|
Post by major01 on Jun 24, 2012 22:39:46 GMT -5
Every great MA forum has that great WC bashing thread with a hundred+ posts, so let's continue that tradition here. To be clear, I train in WC and have for the last 3 years, so clearly I don't think it's all BS, but controversy drives readership.
A few ground rules: Non-chunners No MMA platitudes or non-substantive sloganeering. Please differentiate between problems with the style, training, or proponents. Let's rid ourselves of generalities and stick to specifics.
Chunners Be logical, not ideological. Don't be defensive. Let's stay away from lineage bashing unless you can provide a solid coherent reason as to why you think the way you do.
Other than that, anything and everything regarding the Chun is on the table. Let out your inner-loathing for the style and all it stands for here. Or simply discuss the pros and cons of the art. Whatever you fancy.
I'll get the ball rolling -- William Cheung's How to develop Chi Power is the greatest book ever written? ;D
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 24, 2012 23:50:47 GMT -5
Most people don't know what wing chun is so the shit talking will continue forever.
The biggest problem with it I think is the countless number of mcdojos out there everyone thinks they teach legit wing chun bit it's not.
People tend to compare mcdojo kids to mma pros which is the stupidest thing you can do and you might as well compare all scientists to the kids in the special ed class because those kids ca;t do it as good as the scientists and the only difference would be the good scientists are more well known and popular so everyone knows what real science is.
It's a science not a style much like jkd or how boxing used to be.
Concepts & principles create techniques so with the right combination of concepts & principles you can potentially create an infinite number of techniques variations wither they be offensive or defensive only limited to how your body can move and what you can come up with, test & perfect which sometimes can take generations to do and things regress and progress accordingly.
Also you can't copy something someone else does perfectly since no 2 bodys are identical but you can use another move just as effectively but again their are countless variations of moves.
It's a good wing chunners to check all the variables and make sure what they are doing is right according to their principles & concepts not just because tradition dictates.
That's why there is such an emphases on concepts in wing chun over technique.
And my old sifu told me jkd is just bruce lees wing chun done right sisnce it still follows all the same principles as wc but a few more added from fencing and boxing and a few other styles that he used to create techniques form.
Like if you break all styles down to concepts & principles you would see just how similar they are the main differences are how said principles & concepts are actually applied and thats where there is so much hate because people cant accept something so similar but so different like techniques let alone a whole style.
We live in a world where people commit genocide against people for being different so don't expect to please everyone without some kind of ridicule from the vulgars.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 25, 2012 3:13:15 GMT -5
Most people don't know what wing chun is so the shit talking will continue forever. Yes it will, but I don't think it's because people don't know what it is. This is what every Chunner says. Then they get their asses kicked and all the other Chunners forsake them and just keep saying it. Every Chunner claims that their Wing Chun is the real deal. None of them have proven it to the world so far. So where the hell are the GOOD Wing Chun fighters that could hang with the pros? I sure as hell don't see them competing, and the excuse that it's because of the rules of the ring is bullshit. Boxing isn't a science anymore? Call me crazy, I think it's come a long way. How does this translate to Wing Chun not sucking? And yet every time a Wing Chunner loses a fight, people say it's because his form wasn't just perfect, and if they had done REAL Wing Chun it would have been. Right, because technique is stupid. Nobody's ever won a fight with great technique. Fights are won on chalkboards covered in fancy formulas because concepts are what truly matter in a fight. No, the hate is there because Wing Chun sucks and yet instructors make a lot of money off of students for teaching them things that don't work while claiming they will.
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 25, 2012 16:39:29 GMT -5
1. are you sure becaue you don't sound verry educated on the subject.
2. I'm not a wing chunner but I said so non chunners say it too but everyones a poser even ggj abn bjj are different styles but the bjj guys won't admit they aren't doing something different even though they are.
3. then why don't wrestlers compete in boxing or does their style conflict with the rules that would need adaptation to work?
4. yes it's all punching and james toney proved it's usefulness against a compitent grappler. which shows proper evoloution for the better... not lol
5. because it's always changing but it's only sucks when people stop the change and it gets stale.
6. because just like every style there are morons
7. thats just stupid and your putting words in my mouth lol
a proper punch isn't a random flailing of the arm it's done according to concept & principles and if your not following any your flailing your arm around randomly...
proper technique is relative to a style like a shoulder throw in judo is different than wrestling but neither does it wronf but according to you one does but which one?
8. again uneducated bias just because you learned at a mcdojo doesdn't mean they all are and my 1st judo club I quit becaue it was a mcdojo but I don't hold it against all other judo dojod.
that would be like comparing all mma fighters to brett rogers who beat his wife because it's true they all do according to your logic.
and it will always be a bad art uas long as people like you go to a mcdojo and say youve seen legit wc 1st hand.
I met a mma fighter who was in jail for rape and he got his ass kicked and has to go to pc so where was his sick mma skillls?
oh wait he did use them to mounted buddy but had his sack squeezed so hard he went into shock because the pain and got his head stomped until the guards stopped the fight.
you can compare apples and oranges all day if you wan't but it won't help you come any closer to what is a better fruit.
|
|
|
Post by Glutton4Punishment on Jun 25, 2012 16:58:39 GMT -5
You don't know where I trained and it was not a McDojo. Saying I don't sound educated on the subject does not make it so, either. I have 3 years of Wing Chun experience with two different Sifu and if I didn't feel that they were good representations of Wing Chun and what it has to offer, I wouldn't be talking right now. I've been to McDojos. I know what they are like and I'm not afraid to call a spade a spade.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Comparing Wing Chun to the dominant striking styles in MMA is not apples to oranges, it's definitely apples to apples. If you have a good Muay Thai fighter, Kyokushin Karateka, or Boxer square off against an equally trained Wing Chun fighter with gloves, you know what the result will be. Taking off the gloves does not in any way, shape or form give the Wing Chun practitioner any more of an advantage. Why? Because if they couldn't land good, clean hits with the gloves on, there's no reason to believe that they will land good, clean hits without the gloves. Gloves do not make one unskilled. Look at Alan Orr and his Wing Chun training methods. VERY modern, and much more realistic than the crap most places are trying, and they've competed in MMA fairly well, but still not well enough to call Wing Chun a good fighting art. But at the very least, his students aren't deluded enough to say that the presence of gloves and rules makes their system difficult to adapt. It just isn't true.
Comparing a wrestler to a boxer is just ridiculous. It's not an apples to apples comparison, so your argument does not hold up. Any Wing Chun practitioner who enters MMA will have some form of grappling to take with them. Reference Alan Orr again, or Shawn Obasi. They still haven't been able to effectively produce world class fighters. Nobody in their right mind is going to try to use pure Wing Chun to win against an MMA fighter.
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 25, 2012 20:42:15 GMT -5
depends if the wing chunners train full contact or not and if the mme fighter, karate huy & kickboxer don't train full contact they will get beat by a cw guy who did.
and there is no such thing as a pure style it's bullshit lol
|
|
odee
Global Moderator
Kyokushin 10 years - Brazilian Jujitsu 3 years - Muay Thai 2 years.
Posts: 1,286
|
Post by odee on Jun 25, 2012 21:32:15 GMT -5
This is true. There are no purists in top level MMA tournaments anymore. No student of Brazilian Jujitsu, Muay Thai, Wrestling, Kickboxing, Boxing or Karate survives as a purist anymore. But it's true that there are purists from Muay Thai, Karate, Savate, Kung Fu and Taekwando in Kickboxing. Why no Wing Chun?
I know the answer and it's got nothing to do with technique or rules.
A Karateka in Kickboxing is usually encouraged to compete by their teacher and fellow students or at the very least supported and assisted by them. Such combinations of students and teachers with regards to competitions are just so rare in Wing Chun that they have no real talent pool to push a fighter into the top competitions. It's a matter of odds. Since there are very few Wing Chun students who compete there are very few chances of one of them having the talent and ability needed to be successful and just as few chances of one being noticed and given a shot at the big boys. Remember that old expression "You gotta be in it to win it" Wing Chun students aren't in it.
|
|
Chef Samurai
Global Moderator
Canadian Catch Wrestling
Posts: 843
|
Post by Chef Samurai on Jun 25, 2012 21:38:28 GMT -5
This is true. There are no purists in top level MMA tournaments anymore. No student of Brazilian Jujitsu, Muay Thai, Wrestling, Kickboxing, Boxing or Karate survives as a purist anymore. But it's true that there are purists from Muay Thai, Karate, Savate, Kung Fu and Taekwando in Kickboxing. Why no Wing Chun? I know the answer and it's got nothing to do with technique or rules. A Karateka in Kickboxing is usually encouraged to compete by their teacher and fellow students or at the very least supported and assisted by them. Such combinations of students and teachers with regards to competitions are just so rare in Wing Chun that they have no real talent pool to push a fighter into the top competitions. It's a matter of odds. Since there are very few Wing Chun students who compete there are very few chances of one of them having the talent and ability needed to be successful and just as few chances of one being noticed and given a shot at the big boys. Remember that old expression "You gotta be in it to win it" Wing Chun students aren't in it. It's a lot like old karate too many people were into forms but no fighting and kickboxing changed that & I think sanshou is doing the same with wc and other wushu styles but it's up to the practitioner if they wan't to do full contact or not.
|
|
|
Post by youxia on Jul 3, 2012 7:19:32 GMT -5
Apparently aliveness isn't all that anyway, according to the magic of [glow=blue,2,300]SIENS[/glow]- nononsenseselfdefense.com/aliveness.htmlAlso here is a very rare real life Wing Chun fight ... okay its from a movie but its still pretty cool
|
|
|
Post by rounhouse85 on Jul 4, 2012 3:54:32 GMT -5
I will begin by saying I am not a "chunner".
What I am about to say is coming from a load of book knowledge, combined with what experience I do have in martial arts.
Wing Chun is certainly based in science, and well, hey, mathematics. Its strikes are very linear (not exclusively so, not dealing in absolutes here), as to deliver force cleanly and efficiently. Its origins are in Southern Shaolin Wushu, which tend to feature a lot of in-fighting, close-up brawling. This is also where Bruce Lee's famous One Inch Punch came from. The arms line up in almost a battering-ram like fashion, so as to push and drill "through" a target.
Bruce Lee compared it to Western Fencing (which is where I am drawing my comparisons from, I fence) but only without a sword. From what I can tell of Wing Chun, most of it is there, parry, riposte, thrust, deflecting attacks away from center line...
In making Jeet Kune Do (JKD) Lee studied a great number of martial arts, stating there were no "styles", that we could only fight a certain way. We all have two arms, two legs, and until we fight guys with four arms, and four legs, there is only so many ways we can move. He set about taking all the best parts of the "styles" (Boxing's Jabs, Karate's Blocks, Judo's throws, Kicks of Muay Thai and TaeKwonDo... etc.) and combined them with what he knew of Wing Chun.
The topic of this is thread is "Wing Chun is Bullshit". I wholeheartedly disagree. Wing Chun is not bullshit, but it is in its current state, incomplete. Bruce Lee stated that JKD did not teach one how to fight, it took a good fighter and made him better, implying that you needed to bring a little something to the table. From what I can gather, Wing Chun is a toolset, from which to take what youre already doing, admit areas youre weak in, and fill in gaps in your chosen "style". I, myself, find Lee's "straight lead" indespensable. Learn from it, take what you want, and leave the rest.
|
|