So when did grappling get involved?

yipman_sifu said:
Andrew, do you mean that it doesn't work in MMA rules in the competition?, is that what do you mean "regulated fight" in UFC, Pride, and K1. If that is your meaning I would say, that is difinitely true.

Yup.

Wing Chun is not made for the ring, if it were to be used there, you need to know what is a ring experience and how to deal with the time factor. Wing Chun was proved to be one of the best in streets and self-defence. I once asked my instructor about UFC. He told me that it works with specific rules and regulations that a Wing Chun trainer cannot adapt, especially when it comes to sumbission of the opponent. Wing Chun can never submit someone like BJJ or any MMA. Wing Chun is a pure self-defence fighting system.

and nope.

My point was that all systems, whether they admit it or not are goverened by a set of rules, even if they are not laid out as such. Assumptions are made about what will be done, how it will happen, what will be involved, etc.

Wing Chun is no different, safe training requires that rules be followed in training.

"Street" fighting is completely untestable as too what is the most effective, because as soon as you attempt to test it, you create a artificial situation, there by making your results unreliable.

It serves no one any good to argue about the effectiveness of street fighting, because it is untestable. No one can ever be proven right or wrong. All we know is that many systems have been used effectively, even if those systems have had a poor showing in arranged matches.

We can discuss what works in a MMA context, we can discuss what works in a wing chun context. Those are testable. But all we can do is speculate about "real" self-defence, because it is not testable.
 
Good post.

WC may be effective against a thug who hits and hopes, but my own experience is that if you fight someone who wants to take it to the ground and you haven't trained anything on the ground, you're in trouble!!

There is some stuff in WC that would work well IMO in UFC. So far it seems no one has the knowledge of it, applicable knowledge, to train anyone to use it in that way.
 
fightingfat said:
Good post.

WC may be effective against a thug who hits and hopes, but my own experience is that if you fight someone who wants to take it to the ground and you haven't trained anything on the ground, you're in trouble!!

There is some stuff in WC that would work well IMO in UFC. So far it seems no one has the knowledge of it, applicable knowledge, to train anyone to use it in that way.

From all Wing Chun trainers I saw in UFC were 2. Both lost, but I think they were almost a technition. Those thaught that training for 3 years and go to fight in a ring will make them champions. So what about someone like Royce who trained for years in Jujitsu, did they thaught they can beat him, no way:) .

At the same time I see silly things in UFC or K1. Who remembers the fight between Hideo Tokoro vs Royce grcaie. I beleive that there was unfairness in making the Draw. Royce was supposed to lose if you compared him to that fighter in that day. Now this Hideo techniques are very easy to stopped if you just stop his center and counter attack his center, he was really tensed and could be decieved easily. Royce usually uses the long route to victory by grappling, I wonder why it was a draw.

Regarding if proper Wing Chun training is needed for UFC. I will say that I don't know about this, but I beleive that whenever I asks anyone from the Wing Chun about UFC and grappling and special training, he smiles and says "Man, why do you like fighting in the UFC, what is the purpose?,fight only when it is nesseccary". That's about the UFC fightingfat.

One of our training partners went to a MMA and grappling school. When I asked him about it. He says it is good for health and stamina, but the aspects still needs real testing in the streets, rather than the ring, which is really something you need a special traning to in order to participate.

Wing Chun was tested in HK during the 50's and 60's in Beimos. Although it is also regulated to some extent, it was much more realistic in the aspect of freedom and no proffesional judge. The rule went as follows "let the hand do the talking, ask questions later". Wing Chun at that time dominated all other styles and systems, and defeated masters that were having years of experience in other arts.
Martial art in the street is still something that really needs prove as you said, that's definitely correct Andrew:) .
 
Andrew Green said:
Yup.



and nope.

My point was that all systems, whether they admit it or not are goverened by a set of rules, even if they are not laid out as such. Assumptions are made about what will be done, how it will happen, what will be involved, etc.

Wing Chun is no different, safe training requires that rules be followed in training.

"Street" fighting is completely untestable as too what is the most effective, because as soon as you attempt to test it, you create a artificial situation, there by making your results unreliable.

It serves no one any good to argue about the effectiveness of street fighting, because it is untestable. No one can ever be proven right or wrong. All we know is that many systems have been used effectively, even if those systems have had a poor showing in arranged matches.

We can discuss what works in a MMA context, we can discuss what works in a wing chun context. Those are testable. But all we can do is speculate about "real" self-defence, because it is not testable.

Well put! Spoken like a true scientist. I wish more MMA people felt the same way as well as TMA's.
 
yipman_sifu said:
Wing Chun was tested in HK during the 50's and 60's in Beimos. Although it is also regulated to some extent, it was much more realistic in the aspect of freedom and no proffesional judge. The rule went as follows "let the hand do the talking, ask questions later". Wing Chun at that time dominated all other styles and systems, and defeated masters that were having years of experience in other arts.

That is saying alot right there but that is all speculation without actual facts. Of course WC people from back then will lay claim to this. Which art will admit to be handled by others in another art?
 
AceHBK said:
That is saying alot right there but that is all speculation without actual facts. Of course WC people from back then will lay claim to this. Which art will admit to be handled by others in another art?

NO, no. Don't get me wrong my friend. They lost at some matches but won the majority. There are some articles I read about how sometimes they lost during to the fact that they were not expercting a certain attack from their opponent. So they went to discuss how to overcome such move if it were applied to them the next time they Brawl in the Beimo. Master Wong Shun-Leung himself who won at least 60 matches without loss admitted once that he was punched by a dunking opponent who really hurted him. That's why he applied a different postion of Jum Sao compared to the Yipman one.

Regarding the victories of master Wong. You can check articles of Sifu David Peterson who says that you can find magazines of that time reporting his victories. If you really search hard in HK, you can still get them to be sure of what I am saying.

GO to any Wing Chun site concerning Wing Chun theories of application, you will realize how they admitted their defeat at a tournament that was held in Singaphore in 1969. That was to the fact that the tutition fees were very expensive and little students could learn the concepts of Wing Chun. Well those are facts I am not creating them, check my friend:) .
 
yipman_sifu said:
Wing Chun was tested in HK during the 50's and 60's in Beimos. Although it is also regulated to some extent, it was much more realistic in the aspect of freedom and no proffesional judge. The rule went as follows "let the hand do the talking, ask questions later". Wing Chun at that time dominated all other styles and systems, and defeated masters that were having years of experience in other arts.

Dude, the only public video of a beimo challenge (which you posted here) demonstrates that at least some of those guys SUCKED. Period. What makes you think there were good fighters there? What PROOF do you have?

Until someone proves me otherwise, I´ll keep believing that those beimo fighters were nothing but amateurs, specially compared to UFC and Pride professionals.

And, quite frankly, even I could have done better than what that video showed. Which, admittedly, doesn´t mean much, as those guys could barely throw a kick without falling on their butts.
 
WingChun Lawyer said:
Dude, the only public video of a beimo challenge (which you posted here) demonstrates that at least some of those guys SUCKED. Period. What makes you think there were good fighters there? What PROOF do you have?

Until someone proves me otherwise, I´ll keep believing that those beimo fighters were nothing but amateurs, specially compared to UFC and Pride professionals.

And, quite frankly, even I could have done better than what that video showed. Which, admittedly, doesn´t mean much, as those guys could barely throw a kick without falling on their butts.

Oh Lawyer, Long time no hear:) , how is everything pal?.

Regarding Beimo. Wing Chun looks very ugly in its moves. This was a normal Beimo contest between teens, not supposed to be a professional one. After all Beimo was a street fighting, not neccessary to find all good fighters to participate in it. The Wing Chun fighters in Beimo were mostly known for defeating masters from other styles, this also included Boxers, Japanese Jakuda and Karateka. Watching this video is not a source to value Beimo as a crap, don't you agree. Now watching Royce Gracie in the ring gets fighting Hideo Tokoro for the first time. You will say what the hell is Jujitsu. It's really unfair that the Japanese got a draw. He really hitted Royce with more than could he anticipate. Do you think that a single clip I saw will give me the correct picture of a fighting period event. I don't think so, otherwise if it is, I as a fool will consider Royce to be pathetic in that match who gets beaten badly.:idunno:
 
yipman_sifu said:
Oh Lawyer, Long time no hear:) , how is everything pal?.

Regarding Beimo. Wing Chun looks very ugly in its moves. This was a normal Beimo contest between teens, not supposed to be a professional one. After all Beimo was a street fighting, not neccessary to find all good fighters to participate in it. The Wing Chun fighters in Beimo were mostly known for defeating masters from other styles, this also included Boxers, Japanese Jakuda and Karateka. Watching this video is not a source to value Beimo as a crap, don't you agree. Now watching Royce Gracie in the ring gets fighting Hideo Tokoro for the first time. You will say what the hell is Jujitsu. It's really unfair that the Japanese got a draw. He really hitted Royce with more than could he anticipate. Do you think that a single clip I saw will give me the correct picture of a fighting period event. I don't think so, otherwise if it is, I as a fool will consider Royce to be pathetic in that match who gets beaten badly.:idunno:

Look, I do not judge all beimos from what I saw. But what I saw was horrible, and it demonstrates two things.

1) Some people which participated in those beimos sucked. Period. So a beimo cannot be compared to Pride, because to get in Pride you must be about 10,000 times better than those two guys on the beimo video.

2) There were rules in those beimo challenges; and those rules were MORE restrictive than the rules of Pride. See, in that video, when one guy falls, the other guy not only will not fight the other in the ground, he also does not kick or knee his adversary. He simply waits for him to get up. So I would say those beimo challenges had more restrictive rules than Pride, and therefore they are farther from a real confrontation than Pride.

Remember? The more rules, the less realistic a given sparring match will be.
 
yipman_sifu said:
From all Wing Chun trainers I saw in UFC were 2. Both lost, but I think they were almost a technition. Those thaught that training for 3 years and go to fight in a ring will make them champions. So what about someone like Royce who trained for years in Jujitsu, did they thaught they can beat him, no way:) .

At the same time I see silly things in UFC or K1. Who remembers the fight between Hideo Tokoro vs Royce grcaie. I beleive that there was unfairness in making the Draw. Royce was supposed to lose if you compared him to that fighter in that day. Now this Hideo techniques are very easy to stopped if you just stop his center and counter attack his center, he was really tensed and could be decieved easily. Royce usually uses the long route to victory by grappling, I wonder why it was a draw.

Regarding if proper Wing Chun training is needed for UFC. I will say that I don't know about this, but I beleive that whenever I asks anyone from the Wing Chun about UFC and grappling and special training, he smiles and says "Man, why do you like fighting in the UFC, what is the purpose?,fight only when it is nesseccary". That's about the UFC fightingfat.

One of our training partners went to a MMA and grappling school. When I asked him about it. He says it is good for health and stamina, but the aspects still needs real testing in the streets, rather than the ring, which is really something you need a special traning to in order to participate.

Wing Chun was tested in HK during the 50's and 60's in Beimos. Although it is also regulated to some extent, it was much more realistic in the aspect of freedom and no proffesional judge. The rule went as follows "let the hand do the talking, ask questions later". Wing Chun at that time dominated all other styles and systems, and defeated masters that were having years of experience in other arts.
Martial art in the street is still something that really needs prove as you said, that's definitely correct Andrew:) .

Well, a lot of fights are scored without judges decisions, such as wanderlei silva vs. cro cop, I think wanderlei won that fight but it went to a draw because it was PRIDe vs. K1, i don't know why tokoro/gracie had no judges...maybe because it was THE royce Gracie fighting, or because gracie probably outweighed tokoro. And i'm just wondering.....what is stopping and countering someone's center? Also, MMa is good for a street fight, sure you don't eye gouge or anything but if some dude came swinging wild haymakers at me, i'd rather shoot for a double leg or clinch up and throw the person rather than sit there and trade punches, although since you train in a MA you'd probably whoop them standing too, not to bash you're gym or anything but you'll meet plenty of ppl who will say that UFc in useless in a street fight ect. i use to do kung fu(which wasn't bad actually) and one of the guys there said it's impossible for someone to take you down, he never gave a reason why he also mentioned that it was the "best" fighting style out there and that he could if he "wanted" to compete in K-1....yeah, yet he refuses to demonstrate anything. A lot of people will not be able to understand or see what they are told either, there are plenty of people out there who think MMA fighting is BS, and useless. that only meat headed unskilled losers fight in there, but the truth is, it takes lots of work, it's a sport, the majority of people in there have some kind of college degree, people train in a lot of styles, ect.
 
MJS said:
If I recall correctly, didn't Vitor Belfort use something along these lines in his UFC debut?

Mike
if yo mean chain punching by letting loose combinations of punches than yes. If you mean wing chun punches, no vitor's a boxer, but i agree with andrew. If you let loose too many punches and get carried away you're gonna get caught with a punch or takedown IE Belfort vs. Liddell
 
WingChun Lawyer said:
Look, I do not judge all beimos from what I saw. But what I saw was horrible, and it demonstrates two things.

1) Some people which participated in those beimos sucked. Period. So a beimo cannot be compared to Pride, because to get in Pride you must be about 10,000 times better than those two guys on the beimo video.

2) There were rules in those beimo challenges; and those rules were MORE restrictive than the rules of Pride. See, in that video, when one guy falls, the other guy not only will not fight the other in the ground, he also does not kick or knee his adversary. He simply waits for him to get up. So I would say those beimo challenges had more restrictive rules than Pride, and therefore they are farther from a real confrontation than Pride.

Remember? The more rules, the less realistic a given sparring match will be.

I told you that in street, you can find any level of fighting. I agree that some fighters sucked no problem, they are teens. I saw some pictures of those two guys before the fight. They were like student trainers in their martial arts, I saw a picture of them standing near master Wong shun-Leung. I think he was a sort of coordinator of these matches to students, he himself fought the more proffesional one with masters of other styles.

Regarding the rules of Beimo. You cannot judge it's rules by watching this clip that you are objecting that it is not up to the level. Just try to search the net and find the regulation it was based upon. I told you that you cannot judge everything from a single clip, that's a fact that no one can deny Lawyer.

So tell me, where were you all this time, I think it is about 2 weeks you stopped posting in the WC section as you did before. I saw that you post on bullshido forum. Man I think that took a break to some extent.
 
Well, what were the beimo official rules then?

PS: Yes, I post regularly at bullshido. I am a bullshidoka at heart. Yes, that does explain a lot.
 
MMAfighter said:
if yo mean chain punching by letting loose combinations of punches than yes. If you mean wing chun punches, no vitor's a boxer, but i agree with andrew. If you let loose too many punches and get carried away you're gonna get caught with a punch or takedown IE Belfort vs. Liddell

Yes, I was referring more towards the combos. However, if I recall correctly, the initial punches were not combos. in the sense of jab, cross, hook, but instead straighter punches. It wasn't until he had the person on the cage that he began the combos..ie: jabs, hooks, etc.

His boxing skills certainly rounded out his BJJ very nice.:)

Mike
 
Andrew Green said:
Yup.



and nope.

My point was that all systems, whether they admit it or not are goverened by a set of rules, even if they are not laid out as such. Assumptions are made about what will be done, how it will happen, what will be involved, etc.

Wing Chun is no different, safe training requires that rules be followed in training.

"Street" fighting is completely untestable as too what is the most effective, because as soon as you attempt to test it, you create a artificial situation, there by making your results unreliable.

It serves no one any good to argue about the effectiveness of street fighting, because it is untestable. No one can ever be proven right or wrong. All we know is that many systems have been used effectively, even if those systems have had a poor showing in arranged matches.

We can discuss what works in a MMA context, we can discuss what works in a wing chun context. Those are testable. But all we can do is speculate about "real" self-defence, because it is not testable.

That, in my opinion is the crux of the discussion. As a Wing Chun guy, I love what I do, I don't accept it IS the be all and end all, but I think that in my short time studying it that there may be one or two decent techniques with which to hurt a potential aggressor "in the street" tm, but how good would I be against some 200 pound muscle man in a MMA competition with rules, no kicks to the groin, throat strikes etc? Not very I can tell you. Then again, I'm faaaaar to pretty to risk getting hurt. :ultracool

I think the discussion has moved off course slightly, chin'na or however it's spelt is meant to have been a more advanced part of WC, and is a Chinese grappling art, but only learnt at later stages, will I wait that long to learn grappling techniques? No. Will I take up ju-jitsu now that I'm back from my hols, yes. Will I cease to do Wing Chun and just do grappling stuff? Certainly not. There is a dangerous and equally misguided opinion that the only effective arts are those that have a background in the ring, be they Muay Thai, MMA whatever. To an extent I understand why people think that, but essentially the impression I'm getting here is that "MMA is the only effective art 'cos it's used in the UFC". Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting this, but it does appear that way, or at least a thinly veiled one. Ring sports are great, but as Andrew has more than adequately pointed out, testing the virtues of TMA and MMA in the ring or street and then saying "that's the best" is not only a nonsense, but almost impossible to collect empirical evidence to prove it. You can say one or the other may be better in a given environment, but that's about it. So many variables, so many outcomes. Depends on the guy, on the day, the circumstances, is the fight in a ring with rules, or a fight to the finish on the street with an "unskilled" but nonetheless dangerous opponent, are weapons involved, how many people are involved, what are the reasons for the fight, what skill set are the people involved at etc etc.

I've found in most street fights that I've seen, or had the misfortune to have been involved with, whoever hits first, hardest and fastest tends to get the upper hand. However, trying that against a 200 pound professional athlete who's used to being punched, means that a wider variety of techniques must be used in order to defeat them.

Just my tuppence.

Cheers,

K
 
Andrew Green said:
A lot of styles that did not traditionally have grappling have added some, or "anti-grappling" to their curriculum since MMA got kicked off.

Occasionally it is good, often it is a poor imitation or stuff made up to defend techniques they don't understand.

It's both good and bad, good that these arts are adapting and growing, but bad when they bugger it up completely.

Many had some stand up locks and a few takedowns, not sure if this is the case with wing chun though.

Wing Chun is a combined form of all three major Chinese internal arts, and therefor has very old roots. All of these art forms, if you dig deeply enough, will have the elements of kicking, punching, throwing, locking, and of course chi gong. It's unfortunate, as you say, that Wing Chun schools are digging around outside their art for ways of dealing with things unfamiliar, because if these practictioners looked more deeply at what they were studying, these things would not be unfamiliar. Most Wing Chun schools teach punches mechanically, at the center line, but there's much more to it than that, what modern competitions call grappling included.
 
Awareness is definately the key in any fight; here an understanding of grappling would be important as is the Wing Chun system. All arts will or should teach some defence as to grappling techniques, although I do agree with Yipman when he says that these are often telegraphed movements. Especially when sensitivity is such an important part of the Wing Chun system.

Furthermore, Wing Chun strikes are designed to be quick and powerful, more so than any other punch, and as someone said speed is very important.

As for the couple of Wing Chun guys in the UFC: to me they showed no skills whatsoever, let alone Wing Chun technique or principles. And I sincerely doubt they had studied anything for longer than a year at best!

From my experiences, grappling in the street only happens with people who are unskilled fighters or, one chooses to take the weaker opponent to the ground. I really believe that grappling in the street is not practical, especially against many well-rounded martial artists and it is also often a dangerous thing to iniatiate.
 
Very Interesting Topic:) .

I wish to make myself clear by some misunderstandings regarding Wing Chun.

1)MMA people fights in three phases. Upright, clinching, and grappling. I never recomend the third phase to be faught in a street brawl, because it can never work if you fight more than one guy. You are gonna be down making yourself in a situation that you cannot even escape from :) .

2) Wing Chun never adapted techniques for Grappling. The term Anti-Grappling is not like Anti-striking as some people claims. I mean that the term seems to be weird as it is an adapted one. I personally saw that Anti-Grappling is something different. It is just the idea of lowering the centerline and use your sensitivity by Chi Sao to feel your opponent force on the ground. That concludes that it is not derived after grappling appeared. The guy called Yipman in here said that Anti-grappling is not a good idea. I would like to ask him if he ever tried to grapple a Wing Chun guy who trained in Chi Sao, let him try it and answer us.:)

3) MMA techniques are the most effective people say. Well with roundhouse punches and techniques they are very exposed to be hit. I beleive that also in the ground. I saw many grapplers are holding their opponents hand and leaving the other. Their oppoenets are idiots in paying attension to the grabbed hand and tries to unleash it, forgetting that the other hand may be a very effective weapon:idunno: .

4) Wish you all the best, and hope that we never encounter a brawl in any turf:ultracool .
 
Hi!

this is very interesting indeed.

Note the follwing...

What is Grapplings, and MMA most effective and best technique?

You should know the answer... if not I'll give it in a moment.


Note also that Wing Chun does have a Chin Na element... yet it immediately transitions to striking... as in traditional Shuai Jiao... throw with a strike... strike with a throw...

Also, Yee Chee Kim Jeung Ma (basic stance to some...) should teach you how to drop your weight effectively and keep structure in a clinch and/or cheking the legs and make it hard to sweep you.

There are many grappling scenarios in the WC Dummy forms...
Yet there is no formal ground controls... in the ground you hit them...

This is somewhere that training can be borrowed, but controlling someone with the Basic stance on the ground is addressed... just not emphasised until now. The principles still apply on the ground (centerline theory, economy of motion, etc.)

Just something to consider... enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado

P.S. The best hold is conditioning... athletisism...

which declines with age...

Wing Chun skill increases with time training... so when you're 50, 60 or 70 you can mingle with the 20 y/o's and still impress and kick their posteriors! Just look at Ip Chun and otehr Wing Chun Seniors!
 
profesormental said:
Hi!

this is very interesting indeed.

Note the follwing...

What is Grapplings, and MMA most effective and best technique?

You should know the answer... if not I'll give it in a moment.


Note also that Wing Chun does have a Chin Na element... yet it immediately transitions to striking... as in traditional Shuai Jiao... throw with a strike... strike with a throw...

Also, Yee Chee Kim Jeung Ma (basic stance to some...) should teach you how to drop your weight effectively and keep structure in a clinch and/or cheking the legs and make it hard to sweep you.

There are many grappling scenarios in the WC Dummy forms...
Yet there is no formal ground controls... in the ground you hit them...

This is somewhere that training can be borrowed, but controlling someone with the Basic stance on the ground is addressed... just not emphasised until now. The principles still apply on the ground (centerline theory, economy of motion, etc.)

Just something to consider... enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado

P.S. The best hold is conditioning... athletisism...

which declines with age...

Wing Chun skill increases with time training... so when you're 50, 60 or 70 you can mingle with the 20 y/o's and still impress and kick their posteriors! Just look at Ip Chun and otehr Wing Chun Seniors!

Nice saying pal, but you forgot something.

Wing Chun teaches you how to think in the best way. It is not fixed with moves and techniques. I once remember that my sifu at a certain seminar saw a student doing chain punches all the time, so he smiled and said: be creative, Wing Chun is not limited, use hooks and uppercuts when your center is blocked, as long as you find it faster and will finish the situation in the fastest time possible.:)

Now the stance is not supposed to maintained all the time, especially if you are at a pounding or the ground phase. Again Wing Chun does not limit you. You only apply this stance to protect your center in the upright position.:supcool: :ultracool

Now MMA is good for the ring. You have to use it there, otherwise you get beaten. Why?. because it fits the regulations established by the creators of UFC, Pride, K1, Vale Tudo, and whatever:) . You will find also that the Gracies themselves must be trained in some striking ability to adjust the ring conditions. You know that the ring is something not important for self-defence:) , What you grasp must fit the mysterious street:) .

Regarding Anti-Grappling again. It is not derived after Grappling, it is a Chi Sao in a different situation, that's the whole idea.:)

By the way, I would like especially to stand to Royce Gracie's side after the Matt Hughes issue. Upon roaming around other sites. I saw some UFC fans started to say nonsense stuff about him. They forgot that Royce was almost the best UFC fighter ever. They also forgot his acheivments and how he lead the world to know how important can ground techniques be in the game, . :) Lets just remember champoins like him and his brother Rickson for the coming years.
 
Back
Top