The Road to Wing Chun applied in Combat Sports

[TheMaster]

I hate to break it to you but what they are doing in those links is in fact western boxing. The force generation for all the punches is the western boxing engine. Total abandonment of the elbow driven wc punching system. The parties are in fact boxing parties. The stance is even orthodox boxing stance and boxing footwork. Not a little head movement - they are evading the punches like boxers and abandoning penetration fo the centreline.

It seems the only way they were able to convert wc for the ring was to remove all the wc and adopt boxing...

No it isn't, and it shows the superficial level of your reasoning about this that 'because its in boxing gloves, it's boxing".

No, it is applied WC and the principles are there if you understand what you are seeing. This is what sparring WC will look like. If they did it in MMA gloves it would visually look more different but he is not boxing trained.

And now you want to claim the parrying is 'boxing' as well lol.
<[analyzed}>

Will there be some crossover inevitable in combat sports? Yes.
But there is far more to punching than just the Western boxing version.

 

[Sanserif]

No it isn't, and it shows the superficial level of your reasoning about this that 'because its in boxing gloves, it's boxing".

No, it is applied WC and the principles are there if you understand what you are seeing. This is what sparring WC will look like. If they did it in MMA gloves it would visually look more different but he is not boxing trained.

Will there be some crossover inevitable in cpmbat sports? Yes.
But there is far more to punching than just the Western boxing version.

I can assure you I do not have a superficial understanding of boxing punches.

I can clearly see what they are doing. It doesnt matter what they say - it's what and how they execute during sparring which is important. Their videos are very clear as to what they r doing in reality. It is even clearer particularly in the first video - both are throwing shoulder rotation punches for instance. This is particularly clear when the instructor throws his right cross.

Btw I just noticed you made a comment about parrying. You are clearly unaware that boxing has parries of it's own.

 

[TheMaster]

I can assure you I do not have a superficial understanding of boxing punches. I can clearly see what they are doing. It doesnt matter what they say - it's what and how they execute during sparring which is important. Their videos are very clear a to what they r doing in reality.

No, it shows you didn't watch the last video I posted and you don't have much of an understanding of WC.
This is the applied WC engine in combat sports, not whatever cartoon you have in your mind of what you think it's 'supposed' to look like from Ip Man movies.

Something in any way like the 'movies' (with less dramatics obviously) would have to be the strictly no rules variety which as pointed out cannot really be done.

You actually sound like some of the non-sparring WC nerds with your critique since they also say similar often until they look deeper and understand what he is doing and the WC is clear through and through.

 

[Sanserif]

No, it shows you didn't watch the last video I posted and you don't have much of an understanding of WC.
This is the applied WC engine in combat sports, not whatever cartoon you have in your mind what you think it's 'supposed' to look like from Ip Man movies.

You actually sound like some of the non-sparring WC nerds with your critique since they also say similar often until they look deeper and understand what he is doing.

My understanding of wc has nothing to do with ip man movies and theres no need for you to insult me and being uncivil towards me by saying that - you know very well my knowledge of wc is much more than that and that I have trained previously from what I have shared. If I had only has knowledge through youtube there is no way I will be able to say what I have said.

However I do perceive you have not trained in boxing , is that correct? I do and I can tell you that I have done the same things in sparring as those two are doing and more besides and I was not doing wc but straight up boxing. You do not have this experience so you do not see these things that I and anybody who trains in boxing can see very clearly.

 

[TheMaster]

My understanding of wc has nothing to do with ip man movies and theres no need for you to insult me and being uncivil towards me by saying that - you know very well my knowledge of wc is much more than that and that I have trained previously from what I have shared. If I had only has knowledge through youtube there is no way I will be able to say what I have said.

However I do perceive you have not trained in boxing , is that correct? I do and I can tell you that I have done the same things in sparring as those two are doing and more besides and I was not doing wc but straight up boxing. You do not have this experience so you do not see these things that I and anybody who trains in boxing can see very clearly.

As I mentioned it comes under the domain of crossover which there is bound to be when you take it to the ring.

You need a more alive and dynamic understanding of the system and how the different elements fit together.

The fact you were saying that for WC we would necessarily use the straight blast is the type of very limited thinking I am talking about when we could easily strike from many angles with different types of punches.

The point is the engine is still very much WC and it doesnt need to be changed a whole lot to work in this environment.

 

[Sanserif]

As I mentioned it comes under the domain of crossover which there is bound to be when you take it to the ring.

You need a more alive and dynamic understanding of the system and how the different elements fit together.

The fact you were saying that for WC we would necessarily use the straight blast is the type of very limited thinking I am talking about when we could easily strike from many angles with different types of punches.

The point is the engine is still very much WC and it doesnt need to be changed a whole lot to work in this environment.

I notice you didnt answer my question about whether you train in boxing. Can we take it that the answer is no? If not i am afraid that you do not realy understand boxing and that's why you cannot see what I am saying in my posts above.

I never said wc has to be straight blast. I said wc has no way to bridge the gap from close range to medium and long ranges. This is confirmed in the orr videos where all of them adopted straight boxing footwork.

 

[TheMaster]

I notice you didnt answer my question about whether you train in boxing. Can we take it that the answer is no? If not i am afraid that you do not realy understand boxing and that's why you cannot see what I am saying in my posts above.

I never said wc has to be straight blast. I said wc has no way to bridge the gap from close range to medium and long ranges. This is confirmed in the orr videos where all of them adopted straight boxing footwork.

Nope, it's not straight boxing footwork, but predictable you would call it that.

Further as I pointed out earlier, the system is not preducated on the footwork and can adopt many stances.

If there is overlap in some footwork to avoid punches or bridge the gap with boxing so be it.
We have agreed that the system focusses on close range. It doesn't make it boxing when their strategy and means of delivery and engine is fundamentally WC just because they use some steps that have worked to bridge the gap be it in boxing , kickboxing or whatever.
There is bound to be crossover there are only so many ways of covering distance the point is to be able to use WC while doing whichever bridging methods and to be able to apply their strategy which they are able to.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

It's straight boxing footwork. It is also probably straight wing chun footwork, or karate, muay thai whatever the fuck - because footwork is footwork, clinch is clinch, a left hook is a left hook.

Again, martial arts are not exclusive software to each other. When you get down to it, most of these martial arts are saying the same thing.

 

[Sanserif]

Nope, it's not straight boxing footwork, but predictable you would call it that.

Further as I pointed out earlier, the system is not preducated on the footwork and can adopt many stances.

If there is overlap in some footwork to avoid punches or bridge the gap with boxing so be it.
We have agreed that the system focusses on close range. It doesn't make it boxing when their strategy and means of delivery and engine is fundamentally WC just because they use some steps that have worked to bridge the gap be it in boxing , kickboxing or whatever.
There is bound to be crossover there are only so many ways of covering distance the point is to be able to use WC while doing whichever bridging methods and to be able to apply their strategy which they are able to.

On the contrary the wv system is predicated on the stance and without the stance it is not wc because everything emanates from it including the footwork. The wc stance and thus the footwork are it's own special animal and from it is unlocked the power of wc and if you think it is not essential then your understanding of wc is actually not as complete as you think.

The whole way they fight is in accordance with boxing philosophy. There is no attempt to gain thecentreline or to overcome the parrying hands of the opponent- they r using their hands like guards which is boxing and not wc and they r hitting around those guards - just like boxing.

What they r doing is perfectly valid but it's not wc - its boxing.

 

[Sanserif]

It's straight boxing footwork. It is also probably straight wing chun footwork, or karate, muay thai whatever the fuck - because footwork is footwork, clinch is clinch, a left hook is a left hook.

Again, martial arts are not exclusive software to each other. When you get down to it, most of these martial arts are saying the same thing.

What u say is mostly correct for most martia sports and arts but not for wingchun.

 

[TheMaster]

What u say is mostly correct for most martia sports and arts but not for wingchun.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

What u say is mostly correct for most martia sports and arts but not for wingchun.

It's true of all martial arts, I had a longer explanation on it in relation to the clinch earlier, and another post earlier where I explained in terms of striking there are only 6 things you can do.

I do agree though that if wing chun when made useful resembles boxing, you may as well just learn to box

 

[TheMaster]

On the contrary the wv system is predicated on the stance and without the stance it is not wc because everything emanates from it

I thought you said you were not high level WC? Then why are you trying to tell me what the basis is and also contradicting Alan who is even higher level?

Look at it this way- the internal power generation and attributes, principles and methods are what makes it WC.

The stance and the traditional footwork for close range are just examples of an ideal. One does not and should not remain bound to them when adapting to different circumstances and longer range , to do so contradicts the principle of efficiency.
Like the centreline principle- it illustrates an idea or concept but needs to be adapted. What if the center line is covered? What if you notice your opponent is much better at protecting the centreline but less at other angles or covering more curved punches?
What becomes the most efficient way then?
How can you disrupt his center in this case?

There are some contants of course that are key- one should be fully rooted and flat footed when one strikes in WC for example.

WC provides a vast many solutions that boxing has no answer for (maybe dirty boxing plus MT plus other arts have some of these answers). It fundamentally uses a different and better power generation method also,less reliant on muscular force.

Think more broadly, it is a deep principle based system.

 

[Sanserif]

Lets not get into an appeal to authority fallacy here till it becomes a spitting contest as to who can spit furthest. Anyway I am not the source of what I shared as in what do I know right? I am only communicating what I was taught but I am quite assured those who taught me knew what they wee talking about. 'Nuff said...

In terms of what was shown in the video, if it moves like boxing, punches like boxing, guards like boxing and evades like boxing, then it most likely is boxing. Now if that is wingchun to you, then I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree as maybe u and I have seen and experienced rather different things that are called by the same name in different circles...

I thought you said you were not high level WC? Then why are you trying to tell me what the basis is and also contradicting Alan who is even higher level?

Look at it this way- the internal power generation and attributes, principles and methods are what makes it WC.

The stance and the traditional footwork for close range are just examples of an ideal. One does not and should not remain bound to them when adapting to different circumstances and longer range , to do so contradicts the principle of efficiency.
Like the centreline principle- it illustrates an idea or concept but needs to be adapted. What if the center line is covered? What if you notice your opponent is much better at protecting the centreline but less at other angles or covering more curved punches?
What becomes the most efficient way then?
How can you disrupt his center in this case?

There are some contants of course that are key- one should be fully rooted and flat footed when one strikes in WC for example.

WC provides a vast many solutions that boxing has no answer for (maybe dirty boxing plus MT plus other arts have some of these answers). It fundamentally uses a different and better power generation method also,less reliant on muscular force.

Think more broadly, it is a deep principle based system.

 

[Sanserif]

It's true of all martial arts, I had a longer explanation on it in relation to the clinch earlier, and another post earlier where I explained in terms of striking there are only 6 things you can do.

I do agree though that if wing chun when made useful resembles boxing, you may as well just learn to box

Sure you can say that footwork is the same in generalities in the sense that you need to put one foot in front of the other to move forward, but the wc stance is really a diff species altogether from most striking arts and it impacts the footwork accordingly. It is a really fascinating system wingchun and worth checking out with a good teacher who knows the internals if you hae the chance and the time.

 

[Dece]

I hate to break it to you but what they are doing in those links is in fact western boxing. The force generation for all the punches is the western boxing engine. Total abandonment of the elbow driven wc punching system. The parries are in fact boxing parries. The stance is even orthodox boxing stance and boxing footwork. Not just "a little" head movement - they are evading the punches like boxers and abandoning penetration of the centreline.

It seems the only way they were able to convert wc for the ring was to remove all the wc and adopt boxing...

I have to disagree with you on this one. 90% of those punches in the video were arm punches with no power behind them.

 

[TheMaster]

I am only communicating what I was taught but I am quite assured those who taught me knew what they wee talking about. 'Nuff said...

In terms of what was shown in the video, if it moves like boxing, punches like boxing, guards like boxing and evades like boxing, then it most likely is boxing. Now if that is wingchun to you, then I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree as maybe u and I have seen and experienced rather different things that are called by the same name in different circles...

But he doesn't 'punch like boxing' in any way. The mechanics are different and reflect the Wing Chun approach.

And the parries are WC, its how they are going to look if they choose to spar in boxing gloves.
The guard covers his centreline, typical WC. But even if he chose a crab guard or cross guard that could still work and it is still wc because the engine is the same.

So the fact that just them putting on boxing gloves confuses you so much tells me you are not analyzing well.
Similarly with the footwork. He is just walking and doing basic steps no specific footwork to label it 'boxing'. One need not be standing in a rear weight stance and is not correct at further range, nor to stand in the triangle stance which is more of a leg training stance anyway.

 

[Sanserif]

I have to disagree with you on this one. 90% of those punches in the video were arm punches with no power behind them.

I didnt say that the punches were powerfulor that they were whole body punches with full rotation in the way that boxing punches with good technique are - what I was ref to was that they were in the family of boxing style punches in the sense they are launched from the shoulder instead of from the elbows and spine.

 

[Sanserif]

But he doesn't 'punch like boxing' in any way. The mechanics are different and reflect the Wing Chun approach.

And the parries are WC, its how they are going to look if they choose to spar in boxing gloves.
The guard covers his centreline, typical WC. But even if he chose a crab guard or cross guard that could still work and it is still wc because the engine is the same.

So the fact that just them putting on boxing gloves confuses you so much tells me you are not analyzing well.
Similarly with the footwork. He is just walking and doing basic steps no specific footwork to label it 'boxing'. One need not be standing in a rear weight stance and is not correct at further range, nor to stand in the triangle stance which is more of a leg training stance anyway.

The engine is from the shoulder instead of from the elbows and spine - can you seriously not see how almost all the punches are launched from the shoulder especially for the smaller guy. The bigger guy is obvious in using his shoulder whenever he throws the right cross overhand. He used a lot of hook style punches which is similar to boxing long hooks though he didnt use any hip rotation. His hooks were not derived from linear force from lateral direction as in biu jee lateral strikes.

The engagement is in and out of range and then sniping boxing style instead of penetrating along the centreline and defeating all obstacles in the path to strike the opponent. The energy is boxing style not wc style. It is quite different from the bare handed chi sau application videos you showed earlier.

 

[TheMaster]

The engine is from the shoulder instead of from the elbows and spine - can you seriously not see how almost all the punches are launched from the shoulder especially for the smaller guy. The bigger guy is obvious in using his shoulder whenever he throws the right cross overhand. He used a lot of hook style punches which is similar to boxing long hooks though he didnt use any hip rotation. His hooks were not derived from linear force from lateral direction as in biu jee lateral strikes.

The engagement is in and out of range and then sniping boxing style instead of penetrating along the centreline and defeating all obstacles in the path to strike the opponent. The energy is boxing style not wc style. It is quite different from the bare handed chi sau application videos you showed earlier.

No. This is his WC punching action. He doesn't train boxing. You are just confused because he is visually in boxing gloves. There were multiple videos posted earlier of him punching in chi sau/gor sau and you made no comment at all about his punching action until he put gloves on then suddenly it all apparantly looks like 'boxing' to you lol. A noobie error.

The shoulder is involved in arm movements. You will not be able to 'see' all of someone's punching action on a video, you could feel their punches when they hit and the 'internal force' (heavy hits) if they hit with power but they are the one who will only really be able to feel their actions on the inside.

Same with your comments on strategy. You can't have it both ways. The "go in and destroy using punches, neck strikes, elbows, relentless" approach cannot and will not be applied or tested in this setting.

The whole point of any good martial art is it should have a lower gear sporting version. Control the amount of force, engage and disengage if you want step in and out. We have repeatedly said this is sport WC we are developing.
Just like the truth is Karate has sporting and non sport versions.
Kickboxing comes partly from karate. But we never see the famous 'karate chop' ever in MMA or combat sports it's an illegal technique.

When you make a sport version of the martial art you can test it more and develop skills but the strategy changes as well.
You can also spar in many ways, if you want to work on entries and engaging ability then of course you step in and out.
You sound like you haven't trained much or really thought about how training methods can be applied for different purposes.