The Wing Chun fighting stance explained

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Me. My friend Sai. Sai's sifu. Sifu Mark Phillips.... There are more martial artists than just famous combat sportsmen.

But at that point it's not historically validated, it's modernly validated. Historically validated would mean because a famous guy could use it 100 years ago, that proves it's good. Which isn't the case.

 

[drop bear]

But at that point it's not historically validated, it's modernly validated. Historically validated would mean because a famous guy could use it 100 years ago, that proves it's good. Which isn't the case.

No. I did ask for modern context.

And I will use the gravies as an example.

We could look at the first UFCs that had almost no rules and suggest that because gracie jujitsu dominated it has been shown that GJJ is the best system for no rules fighting.

Historically proven.

And of course because a pure GJJer would get ground up and spit out in a 2018 ufc match. That the rules have changed the success ratios unnaturally.

And so we would say. Ok kron Gracie. You manhandle kabib Nurkumurkamurka and you will be validated in a modern context.

 

[drop bear]

Me. My friend Sai. Sai's sifu. Sifu Mark Phillips.... There are more martial artists than just famous combat sportsmen.

Who has he fought that was any good?

 

[DaveB]

It could also mean that the style (or understanding of it) has degraded since the time when it was applied. Or that historical application was exaggerated.

We always have to allow for those possibilities, and look for ways to validate in the here and now.

Agreed, but if we decide that the system doesn't work because there are YouTube videos representing around 0.00001% of wingchun exponents, or even because we've proved that 98% of schools don't train in a realistic manner, then we are making faulty assumptions and equally flawed conclusions.

 

[DaveB]

Who has he fought that was any good?

Frank. Frank's awesome.

 

[Hanzou]

I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.

 

[KPM]

I think we can look at percentages as well. Plenty of BJJ guys are able to make their method work. Not just Royce Gracie. That shows that the method itself is good because a good percentage of BJJ guys can make it work, not just Royce Gracie or one of his brothers. Same goes for Boxing, or Kickboxing. You might find a Wing Chun guy here and there that can make it work. But percentage-wise?.....The percentages just don't look good for Wing Chun and just about any other "Traditional" martial art in a modern context. You might have an occasional guy here and there in Wing Chun or some other TCMA that just has raw talent and could make ANYTHING work! But percentage-wise the success rate just hasn't been very good. And as Gerry pointed out....its hard to know in a historical context just how many of those stories are a bit exaggerated.

 

[drop bear]

Frank. Frank's awesome.

And here is the issue.

If your level is far above the level of the people you are applying you can get away with a lot more.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

No. I did ask for modern context.

And I will use the gravies as an example.

We could look at the first UFCs that had almost no rules and suggest that because gracie jujitsu dominated it has been shown that GJJ is the best system for no rules fighting.

Historically proven.

And of course because a pure GJJer would get ground up and spit out in a 2018 ufc match. That the rules have changed the success ratios unnaturally.

And so we would say. Ok kron Gracie. You manhandle kabib Nurkumurkamurka and you will be validated in a modern context.

I was actually thinking about the gracies when I said that. And I think that we're saying the same thing, but I just want to clarify.

To me, the gracies are still historically valid, not modernly valid. It proves that, once upon a time (25 years ago), GJJ was a very effective system. That could because it's really an effective system, because people didn't know how to counteract it, or that they had some trick people hadn't figured out yet. In order for me to care if it's still valid, I would want it to be both historically valid (even just 5+ years ago), and modernly valid. The modern valid proves that it's effective right now, and the combination of modern and historical validity shows that it's not a one-trick pony, or that people just haven't gotten used to it yet. As long as 95% of techniques are still allowed, the rules shouldn't come into play, IMO.

 

[JowGaWolf]

And here is the issue.

If your level is far above the level of the people you are applying you can get away with a lot more.

I've seen him get away with similar stuff against equally match opponents. I like the one at 2:39. I was waiting for him to drop the elbow, like in professional wrestling lol.

 

[drop bear]

I was actually thinking about the gracies when I said that. And I think that we're saying the same thing, but I just want to clarify.

To me, the gracies are still historically valid, not modernly valid. It proves that, once upon a time (25 years ago), GJJ was a very effective system. That could because it's really an effective system, because people didn't know how to counteract it, or that they had some trick people hadn't figured out yet. In order for me to care if it's still valid, I would want it to be both historically valid (even just 5+ years ago), and modernly valid. The modern valid proves that it's effective right now, and the combination of modern and historical validity shows that it's not a one-trick pony, or that people just haven't gotten used to it yet. As long as 95% of techniques are still allowed, the rules shouldn't come into play, IMO.

Correct.

And look there is modern bare knuckle. And that is growing as a sport. We can take modern examples.

Which I was dragged kicking and screaming out of my beliefs on this
But I had to talk to bare knuckle fighters first.

 

[drop bear]

I've seen him get away with similar stuff against equally match opponents. I like the one at 2:39. I was waiting for him to drop the elbow, like in professional wrestling lol.

Does it less though.

The thing is if all he fought were those guys. That would be his killer method.

There are guys at my gym I could old timey box or chun. But I wouldn't do that fighting for sheep stations.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Does it less though.

Lol that's because he's smart. He can't get away with too many times so he doesn't push his luck, knowing that fighters at the same level will pick it up quickly.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.

I suspect the biggest error a classical art (okay, actually its proponents) can make, in regards to fight effectiveness, is to focus on differentiating the art. If something works, it should be considered whether it fits within the system, and only rejected if it’s out of scope (big kicks for BJJ, perhaps) or the system has or can incorporate a reasonable alternative. Or, perhaps, if the thing is effective but not in a situation deemed likely enough (multiple attackers wielding pasta tongs).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think we can look at percentages as well. Plenty of BJJ guys are able to make their method work. Not just Royce Gracie. That shows that the method itself is good because a good percentage of BJJ guys can make it work, not just Royce Gracie or one of his brothers. Same goes for Boxing, or Kickboxing. You might find a Wing Chun guy here and there that can make it work. But percentage-wise?.....The percentages just don't look good for Wing Chun and just about any other "Traditional" martial art in a modern context. You might have an occasional guy here and there in Wing Chun or some other TCMA that just has raw talent and could make ANYTHING work! But percentage-wise the success rate just hasn't been very good. And as Gerry pointed out....its hard to know in a historical context just how many of those stories are a bit exaggerated.

And I’d go so far as to argue the problem is universal enough to cause questioning of the types of training methods that are common in (and those commonly excluded from) those styles.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And here is the issue.

If your level is far above the level of the people you are applying you can get away with a lot more.

Agreed. I can get away with some pretty...um, pretty stuff against people who aren’t yet well trained. Much of that pretty stuff won’t work reliably against someone with skill who really tries to stop me.

 

[Hanzou]

And here is the issue.

If your level is far above the level of the people you are applying you can get away with a lot more.

As a 4-stripe blue belt, I once rolled with a group of fresh white belts and made it a point to take their backs and RNC each and every one of them. They thought I was a legit bad ***. Little did they know that a few hours later I tried those same back takes with my buddy who is a brown belt and he flicked me away like an insect every time.

 

[drop bear]

As a 4-stripe blue belt, I once rolled with a group of fresh white belts and made it a point to take their backs and RNC each and every one of them. They thought I was a legit bad ***. Little did they know that a few hours later I tried those same back takes with my buddy who is a brown belt and he flicked me away like an insect every time.

Yeah. The good old one armed guard pass is a great example. But it takes too much explaining.

 

[Martial D]

I eagerly await the day I see some classical kung fu like Wing Chun used in a MMA context successfully. Until then, it's hard to take much of what they say (in terms of fighting theory) seriously.

Alan Orr's fighters have had some success.

 

[Hanzou]

Alan Orr's fighters have had some success.

I don't really see much out of what Alan Orr does that resembles Wing Chun. Looks like standard MMA striking and grappling to me. He even uses the boxing guard.