Wing Chun vs MMA

[mograph]

The thread has become quite muddled.

Well, arguably, it's improved since its beginning.

... but it is considerably less witty.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I'm still trying to figure out what Wing Chun has against the Maine Maritime Academy

 

[wckf92]

I'm still trying to figure out what Wing Chun has against the Maine Maritime Academy

I agree...that establishment has never done anything against WC as far as I know. Hahaha

 

[guy b.]

The thread has become quite muddled.

Feel free to de-muddle it with your superior experience and insight.

 

[KPM]

Incredibly unlikely that WSL hollowed the whole WC system out and replaced it with something he thought up all by himself, especially given the complexity, coherence, deep simplicity and effectiveness of the result. I think it is just wing chun, standard method.

Pan Nam Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/l-jpEHsP97w/maxresdefault.jpg

Snake-Crane Lineage:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Nn_a9trnHsg/VcDYK4TxgTI/AAAAAAAAAPw/U2iGcWUF8nU/s1600/tan+sao+1.jpg

KuLo22 Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ejJdNfQdE0Q/maxresdefault.jpg

It seems more likely to me that viewing Tan Sau primarily as a defensive movement is the standard method in ALL Wing Chun....and Weng Chun!

 

[Vajramusti]

Pan Nam Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/l-jpEHsP97w/maxresdefault.jpg

Snake-Crane Lineage:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Nn_a9trnHsg/VcDYK4TxgTI/AAAAAAAAAPw/U2iGcWUF8nU/s1600/tan+sao+1.jpg

KuLo22 Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ejJdNfQdE0Q/maxresdefault.jpg

It seems more likely to me that viewing Tan Sau primarily as a defensive movement is the standard method in ALL Wing Chun....and Weng Chun!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well FWIW while we are expressing opinions and calling some of them when convenient as facts-
my opinions after reading and watching things on this list--
1. Of course tan sao is an important movement-one of the three seeds- tan, fok and bong- from the development of those three seeds-other motions arise to be properly used- provided structure and footwork
are coordinated.
2. WSL was a good fighter but he was not always a good analyst IMO.Joe Frazier was a great boxer but not necessarily a good analyst. WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways. Neither of the two supposedly WSL guys on this list have been directly trained by WSL- so they depend on PB a lot.More dogmatic Gledhills.
3. PB is fast but that is only one attribute. In many videos he quickly rolls. strikes and then predictably just pushes the other fella.
4. He doesn't do much tan sao- because he can't. He has good substitutes- but mechanically imitating PB does not give you much IMO.
5. I have rolled with WSL. He has his limitations.
Any system when poorly executed can have his limitations. You can watch the "sparring" clip of WSL and Cheung- pretty sloppy.
6. We can learn from each other rather than being insecure and assuming that everyone else is wrong
on everything.

 

[guy b.]

1. Of course tan sao is an important movement-one of the three seeds- tan, fok and bong- from the development of those three seeds-other motions arise to be properly used- provided structure and footwork are coordinated.

I agree, and I don't think anyone is disputing this.

2. WSL was a good fighter but he was not always a good analyst IMO.Joe Frazier was a great boxer but not necessarily a good analyst. WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.

Please illustrate with an example

Neither of the two supposedly WSL guys on this list have been directly trained by WSL- so they depend on PB a lot.More dogmatic Gledhills.

All sorts of people train with PB. Speaking personally PB is not the only WSL person I have trained with. I believe the same is true for LFJ.

3. PB is fast but that is only one attribute. In many videos he quickly rolls. strikes and then predictably just pushes the other fella

Post a clip to show what you mean

4. He doesn't do much tan sao- because he can't.

He is using tan all of the time in the clip that wckf92 posted. You would like to see him do more tan? Why exactly?

He has good substitutes- but mechanically imitating PB does not give you much IMO.

What does PB substitute for tan? Who is mechanically imitating PB? Again clips would be useful to pin down what you mean

5. I have rolled with WSL. He has his limitations.

I think everyone has limitations. Which limitations did you think were particularly limiting in the case of WSL?

Any system when poorly executed can have his limitations. You can watch the "sparring" clip of WSL and Cheung- pretty sloppy.

Again post a clip so that we can discuss specifically what you mean

6. We can learn from each other rather than being insecure and assuming that everyone else is wrong
on everything.

I don't think there is a person on this forum who assumes everyone else is wrong on everything. Everyone has at least something to teach. I have learned a lot from you and from KPM for example, and for that I am grateful.

 

[dudewingchun]

Just for the record. I do Chu sau Lei and Chu shong tin. I just really like Duncan Leungs lineage too for the long bridge stuff. You guy think theres no way WSL would of come up with that himself. Well the same for Duncan Leung. One thing WSL doesnt have is body structure.. a bit of hip stuff but thats all. Just put a palm on there face and blitz in seems to be the most common thing iv seen in the lineage.

Whats your guys opinion on David peterson then ? And who has the real WSL wing chun ? cause you are slightly right that was what I learnt on first lesson lol step into a hook with a fuk sao ( not tan ).

The reason he went to Ip man after seeing WSL fight was because WSL did almost zero wing chun. He just threw a kick and chain punched. He wasnt trying to be invicible. He just saw his senior who was supposed to be great look average and not do wing chun at all.

He also entered a tournament and got ko'd. You guys seem to pretend that never happened.

I will try to find the article that WSL did. It mentioned his thoughts on how Ip man taught and how he teaches differently. If anyone knows where to find it cause I cant

Also are you guy.b and LFJ sparring regularly against non wing chun guys ? Just curious.

I really dont care about this though. All this over tan sau now.. first it was jam sau lol Not even going to get started on how we Tan in chu sau lei ( which is my most used and effective hand right now in sparring against my boxing/muay thai sparring partner and its not just for elbow placement....)

 

[guy b.]

Just for the record. I do Chu sau Lei and Chu shong tin. I just really like Duncan Leungs lineage too for the long bridge stuff. You guy think theres no way WSL would of come up with that himself. Well the same for Duncan Leung. One thing WSL doesnt have is body structure.. a bit of hip stuff but thats all. Just put a palm on there face and blitz in seems to be the most common thing iv seen in the lineage.

I think WSL wing chun trains body structure a lot and it is an integral part of the method. It is introduced right after about dan chisau stage has been taken on board and it continues throughout. Most people would be doing it daily, both solo with the pole and via the partner drill.

Whats your guys opinion on David peterson then ? And who has the real WSL wing chun ? cause you are slightly right that was what I learnt on first lesson lol step into a hook with a fuk sao ( not tan )

How would you fook a hook punch? Was it DP that showed you this?

The reason he went to Ip man after seeing WSL fight was because WSL did almost zero wing chun. He just threw a kick and chain punched. He wasnt trying to be invicible. He just saw his senior who was supposed to be great look average and not do wing chun at all.

He also entered a tournament and got ko'd. You guys seem to pretend that never happened.

What does wing chun look like?

In fighting people win and people lose. There is no problem in losing. There is a problem in never trying.

I will try to find the article that WSL did. It mentioned his thoughts on how Ip man taught and how he teaches differently. If anyone knows where to find it cause I cant

I look forward to reading it

Also are you guy.b and LFJ sparring regularly against non wing chun guys ? Just curious.

I trained sport combat MA from early 2000s. VT more important to me now. Of course I test it.

Not even going to get started on how we Tan in chu sau lei ( which is my most used and effective hand right now in sparring against my boxing/muay thai sparring partner and its not just for elbow placement....)

Please do, I would be very interested to hear

 

[drop bear]

No. They violate principles we all agree on, like economy of motion; directness, efficiency, not chasing hands. All these things are agreed upon, but easier said than done, apparently.

In fighting for every rule you make there is an exception. This is because fighting has contradictions you cannot easily control with principles.

 

[guy b.]

In fighting for every rule you make there is an exception. This is because fighting has contradictions you cannot easily control with principles.

Not relevant. The comment is in relation to a Duncan Leung seminar, not a fight, where he is teaching to attack limbs as first line action by the looks of it.

 

[drop bear]

Not relevant. The comment is in relation to a Duncan Leung seminar, not a fight, where he is teaching to attack limbs as first line action by the looks of it.

So he is not teaching something that has relevance to fighting?

 

[geezer]

So he is not teaching something that has relevance to fighting?

In WC, generally speaking--not WSL VT in particular--, you strike directly to the center rather than "chasing hands". The same question, whether to attack limbs or "go direct" is also debated in the FMA circles I frequent. Some advocate first "de-fanging the snake". We do not. In the FMA I practice, like WC, when possible, we "go direct" and "kill the snake".

Of course like all "rules" this is a simplification and has exceptions. We also say "nearest weapon to closest target" ...so if on our way in we encounter a limb first, we hurt it. Of course that is more effective in a weapons based art. In WC we attack to the center. If we encounter an obstructing limb on the way in we move it aside (pak, bong, etc.) or move around it (huen, kau, etc.) or even use it to control and unbalance our opponent opening up a path for the other hand. There are different approaches, but in short, we do not forget that our objective is to strike to the center: Jieu ying, bat jieu sau (Chase center, don't chase hands).

 

[dudewingchun]

I think WSL wing chun trains body structure a lot and it is an integral part of the method. It is introduced right after about dan chisau stage has been taken on board and it continues throughout. Most people would be doing it daily, both solo with the pole and via the partner drill.



How would you fook a hook punch? Was it DP that showed you this?



What does wing chun look like?

In fighting people win and people lose. There is no problem in losing. There is a problem in never trying.



I look forward to reading it



I trained sport combat MA from early 2000s. VT more important to me now. Of course I test it.



Please do, I would be very interested to hear

Well thats good. Wing chun without structure is nothing imo.

It was a high fuk sao that wsl does in his chum kiu ? after the 3 turns, where both your hands extend out then do that movement that alot take for an arm break.. if that makes sense. No I have never met David Peterson. It was a student of Darren Elvey.

Not throwing a kick and just chain punching... I know its impossible to not get hit ofcourse but I would much rather not get hit as much as possible.
I agree. But everyone claims that WSL was " The king of talking hands". Infact I just searched WSL beimo and this came up on the article " What I learned through beimo".

"" sifu Wong is said to have never lost a fight, and most witnesses claim that the majority of exchanges took no more than three techniques to determine his victory. "
But he got ko'd in a tournament fight by someone who was actually skilled. But who cares. Lets just agree to disagree.

Just watch a video Alan has done on it. I highly doubt you will agree but I dont care because it works for me. I only come on the forum when im bored really. Its kind of annoying you cant edit or delete posts because im always changing my opinion on something and it really is just a snapshot of what I was thinking that moment.

To be clear I have nothing against any lineage of wing chun ( except maybe William cheung and Leung ting...) A WSL guy was the first to open my eyes to good wing chun aswell. I met up with him who was an ex classmate of my old school Lo man Kam/Ip ching wing chun . I couldnt do anythnig against him in chi sao. Same as with Chu shong tin and Chu Sau Lei.. Iv touched hands only one time with a william cheung guy and really wasnt impressed.

here is the article. Its on facebook though so have to click next picture to get the next page of article.

Mario Bonafe - Grand Master Wong Shun Leung | Facebook

 

[yak sao]

In WC, generally speaking--not WSL VT in particular--, you strike directly to the center rather than "chasing hands". The same question, whether to attack limbs or "go direct" is also debated in the FMA circles I frequent. Some advocate first "de-fanging the snake". We do not. In the FMA I practice, like WC, when possible, we "go direct" and "kill the snake".

Of course like all "rules" this is a simplification and has exceptions. We also say "nearest weapon to closest target" ...so if on our way in we encounter a limb first, we hurt it. Of course that is more effective in a weapons based art. In WC we attack to the center. If we encounter an obstructing limb on the way in we move it aside (pak, bong, etc.) or move around it (huen, kau, etc.) or even use it to control and unbalance our opponent opening up a path for the other hand. There are different approaches, but in short, we do not forget that our objective is to strike to the center: Jieu ying, bat jieu sau (Chase center, don't chase hands).

Agreed, but I would add that a good gaun sau hurts like a son of a b!tch

 

[LFJ]

WSL was a good fighter but he was not always a good analyst

WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.

I have rolled with WSL. He has his limitations.

Vague sideswipes again.

You see the previous page where people posted videos and described in detail why they agree or disagree with specific things? Yeah? That's how constructive conversation is done. You might try it.

It appears you care more about building your image though, by making these vague criticisms but never giving details, lest it be revealed that after decades of training you lack any real substance.

He doesn't do much tan sao- because he can't.

Can't? That's about the stupidest thing you've said in a while.

Neither of the two supposedly WSL guys on this list have been directly trained by WSL- so they depend on PB a lot.

My, how presumptuous of you to declare who I train/ed with. Who are you again? How do we know each other? You're wrong, btw.

 

[LFJ]

You guy think theres no way WSL would of come up with that himself. Well the same for Duncan Leung.

One guy couldn't have come up with the idea of whacking arms with taan-sau?? That takes generations?!

Just put a palm on there face and blitz in seems to be the most common thing iv seen in the lineage.

You've seen a poor example of the lineage, IMO. Another thing they do is grab each other's necks and waltz around the room together, as if that accomplished anything.

Whats your guys opinion on David peterson then ? And who has the real WSL wing chun ? cause you are slightly right that was what I learnt on first lesson lol step into a hook with a fuk sao ( not tan ).

Those were mainstream sort of ideas shown at public seminars. WSL always said "just for show" or "maybe YOU can do it", lol. His longterm, legit students don't do that because it doesn't work. I've said before, IMO, quality WSLVT is based in Northern Europe. Several German direct students of his, including PB as the most well-known, all share the same thinking.

The reason he went to Ip man after seeing WSL fight was because WSL did almost zero wing chun. He just threw a kick and chain punched. He wasnt trying to be invicible. He just saw his senior who was supposed to be great look average and not do wing chun at all.

Alan Orr deals with this exact criticism all the time. As a student of his, you should know better. He shakes his head at people expecting to see basic drills and fantasy-fu like trapping hands in free fighting. "It's just kickboxing, not Wing Chun!" VT is a Chinese kickboxing style, albeit with very unique and highly refined strategies. Kicking and punching is what you should expect to see. Show me an Iron Wolves fight where they aren't just punching and kicking, and using BJJ...

This just shows that DL was stuck at a basic level and didn't understand how VT was supposed to work in free fighting, not like basic abstract drills.

He also entered a tournament and got ko'd. You guys seem to pretend that never happened.

I don't. But the only source I've seen for that is something that was written about Bruce Lee some 40+ years after the alleged event. No other record can be found, but I'm not afraid to admit he lost more than one fight.

Unlike his fanboys (like the lineage you encountered) who like to claim he was undefeated, I think that's a stupid claim. If he beat everyone he ever fought within three punches, that suggests he never faced any tough competition. If he lost or took hits, that means he did, and that gave him experience to learn from.

Fact is, none of his wins or losses can be proven. All that is known for sure, through various eyewitness accounts, is that he fought regularly. Regardless of the outcome, this undoubtedly gave him more insight into what works and what doesn't. Unlike those students of YM who never had a fight in their lives!

I will try to find the article that WSL did. It mentioned his thoughts on how Ip man taught and how he teaches differently.

All he said about the dummy was that he taught it in different stages, with BJ taught in the middle before completing the set. He didn't change any of the actions, nor did he change it from a sticking device to something else. You imagined that yourself.

Also are you guy.b and LFJ sparring regularly against non wing chun guys ? Just curious.

It's far more rare that I spar against other Wing Chun guys, as there aren't that many in my area. I mostly deal with Sanda fighters and other TCMAs.

All this over tan sau now.. first it was jam sau

They are two sides of a double edge sword. Can't be separated.

 

[LFJ]

WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.

I'm intrigued by this. It's news to me. I wonder where you got this idea. Can you give examples showing how we interpret the efficiency principle in two different ways, or loosely?

When I talk about seeing inefficiency and indirectness in other Wing Chun, I'm referring to the most common mistakes I see. That is, using two arms to perform what could be accomplished by one, and using two or more steps where one is enough.

This is done because they don't have methods of using a single arm for simultaneous attack and defense (no taan/jam elbow), so they either have to use two arms or multiple steps.

Directness and efficiency are always defined by us as using as few steps and tools as it takes to do the job. In what other way do you think we interpret them? Or are you saying you think our definition is loose and YOU can interpret it differently? I think the definition is pretty straightforward.

 

[guy b.]

I'm intrigued by this. It's news to me. I wonder where you got this idea. Can you give examples showing how we interpret the efficiency principle in two different ways, or loosely?

Good luck with that

 

[guy b.]

Well thats good. Wing chun without structure is nothing imo.

Why did you think that WSL VT doesn't have a training method for power and structure? What does CSL wing chun do differently and better in your view? You were quite definite about this so I would be interested to hear.

It was a high fuk sao that wsl does in his chum kiu ? after the 3 turns, where both your hands extend out then do that movement that alot take for an arm break.. if that makes sense.

Doesn't really make sense to me, but I have no way of knowing what they showed. I think as LFJ said probably a seminar type application. Doesn't sound representative of WSL VT

No I have never met David Peterson. It was a student of Darren Elvey.

Seems a small sample upon which to make a decision about the method

Not throwing a kick and just chain punching... I know its impossible to not get hit ofcourse but I would much rather not get hit as much as possible.
I agree. But everyone claims that WSL was " The king of talking hands". Infact I just searched WSL beimo and this came up on the article " What I learned through beimo".

"" sifu Wong is said to have never lost a fight, and most witnesses claim that the majority of exchanges took no more than three techniques to determine his victory. "
But he got ko'd in a tournament fight by someone who was actually skilled. But who cares. Lets just agree to disagree.

I don't know about WSL getting ko'd in a fight, never seen any evidence. Have you? If he did then no big deal, I think most good fighters have been ko'd, chocked unconscious, or otherwise overwhelmed at some point. It happens. If it doesn't then chances are you aren't testing yourself enough. Testing is how you improve.

Just watch a video Alan has done on it. I highly doubt you will agree but I dont care because it works for me.

I have watched some videos of Alan and have been to is school in London. Also trained mma with some of his guys and of course asked about VT. When I try to describe what I think Alan is doing KPM generally says I have it wrong. Since you are training directly with Alan it would be useful if you could help me to understand the structure training and how you feel it differs from other approaches.

I only come on the forum when im bored really. Its kind of annoying you cant edit or delete posts because im always changing my opinion on something and it really is just a snapshot of what I was thinking that moment.

You can edit if you do it fairly quickly after posting

Mario Bonafe - Grand Master Wong Shun Leung | Facebook

Yes I have read this interview before. WSL is saying that YM liked to have favourites, liked to be cryptic, didn't care if students understood or not, liked intelligence and curiosity over financial reward. He is also saying that he teaches differently treating all the same. It is true that when he taught, whether at seminar or in classes, he was a fair and open teacher by all accounts. But I think you will find that the material covered varied depending on venue. I have heard that he was also keen not to cause offence or embarrassment.