Was Wing Chun meant to be a complete system?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

Just thought I would ask this question..

Reading the history of Wing Chun, it was designed to be learned in a very short amount of time and was designed to help a person beat another specific person.

The “founder” was trained in a southern style of kung fu and then distilled it to be learned in that one year time of hard training. Looking at other southern styles you see many of the same concepts there as well, although not as much time is spent on them in some cases.

So do you think that Wing Chun, was a sort of “kung fu combatives” that was meat and potatoes of it’s parent system of the easy to learn apply techniques, or do you think that it was designed to be a whole comprehensive system.

2

I personally believe that Wing Chun is a complete Southern Chinese Martial Arts System. That is how I was taught and I had a few years to see and decide if this could be true. :slight_smile:

3

I think we have the inability at this point to really know what Wing Chun was all about.

Your lineage may vary, but as far as I am concerned, I’ve got a stripped down (meat and potatoes - as you said) version of a Kung-Fu system. By the time it got to me, I got a ‘core’ set of ideas, principles and techniques for a stand-up fighting system.

Plus, what I received is only good for one primary range: closer than striking, but not so close as clinching. There are pointers to different ranges (more like a ‘boxing range’) but that would need a practitioner to look outside the box a bit.

4

Was Wing Chun meant to be a complete system?

This “complete” issue has be discussed over and over in the past. Can you find a girl on this planet who is:

  • pretty,
  • rich,
  • cook well,
  • keep house clean,
  • crazy love in you,
  • give you body massage everyday,
  • be you TCMA training partner daily?
  • …

Is

  • boxing complete?
  • Judo complete?
  • BJJ complete?
  • …

There exist no “complete” MA system on this planet.

5

The Verdfict is in

An the State rest it case!

[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1164641]Was Wing Chun meant to be a complete system?

This “complete” issue has be discussed over and over in the past. Can you find a girl on this planet who is:

  • pretty,
  • rich,
  • cook well,
  • keep house clean,
  • crazy love in you,
  • give you body massage everyday,
  • be you TCMA training partner daily?
  • …

Is

  • boxing complete?
  • Judo complete?
  • BJJ complete?
  • …

There exist no “complete” MA system on this planet.[/QUOTE]

6

From my experience with HFY, WCK is a complete system. It has core principles, mechanics, theories and technology to deal with all ‘ranges’ of combat. The system has everything one needs to deal with a kicker, striker or wrestler/grappler. And by that, I do not mean the practitioner is above fault, but strictly speaking from a system POV.
To date, I have not found the need to add or take away anything within the system’s core principles and concepts, nor have I have found one inconsistancy within the system, or been able to find a situation it didn’t have an answer for.

But I guess the answer really depends on how one defines ‘complete’. WCK was designed to strip away the ideas of styles and focus more on maximum efficiency as a human fighter (vs. animal styles of the time) based on an understanding of Time/Space/Energy and gravity. In that, it is complete.

Others may argue that WCK isn’t complete because it may not have certain ‘tachniques’ in it’s forms or application, or that it lacks a ground game as viewed from a BJJ perspective. To me, this is stripping away what WCK is really about and looking at it from a shapes-only POV. Again, this would be a different definition of ‘complete’ than how I view it :slight_smile:

7

On paper, Wing Chun seems to have complete, thought-out, simple concepts. (this is the romanticized part of wing chun that gives the false ego and gets people in trouble)

I would argue that being perfect on paper is only half of the equation.
Being a complete system (as complete as anything can be with so many variables) would involve having training methods that make the student skilled at performing the concepts in a real situation over and over. (given the student/teacher is capable)

The elephant in the room is that if wing chun is complete, then why are the majority of wing chun students/teachers so embarrassingly bad? Rhetorical, any reason you can come up with is probably true.

I do like Wong Shun Leung’s take on wing chun. The system itself is pretty much perfect, but the student could always find new ways to become better at it.

But who really cares about a “complete system” if a 1 year MMA student can beat your ass after 15 years of wing chun lessons?

8

[QUOTE=Kevin73;1164602]Just thought I would ask this question..

Reading the history of Wing Chun, it was designed to be learned in a very short amount of time and was designed to help a person beat another specific person.

The “founder” was trained in a southern style of kung fu and then distilled it to be learned in that one year time of hard training. Looking at other southern styles you see many of the same concepts there as well, although not as much time is spent on them in some cases.

So do you think that Wing Chun, was a sort of “kung fu combatives” that was meat and potatoes of it’s parent system of the easy to learn apply techniques, or do you think that it was designed to be a whole comprehensive system.[/QUOTE]

IMO Opinion its what it says in the “legend”
A quick to learn (if taught and trained properly) self defense system to get you out of trouble in a self defense situation… thats it

What is isnt, is a combat sport style that can mix it with the combat sport styles

9

I do like Wong Shun Leung’s take on wing chun. The system itself is pretty much perfect, but the student could always find new ways to become better at it.

Why is the system perfect?

But who really cares about a “complete system” if a 1 year MMA student can beat your ass after 15 years of wing chun lessons?

And thats what no one seems willing or able to answer

10

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1164672]this would be a different definition of ‘complete’ than how I view it :)[/QUOTE]

There is a difference between

  • do I have it? and
  • do I need it?

If you live in NYC, you may not need a car and your life will be “complete” without it. If you live in Bastrop, Texas, you will need a car. Your life will not be “complete” without it.

When you see someone did a “flying knee”, you may want to do it too. Can you live without “flying knee?” Of course you can. The question is, “Why don’t you just collect the flying knee into your toolbox?” The day that you die, you can tell your students, “Our style didn’t have flying knee before but it has now because I brought it into our system.”

11

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1164672]But I guess the answer really depends on how one defines ‘complete’. WCK was designed to strip away the ideas of styles and focus more on maximum efficiency as a human fighter (vs. animal styles of the time) based on an understanding of Time/Space/Energy and gravity. In that, it is complete.
[/QUOTE]
As a striking art, yes. On the ground, there’s nothing less efficient than a fish out of water. And the vast majority of WCK practitioners are exactly that on the ground.

Others may argue that WCK isn’t complete because it may not have certain ‘tachniques’ in it’s forms or application, or that it lacks a ground game as viewed from a BJJ perspective. To me, this is stripping away what WCK is really about and looking at it from a shapes-only POV. Again, this would be a different definition of ‘complete’ than how I view it :slight_smile:

WCK does lack a ground game. That is factual, not opinion, viewpoint, or whatever. I’m really not sure at all what a “shapes-only POV” is. Does a WCK practitioner sucking on the ground have a particular shape? What is the shape of suckage?

If you can’t acknowledge weaknesses then you really can’t identify and take advantages of strengths either.

12

[QUOTE=GlennR;1164698]Why is the system perfect?

But who really cares about a “complete system” if a 1 year MMA student can beat your ass after 15 years of wing chun lessons?

And thats what no one seems willing or able to answer[/QUOTE]

perfect, because, not much could be added or taken away from it conceptually to improve the system’s logic or reasoning. (that being said, i have met wing chun “sifus” who have little to no concepts in their training. so that’s a whatever, too.)

as far as no one being able or willing to answer- i’ll take a stab at it. Wing Chun does the fast route in explaining concepts that take most martial artists a lot of hard knocks to learn. Wing Chun bypasses this and backs up everything with reasoning. This allows for a bunch of n00bs to come onto a forum and talk great kung fu game, but they can’t fight. Their martial arts knowledge is conceptually high where other martial arts are concerned (usually comparing crap against crap) but they can’t go down to an MMA or boxing school and get into the ring. They forgot their entire 101 lesson with the yin yang. Mind AND Body.

also, please stop editing my posts sehing73. you’re a mod, not my mother.

13

perfect, because, not much could be added or taken away from it conceptually to improve the system’s logic or reasoning. (that being said, i have met wing chun “sifus” who have little to no concepts in their training. so that’s a whatever, too.)

Not wanting to be argumentative, but “because” isnt an answer. I hear this, WC is perfect thing all the time, but im yet to have anyone prove it.

as far as no one being able or willing to answer- i’ll take a stab at it. Wing Chun does the fast route in explaining concepts that take most martial artists a lot of hard knocks to learn. Wing Chun bypasses this and backs up everything with reasoning. This allows for a bunch of n00bs to come onto a forum and talk great kung fu game, but they can’t fight. Their martial arts knowledge is conceptually high where other martial arts are concerned (usually comparing crap against crap) but they can’t go down to an MMA or boxing school and get into the ring. They forgot their entire 101 lesson with the yin yang. Mind AND Body.

Yep fair call, but its assuming that all the concepts are correct to begin with. Theories are great until they dont work

14

[QUOTE=GlennR;1164724]Not wanting to be argumentative, but “because” isnt an answer. I hear this, WC is perfect thing all the time, but im yet to have anyone prove it.

Yep fair call, but its assuming that all the concepts are correct to begin with. Theories are great until they dont work[/QUOTE]

not being able to prove it was my point. if it’s perfect on paper, but if you can’t perform what the perfect concepts/theories state then how complete is a system?

the lack of ground training is easily dismissed in wing chun because the theories state how to avoid such a time-frame, but most wing chun people are going to get sacked and end up on the ground.

15

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1164672]But I guess the answer really depends on how one defines ‘complete’. WCK was designed to strip away the ideas of styles and focus more on maximum efficiency as a human fighter (vs. animal styles of the time) based on an understanding of Time/Space/Energy and gravity. In that, it is complete.[/QUOTE]

So, what exactly does ‘define’ a complete Martial Art? Surely you are not suggesting an ‘empty hand’ art is complete?? Karate is not complete.

[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1164672]Is

  • boxing complete?
  • Judo complete?
  • BJJ complete?
  • …

There exist no “complete” MA system on this planet[/QUOTE]

Are you actually being serious???

These ‘sports’ you list are just that. Sport. Martial Sport, if you prefer. All ‘designed’ or updated in the last century to enable a safe ‘competing’ platform. Don’t confuse them with Martial Arts!!!

I will offer my definition of ‘complete’ and see if anyone else can add to my idea. I believe a complete Martial Art must have representation of various areas of practise that help develop us as human beings, not just to fight for fighting sake, but to defend ourselves, our loved ones and the weaker/less healthy members of society. We do this by training people in a number of ways:

  1. Form practise. Solo training to enhance technical understanding and basic foundation movements key to a systems development. Many forms have had individual input, becoming more of a ‘stylistic’ representation of said person/s. This isn’t a bad thing, as long as the system knowledge is not sacrificed and lost.

  2. Interactive practise. Call it sparring if you prefer! But when you train with a partner to develop your skill, this is ‘interactive martial play’. It is our Chisau/Looksau/Gorsau and Sansau platform. But only if you remove the ‘competitive’ ego driven nature most younger students seem to have these days lol!

  3. Equipment practise. Take our Wooden Man as an example, it is unique to our system because of it’s scientific design but common in almost all other Chinese Martial Arts as an apparatus that assists in power development. Just like hitting a tree, wall bag, makiwara board or modern boxing pad. Equipment is key to actually feeling contact without injuries.

  4. Weaponry practice. I know it’s an old cliche and many may disagree, but without weaponry training you’re not really training a ‘Martial’ Art. We are lucky in Wing Chun that we hold two key weapons that enhance our short and long range fighting skill. One of the only Chinese Systems that has detailed knowedge of both imho using only 2 base weapons rather than the original 18 Lohan designs.

  5. Cultural practice. Whether it be BJJ, Boxing, Muay Thai or Judo every art has it’s origins and history and just learning a little about theoriginal culture of any give Martial Art may help join a few dots together. Wing Chun is know to be able to ‘talk the fight’ due to our basic concepts and if two Sifus meet they have a language and culture they can share, before they even cross hands.

Now, put all that together in a short period of time. It isn’t difficult to see how this forms a complete understanding of the Wing Chun system, and if you are honestly missing anything here, go find someone that can help you because this is as complete as any Martial Art need to be imho.

This is the very reason we still exist as a system. This is why I find it difficult to watch people ‘add’ things like Escrima, or BJJ to a Wing Chun curriculum. We are as complete as we can be, and most if not all the hard work has already been done by the ancestors. All we have to do is continue and Wing Chun will still be here in another thousand years :slight_smile:

16

So, what exactly does ‘define’ a complete Martial Art? Surely you are not suggesting an ‘empty hand’ art is complete?? Karate is not complete.

Walk into a Kyokushin Dojo and suggest their MA is “incomplete”

Are you actually being serious???

I think you should answer that question yourself

These ‘sports’ you list are just that. Sport. Martial Sport, if you prefer. All ‘designed’ or updated in the last century to enable a safe ‘competing’ platform. Don’t confuse them with Martial Arts!!!

God thats offensive, and stupid as well. The fact that the arts you mention would 9 times out of 10 chew up and spit out a WC guy on the “streets” shows how nonsensical your ideas are

I will offer my definition of ‘complete’ and see if anyone else can add to my idea. I believe a complete Martial Art must have representation of various areas of practise that help develop us as human beings, not just to fight for fighting sake, but to defend ourselves, our loved ones and the weaker/less healthy members of society. We do this by training people in a number of ways:

We? So the “sports” you mention dont encourage the personal development of the practitioner and dont equip them to defend themselves or loved ones? Only “true” martial arts have a monopoly on this do they?

  1. Form practise. Solo training to enhance technical understanding and basic foundation movements key to a systems development. Many forms have had individual input, becoming more of a ‘stylistic’ representation of said person/s. This isn’t a bad thing, as long as the system knowledge is not sacrificed and lost.

Shadow boxing, mirror work and slow repetitive techniques to ingrain the movement.

  1. Interactive practise. Call it sparring if you prefer! But when you train with a partner to develop your skill, this is ‘interactive martial play’. It is our Chisau/Looksau/Gorsau and Sansau platform. But only if you remove the ‘competitive’ ego driven nature most younger students seem to have these days lol!

Sparring & partner drills

  1. Equipment practise. Take our Wooden Man as an example, it is unique to our system because of it’s scientific design but common in almost all other Chinese Martial Arts as an apparatus that assists in power development. Just like hitting a tree, wall bag, makiwara board or modern boxing pad. Equipment is key to actually feeling contact without injuries.

Heavy bag, focus mitts, thai pads and kick shields

  1. Weaponry practice. I know it’s an old cliche and many may disagree, but without weaponry training you’re not really training a ‘Martial’ Art. We are lucky in Wing Chun that we hold two key weapons that enhance our short and long range fighting skill. One of the only Chinese Systems that has detailed knowedge of both imho using only 2 base weapons rather than the original 18 Lohan designs
    .

So the styles with more weapons and forms are more complete than WC?

  1. Cultural practice. Whether it be BJJ, Boxing, Muay Thai or Judo every art has it’s origins and history and just learning a little about theoriginal culture of any give Martial Art may help join a few dots together. Wing Chun is know to be able to ‘talk the fight’ due to our basic concepts and if two Sifus meet they have a language and culture they can share, before they even cross hands.

Tell the Thai’s there is no culture in MT (whats the Ram Muay for?), the Japanese there is no culture in JJ or Karate, Brazilians BJJ… do you see how condescending you sound Spencer?

Now, put all that together in a short period of time. It isn’t difficult to see how this forms a complete understanding of the Wing Chun system, and if you are honestly missing anything here, go find someone that can help you because this is as complete as any Martial Art need to be imho.

PLENTY of chinese martial artists view WC as an incomplete system due to its lack of forms and techniques in comparison to theirs. Using your logic they are right… your thoughts?

This is the very reason we still exist as a system. This is why I find it difficult to watch people ‘add’ things like Escrima, or BJJ to a Wing Chun curriculum. We are as complete as we can be, and most if not all the hard work has already been done by the ancestors. All we have to do is continue and Wing Chun will still be here in another thousand years :slight_smile:

Yip Man changed and added/discarded things… i for one hope he wont be the last

17

not being able to prove it was my point. if it’s perfect on paper, but if you can’t perform what the perfect concepts/theories state then how complete is a system?

Yep good point. Assuming its “perfect” but the concepts are hard to implement, then how complete is it

the lack of ground training is easily dismissed in wing chun because the theories state how to avoid such a time-frame, but most wing chun people are going to get sacked and end up on the ground.

Yep again, notice how quiet the forum is in response to this

Though God bless Spencer for his two bobs worth :wink:

18

This is the very reason we still exist as a system. This is why I find it difficult to watch people ‘add’ things like Escrima, or BJJ to a Wing Chun curriculum. We are as complete as we can be, and most if not all the hard work has already been done by the ancestors. All we have to do is continue and Wing Chun will still be here in another thousand years
__________________

Small fact of nature “that which does not evolve dies” if it is not striving to improve and add different things then it is dying.
Im sorry to break your bubble and this has been pounded into the ground, but wc and for that matter tcma does not have a system for ground. But neither does bjj or wrestling have a full understanding of striking.

19

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1164672]
To date, I have not found the need to add or take away anything within the system’s core principles and concepts, nor have I have found one inconsistancy within the system, or been able to find a situation it didn’t have an answer for.
[/QUOTE]
So I’m picking on you a little bit here Jonathan regarding this post. And my caveat to this is I know you guys just did a seminar on using WCK to address boxer/mma fighter approaches and grappler approaches which I think is absolutely awesome and what should be happening.

“haven’t been able to find a situation it didn’t have an answer for”.

Here are two situations:

  1. Mount
  2. Back Mount

What are the WCK system POV answers for these? How do you handle it if you get there?

So for comparison sake, I’ve seldom heard BJJ make claims about it being a complete system, that it addresses every eventuality. Well, actually maybe only direct members of the Gracie family, and usually the ones that aren’t fighting.

20

[QUOTE=Dragonzbane76;1164739]But neither does bjj or wrestling have a full understanding of striking.[/QUOTE]

Wrestlers are many times some of the worst strikers ever. They really push their punches and have a hard time learning to throw them correctly. Also, BJJ players are often very bad at defending wrestling takedowns despite the clinch/ground focus.