Wing Chun's Weakness

[Vajramusti]

Many good comments have already been made here, but let me just add this.

The strength of a "style" is simultaneously its weakness. In WC, the strong points are the straight-line attack and trapping. Ergo, if an opponent can either stay outside via kicking, or shut this down inside via grappling, the "style" breaks down.

All MA people today know that it's impossible for anyone to master all phases of fighting (kicking, striking, trapping, grappling, and weapons), and that all you can really do is to specialize in an area you feel comfortable with (i.e. learn a "style"), and yet still have some competency in ALL the other areas because - all the variables of self-defense (i.e. the what, who, where, when, why) are largely unforeseeable. (Far more important for self-defense than any "style" or "technique" is simply constant awareness!)

Also, last note, although I have limited training in WC, I would recommend the books/vids put out by Randy Williams; IMO, his working of that system is the most logical and well-rounded.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
You say that you have limited training in WC- yet you comment on strengths and weaknesses and make recommendations!!!
joy chaudhuri

 

[yak sao]

Many good comments have already been made here, but let me just add this.

The strength of a "style" is simultaneously its weakness. In WC, the strong points are the straight-line attack and trapping. Ergo, if an opponent can either stay outside via kicking, or shut this down inside via grappling, the "style" breaks down.

All MA people today know that it's impossible for anyone to master all phases of fighting (kicking, striking, trapping, grappling, and weapons), and that all you can really do is to specialize in an area you feel comfortable with (i.e. learn a "style"), and yet still have some competency in ALL the other areas because - all the variables of self-defense (i.e. the what, who, where, when, why) are largely unforeseeable. (Far more important for self-defense than any "style" or "technique" is simply constant awareness!)

Also, last note, although I have limited training in WC, I would recommend the books/vids put out by Randy Williams; IMO, his working of that system is the most logical and well-rounded.

Many people look at WC as limited. They see it as a close range, "hands only " style of kung fu that is good at trapping.
WC is not a kung fu style...it is a system. It is concept based, not technique based.
It teaches the body to move in a whole new way to generate maximum power with minimum effort while at the same time being able to dissolve powerful attacks.
WC is effective at fighting against all fighting ranges by moving in close to a range that most MA's choose not to fight from. This allows us to shut down kickers on the outside extreme and neutralize grapplers on the inside extreme.

If there is a weakness to WC, it is not in its concepts, it would have to be in the people who practice it. Too many of us are guilty of not pressure testing our art against realistic attacks from other MA.

 

[zepedawingchun]

Many people look at WC as limited. They see it as a close range, "hands only " style of kung fu that is good at trapping.
WC is not a kung fu style...it is a system. It is concept based, not technique based.
It teaches the body to move in a whole new way to generate maximum power with minimum effort while at the same time being able to dissolve powerful attacks.
WC is effective at fighting against all fighting ranges by moving in close to a range that most MA's choose not to fight from. This allows us to shut down kickers on the outside extreme and neutralize grapplers on the inside extreme.

If there is a weakness to WC, it is not in its concepts, it would have to be in the people who practice it. Too many of us are guilty of not pressure testing our art against realistic attacks from other MA.

100% true and I agree with this whole heartedly. People who say Wing Chun is limited have not learned the whole system to understand it fully.

 

[punisher73]

Many people look at WC as limited. They see it as a close range, "hands only " style of kung fu that is good at trapping.
WC is not a kung fu style...it is a system. It is concept based, not technique based.
It teaches the body to move in a whole new way to generate maximum power with minimum effort while at the same time being able to dissolve powerful attacks.
WC is effective at fighting against all fighting ranges by moving in close to a range that most MA's choose not to fight from. This allows us to shut down kickers on the outside extreme and neutralize grapplers on the inside extreme.

If there is a weakness to WC, it is not in its concepts, it would have to be in the people who practice it. Too many of us are guilty of not pressure testing our art against realistic attacks from other MA.

You pretty much just restated what Mr. Striker said, but on the positive side. You point out that WC can move in to take away a kickers weapons. Yep, and as Mr. Striker pointed out that if you CAN'T do that, then you will get beat. It is not a slam on WC, just a fact of any martial art that prefers a certain range and it's tools are designed to get to that range. Because as you pointed out, it is effective at close range, it is NOT effective at fighting all ranges. You wouldn't stay in kicking distance, you close the gap to be in close where you want to be.

For example, we could say that BJJ is great because we close in the gap and then take the fight to the ground where we will use dominate positioning and control to beat an opponent. Yep, but what if you can't get there to use your tools?

In either example, it is never the concepts of the art that were questioned, but just what happens if you can't get the fight to the range where you want it to be.

 

[geezer]

...as you pointed out, it is effective at close range, it is NOT effective at fighting all ranges. You wouldn't stay in kicking distance, you close the gap to be in close where you want to be ...it is never the concepts of the art that were questioned, but just what happens if you can't get the fight to the range where you want it to be.

This is precisely why certain groups have made some changes in WC in the last few decades. Bruce Lee, famously found that chasing an evasive, long range fighter created real problems in closing to WC's strongest range. So, many in WC have modified their footwork to close faster. When the Gracies came on the scene in the late '80s, others found that grappling presented problems they weren't adequately prepared for, so some WC groups have worked at developing "anti-grappling" techniques -- not to out-grapple the grappler, but to counter and move the fight back into their preferred zone, the close quarters stand-up, striking range.


BTW I'd second the previous comments that WCs strong in-fighting range makes it a natural for self defense where the attacker is closing on you, and where going to the ground may be a very dangerous option. On the other hand, this focus is one of several things that make it less applicable in a sporting situation.

 

[Eric_H]

Ip Man line wing chun is weak in the longer ranges and like all CMA has no ground wrestling ability.

 

[Vajramusti]

Ip Man line wing chun is weak in the longer ranges and like all CMA has no ground wrestling ability.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An over -generaliztion! Depends on person, knowledge, training and experience.

joy chaudhuri

 

[mook jong man]

If you have the bloke backed up against a wall , there is no long range.

 

[Cyriacus]

If you have the bloke backed up against a wall , there is no long range.

Im not sure when exactly Youd have a long range fight.

 

[geezer]

Im not sure when exactly Youd have a long range fight.

Well, on some of the other WC forums, the web-warriors posting seem to have long-range fights all the time ...fighting by email.

 

[bully]

Spot on Geezer, my thoughts exactly. Thank god MT isn't like that.

 

[punisher73]

Im not sure when exactly Youd have a long range fight.

Personally, I have seen it one time. A person trained well in boxing kept himself out of range and peppered the other guy with punchs and then would move back out of range. It was a jail situation where the boxer was older and a young gang member was trying to pick a fight with him. The other fights I responded to or broke up was that once contact was made they stayed close. Many time they would grab on to each other and fall to the ground, but no skilled takedowns. There there were a couple bearhug bodyslams where one person went down and then was kicked/stomped.

 

[Eric_H]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An over -generaliztion! Depends on person, knowledge, training and experience.

joy chaudhuri

I disagree, though many folks have imported ways of dealing with longer range situations, it still remains that pre-contact is the most dangerous place for IP line WC to find itself. Other than Dog Boxing, I've never seen ground wrestling in TCMA, and certainly no arts that have focused on it as much as BJJ, if you have please direct me to it.

 

[Eric_H]

Im not sure when exactly Youd have a long range fight.

So arts that focus on it like Hung Ga and Choy Lei Fut aren't effective?

 

[punisher73]

I disagree, though many folks have imported ways of dealing with longer range situations, it still remains that pre-contact is the most dangerous place for IP line WC to find itself. Other than Dog Boxing, I've never seen ground wrestling in TCMA, and certainly no arts that have focused on it as much as BJJ, if you have please direct me to it.

I think that is an important distinction. Until recently, ground wrestling has always been in the context of combative sports. Traditional arts have ground FIGHTING, that is, getting up off the ground immediately and protecting yourself from the ground, but their focus was not on staying there or taking it there. Doing so would be dangerous in a civilian self defense situation (NOT saying that it's not important to understand that range/type of fighting, only why it wasn't emphasized in the past).

 

[Eric_H]

I think that is an important distinction. Until recently, ground wrestling has always been in the context of combative sports. Traditional arts have ground FIGHTING, that is, getting up off the ground immediately and protecting yourself from the ground, but their focus was not on staying there or taking it there. Doing so would be dangerous in a civilian self defense situation (NOT saying that it's not important to understand that range/type of fighting, only why it wasn't emphasized in the past).

Agreed, we have been over it many times on this forum (and others) the difference between ground fighting vs ground wrestling, if it's a good idea, etc. I'll let each person decide on their own if it's a good idea or not, but the fact is that with only WC most folks don't have much chance if a ground wrestler is able to get a takedown.

 

[Vajramusti]

I disagree, though many folks have imported ways of dealing with longer range situations, it still remains that pre-contact is the most dangerous place for IP line WC to find itself. Other than Dog Boxing, I've never seen ground wrestling in TCMA, and certainly no arts that have focused on it as much as BJJ, if you have please direct me to it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I prefer discussing to debating. So- I try to make my point and let it gur POVs differ considerably. Good Ip man wing chun does not need to categorize ranges of martial action. In good versions of Ip man wing chun there is plenty of foot work and structural integrity to close gaps between opponents and dealing with the slightest of contacts.. Unfortunately there are lots of mediocre wing chun that does not have good structure or mobility.

BJJ is good training for rolling and staying on the ground. But that is not the main objective in wing chun. There are plenty of tools in a good wing chun tool box for dealing with self defense on the ground
and not staying there. Generalizing about all of TCMA or even about all versions of a style is not easy and not usually accurate given the diversities in TCMA..

joy chaudhuri

 

[Eric_H]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I prefer discussing to debating. So- I try to make my point and let it gur POVs differ considerably. Good Ip man wing chun does not need to categorize ranges of martial action. In good versions of Ip man wing chun there is plenty of foot work and structural integrity to close gaps between opponents and dealing with the slightest of contacts.. Unfortunately there are lots of mediocre wing chun that does not have good structure or mobility.

BJJ is good training for rolling and staying on the ground. But that is not the main objective in wing chun. There are plenty of tools in a good wing chun tool box for dealing with self defense on the ground
and not staying there. Generalizing about all of TCMA or even about all versions of a style is not easy and not usually accurate given the diversities in TCMA..

joy chaudhuri

Fair enough Joy, do you have any examples or videos from Sifu Fong that demonstrate how you guys handle pre-contact to engagement? I'm not above changing my opinion if a good case can be made.

TCMA doesn't have ground wrestling. That's not a generalization, it's a fact. We've already discussed on this thread some of the cultural/combat reasons as to why. Having seen multiple videos of Ip line WC on the ground defense, based on both my WC and wrestling backgrounds I can't say it's anything that looks even close to effective.

 

[Vajramusti]

Fair enough Joy, do you have any examples or videos from Sifu Fong that demonstrate how you guys handle pre-contact to engagement? I'm not above changing my opinion if a good case can be made.

TCMA doesn't have ground wrestling. That's not a generalization, it's a fact. We've already discussed on this thread some of the cultural/combat reasons as to why. Having seen multiple videos of Ip line WC on the ground defense, based on both my WC and wrestling backgrounds I can't say it's anything that looks even close to effective.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fong sifu did some old instructional videos almost 30 years ago on the forms under Panther productions umbrella. There is much more to what we/I do besides those old videos. Fong sifu has not put any videos himself on Youtube though some students have put up things. Forms. motions and drills are for specific instructional purposes. But you become fluid and put forms away.Ip Man did, Wong Shong leung did and Fong Sifu did and does when needed. From 1979 there is an old demo that was not rehearsed much which gives some idea of the fluidity of a good Ip Man line wing chun for demo anyway.

See: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PoiOVepwGo>


Your second sentence highlights your opinion based on what you have apparently seen. My opinion is different based on what i know and have seen When a sound wing chun structure is developed it need not abandon you whether you are vertical, horizontal or in some other position.

I dont do Garrett Gee wing chun or Lowenhagen wing chun- so we have quite different perspectives on what we mean by wing chun. I would rather leave it at that... diversity.

With good wishes, joy chaudhuri

 

[Cyriacus]

So arts that focus on it like Hung Ga and Choy Lei Fut aren't effective?

I never said that.

Im sure both of those Arts have some method of getting out of close range in the first place, much like how Wing Chun does have a couple (Im not sure, but I wouldnt be shocked if it were actually literally 2) of longer strikes.