I still see a large disconnect between all that controlling stuff they do in their chi-sau and their actual fights though. None of that linking/de-linking, or "sink, press, rise" stuff seems to come out. How do you work that out?
I think the effectiveness of their fighters is due mainly to the fact that they spar hard and often, but we really just see disengaged striking and BJJ when it comes to the cage. But they do use Wing Chun power generation and elbow as I can see. Not the same strategy as WSLVT, but that's the only stuff from the "Wing Chun side" of things that appear to carry over into their actual fights. I think they'd probably be more successful if they didn't waste their time on things that don't contribute to their fights, and emphasized the stuff that does.
I'd have to agree with you to an extent LFJ. MMA seems to be its own beast! Alan will tell you that their Wing Chun training is what they are using. But sometimes it isn't so obvious and they look like any other MMA fighter.
Same as controlling your opponent, if the way is free you still attack. I dont think there is any WC lineage that state controlling is better than hitting when way is free. Only that if way is blocked, rather than trying to go through some emphasize the priority of getting in control of your opponent. Others think it is better to hit and remove any obstacles along the way. And then there are more... as well as those who are more open minded and say you better be the type that suits you. So first understand yourself.
Good points! But just by way of further explanation....as with a lot of things in Wing Chun, "controlling" is a concept. You can control while hitting. Disengaged striking does not necessarily give up that controlling element. All Wing Chun does this...you don't just close with an opponent throwing a barrage of punches willy nilly....you pick an angle that cuts off a possible response from the opponent, or you use a "cutting punch" that essentially contacts and controls his arm as you are punching him, or you do a body punch into his center that breaks his structure, etc. Putting this emphasis on a "controlling" concept means that when you meet an obstacle, rather than just removing it so you can continue hitting, you do something that breaks the opponent's balance or structure AS you remove the obstacle and keep hitting. What it does NOT mean, is that someone is going to charge in like a wrestler and engage in a grapple until they can gain the advantage and have the opponent under complete control before striking them. That would be like an MMA fighter charging in for a double leg takedown, then gaining the mount and starting his ground & pound. That is not what CSL means by the idea of "controlling while hitting." The control element simply provides options. If, in the process of removing the obstacle to my hitting I have used some control and broken the opponent's balance, then this may open things up for a joint-lock or a sweep, etc in addition to a punch. Options that may have not been there otherwise. From a CSL perspective, that's what good Wing Chun is about...not just hitting!
If it wasn't in Robert Chu's wing chun until he looked elsewhere then he has indeed grafted it on. But lets stop for a minute and look at what actually is in YKS wing chun according to the article written by among others Robert Chu, Hendrik Santos and Jim Roselando (as unbiased a bunch as you could get I'm sure when it comes to this topic). Faat of YKS says that it contains, among 9 other methods, chen, tou and tun.
Given this, how then does CSL wing chun manage to derive its body method which looks just the same as white crane as far as it goes, and also similar to pak mei, spm etc, etc, from the methods of YKS wing chun? Even these guys failed to find method number 4, which I can assure you Alan Orr shows as part of his wing chun.
Also looking at video clips of YKS wing chun it looks absolutely nothing like these others. In fact it looks just like wing chun. Why is this, if it happens to be based on the same core principles as the white crane, bak mei, SPM etc? They look very different to YKS wing chun,but very similar to CSL body method demos.
Do you know the whole system of CSL ? Then how do you know if the other methods are not present ? Tun is present n CSL.. Chi and mor etc.. I really dont know enough about Yuen Kay San wing chun to comment. I thought Yong Chun White Crane was an ancestor art to wing chun ? I remember reading that Lo Kwai ( a direct leung jan lineage ? ) wing chun history states White crane as one of the ancestors arts.. Can anyone confirm that ?
Yea Alan teaches for a living.. People have to make money and to sell stuff you need to be able to market it. But the stuff he is selling is good ****. I couldn't spar with my mate who only started boxing like 2 months ( beggining of 2015) before we started sparring without getting overwhelmed after doing years and years of wing chun at typical wing chun school in Ip ching / Lo man kam lineage.. I had a huge realisation.. Started getting into mma and doing less wing chun.. Met Alan.. went down for a few days and I was already better at sparring and defending and got into Wing chun training for mma fighting.. Just using CSL way of Pak , Tan/Tun , Wu .. and the body mechanics.. Sink/Press/Rise Link/Delink. So for me personally I can use what I learn. Maybe some people might find CSL isnt for them.. But it enables to me fight effectively against anyone.. not just other wing chun guys.. and also I dont just pause and go blank if I get hit..
I know I use the stuff when I fight. Trying to explain why they are using CSL in the mma fights even if its just body mechanics is too hard.
They aren't all present in Yik Kam wing chun, if that is where CSL wing chun derived them from as KPM says. More importantly what we have in these other wing chuns are non specific lists of methods that would fit almost any southern Chinese system in some way or other, or any striking MA in some cases. In contrast what you have in this group of other Chinese MA is systems entirely built around the principles of float sink, swallow spit. Most wing chun is not this way, including footage of Yik Kam wing chun, yet CSL wing chun shows an approximation of it it in chi sau and demos. Why? As someone else said, these don't appear in fighting. I think that the reason is obvious if you have a look at how Hakka systems work in practice and how they are moving when they are using the body methods. To me it looks like someone wanted to put these into wing chun based on something else they saw or did before and went looking for a reason to do so. No other wing chun looks like this.
Tun is present n CSL.. Chi and mor etc.. I really dont know enough about Yuen Kay San wing chun to comment. I thought Yong Chun White Crane was an ancestor art to wing chun ? I remember reading that Lo Kwai ( a direct leung jan lineage ? ) wing chun history states White crane as one of the ancestors arts.. Can anyone confirm that ?
Probably about as well as they can confirm stories about Red Boats and Shaolin Nuns.
Yea Alan teaches for a living.. People have to make money and to sell stuff you need to be able to market it. But the stuff he is selling is good ****. I couldn't spar with my mate who only started boxing like 2 months ( beggining of 2015) before we started sparring without getting overwhelmed after doing years and years of wing chun at typical wing chun school in Ip ching / Lo man kam lineage.. I had a huge realisation.. Started getting into mma and doing less wing chun.. Met Alan.. went down for a few days and I was already better at sparring and defending and got into Wing chun training for mma fighting
C]I think they'd probably be more successful if they didn't waste their time on things that don't contribute to their fights, and emphasized the stuff that does.
I think this discussion has hit a standstill. I withdraw myself from it. Just because I cant explain properly and im not doing Alan or CSL justice in my explanations.
I think this discussion has hit a standstill. I withdraw myself from it. Just because I cant explain properly and im not doing Alan or CSL justice in my explanations. ...Cheers
