Wing Chun Critiques

Trained Wing Chun for 3 years. Recently doing more MMA type stuff, amongst the guys I came across most of them also did Wing Chun and jumped onto the MMA bandwagon. What surprises me I always get similar sorts of Wing Chun criticisms from most. This is a cause for concern because unlike other CMA, Wing Chun is indeed a pure fighting system. And was always being constantly ‘combat’ refined by the likes of Yip Man during the Hong Kong heydays.

From a person who has a bit of sparring in Muay Thai, Judo, MMA, San Shou, judo and BJJ matches and trained extensively in Wing Chun, "The way Wing Chun is taught traditionally is not conducive to any sort of situation, either sport fighting or self defence.

The problems Ive noticed are as follows: The Trapping range is an inferior substitute to either a wrestling or Thai clinch. Instead of controlling the body and the head like a clinch does, Wing Chun seeks to control the limbs, which is hazardous against any opponent who doesn’t make a bridge and is competent in basic boxing and even more dangerous against any semi-competent clinch user. Its hard to stick to someone who is fighting in a more boxer like style as they simply retract their fist immediately after striking instead of trying to form a bridge with their opponent. If you do manage to close the distance enough to use Wing Chun techniques you will probably just end up clinching and falling to the ground anyway.

On Wing Chun’s method of punching , Great emphasis is placed on attacking the centreline with sun punches, but neglected are looping punches, hooking punches, and uppercuts. Also neglected is effective use of angles (not all lineages). Although many Wing Chun schools promote the use of intercepting angles to set up clean strikes, there is little actual training that creates this skill, unlike boxing slipping and footwork drills.

At the schools I trained at, Wing Chun stylist typically had a problem defending against looping punchs. The reason I think this happens is because most Wing Chun guys train with other Wing Chun guys, and since none of them train with hooks, they never really get that good at defending against them.

Additionally, the way punching is taught at the majority of Wing Chun schools I’ve been to leaves one open for counters. The punch is thrown with the shoulder down, as opposed to covering the face. The opposite hand is often held above the bicep to intercept a counterpunch, but as can be seen by anyone in sparring, that’s hardly fool-proof. The shoulder being down prevents any kind of shoulder protection or shoulder roll. Coupled with the fact that the Wing Chun stance is taught with the chin up, in a ‘neutral position’ rather than ducking your chin, and this punch just does not stand up to scrutiny.Wing Chun teaches to keep hands at around chest level instead of up by their head.

My other critique is that the Wing Chun stance of many schools is not very mobile, hard to sprawl (most weight on the backfoot) and not set up well to deal with grappling. Wing Chun’s reliance on footwork as a defensive tool is admirable, but is often overcomplicated and not drilled practically. The fighting range for wing chun is what would be the clinching range for most other styles, so it is a bit strange that grappling (apart from chin-na) is largely absent in traditional Wing Chun.

hello vio…

have a look at www.alanorr.com

you may it find it of some interest…youre right in many respects and IMO id say this is because wing chun is taught incorrectly due to a lack of understanding of what wing chun really is…

hope you find some answers

best

aaron

Great post, Vio…

Carefull to not generalise based on your limited experience.

Many schools train extensively for fighting and also invite other practicioners to come and spar.
Likewise many schools crosstrain with other styles in order to improve their skill level.
And WC is more then the straight punch, you do actually have hooks and uppercuts. If they dont train that in your school, well your a grown man so im sure you can find a way on your own.

Just to cap it off, you dont try and stick to people in WC. Chi sao is not fighting and vice versa.

Great post, jesper…

:slight_smile:

Re Vio’s post

Often in forum discussions- very common to generalize about ALL of wing chun.
Best to stick to what one knows.
Not everyone has their weight on the back leg, not everyone is clueless against grapplers. ETC, ETC, ETC.

joy chaudhuri

Broad generalizations seems to be the norm on internet forums… but in person… different entirely.

While there are some arguments to be made against the rest of your first post, Vio…(which is not to say that you don’t present valid arguments there against MOST wing chun schools/training)…

nonetheless, this part of your post was flawless in it’s analysis, imo…

“The problems Ive noticed are as follows: The Trapping range is an inferior substitute to either a wrestling or Thai clinch. Instead of controlling the body and the head like a clinch does, Wing Chun seeks to control the limbs, which is hazardous against any opponent who doesn’t make a bridge and is competent in basic boxing and even more dangerous against any semi-competent clinch user. Its hard to stick to someone who is fighting in a more boxer like style as they simply retract their fist immediately after striking instead of trying to form a bridge with their opponent. If you do manage to close the distance enough to use Wing Chun techniques you will probably just end up clinching and falling to the ground anyway.”

***Btw…WENG CHUN…a brother art to wing chun…does have quite a bit of standing grappling/throwing techniques in the “clinch” range.

jesper,

I have tried to get in touch with you before, but you might not have noticed it…

I am curious about some things…

Maybe you could provide an e-mail address so I can contact you, or alternatively you could reach me privately through pm on this board or this e-mail address: jesperlundqvist@hotmail.com.

Many thx in advance

:slight_smile:

regards,
JLQ

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;744179]Often in forum discussions- very common to generalize about ALL of wing chun.
Best to stick to what one knows.
Not everyone has their weight on the back leg, not everyone is clueless against grapplers. ETC, ETC, ETC.

joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE] Some lineages do use 50-50 distribution, but most are 70-30 (in the UK anyway). But doesn’t invalidate my argument that the stance isn’t too good for the sprawl.

Would you care to expand. Which lineage would that be that has in depth grappling syllabus?

[QUOTE=jesper;744035]Carefull to not generalise based on your limited experience.[/quote] That’s very vague. Would you care to expand on what you mean by generalize?

If I said Aids was an epidemic in Africa, would you call that generalising? - While it may not be true for everyone. It is an undeniable FACT it affects a broad spectrum. All too often its easy for immature people to brush things aside and bring out the old “its just generalising” without backing themselves up.

Many schools train extensively for fighting and also invite other practicioners to come and spar.
Likewise many schools crosstrain with other styles in order to improve their skill level.
And WC is more then the straight punch, you do actually have hooks and uppercuts. If they dont train that in your school, well your a grown man so im sure you can find a way on your own.
For onething, I didn’t say the ‘straight punch’ was the only punch in Wing Chun. And I certainly didn’t say that Wing Chun schools don’t cross train. Assuming you are a grown man you surely didn’t understand what I wrote. You come across as being more overly defensive and overly emotional than anything else.

Any topic that can awaken Joy from his slumber is one worth reading and commenting on.

Where did this version of wing chun come from. Where the emphasis is trapping and centerline punching where the stance never changes?

Wing chun all wing chun dont need to look to weng chun has grappling hands. pak sao,jut sao,gum sao, huen sao,lop sao. Just a few. Push pull unbalance and control the center of gravity. Control and manipulate joints. Its all there and is taught. Trapping looks good for a demo but it is just something that happens in an incidental way during combat. Also many things can be trapping for example if you move to the outside gates and cannot be struck with the far arm thus giving you 2 on 1 is a trap.

As for stance what happened to 50/50 training you spend all slt training it . 0/100 is also there and everything inbetween. The stance and footwork are supposed to be flexible and soft. Not some locked in stiff only moving in one direction. Soft and flexible allows you to be nimble and quick and teaches how to use your hips. Know how to use your hips and you know how to do a proper sprawl but that is just a small part of what using the proper stance and training it will teach.

If your not getting all this then you are not getting wing chun and should look for another school. Dont fall for the head of our system was Yip Mans best favorite greatest etc. Judge on what you see not what you are told.

I think that the major problem with Wing Chun is not the effectiveness of the Art but the lack experience. Most Wing Chun schools don’t even have sparing and they most certainly do not train to fight other types of martial arts, such as grappling, boxing, ect.

all of you please read and listen with an open mind. Empty your cup for just a sec and if afterward you think I’m an idiot then disregard.

Styles don’t win battles… people do.

Styles don’t hit hard… people do.

Style are not superior to other styles… people are.

In the end… it is the way people train that makes them effective in fighting or not. Regardless of style.

I am a kung fu person… who specializes in WCK. I know it is not the art I love that makes me good or bad… it is up to me. A good couch, teacher, sensei, sifu or guru are important… but they can’t do one pushup for me… they can’t run my miles for me… they can’t spar my rounds for me… they can not reach the devine AH HAA for me. It’s all up to me.

If you trained at a school of a particular style and it didn’t work for you… blame the school… or you… but don’t blame the system. If you’ve trained at 20 schools of the same style and it didn’t work for you then maybe you can blame the style… or is it you? Hmmmmmm :rolleyes:

May the Schwartz Be With You! :stuck_out_tongue:

[QUOTE=leejunfan;744317]In the end… it is the way people train that makes them effective in fighting or not. Regardless of style.[/QUOTE]

Styles generally determine the way people train. Some styles have more effective training methods than others. Those with less effective training methods will also develop less effective techniques to go with those training methods.

Some perfect examples of this are some of the more esoteric, “deadly” grappling styles that do not have full force sparring. Because of the unrealistic training methods utilized by these grappling styles, these styles develop a whole host of techniques that are unworkable against those who train with more effective grappling methods. These grappling practitioners are almost always easily handled by grapplers who have more realistic training methods.

While the person is ulitmately responsible for making a style work, the style that person trains with is just as, if not more, important.

knifefighter…

isn’t that what I said? Until you’ve trained at EVERY WCK school in the world… you can’t say… “They all train that way”

As for my school… we actually get criticized by some WCK people because we don’t “look” like WCK people :rolleyes:

But I hear ya man… a lot of schools need a major kick in the rear.
Peace,

[QUOTE=leejunfan;744329]isn’t that what I said? Until you’ve trained at EVERY WCK school in the world… you can’t say… “They all train that way”,[/QUOTE]

That’s true… but one can still make generalizations that would be true in most cases.

For example one could make broad generalizations about BJJ that would be true in a majority of the cases such as:

BJJ sparring starts from the knees more often than not.
BJJ techniques are great on the ground, mediocre for clinch and takedowns, and suck in regards to striking.
BJJ does a lot of training from the back.
BJJ focuses less on leg locks than some other grappling styles.
BJJ emphasizes position before submission.

While these things are not true for all schools, most schools can be painted with these broad generalizations. Generally, you won’t find BJJ practitioners disagreeing with these things. Nor will they try to defend the weaknesses of BJJ. Most simply cross train to make up for any perceived deficiencies that their particular training might not address.

Knifefighter you have actually pointed out the problem with wing chun.

You pointed to 5 generalizations with BJJ. What would you say about a BJJ school that only did 2 or 3 of those and ignored the others. That is the wing chun problem.

For example stance,some schools only use a 30/70 stance all the time. They ignore training 50/50 for example even though 50/50 is the first basic stance they are taught. The initial post mentioned the reliance on the center line punch. lets say there are only 3 basic punches in wc. uppercut ,hook ,straight punch. A school should train each punch 1/3 of the time but instead many train 1 punch 80% of the time. You cannot paint wing chun with 1 brush until wing chun schools all train the same basics and they dont. Instead we get the wing chun fights and students that have been brainwashed into thinking wing chun is only done one way and all other ways are wrong etc.

There is no doubt you cant learn how to use your tools unless you train in a realistic way to use your tools. The first problem with wing chun is that so many schools ignore or dont understand what all is in the tool bag to begin with.

hunt1 & knifefighter,

good posts!

BJJ’s proving ground is in competition… WCK NEEDS to compete more and stop hiding behind the “too deadly” excuse.

Here’s a thought,

IMHO the wing chun mindset is to punch, its just about the first thing you learn (after stance and centreline!) Yes wing chun does focus on centreline punching compared to looping punches but there are reasons for that.

When you punch you aim to control the person not just strike them. (Obviously knocking them out in one punch is fine, but how many times does that happen in competition) You will have to stick and continue attacking if you want to finish most of the time. That leads us onto trapping…you should not be trapping the arms but also trapping & controlling the body. Extend the centreline principle through the arms to control the body…

Oh and footwork, try speeding up basic footwork drills and see where it gets you, it will be different but it will work. The 100/0 50/50 etc. is for learning…like your abc’s

Learning, training and fighting are different animals that share many elements.

I agree with many of the previous posts, stop bashing styles and take what works and use it. I prefer to walk the long road and develop my skills through traditional arts with a focus on what works always overlaying the style, as I am not going to be an MMA star. If I was going to be am mma star I probably would go down the Thai, BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing Combo route as it seems to be a quicker route just because the training gyms are already pros at these training styles. Its going to take many years for wing chun to have the sort of experience and network of coaches to make the MMA game succesful but it will happen and its the current teachers and fighters who will pave the way for future wing chun champions.