar. It was done due to the fact that we must use the opponent force against him also in the ground situation. The nice thing in Wing chun is you have not to think as far as your reflexes guides you in punching and feeling, and using your opponent power + your own power to creates an impressive force. What I liked about old disciples of Yipman is when other styles said to them that we can perform thousands of moves to every attack, the disciples said: let the hand talks and they performed very simple moves and defeated others. I wonder why we lack such examples these days?.

 

[WingChun Lawyer]

I personally liked Wing Chun because you can do everything. In boxing, you are limited in using hands and punches above the waist. In Grappling, you must think of a strategy to grapple then apply locks and whatever.
We once had a ground figthing in a WT class, it was like a spar. It was done due to the fact that we must use the opponent force against him also in the ground situation. The nice thing in Wing chun is you have not to think as far as your reflexes guides you in punching and feeling, and using your opponent power + your own power to creates an impressive force. What I liked about old disciples of Yipman is when other styles said to them that we can perform thousands of moves to every attack, the disciples said: let the hand talks and they performed very simple moves and defeated others. I wonder why we lack such examples these days?.

We don´t lack those examples today. We have such examples in events such as Pride. Simple moves and efficiency, all within a minimum framework of rules - same as the old beimo challenges, except the Pride guys are professionals and don´t suck (remember that video you posted? I´ll believe those old guys in Hong King were good when I see evidence of it, not before).

If you are interested in a more hands on approach, you should seek out some Vale Tudo classes, most MMA gyms offer those.

I did that a couple of times, it was an eye opening experience - it was terrifying to see that neither my judo nor my MT or WC worked as predicted within the minimum set of rules present in Vale Tudo matches; but it was cool to see how I could actually adapt, put everything together, and come up with something that not only worked, but was also a reflex of all my martial arts experiences.

I heartily recommend that experience to any and all martial artists.

 

[yipman_sifu]

We don´t lack those examples today. We have such examples in events such as Pride. Simple moves and efficiency, all within a minimum framework of rules - same as the old beimo challenges, except the Pride guys are professionals and don´t suck (remember that video you posted? I´ll believe those old guys in Hong King were good when I see evidence of it, not before).

If you are interested in a more hands on approach, you should seek out some Vale Tudo classes, most MMA gyms offer those.

I did that a couple of times, it was an eye opening experience - it was terrifying to see that neither my judo nor my MT or WC worked as predicted within the minimum set of rules present in Vale Tudo matches; but it was cool to see how I could actually adapt, put everything together, and come up with something that not only worked, but was also a reflex of all my martial arts experiences.

I heartily recommend that experience to any and all martial artists.

Wing Chun works if it were applied properly. I don't know how many time you spent training in the system. Bear in mind that proffessional Wing Chun masters never fights in rings or K1 matches, because they beleive that fighting is bad, and it is only for self-defence purpose. You will tell me about beimo, well, master Wong later said that fighting is not good, and he never advices students to go for matches except sparring, which you and me agree in its importance.

Some Wing Chun masters love other peple to kick them above the waist, because they are used to counter these attacks with finishing moves, and as I expect, how ever fast was any kick in Vale Tudo or Pride, it could never be faster than Bruce Lee kicks, so there is no problem even for advanced students to disrupt it. I personally believe that fighting a guy like Mike Tyson is harder than fighting those Kick boxers or Grapplers in my level of fighting.