Wing Chun effective in the 21st century?

[Bob Hubbard]

I've seen a few threads on other forums concerning the idea that in todays world, especially the more modern societies, that Wing Chun is no longer an effective art.

Having seen concepts from WC in Modern Arnis, EPAK and more, I personally have to disagree.

That said, what is your thoughts?

Is Wing Chun still a viable system, or has its time come and gone?

 

[Kirk]

With the exception of how Fist Of Fury does it, I'd say it's highly
effective

 

[leehoicheun]

anyone who says that Wing Chun is not effective in today's world obviously doesn't know ANYTHING about Wing Chun. Either that or they had VERY poor instruction.

it's always the same thing....... people keep trying to put systems down when they know nothing about the system they are bad mouthing.... usually to promote what THEY do to get you to switch over and send the money to THEM instead.

hhhhmmmmm food for thought.

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Kaith Rustaz
Having seen concepts from WC in Modern Arnis, EPAK and more

Most notably JKD, which certainly has a large following that considers it very effective--at least as they have modified it.

I find the upper body concepts of WC (as I understand them) still good, as long as trapping is not considered a primary approach but rather a backup plan; but the footwork seems too static to me. That's what I would consider to be its weakness.

 

[leehoicheun]

to answer your footwork concern.

there are several lineages of Wing Chun that have a different take on foot work. Taditional and classical (modified). The major difference in the two being in the footwork. Traditional WC has a lot of it

Traditonal Wing Chun almost NEVER stays on the attacking line and always opts to get off and avoid the attacking power where as a lot of classical schools do not move off the attacking line and instead try to disolve the energy using center axis rotation. The problem with this "staying on the line" approuch is that it leaves you VERY vulnerable to being taken to the ground.

 

[The 14th Style]

Having seen concepts from WC in Modern Arnis, EPAK and more, I personally have to disagree.

I agree, It seems very effective to me.
I have a friend here in New Mexico that teaches Wing Chun. And I train with him whenever I can. I see a lot of similarities between Wing Chun concepts and Eskrima concepts

there are several lineages of Wing Chun that have a different take on foot work. Taditional and classical (modified). The major difference in the two being in the footwork. Traditional WC has a lot of it

Not sure which style my friend Phil teaches, but he emphasizes footwork a whole lot. Last week we worked on the triangle quite a bit, which is funny for me because it's so similar to what I learned from my Eskrima teacher.

 

[Gwailao]

Weather you consider it "traditional" or not, you generally move off the attacking line, usually in varying degrees depending on your skill level. Personally i dont care for the whole traditional or classical BS, if you can fight then you can fight. All the yelling and screaming about whats real or not is just crap and makes me think all you want is the recognition that you didnt earn legit, and the money that comes with all the mag covers.

 

[fist of fury]

Originally posted by Kirk
With the exception of how Fist Of Fury does it, I'd say it's highly
effective

So my dropping on the ground in a fetal position and crying like a little girl with a skinned knee isn't effective?

 

[leehoicheun]

Gwailao

please note that I did no say that either was the better of the two. I personally find great things in both. Like I always say to my friends "It's all Wing Chun." That statement means I do not use either to "make money" as you assumed.

Legitimacy is not the issue here. A question was asked and an answer was given. please stick to the subject matter.

 

[fist of fury]

I agree that it lies with the instructor. A punch is a punch, a kick is a kick, etc... this hasn't changed. If you can't use your WC today then the problem is with your instructor.

 

[Gwailao]

i didnt name any names there lee, so dont take it so personal. just the defining of the difference between "traditional" and "classical", or "modified" or whatever people call it today. wing chun is wing chun, even in the same lines things can look or be accented different by different practitioners. Not every tech works the same exact way for everyone, and some may perfer this to that. I never claimed one is better then the other, just the student and teacher can make that difference. I just dont care for people having to make their own labels for it all, or to discredit someone and promote him/her self. reminds me of the whole east coast west rap war or something.

 

[leehoicheun]

too many poeple pitting wing chun vs ving tsun vs... whatever. It's all wing chun and it's all good..... and bad.

 

[celtic bhoy]

My Sifu teaches classical Wing Chun and I garantee the style is effective in any era.

I had boxing experience before beginning Wing Chun, but let me tell you when I first started I would have had difficulty in hitting my sifu with a handful of pebbles.

My sifu is well in his 60's.

Effective?..............Absolutely!!

 

[Phil Elmore]

Wing Chun: Effective Close Combat

 

[someguy]

Here's a tought for you. It was developed in a time where guns where already in existance. Wing chun was developed after it could have been used to its full effect on the battle feild. Wing chun tends to go more for the use of bare hands( I know there are butterfly sword and staff forms) as such it would not be as effective in a fight hand to hand as say a style based on fighting with a common close range wepond used on the battle field at that time. As such it was developed in a manner that still applies a large amount to todays world. I'll try to explain that a bit more clearly when i'm not about to go to class. Hope it makes some sense.

 

[arnisador]

I wonder if people would say that Jun Fan Gung Fu is more effective for the 21st century than Wing Chun is?

 

[MA-Caver]

Originally posted by fist of fury
So my dropping on the ground in a fetal position and crying like a little girl with a skinned knee isn't effective?

:rofl: That always worked for me when I was a kid whenever I got jumped on by a bully in school but then I grew up and developed the bane of every-man's existence... an ego, so I can't do that anymore .

 

[leehoicheun]

I wonder if people would say that Jun Fan Gung Fu is more effective for the 21st century than Wing Chun is?

to answer this I will cut right to the chase. At our Wing Chun Academy we have two instructors BOTH taught by Guru Dan Inosanto. They teach Jun Fan Gung Fu and Jeet Kune Do as well as kali-Escrima. On a regular basis I hear Both Sifu's pay MUCH respect to the power and effectiveness of Wing Chun.

What people have to understand is that Bruce Lee created Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do because his Wing Chun training was never complete. He left Hong Kong long before her could finish his training.

With that said, I think any martial artist/scientist would search to fill in the gaps. This is exactly what Bruce Lee did.

I recently had the chance to train with Guru Dan Inosanto and the things he tells you are enlightneing to say the least.

So to sum up....... a big PHAT..... NOPE! Jun Fan is effective....... YES...... but no more effective then Wing Chun.

Thanks for listening.

Ami To Fo:asian:

 

[someguy]

Well that also depends on the system of wing chun.
If you prove me wrong on that cool. Then I will have to make my self right by creating yet another systme of wing chun that will be absolutly horrible. the opening stance for a form willl be fetal position.