Wing Chun Boxing

[Callen]

But there are wing chun systems that do address that issue with live testing, cross training and seeking out expert advice.

All Wing Chun practitioners should be doing live testing. As far as cross training, that's an option for those practitioners who feel they need it.

Being a practical fighting system is definitely part of at least some wing chun methodology

Being a practical fighting system is the heart of Wing Chun methodology, along with aliveness and adaptability.

However, I don't see how any of this is relevant to my comment above. The statement I quoted from CYNIK75 has zero contribution to the Wing Chun community.

 

[wckf92]

BJJ has hip throw that requires to bend spine too.

If there is a $100 bill on the ground, will a straight spine WC guy bend forward and pick it up?

I'd bend my spine as taught in the forms (i.e. last section of Bil jee form) and pick up the $100 bill. Simple, direct, efficient!

 

[drop bear]

All Wing Chun practitioners should be doing live testing. As far as cross training, that's an option for those practitioners who feel they need it.


Being a practical fighting system is the heart of Wing Chun methodology, along with aliveness and adaptability.

However, I don't see how any of this is relevant to my comment above. The statement I quoted from CYNIK75 has zero contribution to the Wing Chun community.

There are levels to fighting.

Which is super important to understand if you ever plan on taking your mad skills out of your dojo and using them on anyone in any context.

 

[APL76]

"king of talking hands"

I thought Jim Henson was the King of Talking Hands.

 

[Cynik75]

Do you really believe this describes wing Chun? Really? Nothing but failures?

It describes the level of legendary beimo fighters and old masters. Doesn't matter if the were or were not chunners.
There is only one footage from beimo fights and it does not show any master level fighters but rather lame blokes who barely know what to do:

The second footage showing the actual level of this times masters is even worse:

So I think I can doubt Wong Shun Leung was beating opponents more skilled than failures.
Submitting 100 BJJ white belts does not make me a BJJ black belt. Submitting 100 BJJ black belts surely does.

I could introduce you to some wing Chun fellows who I would want on my side if the **** went down. You won’t find them on youtube nor in the UFC. But they can fight.

There is a lot of good fighters who are not on youtube and do not compete. But it is really strange that a ALL good wing-chun-only fighters avoid youtube and competitions. I am curious why? They are not regular humans? Or maybe they do not exist at all?

Do you mean in the context of mma competition? I don’t think anyone is confused about the need to develop the full range of skills needed to thrive within the rules of a competition. That is obvious.

Probably not for Nightgreek.

Do you mean in self defense? Do you feel a wing Chun fellow simply cannot defend himself? That training in wing Chun is actually a liability for self defense? Surely not. You know better than that.

First of all: fighting is only a small part of self defense. Second: I do not see any reason why wing chun fellow should not be able to defend himself against typical street assault. Internet is full of examples untrained people who succesfuly defended themself.

Why is it a “FALSE STATEMENT”?

Because all available evidence of pure Wing Chun stylists fighting decent fighters form others styles shows that "pure chunners" cannot fight better than mediocre amateurs.
All chunners who can fight better crosstrain other styles. Especially mentioned above Qi La La who quite well combines orthodox WC with boxing/kickboxing. The "different mentality of boxing" helps them to be improved fighters.
Not QLL but shows what I mean:

Show me something contrary and I will change my mind.

He has an opinion and reasons for it. You may disagree with his reasons. You may have reasons of your own for your disagreement. That does not make your position any more true than his might be false, or vice-versa.Different people understand these things in different ways. If his statement is consistent with his understanding, then it is true. But it may not be the only truth. Your position may also be true, based on how you understand it.

And some people can say that Earth is flat... Jesus...

This isn’t a zero-sum game.

It is zero sum game. If A deny B, and B deny A only one of them can be true.

That's not much of a contribution to this particular forum. There are other locations on MartialTalk for people who don't train Wing Chun, perhaps one of them would be a better fit for you.

Stop crying like a baby. My personal opinion of Wing Chun is that it was designed and created to solve tactical problems in very specific enviroment - small cabins and narrow corridors of red boats. Fighting chest to chest with no place for footwork, body rotations, side steps, head movement. I think it is the only one reasonable answer for question why wing chun looks this way not another.
But somewhere in wing chun history enviromental requirement were lost, the life testing was abandoned and wing chun lost it core. The next generations (like Ip Man and his contemporaries) known the moves but do not understand them because of not testing them on real clashes. They were still trying to earn money teaching people how to fight and they couldn't say to students "sorry, we have no idea what we are doing".
Later the beimo fights against pitifuly weak opponent gave to the next-next chunners generation false conviction about own superiority (techniques, tactic, strategy and training methodology) reinforced in next-next-next generation by lying propaganda of invincible wing chun master Bruce Lee. The result was long loosing streak of chuners from early 90's untill nowadays.
Today many of you understand all weakness of present wing chun and make efforts to make wing chun decent fighting style again, many of you understand that single victorious fight again legit opponent is worth 1000 more than 2000 hours long video rant, but there is a lot of individuals like Nightgreek who make claims, statements, moronic excuses without any track of proof.

I have nothing against wing chun. I simply do not like words without confirmation.

 

[Cynik75]

doubled post

 

[Callen]

There are levels to fighting.

That seems like an arbitrary response. Likewise, I'm not really sure what gave you the impression that I needed you to clarify for me that there are levels to fighting. Maybe that statement was more for your own affirmation.

Which is super important to understand if you ever plan on taking your mad skills out of your dojo and using them on anyone in any context.

You are not educating me on anything new in regards to fighting; and to be clear, I'm also not looking to you for your unsolicited "enlightenment".

I'm not certain who you are talking to when you say, "taking your mad skills out of your dojo and using them on anyone in any context". If that is directed towards me, you don't have a clue about my skillset. Since we don't know each other, it's a big jump for you to assume anything about my training, experience or personal goals as they pertain to the Martial Arts.

All that said, I still fail to see how our recent exchange has anything to do with addressing my original point.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I'd bend my spine as taught in the forms (i.e. last section of Bil jee form) and pick up the $100 bill. Simple, direct, efficient!

Do you know what happens when Cheun Kiu and Biu Ji meet?

Basically, the last inch of a snake strike.

 

[Flying Crane]

It describes the level of legendary beimo fighters and old masters. Doesn't matter if the were or were not chunners.
There is only one footage from beimo fights and it does not show any master level fighters but rather lame blokes who barely know what to do:

The second footage showing the actual level of this times masters is even worse:

So I think I can doubt Wong Shun Leung was beating opponents more skilled than failures.
Submitting 100 BJJ white belts does not make me a BJJ black belt. Submitting 100 BJJ black belts surely does.


There is a lot of good fighters who are not on youtube and do not compete. But it is really strange that a ALL good wing-chun-only fighters avoid youtube and competitions. I am curious why? They are not regular humans? Or maybe they do not exist at all?


Probably not for Nightgreek.


First of all: fighting is only a small part of self defense. Second: I do not see any reason why wing chun fellow should not be able to defend himself against typical street assault. Internet is full of examples untrained people who succesfuly defended themself.


Because all available evidence of pure Wing Chun stylists fighting decent fighters form others styles shows that "pure chunners" cannot fight better than mediocre amateurs.
All chunners who can fight better crosstrain other styles. Especially mentioned above Qi La La who quite well combines orthodox WC with boxing/kickboxing. The "different mentality of boxing" helps them to be improved fighters.
Not QLL but shows what I mean:

Show me something contrary and I will change my mind.

And some people can say that Earth is flat... Jesus...

It is zero sum game. If A deny B, and B deny A only one of them can be true.

Stop crying like a baby. My personal opinion of Wing Chun is that it was designed and created to solve tactical problems in very specific enviroment - small cabins and narrow corridors of red boats. Fighting chest to chest with no place for footwork, body rotations, side steps, head movement. I think it is the only one reasonable answer for question why wing chun looks this way not another.
But somewhere in wing chun history enviromental requirement were lost, the life testing was abandoned and wing chun lost it core. The next generations (like Ip Man and his contemporaries) known the moves but do not understand them because of not testing them on real clashes. They were still trying to earn money teaching people how to fight and they couldn't say to students "sorry, we have no idea what we are doing".
Later the beimo fights against pitifuly weak opponent gave to the next-next chunners generation false conviction about own superiority (techniques, tactic, strategy and training methodology) reinforced in next-next-next generation by lying propaganda of invincible wing chun master Bruce Lee. The result was long loosing streak of chuners from early 90's untill nowadays.
Today many of you understand all weakness of present wing chun and make efforts to make wing chun decent fighting style again, many of you understand that single victorious fight again legit opponent is worth 1000 more than 2000 hours long video rant, but there is a lot of individuals like Nightgreek who make claims, statements, moronic excuses without any track of proof.

I have nothing against wing chun. I simply do not like words without confirmation.

 

[jobo]

a wing chun discusion that ended in insults and acrimony , thats unusual

 

[drop bear]

That seems like an arbitrary response. Likewise, I'm not really sure what gave you the impression that I needed you to clarify for me that there are levels to fighting. Maybe that statement was more for your own affirmation.

You are not educating me on anything new in regards to fighting; and to be clear, I'm also not looking to you for your unsolicited "enlightenment".

I'm not certain who you are talking to when you say, "taking your mad skills out of your dojo and using them on anyone in any context". If that is directed towards me, you don't have a clue about my skillset. Since we don't know each other, it's a big jump for you to assume anything about my training, experience or personal goals as they pertain to the Martial Arts.

All that said, I still fail to see how our recent exchange has anything to do with addressing my original point.

Ok.

So you do understand that there are levels to fighting and you understand that we don't make assumptions without evidence.

So to determine if a school can effectively employ their martial arts in a practical way then there would be evidence that the school has fought somewhere.

This is very important if your school is trying to gauge its ability to transfer its fighting skills. Because without this evidence the school is receiving false feedback.

So the question of (and I am paraphrasing here) yes you win fights but do you fight bums? is actually an incredibly important piece of self reflection to make if you want any sort of realistic assessment of a martial arts schools ability to practically function as a martial art.

And there are wing chun schools addressing this question in a realistic and thoughtful way.

So the suggestion that this question is not only not a vital component to wing chun but not even relevant to wing chun is incorrect.

This is a question that has to be addressed with due diligence by all martial arts if they seek to employ their skills outside their own dojo.

 

[wckf92]

Do you know what happens when Cheun Kiu and Biu Ji meet?

Basically, the last inch of a snake strike.

?
I either missed the point of a joke...or I do not understand what you are saying. haha. I gotta ease back on the drinking!

 

[Lisa lyons]

i am lead to believe from a JKD instructor that WC is just a small part of JKD. Did they not change the wooden dummy forms in JKD? if so how do they differ

 

[yak sao]

i am lead to believe from a JKD instructor that WC is just a small part of JKD. Did they not change the wooden dummy forms in JKD? if so how do they differ

Yeah maybe....but from my perspective I see it as JKD is a small part of WC.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

but from my perspective I see it as JKD is a small part of WC.

If we consider the following striking combo (not sure it exists in JKD or not):

1. Right jab - straight line,
2. Right hook - horizontal to the left,
3. Right back fist - curve forward,
4. Left over hook - vertical downward,
5. Right uppercut - vertical upward
6. Left hook - horizontal to the right.

It includes punches from all different directions. It also include a punch has been changed into 3 different angles (right jab, right hook, right back fist).

Compare this to the WC punches, which one is the superset and which one is the subset?

 

[yak sao]

If we consider the following striking combo (not sure it exists in JKD or not):

1. Right jab - straight line,
2. Right hook - horizontal to the left,
3. Right back fist - curve forward,
4. Left over hook - vertical downward,
5. Right uppercut - vertical upward
6. Left hook - horizontal to the right.

It includes punches from all different directions. It also include a punch has been changed into 3 different angles (right jab, right hook, right back fist).

Compare this to the WC punches, which one is the superset and which one is the subset?

With the exception of the backfist, these punches are present in Wing Tsun.
Some other WC lineages include the backfist.

 

[Flying Crane]

With the exception of the backfist, these punches are present in Wing Tsun.
Some other WC lineages include the backfist.

The backfist was certainly present in the wing Chun that I trained.

 

[geezer]

With the exception of the backfist, these punches are present in Wing Tsun.
Some other WC lineages include the backfist.

Even in WT there are plenty of times when backfist can be used instead of a fak sau or vice versa. It may not be as traditional, but a lot of people use it.

...also, Yak, ya ever notice how the chik-lok-jarn or downward elbow movement (following the hooking punch) in Biu-Tze also can be seen as a short backfist?

 

[yak sao]

Even in WT there are plenty of times when backfist can be used instead of a fak sau or vice versa. It may not be as traditional, but a lot of people use it.

...also, Yak, ya ever notice how the chik-lok-jarn or downward elbow movement (following the hooking punch) in Biu-Tze also can be seen as a short backfist?

I agree that there are places for it and frankly I'm not really even opposed to it under the right circumstances. And like you I see places in the forms that could be seen as a backfist.

I don't specifically care either way but my teacher trained in HK directly from Leung Ting and he said LT insisted there were no backfists in WT.

 

[geezer]

I don't specifically care either way but my teacher trained in HK directly from Leung Ting and he said LT insisted there were no backfists in WT.

Yes, that is what he said to us as well. But he was talking about WT which is his own branch (with the implication that the same was true for Yip Man's Wing Chun as well). Yet so many others also coming out of the Yip Man lineage do use the backfist. Maybe it was borrowed from elsewhere but it can be applied without breaking WT concepts so ...what the heck. If you like it, use it. It certainly adapts to sparring with light gloves more easily than fak-sau.

Or, I suppose I could go through my entire life unquestioningly following arbitrary rules laid down by my old sifu decades ago...