Wing Chun vs MMA

[geezer]

Now for something a bit more random. Check out these two "brothers by a different mother." Never knew WSL had an American cousin.

WSL:
http://www.vingtsun-trainer.de/sites/default/files/ving_tsun_kung_fu_kungfu_trainer.jpg

Charles Bronson:
http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...047/t/5457c3d2e4b0633d101e3451/1415037906512/

 

[LFJ]

David Peterson lineage through Darren Elvey.

First time I tried what I learnt at WSL i ran into a hook.. aswell as every other time.. When I try Duncan Leungs stuff I dont get hit.. Wonder why !

Well, that's one lineage that teaches people to walk into hooks with a taan-sau, so...

I dont agree at all with your thoughts on Duncan Leungs wing chun. ALL of his students were paying for opium money.. including WSL and mate if I was an opium addict id actually value students who paid a fuckton more then someone who paid pittens.. You appreciate people who can get you drugs. Duncan paid alot which = more drugs which= Happy Ip man which= good tuition if thats the logic we are going on.

All I can do is look at the kind of things he teaches. His money could have gotten him more time, but that doesn't say anything about what he was actually taught during that time. For that, we have to examine what he teaches.

You really seriously think WSL is the only person who got taught right ? If he was so efficient why would Duncan go to quit wing chun after watching him fight in real life. (one of the "beimos" WSL guys like to talk about but never mention he got ko'd in an actual tournament by one kick ) Why would he say " he just kicks and punches" " hits but get hit" .

I just see basic VT principles violated by what others teach. What am I to assume?

Getting hit is the nature of fighting. Which fighter has never taken a hit? I didn't witness WSL's fights and can't prove wins or losses, but I would be glad to say he lost more than one. That means he faced tough competition. That's how you learn and improve. It's stupid to want to quit because someone got hit. Duncan doesn't sound like a very realistic person if invincibility is what he was looking for.

The thing about the dummy is something that came out of wsl mouth on an article he did. Maybe it is wrong Idk.

Source? Saying it's a mistake to stick to the dummy, doesn't mean he changed anything. That means those who stick to it don't know what they're doing.

I respect Duncan Leung alot because from what iv seen and heard from him he is a no ********, straight to the point. His stuff iv learnt a bit of works quite well when I spar

He appears much more aggressive than others, I'll give him that. But does it violate many VT principles, I think so. Can things still be made to work when violating VT principles? Of course, like the many other martial arts. But they aren't proper VT, are they?

 

[geezer]

...He appears much more aggressive than others, I'll give him that. But does it violate many VT principles, I think so. Can things still be made to work when violating VT principles? Of course, like the many other martial arts. But they aren't proper VT, are they?

See. This is why people get ticked-off. You are so quick to pronounce other branches of WC "right" or "wrong", using terms like "violating VT principles". I get the same attitude from a lot of TWC guys and WT guys. Their way is always right. Sounds bloody arrogant.

A more modest position would be to point out that other methods violate the principles of your VT, as you understand it. But honestly, who are you (or any of us) to make sweeping judgements about WC/VT/WT in general?

BTW I have no opinion on Duncan Leung's VT. I don't know anything about it. And I do have strong opinions about what is effective WC/VT and what isn't. Really, it boils down to expressing opinions with humility and respect. Can't you see my point?

...Or do you want to be the "Donald" of the forum.

 

[LFJ]

See. This is why people get ticked-off. You are so quick to pronounce other branches of WC "right" or "wrong", using terms like "violating VT principles". I get the same attitude from a lot of TWC guys and WT guys. Their way is always right. Sounds bloody arrogant.

A more modest position would be to point out that other methods violate the principles of your VT, as you understand it. But honestly, who are you (or any of us) to make sweeping judgements about WC/VT/WT in general?

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.

 

[geezer]

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.

It would have been helpful if you had stated that. Those are points we could all agree on.

 

[LFJ]

It would have been helpful if you had stated that. Those are points we could all agree on.

That's what I was talking about with the DCS method. Same point I made on the HKM thread. And I think the same violations show up in their free fighting techniques. DL lineage seems to like to attack the arms a lot, then turn to the person. Limb destruction is a valid tactic, but in other TCMAs.

 

[guy b.]

I said "show me" not "tell me". I provided videos of White Crane so that anyone could watch and decide if it looked similar to Wing Chun for themselves. Where are the videos of this "Rooster fighting" so that people can do the same?

Your idea of similarity is a superficial one though based on what you perceive to be similar looking bits and pieces of arm movements.

The fact that it functions in a completely different way to wing chun, both mechanically and conceptually, has been pointed out to you and yet you have ignored it for some reason.

 

[wckf92]

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.

No biggie...lots of WC/WT/VT violates these...even the PB folks. This is based on how each of us define subjective things.
And again, everything hinges on the "why" and "how" and definitions etc behind their training, drilling...
Obviously, WSLVT thinks they train DCS for X reasons, while others train it for Y reasons. Who cares?
Like I said earlier, I learn a lot about others' WC from reading these forums; and that is a good thing. I disagree on a lot of it, but I'm not going to attempt to sway others' opinions one way or another.
I'm not going to comment on WSLVT chi sau because I've never personally experienced it...but from watching video clips I see a gap or flaw in their methodology which violates the above mentioned principles. Again, who cares. They firmly believe they are doing it right, just as I think my way is right.
DL's first form tan sao's...there are more than three, and each one trains a different aspect of the Tan shape.
DL's DCS, haven't seen that clip in a long time but if he pulls, the pull is down and back, not straight back like some / most do. Again he has his reasons for it, which are based on his ideas on why DCS is done that way and what attributes he is training. DCS is not fighting. It is simply a drill.
Sorry for the rant gents...its early... now carry on!

 

[wckf92]

I respect Duncan Leung alot because from what iv seen and heard from him he is a no ********, straight to the point. His stuff iv learnt a bit of works quite well when I spar. When I try Duncan Leungs stuff I dont get hit.. Wonder why !

Awesome dude!

 

[guy b.]

No biggie...lots of WC/WT/VT violates these...even the PB folks. This is based on how each of us define subjective things.
And again, everything hinges on the "why" and "how" and definitions etc behind their training, drilling...
Obviously, WSLVT thinks they train DCS for X reasons, while others train it for Y reasons. Who cares?

Reasons are both interesting and important. Reasons make the system what it is. Why not discuss these reasons?

I'm not going to comment on WSLVT chi sau because I've never personally experienced it...but from watching video clips I see a gap or flaw in their methodology which violates the above mentioned principles. Again, who cares. They firmly believe they are doing it right, just as I think my way is right.

I care. Please let me know. If you are correct then I will have a lot to think about.

DCS is not fighting. It is simply a drill.
Sorry for the rant gents...its early... now carry on!

Why drill if not important in some way?

 

[LFJ]

I'm not going to comment on WSLVT chi sau because I've never personally experienced it...but from watching video clips I see a gap or flaw in their methodology which violates the above mentioned principles. Again, who cares.

I care! Because sometimes we can't see flaws in what we do and need someone to point it out. I would love to hear someone pick it apart, either from experience with it, or just from their perspective and what they perceive.

Most often though, people say they respect WSLVT and acknowledge that it's a good lineage, even if they do things differently. Rarely do I hear an honest critique of its possible negatives. And when I do, it's usually against those I also disagree with (the guys with application-based thinking).

You say you see PB guys violating directness, efficiency, or chasing hands? There are tons of videos from this lineage. Can you point out what you're referring to?

To do my own work, this is an example of what I mean from DL lineage.

At :48 he shows turning completely sideways and chopping a round kick with his lead arm. Then he turns the other way and chops the guy's arm. In neither case is he attacking the person at the same time or even facing them. He's facing and attacking the limb. Throughout the clip you'll see this common tactic where they attack the limbs first, then the person.

This is not direct, not efficient, and is limb chasing to the extreme. If it's in such severe violation of basic VT principles that make the system, it can't be considered VT proper anymore. As I said, limb destruction is a valid tactic, but in other TCMAs, or at least not like this in VT.

However, I think chopping kicks like that only works in training when they have those bulky shin and forearm guards. For real, against a strong kicker, shin vs forearm, that's a broken ulna.

 

[guy b.]

in Siu nim tao there are 3 tan saos each done differently.. so in WSL they are all just for elbow positioning ?

Yes

Seems a bit silly.

Why do you think it sounds silly? Sounds consistent to me. Also sounds unlikely to be made up by someone who misunderstood what they were taught.

Meanwhile Duncan Leung who is an actual private disciple of Ip man has the first one for elbow power ( can someone from D.L lineage correct any of my mistakes ! ) a whipping tan sao and dont remember the idea for the 3rd one.

Sounds like someone I learned VT from when I first made the switch from other wing chun to WSL. They were a seminar and second hand learner mostly. They didn't understand the thinking and so they made things up to explain certain actions. Three tans three energies/applications is what this person taught. Later I learned differently.

So I guess Ip man taught his actual private disciple who paid more then anyone to learn from him in private the wrong way ? Highly doubt it.

Open your eyes, look at the results. This is all anyone can do

I read that WSL even changed the dummy so your arms dont stick to it from his fighting experience.. wouldnt it be likely to be the same with tan sao ?

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.

 

[guy b.]

I dont agree at all with your thoughts on Duncan Leungs wing chun. ALL of his students were paying for opium money.. including WSL and mate if I was an opium addict id actually value students who paid a fuckton more then someone who paid pittens.. You appreciate people who can get you drugs. Duncan paid alot which = more drugs which= Happy Ip man which= good tuition if thats the logic we are going on.

There is record of YM's teaching method.

You really seriously think WSL is the only person who got taught right ? If he was so efficient why would Duncan go to quit wing chun after watching him fight in real life. (one of the "beimos" WSL guys like to talk about but never mention he got ko'd in an actual tournament by one kick ) Why would he say " he just kicks and punches" " hits but get hit" .

WSL is a person who appears to have received a lot or all of the system. This is evidenced by the lack of contradiction and adherence to concepts in his method. WSL method is not invincible, it is just good real kung fu. This makes it valuable compared to other wing chun I have seen. Other people might also have YM's kung fu. I don't know who they are and if they exist at all, but then I have not seen all wing chun.

The above quotes make Duncal Leung look a bit stupid. Or maybe he was just young and inexperienced- who knows. Fighting tends to involve getting punched.

Maybe someone who actually does Duncan Leung lineage can comment about the Dan Chi sao.

The thing about the dummy is something that came out of wsl mouth on an article he did. Maybe it is wrong Idk. You guys strike and get hit alot too ( or I guess I havent seen the real WSL wing chun right ? )

What did WSL say about the dummy? Please provide a link. Fighting involves getting hit including fighting with wing chun.

I respect Duncan Leung alot because from what iv seen and heard from him he is a no ********, straight to the point. His stuff iv learnt a bit of works quite well when I spar ( I actually test my wing chun every week and you learn what works fast) First time I tried what I learnt at WSL i ran into a hook.. aswell as every other time.. When I try Duncan Leungs stuff I dont get hit.. Wonder why !

Maybe it is lack of understanding or inability to make WSL approach work? It isn't easy. Or maybe Duncan Leung approach is better. Let experience be your guide and follow the path that you think is correct.

Most wing chun guys cant fight unfortunately.

This is true

 

[wckf92]

Reasons are both interesting and important. Reasons make the system what it is. Why not discuss these reasons? I care. Please let me know. If you are correct then I will have a lot to think about. Why drill if not important in some way?

Hi Guy. Yes, I agree, drills are important. I did not mean to imply they are not. My point is each of us have different ideas on what is important or why it is important. Thx.

 

[wckf92]

I care! Because sometimes we can't see flaws in what we do and need someone to point it out. I would love to hear someone pick it apart, either from experience with it, or just from their perspective and what they perceive.
You say you see PB guys violating directness, efficiency, or chasing hands? There are tons of videos from this lineage. Can you point out what you're referring to?

Quite true! This is always a wise course of action, and a humble one IMO. I will try to find a video to illustrate...but its hard to find videos of PB actually moving slow enough! haha...he seems pretty fast!

To do my own work, this is an example of what I mean from DL lineage.

At :48 he shows turning completely sideways and chopping a round kick with his lead arm. Then he turns the other way and chops the guy's arm. In neither case is he attacking the person at the same time or even facing them. He's facing and attacking the limb. Throughout the clip you'll see this common tactic where they attack the limbs first, then the person.

This is not direct, not efficient, and is limb chasing to the extreme. If it's in such severe violation of basic VT principles that make the system, it can't be considered VT proper anymore. As I said, limb destruction is a valid tactic, but in other TCMAs, or at least not like this in VT.

However, I think chopping kicks like that only works in training when they have those bulky shin and forearm guards. For real, against a strong kicker, shin vs forearm, that's a broken ulna.

Thanks for doing the work on your end. I've no comment on the clip you posted. I completely agree with you that turning sideways like that (eyes) doesn't seem smart...I was trained to always keep eyes on the bad guy. (I'm thinking of that Bruce Lee scene haha...."never take your eyes off your opponent...even when you bow". But, I digress...

So, I'm headed to the airport in a few minutes but to get some discussion going...here is what popped up on youtube with a quick search for Philip bayer...

I see this all the time, from most everyone's WC/WT/VT but as we are discussing supposed violations of intrinsic principles...watch what happens at the :52 mark. Again, I do not wish to descend into an argument about who is right or wrong...but if PB's VT is "proper" (your word), then why does his hand retract and chase upstairs? Why wouldn't his limb/body/strategy follow the adage "follow what goes" at that moment and punch that dude right in the gut? IMO he just violated the very reasons you stated above to toss "proper VT" out into the cold.
Now, like I said...it is a matter of perspective on all accounts...you, me, anyone could just as easily scratch up videos from probably most chunners out there who do the same thing.

Same thing here:

They begin in chi sau drill/range...then, when one of them retreats and/or creates a gap or loses pressure...a step back and kick is being drilled.

Anyway, l already regret my post (168) because I knew it would generate / necessitate further descriptive responses which is something I'm not that good at. But, hopefully you can kind of see what I mean...if WC is supposed to be "direct" and "not chasing hands"...then...
Gotta run for now...gotta catch a plane ride...be back on via cell later...peace my brothers from other mothers!

 

[wckf92]

Let experience be your guide and follow the path that you think is correct.

Yep! That's all any of us can do...

 

[guy b.]

I see this all the time, from most everyone's WC/WT/VT but as we are discussing supposed violations of intrinsic principles...watch what happens at the :52 mark. Again, I do not wish to descend into an argument about who is right or wrong...but if PB's VT is "proper" (your word), then why does his hand retract and chase upstairs? Why wouldn't his limb/body/strategy follow the adage "follow what goes" at that moment and punch that dude right in the gut?

He bounces the opponent away (removes obstruction to hitting from his arm) and punches into space. Punching straight from where hand was would hit the same obstruction which was still close. I think it maybe could have been done better with bigger bounce and more direct step in and hit but I think it is in line with VT concepts. Bear in mind that PB is not perfect, would not claim to be perfect, and anyone can make mistakes. He often corrects himself in training or demoing.. Chi/Gor sau is a training methodology. Fighting is fighting. And VT is difficult!

Anyone that expects their teacher to execute everything perfectly every time is in for a disappointing life. Knowing what you did wrong and being able to identify it in yourself and others is the important thing. VT doesn't have masters who must be revered and must never be seen to do something that could have been done better. We are all here to question and test each other so that we all might improve.

They begin in chi sau drill/range...then, when one of them retreats and/or creates a gap or loses pressure...a step back and kick is being drilled.

They are stepping to angle off the line of a kick, then kicking back along a new line. I think this is in line with VT concepts and don't see any problem with this one.

Anyway, l already regret my post (168) because I knew it would generate / necessitate further descriptive responses which is something I'm not that good at. But, hopefully you can kind of see what I mean...if WC is supposed to be "direct" and "not chasing hands"...then...

I don't regret your post and think you are fine at describing what you mean. It is great to have someone critique VT from outside because it means we have to think about it. I think I agree that PB could have moved better in the first clip you identified, but I think that what he intended to do was in line with VT concepts. I look forward to hearing what LFJ thinks about it, whether he thinks I am talking crap, or whether he agrees. It isn't something I am going to take personally.

Enjoy your flight.

 

[LFJ]

watch what happens at the :52 mark. Again, I do not wish to descend into an argument about who is right or wrong...but if PB's VT is "proper" (your word), then why does his hand retract and chase upstairs? Why wouldn't his limb/body/strategy follow the adage "follow what goes" at that moment and punch that dude right in the gut? IMO he just violated the very reasons you stated above to toss "proper VT" out into the cold.

I think I'm having trouble seeing what you're seeing. They are just rolling, exchanging force as per usual with changes from outside to inside. Then basic seung-ma vs teui-ma drill as PB pressures in with his left to check for correct jam vs taan elbow, angle, alignment, footwork, etc.. Following, PB does inside paak + punch. It's responded to with "wrong" bong and immediately jat-da. PB goes to bong + wu and they continue.

Where does he retract and chase upstairs? Chase what? Do you mean after paak with the right he should do a gut punch from there? The arm is already extended and from that angle a body shot would be weak and a poor trade for a punch to the face, so the hand is swiftly recovered to wu position behind bong. I fail to see what principle has been violated.

Keep in mind, these drills are abstract and mutual. If you look at the rolling as trying to feel intent and get strikes on each other, you completely miss the point of exchanging force to mutually check each other's alignments and ability to handle force and respond correctly at each stage as the speed increases.

Sometimes we hit or even allow ourselves to be hit to show whether or not the partner is making the correct lines and force. It's for individual development of VT structures and behaviors in practice with a partner, not just offense/defense with a confrontational mindset. It's like live dummy training. We are using each other, but the focus is on controlling our own behaviors, not fighting an opponent. Abstract and mutual, see? PB is helping his student. If you look at the rolling and exchanging in this light, you might come away with a different understanding of what you're looking at.

They begin in chi sau drill/range...then, when one of them retreats and/or creates a gap or loses pressure...a step back and kick is being drilled.

It's a kicking drill. As guy b. said, they are drilling footwork, distance, timing... Footwork to get off line of the first kick but at the right distance and angle, and timing to deliver a kick in return. Unlike some teach, we don't want to block kicks with the hands. WSLVT is highly mobile and uses this to manage range, rather than walking into round punches with a taan-sau or blocking kicks with the hands. Don't want to end up like this guy below? Move your butt and keep your hands away from kicks!

 

[Vajramusti]

The thread has become quite muddled.

 

[LFJ]

The thread has become quite muddled.

It's valuable discussion which you've added nothing to with your pointless one-liners.

Either add your value or... well, I'm not forum police. Don't let me stop your whining.