Wing Chun is Inside Fighting

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

The Core of Wing Chun is Inside fighting. Of course it can be adapted to fight outside and inside. But the tools of Wing Chun are all for inside combat. Both medium and close range. The Punches are design for short range attacks. Most people use WC for strickly outside fighting. But Why not Do Karate or Muay Thai for that?

Wing Chun chi sau teaches one sensitiviy to be able to control an opponent by sticking to him! Its not the same as a clinch!

Think of Wing Chun Inside fighting like Trapping Hands and controlling Hands

The Problem I see is when people spar with Wing Chun they forget the Trap hands. But when they Chi sau with Wing Chun they can control someone all day long. What about all out sparring against a struggling opponent trying to knock your head off. If you can control and trap Him wouldnt it be beneficial. The problem with outside fighting is you have to wait for opening to leak in. But With Trapping and Controlling your opponent you create openings as well as feel for them. If you trap your opponent you limit his mobility and ability to mount a counter attack. So the question is How do we use trap hands in fighting?

So Please share with me if you use Trap hands, Controlling hand and stick hand theory in real sparring?

If not do you think its possible to incorporate this aspect into actual fighting, If not do u think chi sau and the drills are useless if all ones does is punch and kick? Why do you even need to know forms?

2

Decided to reprint the text of your remarks…

so as to be able to comment upon them, Yoshiyahu.
…

“The Core of Wing Chun is Inside fighting.” (Y)
…

***YES. Wing chun is a close quarter stand up striking system that features short range punching, palm strikes, elbow strikes, knee strikes, and low short range kicks, for the most part. A few sweeps and (not very high percentage) armlocks/breaks are part of the package as well.
…

“Of course it can be adapted to fight outside and inside. But the tools of Wing Chun are all for inside combat. Both medium and close range. The Punches are designed for short range attacks.” (Y)
…

***AGREED.
…

“Most people use WC for strickly outside fighting. But Why not Do Karate or Muay Thai for that?” (Y)
…

***DON’T KNOW about “most” - but quite a few do. As to your comments about karate and MT, you’re onto something.

Because it’s GETTING to the close quarter inside range without eating overhands, round punches, hooks, roundhouse kicks, shoots to the legs or being engulfed by a full clinch that is the problem for many wing chun people.
…

“Wing Chun chi sau teaches one sensitivity to be able to control an opponent by sticking to him! Its not the same as a clinch!” (Y)
…

***CORRECT AGAIN about the “it’s not the same as a clinch” part. Although sticking (and bridging) is not so easy against a skilled opponent, especially someone with solid boxing, kickboxing, and MT skills.
…

“Think of Wing Chun Inside fighting like Trapping Hands and controlling Hands.
The Problem I see is when people spar with Wing Chun they forget the Trap hands. But when they Chi sau with Wing Chun they can control someone all day long.” (Y)
…

***NOW you’re touching the core of the issue. “Trapping” means different things to different people - but ime it’s more realistic to try and manuever your positioning and your technqiues so that one of your hands controls one of his in such a way so that his other hand, although not necessarily “trapped” - is nonethless out of play for a moment - giving you the opportunity to be striking him with your other hand.

As for the chi sao part of your comment - that’s because chi sao is NOT fighting.
…

“What about all out sparring against a struggling opponent trying to knock your head off. If you can control and trap Him wouldnt it be beneficial.”(Y)
…

***SEE ABOVE.

“The problem with outside fighting is you have to wait for opening to leak in. But With Trapping and Controlling your opponent you create openings as well as feel for them. If you trap your opponent you limit his mobility and ability to mount a counter attack. So the question is How do we use trap hands in fighting?”
…

***AND HEREIN LIES my only major disagreement with your post. In FIGHTING - you can’t afford to wait - you have to use OUTSIDE WEAPONS (which may or may not come from pure wing chun) to get from long range outside fighting to inside close quarter fighting.
…

"So Please share with me if you use Trap hands, Controlling hand and stick hand theory in real sparring?

If not do you think its possible to incorporate this aspect into actual fighting, If not do u think chi sau and the drills are useless if all ones does is punch and kick? Why do you even need to know forms?"
…

***THINK ABOUT all I’ve said so far and maybe your last questions will be answered.

3

Thanks

Victor very interesting indeed. it will take a while for me to digest all you said. Some easily understandable other parts is vague right now. But give me a moment its late now im sleepy tomorrow i will be refreshed.

In boxing you have outside fighters like Muhammed Ali and inside fighters like Mike Tyson or Joe Fraiser. The Inside fighter usually keeps the pressure on with a flurry of attacks. Wing Chun has entry techniques that allow you to enter your opponents gates with out eating a jab most of the time. And if you can control them then you can get your flow and flurry on. But You stated Chi sau is not fighting. You are correct its not. its two man exercise to develop sensitivity, learn listening ging, learn how to trap and control your opponent as well staying attached. But with that being said. Why can’t one adapt Chi Sau to real fighting. In other words your not doing chi sau. But your using elements from chi sau like trapping,sticking,redirecting, flanking ones blind side, jerking,pulling, pushing and controlling your opponents elbow,wrist, or neck. So Chi Sau is learning tool but why not incorporate and adopt the purpose of chi sau into fighting. After all if Chi Sau is useless and has no real value for you in when you spar why practice it. Why not forget chi sau all together and just shadow box, light spar and hard spar?

Victor said - “use OUTSIDE WEAPONS (which may or may not come from pure wing chun) to get from long range outside fighting to inside close quarter fighting.”

So in other words you do not think WC bridging the gap techniques are sufficent from long range to short range? Also what long range tools do you think may assist in closing the gap and seeking the bridge?

Chum Kiu and the Sup Yee San Sik has techniques for bridging the gap as well! But I am all for switiching up styles on an opponent. If you have more than one style to accompany your core art or the art you rely on most then you can confuse your opponents strategy. For instance if your opponent thinks at first glimpse your a long range kicker because you use Kyoshukin Kicks he may attempt to close the gap thinking his inside punches will be devasting to you. But when he reaches the inside he finds that you are great at trapping and controlling the center line an becomes confused and loss. My Sifu is all about using different arts!

4

…I was always taught trapping is a “gift”…you find it in the moment, but you dont go looking for it…otherwise you end up playing bullsh*t chasing games…

5

[QUOTE=Badnews;1064109]…I was always taught trapping is a “gift”…you find it in the moment, but you dont go looking for it…otherwise you end up playing bullsh*t chasing games…[/QUOTE]

is it possible to bait or lead your opponent into a trap?

6

of course it is…as it is equally easier to be baited yourself trying to over complicate things…trapping is secondary to direct action (attack) to finish your opponent…
sure a trap if its there take it…but wouldn’t it be better to finish in 1 move than 2?..WC is simple, direct, efficient…the traps allow us to press the attack AFTER our initial attack has failed…it should never be the leading thought IMO

7

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1064098]The Core of Wing Chun is Inside fighting.
[/QUOTE]

No. WCK’s method is to control while striking the opponent and that requires being on the inside.

Of course it can be adapted to fight outside and inside.

No, it can’t. Outside and inside are two different animals, that use different tactics, mechanics, actions, etc. And that is why when you see WCK people “spar” on the outside, all the WCK goes out the window and they end up kickboxing.

When on the outside, WCK has one objective: enter to the inside.

But the tools of Wing Chun are all for inside combat. Both medium and close range. The Punches are design for short range attacks. Most people use WC for strickly outside fighting. But Why not Do Karate or Muay Thai for that?

The operative range for WCK is chi sao “range”. The drill/exercise teaches you this.

Wing Chun chi sau teaches one sensitiviy to be able to control an opponent by sticking to him! Its not the same as a clinch!

Wrong. WCK doesn’t teach you sensitivity. WCK teaches you contact actions.

If you are in sustained contact, you are in a clinch. Chi sao is a (unrealistic) clinch.

Think of Wing Chun Inside fighting like Trapping Hands and controlling Hands

No. There is no such thing as “trapping”. This is a misnomer. WCK controls the opponent while striking him. The focus is on controlling the opponent, not simply his hands. The hands are merely “handles” to his center.

The Problem I see is when people spar with Wing Chun they forget the Trap hands. But when they Chi sau with Wing Chun they can control someone all day long. What about all out sparring against a struggling opponent trying to knock your head off. If you can control and trap Him wouldnt it be beneficial. The problem with outside fighting is you have to wait for opening to leak in. But With Trapping and Controlling your opponent you create openings as well as feel for them. If you trap your opponent you limit his mobility and ability to mount a counter attack. So the question is How do we use trap hands in fighting?

So Please share with me if you use Trap hands, Controlling hand and stick hand theory in real sparring?

As I said, there is no such thing as trapping. That is fantasy fu. The “traps” taught in chi sao aren’t meant to control the hands. There is something else.

If you don’t know WCK’s method, to control while striking, and don’t practice it, then you won’t be able to use it in sparring. The KEY to controlling while striking is breaking the opponent’s structure and keeping it broken, not “trapping his hands.” If his structure is broken, you don’t need to be concerned with his hands.

If not do you think its possible to incorporate this aspect into actual fighting, If not do u think chi sau and the drills are useless if all ones does is punch and kick? Why do you even need to know forms?

The forms teach us the WCK actions/movements, chi sao permits us to learn and practice those movement/actions as contact tools using WCK’s method. But that doesn’t teach you to or develop your fighting. You only learn to swim by swimming.

8

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1064170]
When on the outside, WCK has one objective: enter to the inside.
[/QUOTE]

Correct.

I see many people train WC who seems “afraid” to be on the inside.
Relish it or find another art

Well just my thought

9

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1064170] There is no such thing as “trapping”. This is a misnomer. WCK controls the opponent while striking him. The focus is on controlling the opponent, not simply his hands. The hands are merely “handles” to his center.

If you don’t know WCK’s method, to control while striking, and don’t practice it, then you won’t be able to use it in sparring. The KEY to controlling while striking is breaking the opponent’s structure and keeping it broken, not “trapping his hands.” If his structure is broken, you don’t need to be concerned with his hands.

The forms teach us the WCK actions/movements, chi sao permits us to learn and practice those movement/actions as contact tools using WCK’s method. But that doesn’t teach you to or develop your fighting. You only learn to swim by swimming.[/QUOTE]

This all makes perfect sense to me! Good post!

10

[QUOTE=KPM;1064289]This all makes perfect sense to me! Good post![/QUOTE]

I think it makes sense too.. But it may understate the control factor of the limbs..(arms and legs) Control must also mean that we create the opportunity to cleanly strike and so control must facilitate the space and position to do so.. The classical techniques certainly restrict the ability of the legs (their movement) and their arms which might get in the way of our striking in a variety of ways…

11

[QUOTE=Badnews;1064109]…I was always taught trapping is a “gift”…you find it in the moment, but you dont go looking for it…otherwise you end up playing bullsh*t chasing games…[/QUOTE]

YES. same here. That’s why the training of the correct reflexes is so essential.

If you have to think about it, it is already too late.

12

First Off Terenece Niehoff excellent Post. I only disagree in semantics. But its a great post none the less. You hit it dead on man…Keep it up!

[QUOTE=shawchemical;1064308]YES. same here. That’s why the training of the correct reflexes is so essential.

If you have to think about it, it is already too late.[/QUOTE]

Yes that is so true once someting becomes a natural reflect you dont need to worry about trying to make plans before time. WC is about the flow and using your natural flow to overcome your opponent!

[QUOTE=jesper;1064175]Correct.

I see many people train WC who seems “afraid” to be on the inside.
Relish it or find another art

Well just my thought[/QUOTE]

In part i dont really think most of them are afraid to go on the inside. They just aren’t taught how to go the inside. In other words When they spar with people from other arts or have sparred in previous arts chances are it was from the outside. So they are use to outside fighting. We get into WC they do so with other reasons. Not really interested in close combat persay. Because their ideal of inclose fighting is medium to kicking range.

[QUOTE=Badnews;1064118]of course it is…as it is equally easier to be baited yourself trying to over complicate things…trapping is secondary to direct action (attack) to finish your opponent…
sure a trap if its there take it…but wouldn’t it be better to finish in 1 move than 2?..WC is simple, direct, efficient…the traps allow us to press the attack AFTER our initial attack has failed…it should never be the leading thought IMO[/QUOTE]

I agree the key is to strike If you opinion defends and intercept your intial attack then flow around their parry,interception or block or simply redirect it to a favorable posistion where you can strike easily!

13

And quite often, the way to break the opponent’s structure, unbalance him, and keep him on defense is by first controlling the fight by “trapping” the hands in the way I described earlier.

That is, by manuevering your positioning and your techniques so that one of your hands controls one of his in such a way so that his other hand, although not necessarily ‘trapped’ - is nonethless out of play for a moment - giving you the opportunity to be striking him with your other hand.

This is how I define “trapping” in a realistic sense when up against a good fighter.

And is clearly one very big wing chun way of “controlling while striking.”

Trying to break his structure is all well and good; but remember, if he’s a good fighter, then he’s also trained in using his hands as strikes, blocks, etc. not only as offense - but as a means of protecting and defending his body structure.

And you’ll have to deal with those hands.

14

[QUOTE=Badnews;1064109]…I was always taught trapping is a “gift”…you find it in the moment, but you dont go looking for it…otherwise you end up playing bullsh*t chasing games…[/QUOTE]

yes good way to put it, opportunistic fighting. I had a fight years ago outside a pub i did bouncing at , where long story short, a guy took a swing at me without warning and as it passed by my jaw, missing by a 1/2 " I trapped his elbow as it passed by me ‘turning him’ the ‘gift that kept on giving’ :smiley: and knocked him out with 3 punches as I trapped him…ah memories.

blocking with tan can be your worst idea…let them swing at you and take the gift…use mobility and timing to gain entry…allowing a guy to overextend, reach, lose balance for a second all good and isnt …attached. Like offering a rope to pull on then letting go as they are about apply force, or to pull it away before they can even grab it…alignment drills become more apparent to striking the open space ‘gift’ created by bad mechanics…

15

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1064323]First Off Terenece Niehoff excellent Post. I only disagree in semantics. But its a great post none the less. You hit it dead on man…Keep it up!
[/QUOTE]

We do not agree. On anything. If you read my post (the one you call “excellent”), I began each paragraph by disagreeing with the points you made in your post.

16

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;1064333]And quite often, the way to break the opponent’s structure, unbalance him, and keep him on defense is by first controlling the fight by “trapping” the hands in the way I described earlier.
[/QUOTE]

No. Your theory isn’t WCK’s method.

Control has to be your primary focus. If not, then you won’t get control.

That is, by manuevering your positioning and your techniques so that one of your hands controls one of his in such a way so that his other hand, although not necessarily ‘trapped’ - is nonethless out of play for a moment - giving you the opportunity to be striking him with your other hand.

This is how I define “trapping” in a realistic sense when up against a good fighter.

No. That won’t work. And, that’s why you didn’t see any of that in your sparring clip. And, you won’t even be able to do that in chi sao (unless your partner lets you).

The control comes ONLY from breaking his structure. If his structure isn’t broken, you have NO control.

And is clearly one very big wing chun way of “controlling while striking.”

No. There is no control if his structure isn’t broken.

Trying to break his structure is all well and good; but remember, if he’s a good fighter, then he’s also trained in using his hands as strikes, blocks, etc. not only as offense - but as a means of protecting and defending his body structure.

And you’ll have to deal with those hands.

What do you think you are learning in chi sao?

17

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1064469]We do not agree. On anything. If you read my post (the one you call “excellent”), I began each paragraph by disagreeing with the points you made in your post.[/QUOTE]

your way of disagreeing is actually agreeing my friend. We may word things differently but its all the same

WC is inside fighting. which is while you are attached while striking. But if you disagree its cool!

18

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1065826]your way of disagreeing is actually agreeing my friend. We may word things differently but its all the same
[/QUOTE]

No, you and I don’t agree at all.

WC is inside fighting. which is while you are attached while striking. But if you disagree its cool!

No, what YOU do is latch on to posts by others, including myself, to try and make yourself look like you know what you are talking about when in fact you are clueless. I know that you are full of sh1t. And, I think most people here realize it too.

19

wow buddy your being a jerk. I done nothing but be respectful…well my friend your an azzhole through and through…

i still like what you saying…as for attached to what other people…i am sure your attaching to what i said in the past about attached fighting

[QUOTE=t_niehoff;1065861]No, you and I don’t agree at all.

No, what YOU do is latch on to posts by others, including myself, to try and make yourself look like you know what you are talking about when in fact you are clueless. I know that you are full of sh1t. And, I think most people here realize it too.[/QUOTE]

20

[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1066102]wow buddy your being a jerk. I done nothing but be respectful…well my friend your an azzhole through and through…
[/QUOTE]

You are delusional. Try to understand this, Clarence, because I have told you it again and again – I want nothing to do with you or your group of fake WCK. We don’t agree on ANYTHING. Got it?

If you think we agree, then you would also agree that Stan’s stuff is pure crap, that Eddie Ma was a fraud, etc. Do we agree? LOL!

i still like what you saying…as for attached to what other people…i am sure your attaching to what i said in the past about attached fighting

All you do is parrot what other people say on this forum. Go away.