Non-Wing Chun

[Steve]

Does anyone think the thread has drifted far enough away from the op to warrant starting a new thread?

 

[Steve]

There is an assumption that how people train, whether they focus on application, for example, and/or how much conditioning they do, can be known based on which style they practice. Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason, but I think that this assumption is the root of a lot of the antipathy in our collective unproductive arguments. In my experience it is not a reliable assumption.

What is considered "traditional" is another baseline standard that if we were going to have productive discussions intra-style, we would need to resolve. I don't personally believe that it is traditional in southern kung fu styles to wear silk uniforms and primarily practice forms and choreographed fight sequences, but some people do and some people who don't train in a TMA system believe that is what happens inside of all TMA systems and schools. It certainly happens in some, but I assure you, it is not how everyone trains.

I don't believe that tournament chi sao is a traditional way to train in Wing Chun, but some people do. I have no problem with those people, but it's got nothing to do with me.

MMA deserves respect. I really admire the way that people train in BJJ, boxing, Muay Thai, MMA gyms. I love the sports of boxing and Muay Thai and admire grappling sports, like Judo, Jiu Jitsu, and various forms of wrestling, though I haven't spent significant time in any of them, the way that I have in boxing. But, my wife joined a boxing gym a few years back and loves it. It's gotten her in shape, it's therapeutic, it's given her some confidence, and it wouldn't not work for self defense, she knows how to throw a punch and maintain her balance now, maybe even some footwork. But, as much as I love her, she's not better prepared for self defense than my students. She's just not. My students go through more application training, get hit more, face non-compliant, unconstrained by rules force than she ever will. The idea that your legitimacy or lack thereof is about what style or system you affiliate with is flawed.

I get that there are a lot of examples of people walking into MMA gyms with black belts that they got usually as kids, who can't handle 20 seconds in a ring with an intermediate MMA student. We get them too. I've trained cops and air marshals, and ex military people with and without TMA training that they felt left them short and if you own an MMA gym, you have too. My students and I to varying degrees have all been challenged and tested in training and in the real world with varying degrees of success that we learn from and bring back into our training. We don't talk about it much, we don't post it on YouTube and we don't make sweeping claims about our superiority, but I wish the every time that I logged into MartialTalk, which honestly I have diminishing reasons to do, our legitimacy wasn't being dismissed by people who watched the Yip Man movies or read the Tao of JKD.

The challenge I give to everyone who inquires with me about training is to think hard about what it is that they are worried about happening that they are training for and then find what will help them the most to prepare for that. The answer isn't always Wing Chun and it isn't always to train with me, but sometimes it is.

The arrogance of the viewpoint that it is always MMA or BJJ or boxing is a fundamental difference that is just a barrier to any reasonable conversation. The original point of this thread was "if you believe the Wing Chun is BS and a waste of time, unless it's just for fun or fitness or some other non-application purpose, then why do you reply to Wing Chun threads?" I don't mean this particular thread and neither did the OP, he meant every single question or thought or opinion or discussion in the Wing Chun forum.

There are only a few possible answers:

• It's just straight up trolling
• You believe that you are absolutely right and everyone in this forum, even though you've never trained with them is wrong or lying and you owe it to people to inform them of the right way...like an evangelical of some sort. This appears to be specifically against the rules at MartialTalk, but it is not generally enforced in the Wing Chun forums for some reason, which is why MartialTalk is really not a great place for people who want to connect with other Wing Chun people. Too much noise.
  
• You're posting uninformed throw away remarks off the top of your head without realizing that you're being entirely dismissive of the credibility of people who you really don't know much about.

If anyone wants to own any of those, then great. We definitely have trolls and though trolls never own being trolls, we have had some say things like "because I want to" and "because I have a right to say whatever I want", which really equates to trolling. I'm sure there are also true believers. And I give the benefit of the doubt to the fact that some people are just not self aware enough to understand what ****s they are being.

It is what it is and we're not going to change it with this discussion or any other. Even if we all came to some agreement right now, someone is going to join tomorrow and start this all over again. What is isn't in a "Friendly Martial Arts Community" unless you are from one of the UFC approved approaches to training.

I really believe you are making a lot of assumptions. Your entire post is about how other people think and why they think it. Speaking for myself, I don't think of anything in an mma or bjj centric way and I have no beef with WC. If you think otherwise, you are mistaken.

 

[Hanzou]

I'd assert this is training methods, not necessarily the style - though the two correlate strongly in some styles. If a boxer spent their sparring time shadow boxing, they'd likely take a lot longer getting to that proficiency (if they ever did). Similarly, if we compared two WC practitioners, where one focused on forms and the other spent a lot of time sparring, I think it'd be pretty easy to guess which would develop their fighting skills faster.

Absolutely, but we also have to look at what those styles produce on a whole. Not sparring in Boxing is a personal choice, because sparring is a pretty integral part of the sport. There are many traditional martial art schools that don’t allow sparring. Also if we look at the top boxers in the world, it’s pretty clear what type of fighter that sport can produce. It’s unclear what a top fighter from traditional Chinese martial arts would look like. Those that have stepped forward to challenge sport fighters haven’t done very well, and show a rather distinct lack of fighting knowledge. That said, they deserve respect for attempting to defend their martial art.

 

[Hanzou]

I don't think Tony was arguing those strikers had ground games on par with the BJJ-centric fighters. But if McGregor didn't have a competent ground game (and takedown defense), other fighters would have found that weakness pretty early in his pro career and would have used it to minimize his striking.

Well that’s the point; If we’re discussing fighters with ground games beyond the already high standard of MMA to the point where opponents attempt to avoid that range completely, then the martial art giving those fighters that advantage should be recognized. Being forced to avoid the ground completely is a huge disadvantage in MMA.

More to the original point, if a MMA fighter is winning their fights using Bjj strategies, and their skill in Bjj is respected to the point where their opponents actively avoid that entire range of fighting, is it fair to say that that fighter is 90-95% using Bjj to win their fights?

 

[ShortBridge]

Does anyone think the thread has drifted far enough away from the op to warrant starting a new thread?

If by "drifted away" you mean that we have 3 people talking not only about MMA at this point, but about specific professional MMA fighters, then...no, that's what normally happens in Wing Chun threads and it is exactly the point that I think the OP was trying to suss out.

I really believe you are making a lot of assumptions...

I can't say what you do or don't believe Steve, I'll take your word for it, though the post in the other thread that I quoted here and you didn't want to acknowledge would suggest differently. But this doesn't have to be about you (or me). There is a regular cast of characters who join Wing Chun threads to discredit and promote their superior (MMA) worldview and we do not have to make assumptions about them because they are clear on it.

 

[Hanzou]

I can't say what you do or don't believe Steve, I'll take your word for it, though the post in the other thread that I quoted here and you didn't want to acknowledge would suggest differently. But this doesn't have to be about you (or me). There is a regular cast of characters who join Wing Chun threads to discredit and promote their superior (MMA) worldview and we do not have to make assumptions about them because they are clear on it.

Actually before this thread, I haven’t posted in the WC forum in a long time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You're getting there. It's about application (and the training culture that promotes it) and not style. I think most martial arts styles are cool as hell. I don't like how some reason, and I think it's dangerous if they confuse martial training with fighting application, more so if they promote this as a "feature" of the style.

Sparring is a good training tool, and essential, I think. But it isn't fighting. It concerns me that you conflate them.

You start this post condescending, and just dig deeper.

 

[jobo]

Actually before this thread, I haven’t posted in the WC forum in a long time.

neither has anyone else , but some how people who seldom if ever post are getting blamed by people who seldom post for people seldomly posting

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This is a WC sub-forum. Nobody care about your non-WC guy's opinions. Why are your non-WC guys still hanging around here?

This is a non-WC thread. Nobody care about your WC guy's opinions. Why are your WC guys still hanging around here?

A non-WC thread in a WC sub-forum, is that funny?

 

[ShortBridge]

neither has anyone else , but some how people who seldom if ever post are getting blamed by people who seldom post for people seldomly posting

Well, let's see. That should be easy enough to check. Including this discussion, you have posted to Wing Chun threads 200 times since 2017. That's kind of a lot for someone who doesn't train in Wing Chun or respect it at all.

Some highlights of a few of the contributions from the thread you hijacked that prompted @Highlander to start this dog of a thread.

ok learning wc is like learning to cook with an empty source pan,

how many wcers dors it take to change a light bulb, cant be done if its off the centre line

did you hear about the chunner who got stuck in a maze, he could only go in straight lines

i dont think it sucks, i think it blows
how about this one

if your going to drag your back foot wear a roller skate

So @Hanzou you keep saying it isn't you...never said it was, but this is what we're talking about.

 

[Hanzou]

So @Hanzou you keep saying it isn't you...never said it was, but this is what we're talking about.

Oh you’re talking about Jobo... well....

 

[ShortBridge]

Not just Jobo, but sure. Especially if he's going to say crazy **** like prior to this thread he hasn't posted in a Wing Chun forum in a long time.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Wait...what's not Wing Chun?

Christ.

Tiger style, for starters. Definitely little to no snow leopard.

Horse? Nope.

 

[jobo]

Well, let's see. That should be easy enough to check. Including this discussion, you have postea 200 in d to Wing Chun threads 200 times since 2017. That's kind of a lot for someone who doesn't train in Wing Chun or respect it at all.

Some highlights of a few of the contributions from the thread you hijacked that prompted @Highlander to start this dog of a thread.









So @Hanzou you keep saying it isn't you...never said it was, but this is what we're talking about.

Well, let's see. That should be easy enough to check. Including this discussion, you have posted to Wing Chun threads 200 times since 2017. That's kind of a lot for someone who doesn't train in Wing Chun or respect it at all.

Some highlights of a few of the contributions from the thread you hijacked that prompted @Highlander to start this dog of a thread.









So @Hanzou you keep saying it isn't you...never said it was, but this is what we're talking about.

200 in very nearly 4 years is seldom considering i do about 200 posts a month and before that post it was many months seince my previous one
and those were in request for wc maxims, so i was invited to make the posts
.that said they are funny, well i think there funny anyway,

and im an equal opertunity poster, i mock sillyness where ever i find it
.it just the wc lot are so far up their own &&&& they they get all butt hurt if people laugh at them and its like peopke walking round with clown shoes, if you dont want to be laughed at, dont do it

karate and all the other tmas) regularly gets the treatment from the mma guys, but no one starts self indulgent whingeing threads saying how mean they are.

coz karate men are hard

 

[Steve]

If by "drifted away" you mean that we have 3 people talking not only about MMA at this point, but about specific professional MMA fighters, then...no, that's what normally happens in Wing Chun threads and it is exactly the point that I think the OP was trying to suss out.



I can't say what you do or don't believe Steve, I'll take your word for it, though the post in the other thread that I quoted here and you didn't want to acknowledge would suggest differently. But this doesn't have to be about you (or me). There is a regular cast of characters who join Wing Chun threads to discredit and promote their superior (MMA) worldview and we do not have to make assumptions about them because they are clear on it.

I am pretty sure I'm referencing that other post specifically, and welcome you to reread my posts now that you have a better idea of what I'm trying to say. You can post a response there if you like. Or not

And you wc guys (not you but others) have been incredibly rude and hostile in this thread, and bear as much of the responsibility for the tone as anyone else.

 

[Steve]

You start this post condescending, and just dig deeper.

I don't mean to be condescending. It's possible that it seems condescending to you because you already think you get it. EDIT: Just to add, what I mean by close, but not quite there is that I agree with you completely that it's not the style, it's the training. But then you somehow suggest sparring isn't training. That doesn't compute. I would ask you to presume good intent. I'm not trying to win an argument. I'm encouraged to post because I think you (and sometimes others) get really close to getting what I mean, but then take a crazy Ivan at the last minute that makes me think we're close to agreement.

This is, honestly, more relevant in the other thread (where it is on topic) so if the moderators want to move it, feel free. But this is exactly why I like to think about doing an actual study. I believe it's not the styles; it's the training model. And in particular, it's training models that lead to application as opposed to training models that are the application. To try and keep this a bit on topic, consider this. Chi sao seems to be a bit of a controversial topic among WC practitioners. In particular, the idea of chi sao competitions and the like. I see this as a kind of inevitable misapplication of the style. Whether the chi sao competitions become more widely accepted and mainstream or not, the emphasis on developing chi sao skills as an end goal is understandable, and in the absence of other venues for application, inevitable.

Conversely, BJJ competitors who focus entirely on a single rule set for competition will inevitably see their training drift in that direction. We see this in any form of application. Application encourages reliable, predictable skill development, but it also focuses skill development on what is being applied. In TKD and in Judo, as the competitive rule sets have focused the skill development, some skills atrophy and others are developed with emphasis because the ruleset. It's easy to see how much of an impact application has on skill development. This same process is observable in any other context for application. Cops do cop things well, soldiers do soldier things well, etc. The answer, though, isn't to eliminate any external application and focus entirely on training. Rather, it's to encourage diversity in application.

And ultimately, as I said in the other thread, this is so fundamental and universal to skill development that I don't think style matters. In the other thread, I outlined four groups, and while I listed some examples of styles associated with training model, the style involved is not relevant. That wasn't intended to be limiting. So, for example, you could take 40 people (two groups of 20) with no previous experience, where they train BJJ in isolation with a competent instructor (to eliminate the variable of quality training partners). Group one is training for competitions and required to compete a minimum number of times per year, and group two does not compete. I think group 1 develops skills quickly, and I would expect that group 2 will take years to see any appreciable skill development. After 1 year, I don't think that group 2 can demonstrate much skill. Possibly some skill development after three or five years, but stunted when compared to the developing expertise within group 1.

 

[Hanzou]

And ultimately, as I said in the other thread, this is so fundamental and universal to skill development that I don't think style matters. In the other thread, I outlined four groups, and while I listed some examples of styles associated with training model, the style involved is not relevant. That wasn't intended to be limiting. So, for example, you could take 40 people (two groups of 20) with no previous experience, where they train BJJ in isolation with a competent instructor (to eliminate the variable of quality training partners). Group one is training for competitions and required to compete a minimum number of times per year, and group two does not compete. I think group 1 develops skills quickly, and I would expect that group 2 will take years to see any appreciable skill development. After 1 year, I don't think that group 2 can demonstrate much skill. Possibly some skill development after three or five years, but stunted when compared to the developing expertise within group 1.

Didn't this actually happen within Bjj when there were schools that eliminated sparring among white belts because it was deemed too dangerous? Those schools eventually stopped doing it because when those non-sparring white belts became blue belts they were seriously lacking in fundamental ability, despite their greater emphasis on drills and practice.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't mean to be condescending. It's possible that it seems condescending to you because you already think you get it. EDIT: Just to add, what I mean by close, but not quite there is that I agree with you completely that it's not the style, it's the training. But then you somehow suggest sparring isn't training. That doesn't compute. I would ask you to presume good intent. I'm not trying to win an argument. I'm encouraged to post because I think you (and sometimes others) get really close to getting what I mean, but then take a crazy Ivan at the last minute that makes me think we're close to agreement.

This is, honestly, more relevant in the other thread (where it is on topic) so if the moderators want to move it, feel free. But this is exactly why I like to think about doing an actual study. I believe it's not the styles; it's the training model. And in particular, it's training models that lead to application as opposed to training models that are the application. To try and keep this a bit on topic, consider this. Chi sao seems to be a bit of a controversial topic among WC practitioners. In particular, the idea of chi sao competitions and the like. I see this as a kind of inevitable misapplication of the style. Whether the chi sao competitions become more widely accepted and mainstream or not, the emphasis on developing chi sao skills as an end goal is understandable, and in the absence of other venues for application, inevitable.

Conversely, BJJ competitors who focus entirely on a single rule set for competition will inevitably see their training drift in that direction. We see this in any form of application. Application encourages reliable, predictable skill development, but it also focuses skill development on what is being applied. In TKD and in Judo, as the competitive rule sets have focused the skill development, some skills atrophy and others are developed with emphasis because the ruleset. It's easy to see how much of an impact application has on skill development. This same process is observable in any other context for application. Cops do cop things well, soldiers do soldier things well, etc. The answer, though, isn't to eliminate any external application and focus entirely on training. Rather, it's to encourage diversity in application.

And ultimately, as I said in the other thread, this is so fundamental and universal to skill development that I don't think style matters. In the other thread, I outlined four groups, and while I listed some examples of styles associated with training model, the style involved is not relevant. That wasn't intended to be limiting. So, for example, you could take 40 people (two groups of 20) with no previous experience, where they train BJJ in isolation with a competent instructor (to eliminate the variable of quality training partners). Group one is training for competitions and required to compete a minimum number of times per year, and group two does not compete. I think group 1 develops skills quickly, and I would expect that group 2 will take years to see any appreciable skill development. After 1 year, I don't think that group 2 can demonstrate much skill. Possibly some skill development after three or five years, but stunted when compared to the developing expertise within group 1.

Actually, your third sentence is where you go off the track. I never said sparring wasn't training. Not once.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Didn't this actually happen within Bjj when there were schools that eliminated sparring among white belts because it was deemed too dangerous? Those schools eventually stopped doing it because when those non-sparring white belts became blue belts they were seriously lacking in fundamental ability, despite their greater emphasis on drills and practice.

Which is pretty much what you'd expect. Not sure why the folks running those schools didn't.

 

[Steve]

Actually, your third sentence is where you go off the track. I never said sparring wasn't training. Not once.

Hmm. Okay. You said this:

I'd assert this is training methods, not necessarily the style - though the two correlate strongly in some styles. If a boxer spent their sparring time shadow boxing, they'd likely take a lot longer getting to that proficiency (if they ever did). Similarly, if we compared two WC practitioners, where one focused on forms and the other spent a lot of time sparring, I think it'd be pretty easy to guess which would develop their fighting skills faster.

where I talk about application, you tend to substitute the word “sparring” and then move on. So, to be clear, I agree with your overarching point, that training model is important. However, it suggests to me that you don’t “get it” when, instead of thinking about contexts for application, your brain shifts instead to sparring as application. Said differently, if you think sparring is the key to skill development, I think you’re still missing the point.

Now, to hanzous point, where application also exists, (E.g., competition), sparring is very beneficial. Absent application, sparring can be pretty pointless.