My current opinions on wing chun

[Mayhem]

WC and apparently CMA in general have this premise that it takes a long time to learn how to fight. It is interesting WCL that you mentioned that the MT guy who got the better of you had only been training for 6 months. In my experience that is about the time it takes someone who starts MT to develop enough skill to trample most non-MT people.

MT essentially has:
2 kicks, 3 punches, 2 knees and 2 elbows, some standup grappling and thats about it.

The strength of MT comes from employing these simple techniques over and over again, developing technique, power and speed. The techniques 'feel' natural when you do them for the first time and so you can employ them straight away. There is no standing in strange positions or utilising techniques which don't feel natural. MT has a simple syllabus which is easy to pick up and use. WC on the other hand has a HUGE amount of material to learn. A lot of CMA guys have shown me some techniques and then finished with 'but you probably wouldn't use that in a fight' and I think 'well why learn it then?'

Basically MT is simple and effective, it uses the bodys natural movements to develop power and speed. WC teaches MUCH more than you would ever employ in 100 fighting situtaions and you have to use a lot of movements that initailly dont feel right from the start.

I think chain punches are overrated.

[Thaiboxerken]

You can't beat WC for effectiveness, it was created so that toddlers could beat up adult MMA champions.

[Mouthfire]

WCL, the only question I have for you is about time frame. Any style I've seen, it generally takes 5+ years to master. Is WC the same way, and, as a follow up, is that a bad thing?

I know **** about MT or BJJ, but from this board I get the impression that they are simpler, more straightforward styles to learn. Does this mean that you can learn the entire style in a year or two? What then?

Well, that's the beauty of Muay Thai. You don't spend years and years learning impractical techniques that you will never use. You spend a short time learning the few techniques that it does have, and then you spend the rest of your career honing those skills and beating people up.

People who believe more techniques = better fighters are the same people who think 5 y/o black belts are T3H D34DLY.

[Preacher Man]

So because Wing Chun has more techniques than MT it is useless? I think thats just a bit silly.

The biggest problem with WC is not its techniques or methods, its the way its being taught. A lot more Sifu's need to get out there and start teaching it with realistic sparring and the like.

[Onny]

Also, wing chun is one of the quickest roads to self defense if that is what you are looking for. Since it was created by a nun for a woman, it is also very effective against larger opponents.

i know that dochter has briefly touched on this, but i'd like to ask a more direct question if i may.

what, in the opinion of the WC'ers here, makes it a good art for "weaker" people?

i've heard this a couple of times, and i'm a bit puzzled by it. most wing chun strikes (certainly the strikes learned by beginners) rely on the speed and strength of the arm alone to deliver power. wouldn't "weaker" folks be better off learning strikes that involve other parts of the body (ie, the hips, the feet) in order to hit harder?

[waapwoop]

i know that dochter has briefly touched on this, but i'd like to ask a more direct question if i may.

what, in the opinion of the WC'ers here, makes it a good art for "weaker" people?

i've heard this a couple of times, and i'm a bit puzzled by it. most wing chun strikes (certainly the strikes learned by beginners) rely on the speed and strength of the arm alone to deliver power. wouldn't "weaker" folks be better off learning strikes that involve other parts of the body (ie, the hips, the feet) in order to hit harder?

Well..... it does teach you how to punch hard. I know i can punch a lot harder than i used to be able to as a reult of wing chun... i am not very strong.
I know many wing chun schools don't teach how to get power in punches... one guy on here said once that they don't hit hard, so they hit lots of times, ie chain punching.... which is just silly, if you can't hurt the person you won't win the fight.

If you are doing wing chun, and you can't hit hard.... it is useless... its a striking art. If your instructors/sifu can hit hard, and can show you how to do the same thing with great efficiency then I think that is good.

One thing I like about wing chun, and i don't think its taught much, but is apart of the chi sau i learn... is that of fighting force... if someone has there are extended, and i tap at their arm, they automatically push out to meet the tap.... a built in body reflex that i believe is a hinderance to fighting. If you don't fight the force, in any minute detail (like someone just lightly touching your arm, and your arm going sideways) then you will have a much greater chance of hitting your opponent as you won't be distracted by your opponents arms., you will just hit straight, no matter what.

[wingchunnewbie]

Apparently there have never been any good wt/c practicioners who have ever got into a fight with someone not doing the same style.

Apart from Kevin Chan and the guy from Chum Sut WC in Northern Ireland.

[Kinzei]

My formal wing tsun training was relatively short (long enough to learn si num tao) The problems with the system, in my limited opinon, is that what was taught in theory was not taught in practice. Also, it seemed to me that the techniques were not used to the fullest of potential. For example, tan sau was taught as an absorbing type block, but could have easily been turned into an offensive technique. (block with tan sau, rotate arm palm down while moving in, for a close line verson of irimi nage.) I don't know if I left to soon, or this is typical of the system in general. Also, it seemed to me that with chi sau, there are many opertunities for arm breaks etc. Moved on because the drive was to long and I wanted to get back into jujitsu.

[Preacher Man]

wouldn't "weaker" folks be better off learning strikes that involve other parts of the body (ie, the hips, the feet) in order to hit harder?

And for the second time you do use you're hips and feet in WC punches, it aint all chain punches you know.



Incidentally my WC comes from Kevin Chan, who taught my Sifu. That was many years ago though, before he did gradings and such.

My formal wing tsun training was relatively short (long enough to learn si num tao) The problems with the system, in my limited opinon, is that what was taught in theory was not taught in practice. Also, it seemed to me that the techniques were not used to the fullest of potential. For example, tan sau was taught as an absorbing type block, but could have easily been turned into an offensive technique. (block with tan sau, rotate arm palm down while moving in, for a close line verson of irimi nage.) I don't know if I left to soon, or this is typical of the system in general. Also, it seemed to me that with chi sau, there are many opertunities for arm breaks etc. Moved on because the drive was to long and I wanted to get back into jujitsu.

Tan sau itself cannot really be used offensively, it is after all a block. But you can follow on from it with a lap or pak sau to remove an arm or simply a strike or an elbow to the body. You have to remember that whilst WC uses simultaneous attack and defence you dont have to return to a set position to use your blocking arm as a offensive weapon, one of my favourite techniques is to use a biu ji as a block which if applied from outside gate can also follow straight through into an eye strike. Also using a jum sau which can turn into a strike over a redirected arm is similar.

And yes there are arm/elbow breaks in WC, Tok Sau being one which is shown in Chum Kiu.

[Kinzei]

Quote: one of my favourite techniques is to use a biu ji as a block which if applied from outside gate can also follow straight through into an eye strike.

I was refering to using tan sau in a similiar manner.