What was Wing Chun designed for?

[Parky]

No. But you yourself as a Wing Chunner should adopt long range moves to defeat him quickly if he retreats and not Biu Ma which takes too long.


Yes. But running doesn't mean running in marathon style. "Running" towards the enemy in Choy Lee Fat style. Or should I say advancing.


I thought you were disagreeing with me about running. Why are you saying now that stepping,walking and running is all you need?

I don't Biu Ma. I step, walk, or run...just like I did when I was a little feller. I agree with you that Biu Ma, if done in the stiff and rigid manner some folks do it in, takes too long. When I say Running I mean Advancing quickly. Again I agree with you. But I don't see stepping, walking, or running as 'moves'. What I'm trying to say and maybe I'm not direct enough is that maybe there is no footwork in Wing Chun. Well, maybe there's a little bit in the knives form. Maybe mostly there is just moving the center of mass and the feet follow. Maybe the mind directs where to place the center of mass and the center moves and the feet follow. I think it's that simple. Most people would probably disagree and that's cool. I think people try and 'look' Wing Chun, rigidly. People try and perform Wing Chun. I think that's wrong thinking. I think people over complicate it with all kinds of footwork and footwork drills and the idea of all these techniques that must be drilled repeatedly with a partner in a Wing Chun manner. I understand that place because I lived there for years. I'm not judging I just see things differently now and occasionally I see a comment that moves me to share my current thoughts. I'm sorry you quit after SLT. There's a lot within the first form alone that translates to other arts, but Wing Chun certainly aint everyone's flavor. Cheers!

 

[drop bear]

That wasn't the point. The point was how do you make WC better at long range. If you accept that as a weakness (which I don't) there are arguably better ways than boxing.

It is the point. Why limit these better ways to a specific range? Just use the better ways.

 

[Juany118]

It is the point. Why limit these better ways to a specific range? Just use the better ways.

Well because a weapon, in this context, does have range limits. Say I am using something the length of your average Kali stick. Once I am in corto I am largely limited to punyo strikes and to get back out to medio or largo to fully use the weapon.

 

[KPM]

That wasn't the point. The point was how do you make WC better at long range. If you accept that as a weakness (which I don't) there are arguably better ways than boxing.

But we weren't speaking about the weapons element at all. We were talking about a sparring/free-fight situation all this time.

 

[KPM]

Yeah, well I do think Wing Chun functions best as a close-range system, so there X 10!

BTW is it hilarious or what? how worked-up people get over these discussions? ....or maybe I'm just getting too comfortable with nobody taking me seriously. 20 years teaching high school and nearly 30 years of marriage can do that to you!

I don't know about "worked up" or "hilarious" but I do find it odd that I have to keep restating and reexplaining the obvious to people that should know Wing Chun.

 

[Parky]

"What is often described as short or long range in one system or another is really a training methodology and mechanism that has little relevance to the range at which it is useful. It is a training mechanism that teaches and develops and reinforces certain principles of movement and power generation, that can then be applied in any situation once you understand them. As a methodology, there is a certain consistency that is important in training the principles. These principles are expressed in certain techniques that are part of the training regimen, but are not limited to those techniques. They can be utilized in any movement that is needed to fit the situation, even if that movement is not a "proper" technique. It does not matter. But it is up to the individual to apply them as they will, in whatever context they find themselves, and any failure is the person, not the method. If you cannot see that wing chun ought to be plenty useful at any "range", then I think you are selling the method short. It has more potential then you are giving it credit for.

A martial system is not the same as that. It is a methodology used to develop skills that can be applied whenever and wherever and however you need them, to the extent of your own skill level. And different people will get different mileage from it, and some methods are a better match for some people than others are, so pick your method wisely. Flying Crane quote.

This is great stuff!!! I couldn't agree more. The so-called 'techniques' are just expressions of movement. What matters is what powers the so-called techniques, or at least that's what matters to me. The same thing that powers my Wing Chun movement could power movements I previously learned in the Tai Chi, Hakkoryu JuJutsu, and Northern Mantis I dabbled in. It could also power my golf swing. The training is about 'powering up'. Just my 2 pennies worth.

 

[LFJ]

But then, you have no evidence and can provide no proof that your version of Wing Chun is any different. And you go on and on about how "broke" everyone else is but come up short when asked to show what you do differently to prove that yours isn't "broken." Quite amusing, really......

So, assuming my VT is also broken...

This doesn't change the fact that you blew a gasket whenever I said other YMWC is broken and gap-filling left and right, but have now been starting threads admitting to all the holes and gaps in WC and looking for ways to fill them!

I'm glad you've finally come to the realization and are trying to do something about it, but saying "yours is broken, too" doesn't help your situation.

 

[LFJ]

---Boxers only have a hard time handling kicking if they haven't trained against kicking. Why would you assume that a footwork system that is very mobile and evasive would have a problem with kicking?

And if they train against kicks, they have to change a ton about their footwork and overall strategy or this happens:

 

[LFJ]

You can be perfectly content with the idea that you can survive at long range enough to use closing skills to get to close range. But that is not the same thing as having a "long range game" that is the equivalent of what is done in boxing.

If you have a striking style that only functions at close-range and you are outclassed there with no recourse to a longer range, you just get beat trying to do what doesn't work. That's a pretty dumb fail for your system.

You keep harping on this "surviving long enough to get close is not a long-range game", but that's not all that can be done with functional VT.

See here from 2:13 to 2:26. The VT guy is sparring an MMA guy with a reach advantage on him and probably superior grappling skills.

He stays outside using highly mobile and evasive lateral footwork and kicks to keep the opponent at bay. At 2:18, he stops the MMA guy's kick with his own, nails him in the jaw with a nice VT punch (that would have much different effects without the protective gear), and safely remains at outside range.

Now, there are many reasons why one may want or need to stay out at longer range, not the least of which is being, as I already stated, outclassed at that range. It's stupid to stay close then or only know how to fight close.

And a fight can definitely be finished at longer range. There are many ways to end a fight without closing in.

But first, conducting a fight on the outside, 2:13 to 2:26.

So, there are of course VT methods of conducting a fight at longer range with mobile and evasive footwork to avoid leg kicks and so on.

But, VT can also end fights at longer range.

This, done with intent can absolutely end a fight and ruin someone's life. That's why it's illegal or at least strongly frowned upon in sport fighting.

This, too, can absolutely end a fight. Kick someone over chairs and tables, into other people, into a wall, off a pier. If cracked ribs or other injuries don't stop them from continuing to fight, and you don't wait for them to get back up, it buys time for escape.

 

[LFJ]

And obviously, it meant something to WSL, or he wouldn't have put it in the title! He could have just titled the video "Wing Chun: The Science of Street Fighting" or something along those lines.

It's true that VT's main strategy is to get in, overwhelm, and finish an attacker quickly.

But, it also has methods of conducting and even finishing a fight from longer range because it wasn't developed by fantasy fighters who'd never actually fought to know that sometimes you're not going to be able to win at close range, and without recourse, you're dead.

---And it seems to me that the people that are having a hard time admitting that their Wing Chun doesn't have a "long range game" just aren't being honest with themselves.

It seems to me you really wish for others to have WC as deficient as yours so you can feel better about having to gap-fill.

If you don't understand how Wing Chun works...how it was designed...I honestly don't know how to help you either.

How could you? You're the one who started this thread called "What was Wing Chun designed for" because you are trying to validate the ridiculous idea that WC was purposefully designed with gaps so you are justified in filling them with Western Boxing without losing face.

 

[KPM]

So, assuming my VT is also broken...

This doesn't change the fact that you blew a gasket whenever I said other YMWC is broken and gap-filling left and right, but have now been starting threads admitting to all the holes and gaps in WC and looking for ways to fill them!

I'm glad you've finally come to the realization and are trying to do something about it, but saying "yours is broken, too" doesn't help your situation.

I don't recall you ever talking about a lack of a "long range game" when you referred to everyone's Wing Chun as being "broken". And....I repeat myself again......Wing Chun is a close-range system...designed and optimized for close range. It has a long range strategy for surviving at that range so you can close in to the preferred close range. Saying there is a lack of a more extensive "long range game" equivalent to boxing is not saying Wing Chun is "broken." It is simply pointing out that there is room for improvement, should someone want to pursue it.

 

[KPM]

He stays outside using highly mobile and evasive lateral footwork and kicks to keep the opponent at bay. At 2:18, he stops the MMA guy's kick with his own, nails him in the jaw with a nice VT punch (that would have much different effects without the protective gear), and safely remains at outside range.

--Yeah, that was a good clip! You seem to like that one. Maybe because its the only one showing WSLVT guys doing any real sparring?

----Here's what I see Sean's student doing on the outside......keeping his weight more on the forward leg with his posture a bit "hunched" forward and his guard held in close to his face.....high covers used to defend punches to the head....quick "hopping" lateral movement...some bobbing and weaving to avoid strikes. Hmmm....sounds amazingly like boxing, doesn't it??? And given that Sean's guys are preparing for MMA competition and therefore also are incorporating sweeps and throws and such (which aren't part of WSLVT)....this leads me to believe that this "outside" portion is also not typical WSLVT and has been incorporated from elsewhere. So I applaud Sean and like this video. He has clearly been making updates and improvements to his WSLVT method.

---And BTW....landing a kick to finish a fight is not at all what I meant by conducting a fight from long range. Of course you have to move in to be able to strike the guy, and you aren't going to finish him without hitting him! Long range fighting is more about how you control and maintain distance and choose when to close in to strike when its in your favor to do so.

 

[KPM]

You're the one who started this thread called "What was Wing Chun designed for" because you are trying to validate the ridiculous idea that WC was purposefully designed with gaps so you are justified in filling them with Western Boxing without losing face.

I started this thread to get other people's ideas. Yet after 11 pages no one has yet proposed a valid alternative explanation and description of Wing Chun being something other than a "close range" system. No one has tried to justify why they think Wing Chun is NOT designed for and optimized for close range fighting. They've simply argued against the fact that Wing Chun was NOT designed for nor optimized for fighting at long range.

I know of at least one person that could have chimed in and explained how he thinks Wing Chun was designed to be an "in between" system....between striking and grappling. And how Wing Chun is as much a standing grappling system as a striking system. That would have made the discussion interesting. But he knew he would get the kind of BS argumentative responses that I have been getting so he didn't bother. He predicted that people would just be trying to defend their entrenched beliefs rather than really discussing the topic. Its a shame really.

 

[LFJ]

I don't recall you ever talking about a lack of a "long range game" when you referred to everyone's Wing Chun as being "broken".

There are so many gaps in mainstream YMWC. I point them out whenever the particular topic arises.

Saying there is a lack of a more extensive "long range game" equivalent to boxing is not saying Wing Chun is "broken." It is simply pointing out that there is room for improvement, should someone want to pursue it.

I heartily disagree for the fact that if you are outclassed at close range and that's all you know how to do, you're finished, because your broken WC failed to give you a functional recourse.

--Yeah, that was a good clip! You seem to like that one. Maybe because its the only one showing WSLVT guys doing any real sparring?

It is good. How many you've seen doesn't mean anything in terms of what WSLVT is.

keeping his weight more on the forward leg

There is no forward leg and it's evenly weighted.

with his posture a bit "hunched" forward and his guard held in close to his face.....high covers used to defend punches to the head....quick "hopping" lateral movement...some bobbing and weaving to avoid strikes. Hmmm....sounds amazingly like boxing, doesn't it???

Maybe "sounds" like it, but is quite different in execution, and drastically different in specific strategy and tactics.

And given that Sean's guys are preparing for MMA competition and therefore also are incorporating sweeps and throws and such (which aren't part of WSLVT)

Not in the portion I pointed to.

....this leads me to believe that this "outside" portion is also not typical WSLVT and has been incorporated from elsewhere.

It is pure WSLVT, dummy/knife footwork, standard pre-contact strategy.

---And BTW....landing a kick to finish a fight is not at all what I meant by conducting a fight from long range. Of course you have to move in to be able to strike the guy, and you aren't going to finish him without hitting him!

So, conducting the entire fight on the outside, never going into close-range, and ending the fight with a kick is still not "long-range game" to you??

Then nothing can be!

Long range fighting is more about how you control and maintain distance and choose when to close in to strike when its in your favor to do so.

Oh... This sounds like "surviving long enough to close in". Exactly what you said is not a long-range game!

So, if I stay out and finish the fight with the longest range unarmed weapons (kicks), I'm not conducting the fight from long range...

And if I control and maintain distance and choose when to close in to strike, as you just said is long-range fighting, it's still not a "long-range game", but just survival until I can get in???

 

[wckf92]

Long range fighting is more about how you control and maintain distance....

Seems to me he controlled both pretty well with that kick to the knee

 

[Lobo66]

Hey guys,
Just saw this thread and thought I'd write a short response.
I don't have time to read everyone's posts, so I apologize im Voraus if I'm repeating what somebody else has already said.

Ving Tsun (as I've learned it) is designed for fighting. Period. Not for health or fitness or aesthetics, but for fighting empty-handed and with weapons.
That being said it is important to contextualize. A "fight" can be many things: A typical monkey dance (to use Miller's term), one of the various forms of criminal assault, the struggle to subdue and arrest someone, a sport competition, etc, etc.

So it's important to contextualize. Regaining the initiative and carrying out a successful counter attack after having been assaulted needs a different skill set (mentally and physically) than having to subdue and control an outraged patient in a hospital, for example. Or break up a fight between two adolescents. Or fight an experienced combat athlete in the ring. Whatever martial art you do, you have to contextualize your training to render it truly effective.
If you want to enter mixed martial arts competitions, you better have the possibility to spar with mixed martial artists. If you want your art to give you an advantage during a possible assault, you'd better do some self defence scenario-type training.

When you do this - when you contextualize your training- you will see very quickly what aspects of your art need to be emphasized, what things need to be avoided or kept under control, or maybe even things that need changing. You just might need to supplement your training with other things. I think this is logical and obvious to everyone.

Sorry got to run, but if I have time I'll post some more.

 

[Juany118]

Hey guys,
Just saw this thread and thought I'd write a short response.
I don't have time to read everyone's posts, so I apologize im Voraus if I'm repeating what somebody else has already said.

Ving Tsun (as I've learned it) is designed for fighting. Period. Not for health or fitness or aesthetics, but for fighting empty-handed and with weapons.
That being said it is important to contextualize. A "fight" can be many things: A typical monkey dance (to use Miller's term), one of the various forms of criminal assault, the struggle to subdue and arrest someone, a sport competition, etc, etc.

So it's important to contextualize. Regaining the initiative and carrying out a successful counter attack after having been assaulted needs a different skill set (mentally and physically) than having to subdue and control an outraged patient in a hospital, for example. Or break up a fight between two adolescents. Or fight an experienced combat athlete in the ring. Whatever martial art you do, you have to contextualize your training to render it truly effective.
If you want to enter mixed martial arts competitions, you better have the possibility to spar with mixed martial artists. If you want your art to give you an advantage during a possible assault, you'd better do some self defence scenario-type training.

When you do this - when you contextualize your training- you will see very quickly what aspects of your art need to be emphasized, what things need to be avoided or kept under control, or maybe even things that need changing. You just might need to supplement your training with other things. I think this is logical and obvious to everyone.

Sorry got to run, but if I have time I'll post some more.

I think this is very important, the contextualized point, I tried to get there but didn't articulate it well. Example, I use my WC different than some others do. Most people, naturally, focus on the striking aspect, even in the TWC I study which has a fair amount of grappling. Thing is I study MA to assist my aging body in my occupation so I use it to get myself so I can grapple/control, so to me it is an art to bridge with and "soften up" the target so I can then exert control. If the TWC grappling techniques work, great, if I have to go to control methods I learned from other arts, so be it.

I think what MAY happen is that a lot of people who study martial arts don't really give contextualizing much thought. They study a martial art to be a "good fighter" in a generic sense, then they see another art that seems to be stronger in a specific context, whether or not they will ever actually encounter that specific scenario, and they start looking for a better way.

If they were to ask the question "why do I study martial arts"? They may find that yourtube video they watched really doesn't matter. Such as...

1. I am studying martial arts for physical and psychological well being... so who cares if MA X has a "longer game?"
2. I study MAs to engage in tornament Lei Tai against similar arts. So if you are studying a striking art who cares if your MA has a deep grappling game or not?
3. I study MAs because I am a fan of historical weapons. So who cares if you have a deep empty hand system?
4. I study martial arts in order to gain physical control/submission of an opponent. So who cares if I can't fight as well from a "stand off" position? I need to get inside to gain compliance.

That math is what brought me to my school. I wanted to be better at getting "inside" to control when the opponent is doing everything to prevent it (my WC) so I could use my existing Aikido/Judo skill set plus I wanted those existing control options reinforced (my WC and Kali do that) as well as get better with the use of a baton and knife defense, which Kali provides.

In short shouldn't we look at MA like we do buying a car? I never had kids so I currently have a Subaru Hatchback. My girlfriend has a 3 year old and wants another child though. So first I am buying a roof cargo carrier (a car version @KPM 's idea of adding boxing to his WC) but when I get a new car I am buying a Forester. In short I will chose my new car because of the context that is now my family life, the car carrier is only a "filler" until I can get the proper tool.

 

[Phobius]

Good question! But no one has yet attempted to explain how Wing Chun is NOT a close-range art, nor has anyone tried to show a Wing Chun "long range game" that is equivalent to that found in boxing. No one has tried to describe how Wing Chun is NOT optimized to function at close range much more than long range. Why do you suppose that is???

Because that is not the subject. To have an art that master movement and position at long range in order to either get close or win the fight... This you stated footwork in WC does not work as an undisputed fact.

I say I don't agree it being a fact. Nor would I say BJJ is long range and yet Gracie's have shown closing footwork from long range. So they would be better off doing boxing?

 

[Phobius]

A close range art is not equal to not having long range game. In fact the close range fighter most often need to focus a lot on long range game. This is why I do not agree with KPM stated facts.

Saying a close range art has no long range game because of it as a fact that must not be questioned is like saying a tennis player is just hitting a ball and as such does not need to move around because they never hit a ball they can not reach.

 

[KPM]

I heartily disagree for the fact that if you are outclassed at close range and that's all you know how to do, you're finished, because your broken WC failed to give you a functional recourse.

---So, you believe that Wing Chun is just as developed and optimized for long range fighting as it is for close range fighting? You believe that there is no difference in emphasis in the training for close range vs. long range? You don't see Wing Chun as an "In-fighting" system, as WSL referred to it??


There is no forward leg and it's evenly weighted.

---There were plenty of times where he was hunched forward, leaning out over the forward leg and bobbing and weaving to avoid kicks. He did not stay evenly weighted.


Maybe "sounds" like it, but is quite different in execution, and drastically different in specific strategy and tactics.

---There is some boxing element there nonetheless.


Not in the portion I pointed to.

----Portion? Isn't WSLVT a "stand alone" method that needs no "gap filling"???? Yet your example is a mix of WSLVT and MMA.....including some boxing elements. Kind of goes against your entire thesis on multiple threads now....you know....where you repeatedly maintain that other people's Wing Chun is "broken" and that people have to "gap fill" to fix it, but that WSLVT is different and perfect and complete and all that.



It is pure WSLVT, dummy/knife footwork, standard pre-contact strategy.

----Pure WSLVT? Heck, even Sean just admitted he was mixing things in and it wasn't "pure" WSLVT! Oh wait...you mean that small "portion"???



So, conducting the entire fight on the outside, never going into close-range, and ending the fight with a kick is still not "long-range game" to you??

----Your example showed only the landing of the kick. We don't know how much "long range game" there was behind it at all. He could have just stepped up and kicked, just like people just step up and punch.


Oh... This sounds like "surviving long enough to close in". Exactly what you said is not a long-range game!

---I've described what the "long range game" can consist of two different times now on two different threads. Once again, you are just being argumentative.