Wing Chun vs other MA's fitness standards

[mike321]

No problem. So if you like rugby, and disillusioned with the chun, are you looking for another art?

[Obesely]

Well, Lu/Mike. I do feel ashamed of myself now. My bitchy, overly sensitive response was probably indicative of my age/immaturity, but I do understand the need to keep standards when analysing/discussing things within the MA world etc.

You will have to forgive me, young as I may be, I have spent the better part of my MA youth in the vile clutches of the Chun, and I tend to fire up and lose my rationale when discussing it.

[mike321]

Thanks Lu, better rebuttal then I would have had.

Obesely, I am serious about the pseudoscience and I am basing this on arguments I have heard from chunners. I also believe arts such as wrestling, boxing, judo, bjj have well developed theories with sound science. Concepts like using leverage and getting power from your hips are validated by results and help clarify key concepts in these arts.

The reason I was being picky about your post was an effort to be consistent as Lu pointed out above. Your story does sound consistent with what I have seen and heard of WC. I hope I didn't personally offend. If you did read the whole thread you will see I am being consistent. Also, this traces back to my frustration with comments (not from you) about arts "working only in theory". This admittedly is a pet peeve and I don't take it or myself too seriously.

Also, your age made me want to be a proponent of reason to someone who has the best martial art years ahead of you. No intention to condescend, though it is tough to not do so for a guy in middle age land.

[Lu Tze]

They may be facts to you, but without any corroboration they're just stories to us.

You have to understand, _ing _un is replete with anecdotes about how sifu disabled 10 attackers armed with nothing but chain punches and a smug shit eating grin (seriously, watch any _un video. You must get one with your black fucking sash or something). To give your anecdote credence would be an unacceptable double standard, even if we do agree with its conclusions.

[Obesely]

Well if you're going to be pedantic it technically counts as circumstantial unless we're disputing the validity of the provided anecdotes, furthermore, weight loss in and of itself is hard fact. The combined improvements in my life (some a matter of personal opinion, granted) are a sufficient collection of facts to prove that I was better off dropping WC, thus making it circumstantial evidence.

If you're going to be picky, it's also pseudoscience. If you drop a statement of fact about the unscientific like nature of their supposed scientific approaches to their art (which I've never seen anyone attempt to peddle during all my years of WC) then mentioning why their methodology is crappy would be less redundant than 'The tools of reason are a great thing.,' in an attempt to sound educated and aware of what you're talking about. To paraphrase you: Good opening sentences, yet your last two hardly count for shit as far as this discussion goes.

In fact, looking back on it now, crappy pseudo-science can hardly be construed as a one of the major flaws of WC. Certainly the lack of ground game, the awkward chain punches, the drills with totally compliant opponents, the sparring with Wing Chun vs another Wing Chun user and finally the chi sao pale in comparison to the godly flaw you've pointed out.

Forgive me for this, but I can't take you seriously if you can't add one space worth of punctuation after completing your post, or bother to change the spelling of one typo.

[mike321]

Good story, but that would be anecdotal evidence as far as this discussion goes. I am being intentionally picky because one of the major flaws of WC is using crappy psuedo-science. The tools of reason are a great thing. Chunners seem to really need todevelop them.

[Obesely]

I tried reading this whole thread, I really did, but I stopped at around page 26 and skipped ahead.

In regards to the the actual topic title of WC fitness levels...After experiencing a solid 8 years of life getting sucked out from me at the hands of the Chun, I quit at the end of 2007. 2008 was my last year of high school (AUS School year goes Feb to Nov) and I played my first ever season of a sport (Rugby), and near the end of the year I actually lost weight. How much weight? Around 17kg/37 pounds from my 101kg/222 pound starting weight.

So I actually started becoming healthier upon dropping WC. In fact, I've become more confident in life, and I'm probably a bit better off in an altercation using a poor imitation of the basic fundamentals of Judo/BJJ/MT/Boxing, than what 8 years of WC would have me do.

This provides enough circumstantial evidence to infer that doing no art whatsoever is actually better than doing the _hun.

[Tonuzaba]

Is this in anyway related to this: Keith R Kernspecht - Bltz Defence.

I know nothing about the blitz defense but I thought it was supposed to be simple and Wing Tsun based.

B.D. is Kernspecht's brainchild, copyrighted, if I'm not mistaken. (I've always found it distasteful for a post-WWII German to use the word "Blitz" on anything for sale...)

The video you linked to IMO doesn't show B.D., it's just a usual WT demo thing, with folks lacking devoted attacks and falling over easily.

I've only encountered B.D. on a few lessons at the EWTO here in Slovakia and I was explained it's a set of basic reactions/approaches in street brawl scenarios, where you can act like the victim in the eyes of any bystanders/witnesses.

In theory, B.D. is defence using WT techniques, making it clear the other guy attacked you and not vice versa, for possible legal purposes...



And I was hinting at this ("To be an aggressive fighter within 6 months"):

[M1K3]

This is what I found on youtube for blitz defense. It is uberdeadly!

YouTube - prog blitz defence 10 WingTsun Leung Ting

[M1K3]

Is this in anyway related to this: Keith R Kernspecht - Bltz Defence.

I know nothing about the blitz defense but I thought it was supposed to be simple and Wing Tsun based.

[Tonuzaba]

Where I come from there was this double principle: fast to teach the basics but years to master the advanced stuff.

Which is, again, nothing -ing -un specific.

There was talk, and even a book about "making a fighter in 6 months" if I remember right, though... ;-)

[Tom Kagan]

Hey everyone, please refresh my memory, doesn't WC claim to be awesome at training noobs? A very short learning curve was claimed in many articles I have read. Am I mistaking this with another art?

FWIW, Moy Yat never said this to me. In fact, one of the things I learned from him was the learning progression appears to be inverted, thus making many things more difficult in the short term if the goal is to train people quickly.

[Tonuzaba]

No, you're right.

-ing -un is one of many MA's that spread this claim.

[mike321]

Hey everyone, please refresh my memory, doesn't WC claim to be awesome at training noobs? A very short learning curve was claimed in many articles I have read. Am I mistaking this with another art?

[scorchedearth]

Since you asked for the obvious

I would diagree. One of the thigns I've told kintanon that If shown to me would validate your statements far more is a video of someone doing wing chun and getting beaten.

It has been shown. You have ignored them.

All I've seen in the sparring/early ufc vids you so often point to are people who use wing chun stance at the most. As I said before not a single full contact vid has doen simultaneous attack and defense or even blocked a punch for that matter. They always either get taken down or use thier kick to maintain distance and try to chainpunch a guarded opponent, or they start bouncing around mirroring the other guy in boxing.

That is because, under pressure, all of that bullshit that forms the Chun curriculum falls apart.

I would disagree that a multitude of evidence shows wing chun doesnt work. If you say a multitude of wing chun fighters are not capable fo using thier art in a real situation I would whole heartedly agree.

I reiterate that you are blind or stupid. Pick one.

Even if kintanon wipes thye floor with me in June if I'm not properly applying my wing chun in defending myself it still wont validate wing chun is useless as much as that as a martial artist I overestimated myself and he's a better fighter.

Now you are using some weird circular logic to validate a preexisting supposition on your part - that the Chun works under pressure. The argument does not stand under close scrutiny. For example, if you get your ass kicked, I guarantee that you will come back saying that 'you didn't use your Chun' and that you still aren't convinced. You will insist that getting your ass kicked proved nothing because you aren't willing to think objectively in the first place. You are showing that you will not change your opinion in spite of mountains of evidence.

That's my disagreement with you. You can say that simultaneous attack and defense leaves you open for a counter attack and I can see the logic here. However, I could argue that your second punch in your combination will simply be blocked while I punch you in the face again switching my arms up. So if you have a video of someone actually abiding by the prinicples that I beleive make the art effective and still failing then please show me.

You have obviously never faced a boxer who can throw proper strikes. You may be lucky and block that second punch but since the boxer is always defending and moving very fast from punch to punch, your crappy strike will be deflected while you eat a hook to the face. I am a n00b at MA and can assure you that it isn't as simple as 'blocking the second punch' when someone throws a combination of strikes. Once again, this is theoretical bullshit based on a complete lack of knowledge. The Chun fails again.

If not then I would argue that there are no known videos that prove that wing chun as a system is innefective.

Above in your statement, you proved that you aren't willing to change your mind no matter what happens.