Wing Chun? hard style. Wing Tsun? softer than Aikido. Flipside? practically limp.

[EternalRage]

Nothing wrong with people making fun of an art. Some of the stances in wing chun look hilarious. What I am saying is that you can have a rubbish BJJ practitioner, but it doesn't mean that BJJ is rubbish.

Kevin Chan as a wing chun fighter is certainly not crap and that has been backed up countless times (just look at our website under 'testimonials')

And there are more wing chunners who are very good. All I am asking is that when people post something about wing chun, don't automatically assume it is crap.

I don't think a system should be classified as "bad" just because it's trained in a stupid way - that's not the system's fault per se, but the people who refuse to move with changing times.

But I totally disagree that there is no such thing as crappy systems. That whole "every system has it's weaknesses and it's strengths so lets go dance in a merry circle in the daisy meadows together" is bullshit. Some systems have more inherent strengths than others, and less weaknesses than others = better systems.

Unfortunately for wing chun, it suffers many weaknesses, and it's usually trained like crap - sure there may be people who are quick enough, strong enough, crosstrain enough, and just train the good parts of the system well enough to become decent fighters, but the fact remains that the system of _ing _un itself provides more of a hindrance in their development.

[Virus]

It doesn't prove a technique is valid. Everything has to be tested why does this failure in logic occur in TCMA?

It's too deadly to test.

[Kamon Guy]

Centreline. Fuck. Your point was that idiots start fight with a sternum charge, so you can attack the theoretical/mystical centreline. My point was that you can do pretty much anything to said idiot, so why would you deliberately choose to deerbox him?
.

Deerbox? I did say that chain punching isn't great and I wouldn't use it in a fight
The reason I wouldn't use a hook is that I am not a pro boxer and whilst my weight would probably mean that the punch would take his head off, I would much rather use something that always works, which is the much loved wing chun.

BTW The general consensus is that it is you and your chunning friends who are stupid, and that isn't likely to change until you stop churning out the same old wing chun bullshit we've all read 1000 times before, OR show up at a TD and spar someone who weighs as much as you..

That's fair enough. I am not going to try and change your opinion on that. I have been around different martial arts long enough to know what works and what doesn't. Boxing is great, BJJ is great, but the gyms I have been to previously forced you to compete or they wouldn't train you. I am lucky to have found gyms in the last few years where they would train you (Gracie Barra, etc)

In Kamon, we work hard and I am happy with the training. My hand speed is faster, my positioning is better and my punches have become harder.

People seem to be preoccupied with the idea that a martial art is only good if it works in a fight. Some of the happiest martial artists I know have trained no contact martial arts and know that it is not practical but enjoy the training and social side.
Yeah it is probably a 'soft' art, but hey if it makes a person happy....

Because at the time I, too, was a dumbfuck chunner. As an ex-chunner, I would never bother going to a Kamon demo.

Please feel free to email Kevin Chan and tell him that you thought his wing chun was crap.

[Kamon Guy]

See this is the problem. Everything he talks is stationary/compliant. You guys have failed to see why I stopped arguing.


If you LET me drop a brick on your foot of course it is going to hurt. If Running Dog lies on the floor and will LET you chain punch him to death of course it is going to work.
It is just like your stupid "let me chop you in the neck and tell me it isn't effective" bullshit.

No one is going to LET you do shit. It doesn't prove a technique is valid. Everything has to be tested why does this failure in logic occur in TCMA?

It is Fake - you twat. People on here were saying that chain punches in the ground and pound position were ineffective. When I said let me, I meant let me mount him. He can then defend with anything and I will show you it is effective. I didn't mean give me a free shot to the head. However, for the chop, people are saying that a fut sao would not do anything (ie it is not powerful). So my response was - let me chop your neck and see if it hurts. It wasn't about whether you'd pull it off in the street or not.

Like any move, the fut sao could get a clean strike in or someone might guard up, by which point a fut sao is a great bridge

[It is Fake]

People seem to be preoccupied with the idea that a martial art is only good if it works in a fight. Some of the happiest martial artists I know have trained no contact martial arts and know that it is not practical but enjoy the training and social side.
Yeah it is probably a 'soft' art, but hey if it makes a person happy....

This is a red herring. No one said you can't do wushu/no contact forms based kung fu. It isn't a Martial Art. True sports/modern Wushuists (Jet Li) will tell you they aren't fighters. None of us have a problem with that. They are playing at doing Martial Arts. It is the people claiming they fight with no contact training that are lying.

Funny that this has nothing to do with centerline theory. Oh wait....you brought it up so that makes it okay.

Please feel free to email Kevin Chan and tell him that you thought his wing chun was crap.

I mean I could respect your argument more if it was you instead of "Tell Kevin That, Go to a Kevin Demo, Email Kevin, call Kevin, Spar Kevin."

Jesus dude man up.

[It is Fake]

It is Fake - you twat. People on here were saying that chain punches in the ground and pound position were ineffective. When I said let me, I meant let me mount him. He can then defend with anything and I will show you it is effective. I didn't mean give me a free shot to the head. However, for the chop, people are saying that a fut sao would not do anything (ie it is not powerful). So my response was - let me chop your neck and see if it hurts. It wasn't about whether you'd pull it off in the street or not.

Like any move, the fut sao could get a clean strike in or someone might guard up, by which point a fut sao is a great bridge

So, you now mean in a sparring match?

[Kamon Guy]

I believe the point he was trying to make is that almost anything becomes a viable attack if your opponent refuses to defend against it. As a result, it's not really the best evidence for the value of a martial art.

No the point we were discussing is that you could not use centre line theory as most street thugs cover their centre line. The counter argument was that they don't.

And the point that people have been trying to make is that, if Wing Chun is not useful in ALL of these situations, one would be better studying a fighting form which IS useful in all of those situations.

It is reputed that Bruce Lee came to America and found that his wing chun didn't work against more experienced judo guys and boxers. Therefore he mixed these arts (concepts) into his kung fu and the result was jeet kune do
In Kamon we have done the same. A lot of the traditional stuff does not work in the Western world where the average height of an individual is close to 6 foot. In a lot of Asian countries the height is smaller.

A British street thug is a massive guy and used to street brawling. Therefore Kevin Chan adjusted the wing chun style to adapt to an aggressive, thuggish attacker

From full mount or from within my guard? Centerline chain punches from inside someone's guard will likely end in an armbar or a triangle choke. From full mount, straight chain punches will rarely penetrate a forearm block, and will make it easier for the mounted fighter to grab the top-man's arms and escape the mount. Hooks, elbows, and hammerfists are much harder to defend against, in such a situation.

Never within a guard!!! A full mount. And they will penetrate a forearm block - I did them on a blue belt BJJ player. And I never discounted other techniques from that position. The argument was about usefulness of wing chun and I stated that chain punching could be used in that position.

You're right-- just because someone quits one MA to study another does not mean the first one is crap. However, there is a preponderence of video evidence showing the utility of Boxing, BJJ, Muay Thai, and the martial forms typically lauded by MMA proponents. It's exceedingly difficult to find video of a competent Wing Chun practitioner sparring successfully with fighters from other MA's.
--Joe

I agree and I was going to do some vids of Kamon wing chun vs. styles, but was advised against it as it would be seen as an attack on certain styles which I respect.

I also believe that sparring in wing chun is either crap or non existent
The vid that was posted earlier in the thread was not what I would call good sparring.

[Kamon Guy]

So, you now mean in a sparring match?

Well, yeah, but I don't really use mounts when sparring, unless it is pure BJJ

If a person goes to ground I stamp on them as it is more effective for me

[It is Fake]

You lie on the floor and I'll chain punch and you can tell me if they are effective. Deal?

Then why tell someone to lie down on the floor? This can't be interpreted as sparring.

[Kamon Guy]

[QUOTE=It is Fake]
Funny that this has nothing to do with centerline theory. Oh wait....you brought it up so that makes it okay.
[QUOTE=Kung-Fu Joe]
Huh? Why does that matter? The original tpic was that Kamon video was crap, and we have deviated several times from the post, so why does it matter?

I mean I could respect your argument more if it was you instead of "Tell Kevin That, Go to a Kevin Demo, Email Kevin, call Kevin, Spar Kevin."
Jesus dude man up.

No, running Dog stated that Kevin Chan was spouting the same wing chun bullshit. So I asked an honest question. He insists that Kamon is crap, and I was just asking him to email Kevin Chan with that opinion. I have already seen Running Dogs post, so why would I ask him to email me?

[Kamon Guy]

Then why tell someone to lie down on the floor? This can't be interpreted as sparring.

Because I meant for them to get on the floor, for me to mount them and show how effective chain punches could be in the ground and pound situation. I didn't mean for him to just lie flat on his back with no guard!

The point was about ground and pound. The only way to show it is to get into that position!

[It is Fake]

[QUOTE=Kamon Guy]

He insists that Kamon is crap, and I was just asking him to email Kevin Chan with that opinion. I have already seen Running Dogs post, so why would I ask him to email me?

I don't know maybe because you practice the style.
You are an Instructor.
The best possible answer you are here arguing debating or what ever so you should man up.

[It is Fake]

Because I meant for them to get on the floor, for me to mount them and show how effective chain punches could be in the ground and pound situation. I didn't mean for him to just lie flat on his back with no guard!

The point was about ground and pound. The only way to show it is to get into that position!

The way you just described, it is a compliant drill.

I'm seriously trying to understand your point.

[Kamon Guy]

The way you just described, it is a compliant drill.

I'm seriously trying to understand your point.

Because if we spar, I might not get into a mounted position

Another person I might. The point was that from a mounted position, chain punches can be effective

[Kamon Guy]

[QUOTE=It is Fake]

I don't know maybe because you practice the style.
You are an Instructor.
The best possible answer you are here arguing debating or what ever so you should man up.

I'm not sure what you are asking me to do.
If you are suggesting I should go and fight Runnig Dog - that is his decision. I am more than happy to kick the shit out of him

The point was that Running Dog was deciding to insult Kevin. My point is that he wouldn't say it to his face