Wing Chun vs MMA

[Juany118]

So we are back to the system and not the individual.

Ok. People fight how they train. Does that mean you do simulated eye gouges in the street or do you do real eye gouges in the class room.

Another classic paradox again.

Not really. Why? Look at the systems Holistically. Wing Chun, as an example, has Chin Na incorporated into, which can be used to take down people BUT it doesn't have the breadth of take downs, nor the ground fighting training that MMA does. So the maneuvers I note are more simply a counter balance to the more expansive training in grappling/ground fighting an MMA has at there disposal, used to potentially escape from the strength of another art. Whether it helps you to escape, comes down to who is better at exercising the opposing technique.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Well in my experience, people who really train, fight like they train. The MMA trainers in my area train competition MMA so no eye gouging, just like in the octagon

Ok. People fight how they train. Does that mean you do simulated eye gouges in the street or do you do real eye gouges in the class room.

Another classic paradox again.

The way I deal with this is to train simulated eye gouges, groin slaps, etc but I drill them within the same structure that I use to apply real strikes, throws, etc in sparring. If I were to ever have to use these techniques in a real fight this should maximize my odds of actually pulling them off for real. Even if I were to fail, I would still be operating within the same control structure that I know helps protect me from damage and allows me to execute the techniques that I have successfully applied to resisting opponents hundreds of times.

The last couple of times I met with @yak sao I showed him some of the drills I use to practice eye gouges, head butts, elbows, groin strikes, and the like. You can ask him what his opinion is of my approach from a Wing Tsun perspective.

 

[Juany118]

The way I deal with this is to train simulated eye gouges, groin slaps, etc but I drill them within the same structure that I use to apply real strikes, throws, etc in sparring. If I were to ever have to use these techniques in a real fight this should maximize my odds of actually pulling them off for real. Even if I were to fail, I would still be operating within the same control structure that I know helps protect me from damage and allows me to execute the techniques that I have successfully applied to resisting opponents hundreds of times.

The last couple of times I met with @yak sao I showed him some of the drills I use to practice eye gouges, head butts, elbows, groin strikes, and the like. You can ask him what his opinion is of my approach from a Wing Tsun perspective.

And this is kinda where I have been heading, it's not about the specific art butnthe practitioner. If you want to fight real world you sometimes have to go outside a specific art. One of the reasons I like my school is we train not only in WC but Inosanto Kali. WC doesn't have ground fighting really but IK does teach it along with transitions to and from. It's on me to integrate the two together though into something that works for my purposes.

Now MMA has tried to combine the best of many different arts BUT when it is taugh it is taught with MMA rules in mind. It is up to the individual practitioner to go beyond what his formal training provides him but few do because they have never been in a real fight or flight situation and, tbh, good for them. No one should ever be in such a situation.

Btw, your Sig is true beyond belief. Cheers sir.

 

[drop bear]

The way I deal with this is to train simulated eye gouges, groin slaps, etc but I drill them within the same structure that I use to apply real strikes, throws, etc in sparring. If I were to ever have to use these techniques in a real fight this should maximize my odds of actually pulling them off for real. Even if I were to fail, I would still be operating within the same control structure that I know helps protect me from damage and allows me to execute the techniques that I have successfully applied to resisting opponents hundreds of times.

The last couple of times I met with @yak sao I showed him some of the drills I use to practice eye gouges, head butts, elbows, groin strikes, and the like. You can ask him what his opinion is of my approach from a Wing Tsun perspective.

Yeah. Functional core basics and the put schoolyard on top.

And i will happily go schoolyard if the guy i am training with wants to. The joy of mma there is there is a pressure point and striking system already incorporated. So eyegouges are not that big a suprise. I am already getting forearms and heads and chins grinding me

My go to defence for a can opener is a bit of knuckle in the eyeball.

But it would means you dont fight the way you train. It means everybody trains for a simulated environment.

 

[drop bear]

Now MMA has tried to combine the best of many different arts BUT when it is taugh it is taught with MMA rules in mind. It is up to the individual practitioner to go beyond what his formal training provides him but few do because they have never been in a real fight or flight situation and, tbh, good for them. No one should ever be in such a situation.

Mma guys and sport fighters in general spend as much time in street fights as all these street specific systems.

 

[Juany118]

Yeah. Functional core basics and the put schoolyard on top.

And i will happily go schoolyard if the guy i am training with wants to. The joy of mma there is there is a pressure point and striking system already incorporated. So eyegouges are not that big a suprise. I am already getting forearms and heads and chins grinding me

But it would means you dont fight the way you train. It means everybody trains for a simulated environment.

Not really. Look at your Martial Arts like Academics for a minute. I am a Police Officer now but originally studied to be a History Teacher. I also had a love of philosophy and political science. While doing student teaching my knowledge of the last 2 allowed be to put into context how the history that was in books. It didn't mean I was training for other things, it just meant I didn't get myopic on what I chose to "major" in. It was about Me the Teacher (read Martial Artist) refusing to limit myself to one specific mindset.

Mma guys and sport fighters in general spend as much time in street fights as all these street specific systems.

Yes, but they usually find themselves, not just MMA but most martial artists who get into street fights, in a testosterone driven brawl with someone, likely untrained, who is only looking to show how tough they are. Every boxer or MMA guy I have encounters on the street, who thought they could cold cock me before I got to a tool later said "damn, I assumed you were like everyone else and had to use one of those things on your belt."

Again this isn't to say MMA is worse than any other art. Only that the artist makes a difference. Whether it be their assumptions, self imposed limitations, etc. But in the end the Art can only go so far as the person learning it allows it to.

 

[Nobody Important]

I haven't. Did WC not have anti-grappling methods before then? They've developed new anti-grappling training in response to modern MMA?

Has WC not had representation in lei tai matches? I haven't checked to be sure, but I'd be very surprised if that were true.

Wing Chun unfortunately, has not proven it's effectiveness in any full contact fighting arena. This is a sad truth. For all the bravado and claims of theoretical superiority spouted by chunners, one has yet to step up and prove the claim. There are hundreds of videos of Wing Chun practitioners getting their backsides handed to them because they drank the kool-aid given to them. Theory does not make a fighter nor will it protect you. This is a shame as Wing Chun has some very good concepts, the problem lies in individuals who over complicate and adhere to the dogmatic law of their sifu and limit defense training to over stylized drills. Fighting is organic and cannot be approached with a structured set of responses. Many chunners are too over analytical for their own good and get lost in the theory.

 

[drop bear]

Not really. Look at your Martial Arts like Academics for a minute. I am a Police Officer now but originally studied to be a History Teacher. I also had a love of philosophy and political science. While doing student teaching my knowledge of the last 2 allowed be to put into context how the history that was in books. It didn't mean I was training for other things, it just meant I didn't get myopic on what I chose to "major" in. It was about Me the Teacher (read Martial Artist) refusing to limit myself to one specific mindset.


Yes, but they usually find themselves, not just MMA but most martial artists who get into street fights, in a testosterone driven brawl with someone, likely untrained, who is only looking to show how tough they are. Every boxer or MMA guy I have encounters on the street, who thought they could cold cock me before I got to a tool later said "damn, I assumed you were like everyone else and had to use one of those things on your belt."

Again this isn't to say MMA is worse than any other art. Only that the artist makes a difference. Whether it be their assumptions, self imposed limitations, etc. But in the end the Art can only go so far as the person learning it allows it to.

Ok. So it is the individual again not the art.

So then what happened to arts training illegal moves giving the advantage?

 

[Juany118]

Wing Chun unfortunately, has not proven it's effectiveness in any full contact fighting arena. This is a sad truth. For all the bravado and claims of theoretical superiority spouted by chunners, one has yet to step up and prove the claim. There are hundreds of videos of Wing Chun practitioners getting their backsides handed to them because they drank the kool-aid given to them. Theory does not make a fighter nor will it protect you. This is a shame as Wing Chun has some very good concepts, the problem lies in individuals who over complicate and adhere to the dogmatic law of their sifu and limit defense training to over stylized drills. Fighting is organic and cannot be approached with a structured set of responses. Many chunners are too over analytical for their own good and get lost in the theory.

But there are Sifu's out there like mine who say (direct quote)"don't drink the kool-aid, there is no secret sauce" and teach WC, as combative, with the experience of someone who had actually applied MA concepts on the street. A perfect example is tonight. We had a guest instructor who is 110% traditional Wing Chun. He step away to talk to other students, he said "in real life, you won't do that half. The first half works, the second half do this, it has a better chance of disabling your opponent.". Was it WC? Yep. Was it the standard "flood the center with punches to the face?" NOPE.

 

[drop bear]

Not really. Look at your Martial Arts like Academics for a minute. I am a Police Officer now but originally studied to be a History Teacher. I also had a love of philosophy and political science. While doing student teaching my knowledge of the last 2 allowed be to put into context how the history that was in books. It didn't mean I was training for other things, it just meant I didn't get myopic on what I chose to "major" in. It was about Me the Teacher (read Martial Artist) refusing to limit myself to one specific mindset.

Sorry what?

 

[Juany118]

Ok. So it is the individual again not the art.

So then what happened to arts training illegal moves giving the advantage?

You love strawmen arguments but I will bite. The difference is this. To actually hard core go for another human's eyes, throat, groin... I mean hard core, not just a "cup check" or a poke, requires a degree of aggression that emotionally stable humans have to develop. It doesn't come with Martial Arts training, it comes from actually being is situations where you aren't saying "I might lose this fight" but rather being either in situations where you have had to say "I might die here" or where the training you get is constant non-stop military training where you act in such a violent manner without any such consideration.

Note I said emotionally stable. Sadly I have met people with neither the training or experience, they were just broken because, as social animals, humans find it FAR easier to do major damage at range than face to face. That isn't my idea btw, but the conclusions of modern psychological science.

 

[Juany118]

Sorry what?

Are you going to respond to the same post twice? Really? I get it, you like MMA, you think it is good enough to overcome a skill/talent deficiency. I disagree. Can we just agree to disagree on the art vs practitioner argument and move on?

 

[Nobody Important]

But there are Wife's out there like mine who say (direct quote)"don't drink the kool-aid, there is no secret sauce" and teach WC, as combative, with the experience of someone who had actually applied MA concepts on the street. A perfect example is tonight. We had a guest instructor who is 110% traditional Wing Chun. He step away to talk to other students, he said "in real life, you won't do that half. The first half works, the second half do this, it has a better chance of disabling your opponent.". Was it WC? Yep. Was it the standard "flood the center with punches to the face?" NOPE.

Being a WC practitioner I can say that it works well against uneducated individuals if you have an aggressive fighting mentality. It begins to fall apart when those that can recognize what is being done have the same mentality. I believe WC is more concept than anything else, a tool kit to help elevate a simpler but effective method like boxing or judo. Many chunners will disagree, but that's ok. WC is fine motor skill primarily. Fine motor skill is high maintenance at high cost and length of time to acquire ability. Unlike gross motor skilled arts like boxing and judo. In situations of high stress fine motor skills are the first to go unlike gross motor skills which remain. This is the primary reason the art fails the practitioner.

 

[drop bear]

Are you going to respond to the same post twice? Really? I get it, you like MMA, you think it is good enough to overcome a skill/talent deficiency. I disagree. Can we just agree to disagree on the art vs practitioner argument and move on?

So far you have said it Is both. It is the art when it is in your favour and the practitioner when it isn't.

Any good training will improve the ability of the practitioner. Not just mma. There is good training and bad training.

And you can use that to compare martial arts style.

Now people are different and will have different rates of success. So a talented person in a bad style can be better than a gumby in a good style.

But you can't make people inherently better. All you can do is train them in the best system so they get the most out of their natural ability.

That is why you can't discuss martial arts at the moment without constantly changing your stance. You basic premise falls apart at this level.

 

[Juany118]

Being a WC practitioner I can say that it works well against uneducated individuals if you have an aggressive fighting mentality. It begins to fall apart when those that can recognize what is being done have the same mentality. I believe WC is more concept than anything else, a tool kit to help elevate a simpler but effective method like boxing or judo. Many chunners will disagree, but that's ok. WC is fine motor skill primarily. Fine motor skill is high maintenance at high cost and length of time to acquire ability. Unlike gross motor skilled arts like boxing and judo. In situations of high stress fine motor skills are the first to go unlike gross motor skills which remain. This is the primary reason the art fails the practitioner.

I can actually agree with this to an extent. My entire point here has been to say, in the end the specific art doesn't matter, it is the fighter that makes the difference, in the context of the art. Personally, while I study WC and Inosanto Kali, I prefer IK. I find the IK far easier because it is more about flow. However one guy I study with finds the WC easier, maybe he is a robot but that fine muscle control, as you call it, is second nature to him but flow doesn't. Our bodies are no different than our heads. I suck at math but concepts in words, history, literature? Second nature.

Throughout here I wasn't talking about WC vs MMA as much as you need to pick the right Art for you. It is that pairing, irl that makes the difference.

 

[Juany118]

So far you have said it Is both. It is the art when it is in your favour and the practitioner when it isn't.

Any good training will improve the ability of the practitioner. Not just mma. There is good training and bad training.

And you can use that to compare martial arts style.

Now people are different and will have different rates of success. So a talented person in a bad style can be better than a gumby in a good style.

But you can't make people inherently better. All you can do is train them in the best system so they get the most out of their natural ability.

That is why you can't discuss martial arts at the moment without constantly changing your stance. You basic premise falls apart at this level.

I have never changed my stance. In the end the WHOLE of a Martial Art is not as important as the practitioner. You have jump on my mention of a specific technique here and there but in doing so miss the entire point of Martial Arts. No martial is measured by a specific technique. If I was to use your method I would simply say "MMA sucks irl because the two leg take down leaves you vulnerable to 12-6 elbow strikes to the head and neck." But MMA has more to offer than that does it not?

You have been so desperate to defend a specific style that you cherry pick statements out of total context. As such sir we are are done.

 

[drop bear]

I have never changed my stance. In the end the WHOLE of a Martial Art is not as important as the practitioner. You have jump on my mention of a specific technique here and there but in doing so miss the entire point of Martial Arts. No martial is measured by a specific technique. If I was to use your method I would simply say "MMA sucks irl because the two leg take down leaves you vulnerable to 12-6 elbow strikes to the head and neck." But MMA has more to offer than that does it not?

You have been so desperate to defend a specific style that you cherry pick statements out of total context. As such sir we are are done.

If you were to use my style you would take apart my basic premise as illogical.

If it is not the style but the individual why does the rule set matter?

 

[Juany118]

If you were to use my style you would take apart my basic premise as illogical.

If it is not the style but the individual why does the rule set matter?

No need to do so. Here is a fact of logic, it cuts across all arguments. When one side has to take individual statements out of the context, the person doing so is simply trying to create the appearance of a logical and solid defense. It matters not the topic. This fallacy you are engaged predates Christ in the Western world and goes back to Socrates and beyond.

As I said previously, when someone claims to have a better Mouse trap it is, according to basic rules of logic, their duty to prove that it is better. The is a fact of logic and life, for as long as reason has been recorded. It doesn't matter if it is applied to a science of astronomy, physics or warfare such as the martial arts.

As such I actually have nothing to prove because until my life time your point of view did not even vaguely exist. It is you who has to provide proof.

Do you have any or just more "gotcha" statements out of context and ad hominems? Sorry if this sounds harsh but the Martial Arts have existed in one form or another since human kind has existed. Since then every art has claimed to be the superior art. Since that claim was first made NO art has managed to prove that the art, and not the practitioner, was superior.

It's the job of the MMA defender, a defender of an art born in my lifetime, to disprove thousands of year of history.

Again I am not saying MMA is bad, only that in the final equation it is the practitioner that matters and millennia of debate, success and failure, to support it. So again, the burden is on you, if you wish a logical debate.

 

[drop bear]

No need to do so. Here is a fact of logic, it cuts across all arguments. When one side has to take individual statements out of the context, the person doing so is simply trying to create the appearance of a logical and solid defense. It matters not the topic. This fallacy you are engaged predates Christ in the Western world and goes back to Socrates and beyond.

As I said previously, when someone claims to have a better Mouse trap it is, according to basic rules of logic, their duty to prove that it is better. The is a fact of logic and life, for as long as reason has been recorded. It doesn't matter if it is applied to a science of astronomy, physics or warfare such as the martial arts.

As such I actually have nothing to prove because until my life time your point of view did not even vaguely exist. It is you who has to provide proof.

Do you have any or just more "gotcha" statements out of context and ad hominems? Sorry if this sounds harsh but the Martial Arts have existed in one form or another since human kind has existed. Since then every art has claimed to be the superior art. Since that claim was first made NO art has managed to prove that the art, and not the practitioner, was superior.

It's the job of the MMA defender, a defender of an art born in my lifetime, to disprove thousands of year of history.

Again I am not saying MMA is bad, only that in the final equation it is the practitioner that matters and millennia of debate, success and failure, to support it. So again, the burden is on you, if you wish a logical debate.

If the individual is the determining factor in success. Then you are saying all martial arts training and the thousands of years of its history is redundant.

Yet as people train in martial arts they do tend to get better at it.

 

[Juany118]

If the individual is the determining factor in success. Then you are saying all martial arts training and the thousands of years of its history is redundant.

Yet as people train in martial arts they do tend to get better at it.

Wrong, what I am saying is this. Since Homo Sapien has walked the earth our two arms and two legs can only move in so many ways.

Do you honestly think that miraculously in the 20th century, with the gun rules the day, that thousands of years of unarmed combat can be supplanted?

I am sorry but that simply beggars logic. Basically you are saying "martial arts were in suspended animation for hundreds of years UNTIL MMA was born in my lifetime"

Do you see how arrogant that sounds? That thousands of years of combat evolution stops....until one in our lifetime is born?