It is a sign of the times.MMA are very popular and are already influencing people in our art.This brings questionning about our traditionnals ways of learning and training to many’s mind.The “100% resisting opponent” is always at the center of the debate as if it was the only modern answer to every problems. Young guys in Wing Chun try their techniques on somebody in friendly sparring matches and think their art is not enough when they have some trouble,instead of realising that in fact, they need to study more or seek some advise about their flaws. They start to look in BJJ or other things for answers.
Wing Chun is not easy to master even if it seems simple in the beginning. There is no question,an intermediate trained guy in Wing Chun can hold his ground against most but, you will get exactly what you put in it! To be high level is not the same story. You could not get to that level by huffing and puffing against the force of some “100% you know what!”…You need to study about various attack and defense lines ,timings e.t.c. under the guidance of somebody who knows more than you and can show it to you.You need also to trust your style of Kung Fu enough to study it with enthousiast for life as an art not worrying about “this vs that” wastes of brain energy concerns.
If you can’t do that, you should maybe look elswhere and try some other thing. Some styles can offer a great sense of security in a very short time.If it’s what you really need!
Old Jong - You hit the nail right on the head and drive it in! Rock on brother!!!
Re: Wing Chun and the MMA phylosophy
Originally posted by old jong
[B]The “100% resisting opponent” is always at the center of the debate as if it was the only modern answer to every problems.
Young guys in Wing Chun try their techniques on somebody in friendly sparring matches and think their art is not enough when they have some trouble,instead of realising that in fact, they need to study more or seek some advise about their flaws. They start to look in BJJ or other things for answers.[/B]
You seem to be talking about two different things here.
The “100% resisting opponent” is a training issue. It has nothing to do with MMA or cross-training.
[B]
To be high level is not the same story. You could not get to that level by huffing and puffing against the force of some “100% you know what!”
[/B]
You could not get to that level by doing NOTHING but practicing against a 100% actively resisting opponent, any more than you could get to that level by practicing nothing but Pak Sao.
You could not get to that level by NEVER practicing against a strongly resisting opponent, either.
[B]
…You need to study about various attack and defense lines ,timings e.t.c. under the guidance of somebody who knows more than you and can show it to you.
[/B]
And then you need to practice those various attack and defense lines, timings, etc. against someone who’s 100% resisting. Because if you don’t, when you run into someone who /is/ 100% resisting, you’re not going to be able to apply them correctly.
Practice with a cooperative partner to make sure you have the technique’s form down and can apply it well without thinking.
Practice with a resisting partner to make sure that you can apply that technique against someone who’s NOT cooperative.
Doing either type of drill without doing the other will result in bad kung fu.
All IMHO, of course.
Fatherdog sez - “The “100% resisting opponent” is a training issue. It has nothing to do with MMA or cross-training”
It could be, but most MMA and cross training guys often use this as a reason why the way they do things is ‘better’.
“You could not get to that level by NEVER practicing against a strongly resisting opponent, either”
This is the debate. Some believe that good practice often, especially for chi sau is more then enough.
"Practice with a cooperative partner to make sure you have the technique’s form down and can apply it well without thinking.
Practice with a resisting partner to make sure that you can apply that technique against someone who’s NOT cooperative. "
This is generally of course the case. It is best to train with many different options such as these two. The problem is that it can go too far. In MMA for example, you may train so widely that your techniques are not consistant, because your training is not consistant. At that point better to study JKD, learn a few good moves that work for you and go with it.
"Doing either type of drill without doing the other will result in bad kung fu. "
Again, the essence of the debate, or part of it. Some would say that trianing only classically is the way to go. Some would say trianing only modern is the way to go. Some say a good mix.
Old Jong was right on when he said that many ‘younger’ WC people get into a sparring match or two, or listen too hard to those who use NHB, K1, UFC and so on as examples. You get to a point where you know just enough to feel confident and not enough to compete effectively. As OJ stated, wing chun is a complicated art, but it can fool you with its simplicity, especially if you have no patience.
You see what I mean!..
I don’t doupt the good intentions of young guys like Fatherdog and many more. A big ten month or so of wing chun experience and they know it well enough to start having opinions about training methods and how to make it better!..No wonder so many don’t have the dedication to make it to the level where they would start enjoying some benefits from their learning.
I can understand this thing very well as the ufc and other mma competitions are proposing a very different and securing way of fighting. Some kind of a different reality with fighters assembling their style like if a martial art could be made from a kit or cooking recipie. A little boxing,a speck of muay thai,one or two chokes,“THE” armbar!..ETC…
It’s a question of choice. A personnal thing. You do it your way but!..See you in 20 years!
BTW, There is no resistance possible when a Wing Chun technique is done with good structure,line and timing. If you have to struggle to strike, something is wrong. Ask your Sifu,not your grappling cousin!
Originally posted by red5angel
[B]It could be, but most MMA and cross training guys often use this as a reason why the way they do things is ‘better’.
[/B]
Understood. Old Jong seemed to be equating training on a resisting opponent with MMA training, although I may have just misunderstood his intent.
[B]
This is the debate. Some believe that good practice often, especially for chi sau is more then enough.
[/B]
I suppose that is the core of the disagreement. Personally, I feel that only practicing on a cooperative partner does not constitute ‘good’ practice. But this is once again only my opinion.
[/B]
This is generally of course the case. It is best to train with many different options such as these two.
[/B]
In this much, then, we’re in agreement.
[B]
The problem is that it can go too far. In MMA for example, you may train so widely that your techniques are not consistant, because your training is not consistant. At that point better to study JKD, learn a few good moves that work for you and go with it.
[/B]
That may or may not be true; I’ve never trained MMA so I’m not going to attempt to argue the point. My point was that this doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with training against a resisting partner.
Re: You see what I mean!..
Originally posted by old jong
[B]I don’t doupt the good intentions of young guys like Fatherdog and many more. A big ten month or so of wing chun experience and they know it well enough to start having opinions about training methods and how to make it better!
[/B]
I would never presume, at my current level of knowledge, to say I could make Wing Chun better in any way. Wing Chun’s been refined for hundreds of years by better and more dedicated martial artists than myself; I doubt I could add anything to the system.
However, having trained Wing Chun, as well as other arts (BEFORE starting Wing Chun… I’m not cross training, because I believe that at my current level of skill doing so would serve only to confuse me) and many other physical pursuits… I feel that I can comment on training methods. And one constant in ANYTHING, whether it’s a sport, a martial art, or anything else where you use your body, is that once you’ve gotten the particulars of the movement practiced enough, you must train that movement in as close a way as possible to the way you intend to actually apply it.
[B]
I can understand this thing very well as the ufc and other mma competitions are proposing a very different and securing way of fighting. Some kind of a different reality with fighters assembling their style like if a martial art could be made from a kit or cooking recipie. A little boxing,a speck of muay thai,one or two chokes,“THE” armbar!..ETC…
It’s a question of choice. A personnal thing. You do it your way but!..See you in 20 years!
[/B]
Once again, I don’t cross-train, nor do I advocate doing so.
I /do/ advocate training /realistically/.
[/B]
BTW, There is no resistance possible when a Wing Chun technique is done with good structure,line and timing.
[/B]
And if you never practice on anything other than cooperative opponents, how do you learn good structure, line, and timing? How do you test it?
If you have to struggle to strike, something is wrong. Ask your Sifu,not your grappling cousin!
I have. My Sifu also advocates training realistically; it gives us something to do when our shoulders are too tired to roll 
QUOTE]It is a sign of the times.MMA are very popular and are already influencing people in our art.This brings questionning about our traditionnals ways of learning and training to many’s mind.The “100% resisting opponent” is always at the center of the debate as if it was the only modern answer to every problems.[/QUOTE]
MMA is very popular because it produces victory in the ring and in challenge matches.
The 100% resisting opponent is a red herring.
The real argument for a BJJ guy is that they can practice their techniques to the level of SUBMISSION. Their sparring partner will tap when the pain threshold is reached or if a blood or air choke is used if they go unconcious. It means they have a very clear understanding and wiring of allowing their submissions to work.
It is THEN that the 100% resisting comes into play.
In your chi-sao practice do you deliver full power throat strikes?
Leg breaks? Elbow breaks? to you deliver short power with no pulling of your energy into your partner?
Do you train for the the “oh gosh” I’m on the ground and out of my standing element?
The general consensus among BJJ guys is 2-3 years of hard training will yeild what you need for competance on the ground and dealing with those who are clueless about ground fighting and grappling. It is not about faith on that front, they have the practical experience to back it up. They also have the record of school challenges, MMA events to back it up.
A great instructor and very hard training can indeed make a difference. “Faith” in your art has nothing to do with it. You either can deliver the goods or you can’t.
As the Air Force Top Gun school says: You fight like you train.
Why are our special forces the best in the world? Because they train hard, they do live fire drills and they have real world experience. If your training is not bringing you to that point then you need to be more honest about what your goals are, what your expectations should be, and what outcomes might be against potential “classes” of opponents.
Any if you have never sparred one of those classesof opponents, how can you know what you have will work or not? Martial arts is NOT FAITH based. This is not religion we are studying after all. It should be binary in that it either works for you or it doesn’t. That is separate from the underlying causality.
This is just like the lineage thing. Lineage is an indication of POTENTIAL quality and it defines a originating source of learning, but it speaks nothing of the skill of the teacher and more importantly it does NOT convey skill to the student. 
Only the skill of the teacher in teaching and the kung fu of the student sweating it out and embedding the knowledge into their basic body mechanics and neural reactions conveys skill.
At some point to find out what this is about, I would propose that you have to deal with the reality of combat by experiencing it. The adrenal dump, dry mouth, fatigue, emotional response, etc.
regards,
David
“I suppose that is the core of the disagreement. Personally, I feel that only practicing on a cooperative partner does not constitute ‘good’ practice. But this is once again only my opinion”
Agreed.
“I’ve never trained MMA so I’m not going to attempt to argue the point. My point was that this doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with training against a resisting partner”
This is another of those things where it is association. Many MMA people claim that the more you know the btter you will be. I am sort of a minimalist myself, a few good tools done well will get you out of most situations. ultimately like planetwc says, you cannot train 100%, it is a matter of degrees. MMA and grappling people tend to believe they train the hardest because they do train to submission.
Dont get me wrong, I am a proponent of training as close to 100% as you can get, but I also believe that as with all things, it can be overdone, and may not be necessary.
Start with artificiality and gradually move to reality.
Fatherdog sez:
I suppose that is the core of the disagreement. Personally, I feel that only practicing on a cooperative partner does not constitute ‘good’ practice. But this is once again only my opinion.
Wow! Way off!. Chi sao when properly taught and done is NOT about practicing with a cooperative partner.Above is a profound understimation of the role of chi sao.
Re: Fatherdog sez:
Originally posted by yuanfen
Wow! Way off!. Chi sao when properly taught and done is NOT about practicing with a cooperative partner.Above is a profound understimation of the role of chi sao.
A) I wasn’t referring specifically to chi sao, but training and drills in general
B) I said “Only practicing with a cooperative partner does not constitute ‘good’ practice”
you responded with
“Chi sao when properly taught and done is NOT about practicing with a cooperative partner.”
At what point are you disagreeing, here? Or did one of us misplace an “un”?
I gnerally dont disagree much with David but regarding parts of his post i have a quite different perspective expressed in brackets after relevant snips from his post.
MMA is very popular because it produces victory in the ring and in challenge matches.
((I have seen one survey which shows that the majority of folks who watch UFC type of matches have little figting or martial experience themselves. WWw fake wrestling is pretty popular too))
The 100% resisting opponent is a red herring.
The real argument for a BJJ guy is that they can practice their techniques to the level of SUBMISSION. Their sparring partner will tap when the pain threshold is reached or if a blood or air choke is used if they go unconcious. It means they have a very clear understanding and wiring of allowing their submissions to work.
It is THEN that the 100% resisting comes into play.
((No-- tapping is an agreed upon signal))
In your chi-sao practice do you deliver full power throat strikes?
Leg breaks? Elbow breaks? to you deliver short power with no pulling of your energy into your partner?
((Control and pulling are two different things))
Do you train for the the “oh gosh” I’m on the ground and out of my standing element?
((No. But very good wc when necessary can save you on the ground… alittle bjj knowledge could leave you floundering against someone not doing bjj and you are on the gtound))
The general consensus among BJJ guys is 2-3 years of hard training will yeild what you need for competance on the ground and dealing with those who are clueless about ground fighting and grappling. It is not about faith on that front, they have the practical experience to back it up. They also have the record of school challenges, MMA events to back it up.
A great instructor and very hard training can indeed make a difference. “Faith” in your art has nothing to do with it. You either can deliver the goods or you can’t.
As the Air Force Top Gun school says: You fight like you train.
Why are our special forces the best in the world?
((They are? Possible nationalism here. Little folks in black pajamas and conical hats did pretty well in a far off place without high tech backup))
Because they train hard, they do live fire drills and they have real world experience. If your training is not bringing you to that point then you need to be more honest about what your goals are, what your expectations should be, and what outcomes might be against potential “classes” of opponents.
Any if you have never sparred one of those classesof opponents, how can you know what you have will work or not? Martial arts is NOT FAITH based. This is not religion we are studying after all. It should be binary in that it either works for you or it doesn’t. That is separate from the underlying causality.
This is just like the lineage thing. Lineage is an indication of POTENTIAL quality and it defines a originating source of learning, but it speaks nothing of the skill of the teacher and more importantly it does NOT convey skill to the student.
((Much true but not absolutely so…a teacher can have real fighting skill and just may be able to convey it to some.Per below ))
Only the skill of the teacher in teaching and the kung fu of the student sweating it out and embedding the knowledge into their basic body mechanics and neural reactions conveys skill.
(True))
At some point to find out what this is about, I would propose that you have to deal with the reality of combat by experiencing it. The adrenal dump, dry mouth, fatigue, emotional response, etc.
(Something to it, but again not absolute. I know people who trained well but didnt fight… but in their first encounter when they
dint have a choice—they did very well.)) Joy
regards,
David
They start to look in BJJ or other things for answers.
Who’s doing BJJ?.. I mentioned addapting the training theories (in addition to to WC’s) , not throwing away WC.
To be high level is not the same story. You could not get to that level by huffing and puffing against the force of some “100% you know what!”…You need to study about various attack and defense lines ,timings e.t.c. under the guidance of somebody who knows more than you and can show it to you.
Ok i agree you need to study the attack and defence lines as you have said. But what disadvantages do you see to, as you put it, “huffing and puffing”… dont you think endurance is a quality required for a real fight? (i am aware of the IDEAL situation where pure technique should overcome the agressor) But realistic fighting MAY require endurance…Do you have it if you need it? - eg, more than one opponent.
How about the ability to absorb some real force?..i mean can it really be detrementral to you training to experiment…or atleast make this a small part of the training regiment?
OJ,
“Young guys in Wing Chun try their techniques on somebody in friendly sparring matches and think their art is not enough when they have some trouble,instead of realising that in fact, they need to study more or seek some advise about their flaws. They start to look in BJJ or other things for answers.”
That’s true about most arts and most young folk. Now going against someone of another style or a 90-100% resisting opponent of your own is a great spot check on the physical and mental side of your training, but like you kind of stated the fighter should look at the holes in his training and not in his arts. At least not until he learns the whole thing anyway. Why do visions of Bruce Lee come to mind?
Kind of on this topic is the “reality” based systems. I’m becoming doubtful that the pursuit of reality in training is going to produce the result being sought, which is to function when the S hits the fan. After 9/11 many MA are going to seminars to learn tactics and techniques to beat box cutter weilding tangos, or some irrate youth with a vest full of explosives. One of my intructors(traditional karate) was ASF for many years, his view of what makes someone effective in a given situation is the ability to think while under fire and perserverence, not what techniques you know. Things that can be achieved through training at a good MA school(WC, karate, BJJ, etc).
Joy,
I agree with almost all that you’ve said except for two points,
“… alittle bjj knowledge could leave you floundering against someone not doing bjj and you are on the gtound”
I’ve found the opposite to be true, even several months of basic BJJ can improve your chances and comfort on the ground especially against non-BJJ fighters.
“Little folks in black pajamas and conical hats did pretty well in a far off place without high tech backup”
Well they really weren’t that good and were pretty much wiped out after Tet. Now the NVA were another story, though even there the kill ratio was still in our favor.
Good discussion.
Not all people come to an eclectic style of martial arts because they feel they are plugging holes in their systems. Some are forced to change styles by circumstance (would you rather train something else or give up MA completely?), some just have the type of mind that demands variety and the opportunity to approach something from as many different angles as possible. My first instructor, David Crook, achieved his Nidan in Goju-ryu and Japanese Jiu-Jitsu before switching to CMA in the late 1960’s (Chinese MA teachers willing to deal with gwailos were pretty thin on the ground in Adelaide in the early 1960’s). When he took up CMA, he studied with William Cheung, but also with Choy Li Fut and Northern Sil Lum Sifus. David now teaches an eclectic style which mixes these arts. It works very well. He is really good at nerve point attacks flowing into joint locks, as well as the more common pugilistic spectrum.
My Sifu, Rick Spain trains and teaches BJJ as well as WC. I doubt that anyone on this board is in a position to criticise his understanding of or competence in WC based on that fact with any authority.
Not everyone’s personality thrives on lifelong study of a single art. Probably just as well, since WC is in some histories something of an eclectic style itself, as is Choy Li Fut for that matter. Xingyi and Bagua are taught together because some ancestors decided they were complementary. It happened, it can, possibly should, happen now.
BJJ is NOT practised against 100% resisting opponents, at least not all the time. Much of training is spent working in a light, flowing, constantly moving attitude to develop fluency and flexibility moving between position and seeing opportunity for submissions, though some training IS spent working very close and tight. The injury rate in BJJ would be horrific if everyone went at it gangbusters every training session. In Australia the cost of public liability insurance for an MA school approximately quadruples if the insurance company is told that BJJ is part of the curriculum. That’s NOT because they listened to a few smack-talking “MMA” guys on the web, either.
There are some “tough” schools out there that go hard all the time. or so I’m told. The problem with such schools is the trainees place themselves at real risk of injury when working with a partner, and this miss the atmosphere of safety which allows experimentation, without which learning is stifled. You learn from losing more than winning. If the price of loss is injury which stops you from training, then the training environment is deficient.
There is no resistance possible when a Wing Chun technique is done with good structure,line and timing.
Nahh. The only technique like that is the Crane kick. “If done properly, there is no defense”
Rogue sez:
I’ve found the opposite to be true, even several months of basic BJJ can improve your chances and comfort on the ground especially against non-BJJ fighters.
“Little folks in black pajamas and conical hats did pretty well in a far off place without high tech backup”
Well they really weren’t that good and were pretty much wiped out after Tet. Now the NVA were another story, though even there the kill ratio was still in our favor.
Rogue:
On point one: I can understand your experience.But individual experiences can vary …depending on your general fitness compared to the
fitness and knowledge of the otherguy. Need not be because of bjj. Suffice it is to say that I have not needed bjj-in practice, experimentaion or in reality. My integration ,development and application of wing chun is enough.So given the choice of taking time to learn bjj versus getting better at wing chunI confidently prefer the latter, because i continue to see the connecting and continuing skill devlopment ahead in the wing chun path. There are unique things that are specific to standing up or being down… but if one stays the course witha good art like wing chun you learn how to handle them from your own framework. Once one devlops the auto response system of wing chun you apply it in changing circumstances. But if one’s wing chun is a memorized set of fixed responses to fixed stimuli-thats a different matter.
i do not argue that wing chun is the only way or tha everone should learn it. There is enough bad wing chun out there that some wing chun folks could be in real trouble if they apply their stuff.
On point two: Kill ratios notwithstanding-we lost that war.. and the dominoes continued to fall. I have great respect for special forces folks as individuals… but bringing them into empty hand martial arts discussion as is often done is not always relevant.Teamwork, communications, backup, relevant equipment/weapons ,“relative” youth, a command structure and other things are part of the mix.
On David’s point that you fight like you train is one of those glittering over-generalizations half true half false. If one means that must train in earnest,very true. But training regimens can vary and be tailor made. Some boxers always go to war in sparring sessions. many good ones- dont ..they work on specific problem solving…that was true for Ali, Sugar Ray leonard among others.
Foreman would attack the heavy bag…Ali’s bag work was lighter…more tapping than trying to make a huge dent in the bag.
Why are our special forces the best in the world?
Are they? I’d be opting for the British or Australian SAS myself. The Spetsnaz weren’t pussies, either.
I’m biased, but by the sound of it I’m not the only one 
I have never been so much quoted since I post in this forum!..It feels like my every words are on the hot seat for any interpretation possible but, you get my point about the changes ,the MMA ideas could bring to a traditionnal art like Wing Chun.Like it or not,this influence will make it’s works. Good or bad, only the future will know!..I suspect that techniques or principles that require a long time to master or very high skills will fade away as they are not practical against a 100% resisting opponent before being to old for competitions!..We already seen that in karate when really effective techniques but not very visible for a referee were replaced by high points non effective in the real world moves.You get the idea!
The MMA ideas are already ingrained in many’s mind.This is worth a thought about the future of our art.
What is MMA?