What do you guys think of Wing Chun?

[Human Bass]

I consider myself to be very open minded, but Wing-Chun managed to be the only MA not able to give a good impression in Fight Quest, and those shows always hype the shit of what they are showing...

 

[SideofKO]

crap wrong video and i cant edit posts


This guy does JKD and is really good with incorporating wing chun

That video was ridiculous. He looked like he was about to fall over any minute and got popped with quite a few punches from a non-boxer yet he somehow thinks he could use this stuff against a seasoned boxer? lol. Silly human.

 

[SAAMAG]

I consider myself to be very open minded, but Wing-Chun managed to be the only MA not able to give a good impression in Fight Quest, and those shows always hype the shit of what they are showing...

I agree. That was a horrible showing. Most folks even within the wing chun community have never thought highly of the group that was showcased in that show--for the very reasons you saw. That line of wing chun has been over marketed and hyped and that's the reason why it was on there.

The guy from the Perfect Weapon show was far better in actual skill (Wang Zhi Peng) and his students fight ANYONE that comes to their school, often times winning.

 

[ninjaunicorn]

Nope, I think Wing Chun sucks because based on what they teach it seems like it would suck, there is proof it sucks and there is no proof that it doesn't suck.

Sanshou doesn't suck because based on what they teach it would seem it is effective, there is proof that it works and I know good Sanshou guys.

Stop trying to sound smart because you aren't.

No single martial art "sucks"
everything depends on the determination of the practitioner, their level of training, and their adaptability to different situations against different opponents. It depends on the individual, not the art as a whole.
And seriously, "Stop trying to sound smart because you aren't"
how old are you, 5?

 

[Vaga]

The guy from the Perfect Weapon show was far better in actual skill (Wang Zhi Peng) and his students fight ANYONE that comes to their school, often times winning.

Any videos? I'm skeptical, but I would love to be proven wrong.

 

[SAAMAG]

Any videos? I'm skeptical, but I would love to be proven wrong.

I appreciate the open mindedness, just don't get caught up in the whole search for the holy grail of video footage. That's coming at things from the wrong mindset, regardless of the style. The determinant of a skill's worth should be from first hand knowledge of the skill, experienced empirically through more than just one of the senses.

As it was stated previously, styles don't fight--people fight. Styles don't determine the winner--intelligence, willpower, and skill determine that. The efficacy of a system's efficacy to produce consistently good fighters comes mostly from how realistic the training is.

Of course over the internet, all we can do is try and see what sorts of video footage is out there since we can't exhange ideas physically in person. I'll be the first to admit there's not much in terms of what I'd call good wing chun on the internet.

Nonetheless here's something via you tube that is one of the better vids in terms of inter-school sparring. These guys aren't professional MMA guys mind you, just students. This is not the way I'd go about using it persay either, but I think these guys have the right idea...YouTube - Wing Chun True Disciple - Fight 3 of 3

YouTube - Wing Chun with Master Wang ZhiPeng
Here's the perfect weapon clip

Also, PM your city--and I'll try and see if I can find a good source of solid wing chun for you to experience first hand.

 

[Capt.Canuck]

I appreciate the open mindedness, just don't get caught up in the whole search for the holy grail of video footage. That's coming at things from the wrong mindset, regardless of the style. The determinant of a skill's worth should be from first hand knowledge of the skill, experienced empirically through more than just one of the senses.

As it was stated previously, styles don't fight--people fight. Styles don't determine the winner--intelligence, willpower, and skill determine that.

With all due respect, I don't think that's true at all. To be honest it sounds like a sales pitch for a martial art that has little real world application.

A top Wing Chun practitioner would be absolutely annihilated by a top Muay Thai fighter or a top boxer for that matter. In this day and age, if there was any real evidence to the contrary, there would be lots of readily available footage for all to see.

The common thread between the videos you posted is that the "fighters" for the most part stand flat footed in front of each other, which is highly unrealistic. Could it be effective in self-defence against an untrained person? Perhaps but I can't see the value in it unless one's interest in largely/purely learning a martial art for its own sake. As a combat system it gets very low marks relative to other options available.

 

[Acexwanderer]

No single martial art "sucks"
everything depends on the determination of the practitioner, their level of training, and their adaptability to different situations against different opponents. It depends on the individual, not the art as a whole.
And seriously, "Stop trying to sound smart because you aren't"
how old are you, 5?

Not true, otherwise we would see a much more diverse range of martial arts in MMA.

Wonder why there are no Hapkido fighters in MMA? and the only Wing Chun guy got destroyed in the UFC.

It comes down to the individual when they train in a good martial art like MT,Wrestling or BJJ.

 

[SAAMAG]

With all due respect, I don't think that's true at all. To be honest it sounds like a sales pitch for a martial art that has little real world application.

A top Wing Chun practitioner would be absolutely annihilated by a top Muay Thai fighter or a top boxer for that matter. In this day and age, if there was any real evidence to the contrary, there would be lots of readily available footage for all to see.

The common thread between the videos you posted is that the "fighters" for the most part stand flat footed in front of each other, which is highly unrealistic. Could it be effective in self-defence against an untrained person? Perhaps but I can't see the value in it unless one's interest in largely/purely learning a martial art for its own sake. As a combat system it gets very low marks relative to other options available.

No worries. It's a discussion forum. If no one disagreed there would be no discussion!

There are some things I come across in wing chun that I don't agree with to be sure. I'm a pragmatist by nature so I question everything. Especially today when the system has been watered down so much.

But how much do you know of the wing chun history? Had you ever heard of the matches between Muay Thai fighters and Wing Chun fighters? At that time the word is that sometime the Thais won, sometimes the Chinese. The styles played less of a role then, it was based on who was the better fighter as a person.

I just feel that if the style was completely to blame, then I shouldn't be able to make it work either, but I can. The last time I sparred at the muay Thai gym, I stuck in wing chun as well, and it worked. To be fair though, the other guy was confused a bit because I was using unconventional moves to what he was used to.

TODAY however, I'd very much agree that an average / top Thai fighter would beat the average / top wing chun fighter. Part of that is due to what alluded to in my first post in this thread--they don't train with sparring as the primary component of their training.

 

[Valentine Wolff]

Im an ex-chunner. It all falls appart under a half decent boxer. Dont use the ip-man movie as your referance for the effectiveness of this art.

 

[Keej613]

IMO, the problem with a lot of Wing Chun, JKD and Kung-Fu schools is that there's a LOT of LARPing going on.

Not every school is like this, but a lot of schools give off a terrible Rex Kwon Do / LARP vibe.

That puts WC / JKD / KF's credibility at risk.

This combined with the fact that many schools don't engage in realistic sparring of any kind makes a lot of people skeptical of that whole world from the get-go.

Toss in the fact that very few full-contact combat sports athletes, let alone world-renown champions, use recognizable elements of WC / JKD / KF as their main go-to techniques or make these styles a prominent element of their persona (like Silva does with Muay Thai, GSP does with Kyokushin, Cung Le does with Sanshou, the Gracies do with BJJ, etc) adds to the average martial artist's and casual fan's skepticism.

I can appreciate that many styles of Kung Fu (including WC and JKD) aren't intended to be trained and practiced as combat sports but, IMO, too many schools use this as a crutch / convenient excuse to not engage in realistic sparring or self-defense techniques and the result is practitioners that have been practicing certain styles for years but that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag . . . even compared to the average un-trained shmoe. And this is coming from a guy who's general, universal stance on the "will (insert style) help me in MMA" question is that ANY training is ALWAYS better than NO training.

Anyway, I don't want to shit all over Chinese martial arts because I've met many kung-fu practitioners that could utterly destroy me and everyone I know in a ring, a cage or on the street, and many of these guys are in their 50s. Chinese martial arts DO have a LOT to offer but I think that many of them go about it in a very circular, esoteric, impractical and unnatural way. A great illustration of this point is the growing popularity of MMA in China. Both FightSport and Fighter's Only (the international version) have had lengthy articles about MMA in China and, in particular, on the Art of War promotion. The result of the surge of pro MMA in China is that craploads of BJJ schools are opening up all over China. Now wait a minute! If most professional Chinese combat sports athletes have backgrounds in Kung-fu, Sanshou/Sanda and Shuai Jiao (Chinese grappling/wrestling/submissions), why are BJJ schools opening up all over the place? I personally think that, beyond the attraction of athlete/brand recognizability, it's because BJJ is trained and practiced in a direct and to-the-point manner which is the polar opposite of the way that most Chinese martial arts are trained and practiced.

Just my opinion.

 

[panamaican]

I just feel that if the style was completely to blame, then I shouldn't be able to make it work either, but I can. The last time I sparred at the muay Thai gym, I stuck in wing chun as well, and it worked. To be fair though, the other guy was confused a bit because I was using unconventional moves to what he was used to.

TODAY however, I'd very much agree that an average / top Thai fighter would beat the average / top wing chun fighter. Part of that is due to what alluded to in my first post in this thread--they don't train with sparring as the primary component of their training.

Those two paragraphs sum up every "style vs. style" conversation. You can beat anyone if they have no idea what you're doing and you have some ideaof what they're doing.

Most importantly, if sparring isn't a major component of your training, it doesn't matter what you train. You have to train dealing with fighting circumstances as much as you train the techniques themselves.

MT wouldn't get used very much if ring time wasn't such an important part of the training, the same with boxing. But they both spar regularly and so they know how to defend themselves against live opposition. Most WC schools I've seen rarely spar full contact, it's no mystery why they don't win fights.

To summarize: Ring rookies do not beat ring veterans.

 

[ninjaunicorn]

Not true, otherwise we would see a much more diverse range of martial arts in MMA.

Wonder why there are no Hapkido fighters in MMA? and the only Wing Chun guy got destroyed in the UFC.

It comes down to the individual when they train in a good martial art like MT,Wrestling or BJJ.

Did you not even bother to read my post?
I said it depends on the fighter's skill, determination and adaptability
a lot of the practitioners have a one track mindset, they're unwilling to modify their style to fight others. This is why they're beaten, if they're willing to modify their original style, and add in new ones, they can become a dominant force, regardless of which discipline they started in. For example, Cung Le was first a Taekwondo man (a martial art will assume you believe is not good), however, he picked up several different striking arts, and a ground game. He still utilizes several of his Taekwondo kicks, but he's changed some aspects of them, so that they're more effective, and serve his purpose better.
So I'm going to say this once again, there are no good or bad martial arts. It depends on the fighter.

 

[SAAMAG]

Im an ex-chunner. It all falls appart under a half decent boxer. Dont use the ip-man movie as your referance for the effectiveness of this art.

Correction: YOUR wing chun falls apart against a decent boxer; and no one has mentioned the movie that I've seen in this thread except you.

 

[SAAMAG]

if sparring isn't a major component of your training, it doesn't matter what you train. You have to train dealing with fighting circumstances as much as you train the techniques themselves.

This combined with the fact that many schools don't engage in realistic sparring of any kind makes a lot of people skeptical of that whole world from the get-go.

it depends on the fighter's skill, determination and adaptability; a lot of the practitioners have a one track mindset, they're unwilling to modify their style to fight others. This is why they're beaten, if they're willing to modify their original style, and add in new ones, they can become a dominant force, regardless of which discipline they started in.

These quotes above are the at crux of the matter, and I agree fully as I believe this is truly the bottom line. Martial arts should be an accumulation / shedding process. You accumulate knowledge, and you shed what doesn't work for you through the trial and error of sparring/fighting. What remains should be a viable system that meets the goals you want to achieve.

If most professional Chinese combat sports athletes have backgrounds in Kung-fu, Sanshou/Sanda and Shuai Jiao (Chinese grappling/wrestling/submissions), why are BJJ schools opening up all over the place? I personally think that, beyond the attraction of athlete/brand recognizability, it's because BJJ is trained and practiced in a direct and to-the-point manner which is the polar opposite of the way that most Chinese martial arts are trained and practiced.

Have you ever trained in Shiua Jiao, Sanshou, or Kung Fu of any type? While I realize that the training regimens need to be updated (or focused more on application against RESISTING opponents); the model of the curriculums is quite logical. It works from the foundation up. A student gains a basic understanding of the fundamentals, and then work from there. The problem lies in the fact that sparring is never done. They don't test to see if what is trained actually works. No one learns the skill in application against a resisting opponent, and that's sad because that's where the real skill lies.

What I think is more of a factor in terms of BJJ in areas like China is marketing. The UFC was intended not only on the original idea of finding the best styles/fighters, but also on marketing BJJ specifically. The founders were rightly confident that their system would prevail in most of the matches it was used in and thus the awareness increased, the demand increased, and so long as quality if controlled, the customer satisfaction will continue to be maintained and/or increase. There are styles that are good on the ground as well, hell I'd say american wrestling is just as good, Sambo, and the like. BJJ just does a better job at marketing.

 

[Keej613]

Have you ever trained in Shiua Jiao, Sanshou, or Kung Fu of any type?

Yes.

Northern Praying Mantis, Baji, Bagua, Shuai Jiao fundamentals and Sanshou/Sanda.

While I realize that the training regimens need to be updated (or focused more on application against RESISTING opponents); the model of the curriculums is quite logical. It works from the foundation up. A student gains a basic understanding of the fundamentals, and then work from there.

Perhaps that was what you witnessed / experienced, but that was not what I witnessed / experienced.

What I think is more of a factor in terms of BJJ in areas like China is marketing. The UFC was intended not only on the original idea of finding the best styles/fighters, but also on marketing BJJ specifically. The founders were rightly confident that their system would prevail in most of the matches it was used in and thus the awareness increased, the demand increased, and so long as quality if controlled, the customer satisfaction will continue to be maintained and/or increase. There are styles that are good on the ground as well, hell I'd say american wrestling is just as good, Sambo, and the like. BJJ just does a better job at marketing.

While I agree with most of what you've said, I simply find it strange that a country with a long and rich history of martial arts would hop onto the BJJ bandwagon so quickly if something homegrown is IN THEORY just as effective.

Like I mentioned earlier, I don't think it's the style itself (Shuai Jiao for grappling or Kung Fu for striking) but rather the circular / esoteric / indirect teaching/training methods that result in it being cast aside in favour of direct / simply taught / simply trained / practical styles like BJJ or Muay Thai.

(That being said, it very well may be a cultural thing. East Asian cultures are more long-term oriented whereas western cultures are more short-term oriented.)

 

[SAAMAG]

I get what you're saying. Just because BJJ places are opening up, doesn't mean they'll stay in business, at the same time the chinese culture has its own younger generation that will create the demand for BJJ I think. So we'll have to wait and see what happens there.

Consumer Behavior is a wonderful thing. In business, we study consumer behavior to a degree that people's actions are cataloged and analyzed--and we almost know what the consumer will do before the consumer does. Martial arts is a business now. In order for MMA/UFC and the parasite businesses (schools) to continue to do well, they need to understand consumer behavior, keep track of consumer's needs, and make sure to solve those needs. So far, they're doing well.

Right now the main barriers to continued success are social and economic in nature (cultures, states, governments who don't like MMA and NHB fighting). But overall, I'd say the market for sport fighting skills is doing well. Apparently in China too!

BTW...what did they do in sanshou that was indirect in training? What was esoteric or backwards or what have you? Sanshou is the closest thing China has to a viable MMA type sport so it'd be odd to think the training regimen was not using the most modern methods of fight training.

 

[SAAMAG]

Any videos? I'm skeptical, but I would love to be proven wrong.

Here's how the euro's do it: YouTube - Wing Chun Sparring. For these guys I think while I like the fact they're sparring, they probably need to implement better strategies and tactics so that they're not just trading. But again, it's a start.

And finally here's some eye candy from yet another derivitive of weng chun: Sifu MARIA~

Video 1

Video 2

 

[mjw1]

I appreciate the open mindedness, just don't get caught up in the whole search for the holy grail of video footage. That's coming at things from the wrong mindset, regardless of the style. The determinant of a skill's worth should be from first hand knowledge of the skill, experienced empirically through more than just one of the senses.

As it was stated previously, styles don't fight--people fight. Styles don't determine the winner--intelligence, willpower, and skill determine that. The efficacy of a system's efficacy to produce consistently good fighters comes mostly from how realistic the training is.

Of course over the internet, all we can do is try and see what sorts of video footage is out there since we can't exhange ideas physically in person. I'll be the first to admit there's not much in terms of what I'd call good wing chun on the internet.

Nonetheless here's something via you tube that is one of the better vids in terms of inter-school sparring. These guys aren't professional MMA guys mind you, just students. This is not the way I'd go about using it persay either, but I think these guys have the right idea...YouTube - Wing Chun True Disciple - Fight 3 of 3

YouTube - Wing Chun with Master Wang ZhiPeng
Here's the perfect weapon clip

Also, PM your city--and I'll try and see if I can find a good source of solid wing chun for you to experience first hand.

Much better wing chun video!

 

[spiderguardman]

Those two paragraphs sum up every "style vs. style" conversation. You can beat anyone if they have no idea what you're doing and you have some ideaof what they're doing.

Most importantly, if sparring isn't a major component of your training, it doesn't matter what you train. You have to train dealing with fighting circumstances as much as you train the techniques themselves.

MT wouldn't get used very much if ring time wasn't such an important part of the training, the same with boxing. But they both spar regularly and so they know how to defend themselves against live opposition. Most WC schools I've seen rarely spar full contact, it's no mystery why they don't win fights.

To summarize: Ring rookies do not beat ring veterans.

Fun fact, most thai fighters actually don