Announcement

**Capt Insaino** · 12-28-2005, 07:37 AM

Good points

I'd have to agree with Thai Bri for the most part.
I wish we could have a sensible forum without people getting all huffy and puffy over someone elses opinion. If we practiced respect as much as we did our different arts we wouldn't have that issue. I can say the same for myself many times so I'll try to practice what I preach.
Back to the subject at hand, I think one can get a mastery of WC's first form in a year. I trained WC for quite some time and always found myself going back to sil lum tao (spelling? it's been a while) and rechecking myself. Since all other of WC's forms are built upon the first I think it's best to have your foundation secured before you start to build upon it. If a WC instructor rushes someone past the first form it's probably due to the lack of knowledge. I've seen WC practioners in a fight drop into their horse and stand there thinking that all they'sll need to do is turn to avoid the atack. I've also seen a few shuffle across a parking lot on their back leg(now that was funny).
I like the point on the muscle memory and hiting the bag. I can tell you that it's true. If you hit a bag or anything that drvelopes your follow through power your punches will be more effective PERIOD. There's no "Picture your target a few inches behind you initial taget" snooore

Hitting a bag will also condition your wrists and carpals from getting broked when you do finally throw that knock-out punch.

WC does work in it's own respect, but when someone truely mean and dangerous takes you to the ground, the only thing that will go through you mind is getting back up unless your comfortable with ground fighting.

**Balor** · 03-03-2006, 01:33 AM

Usually I and many others I know have written off Thai Bri as a closed minded wanker. However, in his summary here, he's brought up some interesting things which I believe some people can take away and think about. I myself, and some of my friends who study WC have appreciated some of his criticisms. I was also pleased to note that he had stuck with WC for a year and so had some (even if limited) first hand experience. I also believe that some of his criticism has an element to it that attempts to be constructive.

In short, my background is 3 years TKD followed by boxing, freestyle karate and then kickboxing. I have since moved from kickboxing to WC. I have only done 111 formal lessons of WC (I mention lessons as opposed to the length of time training due to the fact that some people in my academy have performed 111 lessons in less than 20 weeks, whereas it takes others a year or more). What does 111 lessons mean? Very little other than the fact that I am a complete novice in this particular art.

Forms

I have only undertaken training in the first 2 forms. The forms are, amongst other things, about energy direction and sensitivity as well as a thorough understanding of the basic movements. For those who don't understand that, well then - they should consider something a little more primal.

The second form has been useful in tying together many of the WC movements - some of which can seem damn foreign to a person of my MA background. It’s also been helpful in learning how to bridge the gap and close with an opponent.

As for Mike Tyson not needing forms: true, but he fights to rules. I remember when I boxed and took a challenge against a Kyokushin karate practitioner. With the extension of rules that allowed kicking, he hacked up my legs good and proper. I bowed out once I couldn't stand (let alone fight). Months later I watched him practise by smashing baseball bats with his shins. Interesting stuff. No, I am not trying to liken myself to Mike, nor am I insulting boxing – I am merely pointing out that he is not the ultimate fighter (if there is such a thing) and the obvious fact that no one style has all the answers.

Basic Techniques

The WC basic punch is fast. It relies on speed, and it lacks power. You are correct.

When I first encountered a WC practitioner he hit me repeatedly with straight line punches. I admit I was shocked at the speed at which they were delivered. Alas for the WC’er we were playing by my rules (kickboxing) and thus was wearing gloves: so I took the hits and pounded them back, winning the bout. Later I found out that they only had 1 years experience in WC – ie a novice. Not a good example.

The second time I encountered a WC practitioner (17 years experience) he hit me repeatedly with these straight line punches. Now, this guy was about 120kg (260lbs) and he packed a good punch regardless. Had he been using 'western style' punching ala boxing, he would have been hitting harder, and perhaps only fractionally slower. However the point was that he was hitting me repeatedly and he was moving with devastating forward motion - and all his strikes were targeted at the throat and eyes. More power was almost superfluous. Thanks to his accurate targeting and grounded forward motion, speed and accuracy was the major weapon.

You are correct when you say that the style is structurally fast. Economy of movement is maximised. As is economy of energy. Could I kickbox at age 50+. Probably not without difficulty. Could I do TKD? - um, NO, not without further pain to my joints. Could I utilise WC at age 50+? Yes I certainly could, and with less difficulty.

WC stances are fairly grounded; weight is often 80/20 – and it takes practise to move quickly within their stances. I disagree with the good shove theory. I've found exactly the opposite. I've had to spend a lot of time moving my energies and weight downwards to appreciate and use the WC stability.

'Blocking'(or redirecting) and parrying in WC is exceptional in my opinion. Simple as that. Far superior to what I used in boxing / kickboxing where I absorbed impacts with my body and or gloves - Or the karate I did in conjunction with the kickboxing where the blocks were slow and over committed. Add to the fact that WC teaches simultaneous movements of parrying and striking, that when delivered properly can be surprisingly effective.

Chi Sao (or "sticky hands")

Sticky hands can be civilised, or it can be brutal. It depends on who you train with and how you train. In my academy, where required there is no polite keeping of distance. I can assure you of that  Having said that, advanced chi sao is an amazing thing to see - don't fall into the trap of confusing it with sparring. There are links, but they are not comparable.

Chi Sao is a good way of reinforcing the use of the centre line. Deviate and a good training partner will punish you ruthlessly. I've received many a blood lip or bruised eye from lax technique here.

Chi sau also links striking to non-shoot grappling - ie the 'grey area' transition phase between the two but see my comments below.

Trapping

This is admittedly damn hard to do at speed and with any degree of competence, especially against a 'trained' opponent. I can't comment much on it, as I don't believe I'm at a level to. However in its most basic form I have used it in sparring to smother opponent's jabs, with limited relevance / success, thus keeping my opponent where I want them - ie very close hand striking distance. I have only seen it used once ‘outside the classroom’ with effectiveness – by a WC’er against a boxer. The result was a mess with no clear outcome; however the boxer certainly got tangled. If nothing else it showed me what *could* be done.

WC Dummy

The dummy is an excellent tool for conditioning the arms. For various reasons, the WC that I practise does not lend a focus to conditioning the torso to take hits like some styles I know and have done - however there is a lot of emphasis on hard contact to the arms and legs. Aside from conditioning, the wooden man is useful for learning correct position & angles of both the arms and legs. I can't comment much more as I have very little experience on the dummy.

Grappling.

I tire of the arrogance of many of my fellow WC'ers who maintain that they cannot be taken to the ground. I have had friends king hit and taken to the ground, and know more than a few people who have fallen as a result of fighting on uneven terrain. It can happen to the best of us. I have also seen how quickly a competent shoot can be delivered, and the way in which some adrenaline hyped people can sustain (hard) hits to the head, neck and torso as they shoot you, still managing to take you to the pavement. WC has a serious deficiency here. Thus I know many people who practise BJJ in conjunction with WC (with excellent results). The first time I fought a BJJ'er I gouged their eyes during the shoot and then low kicked their knee as they backed off clutching their face. However it was only last night that I found myself in the ground with a BJJ'er and was completely at their mercy. Frightening stuff - once the fight moved into their turf, I was at a serious disadvantage. WC does not have all the answers - but then again, what style does? Let's just say that the BJJ’ers I have trained with have a healthy respect for WC, and vice versa.

Wall Bags

Wall bags are fantastic for conditioning the hands. Our academy uses both them and hanging bags. They serve different purposes and are not comparable as you have implied.

Kicks

As a preference WC practitioners don’t kick above the knees and the kicks are linear with no telegraphing (the complete opposite of what I learnt at TKD many years back). We practise these low kicks ad-nauseum. Your school would have done well to do likewise. Initially I doubted that these kicks had much power behind them, but I have since learnt otherwise - the hard way. Whilst some WC’ers in my academy state that they would NEVER kick in a fight, I maintain that they are one of the most essential weapons of the WC arsenal. Don't get me wrong, I love high kicks and spinning movements, but only for when I feel like being a wanker. I'd never use them in a real situation unless I felt like I could win lottery or my opponent was clearly highly incompetent.

General training.

Your training against thin air must be something pertaining more to your WC school than WC at large.

Mind you, the obvious was pointed out to me by my Sifu last night when he said that the most financially successful schools in my country (Australia) are those who practise little or no contact. Some of that slant applies to some WC schools. And when you have a style that pits most of its strikes at the eyes, throat, knees and hips: well you have to be careful with beginners (such as you were with only 1 year's experience) getting overly carried away with applying testosterone to people's vital organs  The other styles I did had rules, rules and rules. WC has comparatively few rules. For example - BJJ frustrates the crap out of some of my friends due to the sporting focus of their school. “No you can’t gouge the eyes… no you can’t rip the inner thigh… elbow to the head etc etc”

There is none of this '3 minute rounds' of contact fighting in weight categories that I did in ring karate or kickboxing. WC sparring typically lasts 3-10 seconds and then it’s over. More akin to what I've seen on the street. You disable your opponent as fast as possible. You don’t bounce around trading hits for 3 minutes.

As for the 'we are the best mentality' - I've seen that in many styles, WC included (actually, WC especially). It’s a bit of a tedious common trend I'm afraid.

Relevance to Self Protection

Issues like awareness, avoidance, posturing, threat assessment etc etc etc. were not addressed one iota in your class. They are in mine. Not to the extent of some class that I've attended esp Krav Maga. However these issues ARE addressed. Not as much as I'd like, but they are. I agree that this can be a serious deficiency in training, as your mood on the day, your animal instinct and your level of aggression are more important often than the style you train in.

For me the hardest thing about self protection + WC is the fact that WC relies on excellent structure to work. It’s amazing what it can do when the structure is perfect, but try doing that when you're angry or scared. With other styles I practised I could lash out in anger and still perform very well - with WC I need to remain a lot more focused. I am hoping that this focus will come more naturally to me in the years to come.

Having said that, not all people learn 'martial' arts for the 'martial' aspects of training. Learn to respect that. There's a lot more to it than kicking arse and self defence.

You said that "I bet there are people who can make WC work. But they will be near the top of the WC tree, AND they will be in the minority." I will agree with you there. In many ways WC is a complex art despite its simplicities (sorry if that sounded like Yoda). I am keen to learn as much as I can from it, but at the end of the day I will focus the most intense parts of my training on only a few key techniques that I make my own personal primary arsenal. Many of these I am surprised to say, are from WC - and they include the low knee kick, the bon sau (a tech that I thought was laughable when I first saw it), and the simultaneous parry + strikes.

Again, thanks for your summary Thai Bri, I did find it interesting, and I agree some of what you've said. WC obviously wasn’t for you, and it’s not for a lot of people. If you’re happy with whatever styles you’ve subsequently tried, then that’s great – but please stop hacking on WC as a whole.

**phenom** · 03-03-2006, 03:23 AM

grat post mate just curious to know were in australia you are im in melb i myself am a wing chun practitioner and would love to chat about tehniques and applications great outlook towards other opinions your sifu would be proud disihing

**Balor** · 03-03-2006, 05:54 AM

Hi Phenom, I'm located in Canberra and train under Sifu Alan Graham (Canberra Wing Chun Academy). Happy to chat anytime re: techs & applications. There is a vast amount of knowledge on this forum, but I have noticed a disturbing amount of generalising and misconceptions about WC (WC being quite a diverse style in itself with a lot of different and evolving streams).

Every style has its strengths and weaknesses and I think its important that practitioners lend equal focus to the 'weaknesses' of themselves and their chosen martial arts styles as they do the 'strengths'.

Cheers

**phenom** · 03-03-2006, 06:35 AM

thanks for reply here is my email redboysorrel@hotmail.com could you email me so i can use your email to contact you directly instead of threw the forum thanks

**Thai Bri** · 03-03-2006, 10:03 AM

Its strange that you "and many others you know" have written me off as a wanker. Especially since its only your first post. What happens? Do you and your little pencil necked pals sit around the computer reading, but never daring to post?

Its also strange to see just how much you actually agree with me. So why the "wanker" comment? Anyway, lets take some of the things you disagree with and have a look.

If 111 lessons makes you a novice in a fighting art, then it ain't a good fighting art. I can (and have) taken total beginners and given them useable, real skills in 1 lesson. I may have mentioned that I learned more about REAL fighting by watching a video called "The Shredder" by Richard Dimitri than I did in my whole year of WC training. Sounds ridiculous, but t'is true.

You said that those who don't understand "forms" should consider getting a little more primal. I totally agree with you. Fighting is primal. One of the main problems with the martial arts is this - they've got too much "art" and not enough "martial." Thats why so many trainees (even black belts etc.) get the shit kicked out of them by thugs. Because fighting is primal, and should be trained that way. But we have this illogical presumption that, mysteriously, the better an art is, the longer it takes to learn. Bollox. But it is a great way to keep students paying for years on end.

Your example of the inclusion of rules to the disadvantage of WC was ridiculous. It wasn't that the rules inhibited things...it was because they ALLOWED something, i.e. the kicks to the legs. You shot yourself in the foot. That must be pretty painful after getting your legs kicked to smithereens!

So, some guy hit you with speed and power did he? Thats great! Its fantastic that this art, designed by a woman to allow smaller people to defeat bigger ones, was so effective for him. But wait.... he was 120 kilos. THAT'S 264 LBS! Hardly proving anything about Wing Chun, does it?

Now, you at 50. Could you kickbox? I don't know. I think its irrelevant. I don't recommend kickboxing for real fighting. But I get your point. When people recommend "softer" styles for older people they, quite rightly, realise that the older ones can perform these techniques more easily. BUT YOU STILL MAKE AN INCORRECT ASSUMPTION. You assume that these techniques will work. If they were so good that even an older person could use them successfully...then a younger person would be successful also! But where is the evidence? Theres certainly none in low rules MMA fights.

WC dummy conditioning the arms? What the fook for? Like you say, a real fight can last for seconds. What use are conditioned arms? You should be taking him down, not impressing him with forearm toughness. Conditioned arms are irrelevant, and one of the many distractions that so called martial arts have in respect to real fighting. And conditioning the hands? Punch if you want to. In Wing Chun your hands are pretty safe - BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HIT HARD! For anyone else? Use stronger parts of the body than knuckles.

Low kicks? I have no argument there.

Three minute rounds? I too only train for the burst of an explosive real fight. If you don't take someone out with a pre emptive shot, though, it may well last more than 10 seconds mate. Keep your anaerobic conditioning up to 2-3 minutes, or suffer the consequencies.

You depend on "structure", but its hard to do when your scared? Too right. Look what those two great WC Masters did when they fought for real. They rolled around like girlies. They'd put in all those years of training that you hope will give you this "structure". Doesn''t their failure tell you anything?

And you've also fallen into the trap of the "its not just about fighting" argument. Thats the logic of a guy not totally sure that his art is effective, but he's still at the stage where he bravely tells himself that it is - as long as he devotes (i.e. wastes) years of training to it.

You seem like a reasonable and intelligent guy. Go out and test your skills a little more with other styles. I know you've done a little. Why not go bare knuckle, but light contact, with a boxer? See how often you even hit him, compared with how often he hits you. Then both strike various impact devices and see who you honestly think would have had most effect.

All the so called advantages you speak of are done by Wing Chun people on compliant Wing Chun people in Wing Chun classes.

By the way, when I'm play fighting with my kids? Those WC blocks, parries and simultaneous strikes etc. are still there. Its a great game. But when some shite head is trying to fill my face in for real they don't come to mind. Structure or not, they just don't cut the custard under real ferocity.

Its of little concern to me what you train. My own journey has (and still is) long and hard. If someone posts Wing Chun threads, I'll continue to comment. That isn't "hacking" Wing Chun. That is discussing a martial art on a martial arts discussion forum.

But I think I am fair in saying that it is you who have the closed mind. I've kept mine open, and any negative comments are merely observations based on experience.

**Balor** · 03-03-2006, 05:08 PM

Again, I can't deny that you make some very relevant points, and this is from someone who generally dislikes people who concern themselves too much with 'waves that rock the boat.' The comments you've made in this post are largely constructive and thus they interest me, other comments of yours that I have read in the past I would put in the hacking basket.

Yup, whilst I might not be pencil necked

I am indeed a white collar worker who spends way too much time in front of a computer, having intermittently read on the forums for a while, but never posting until now. Don't get me wrong, there's a wanker in us all and I believe yours manifests itself quite nicely. Your 'haw haw haw' trademark is well known in a couple of Aus MA schools now. Take that as you will.

Again I'll address some of your points as you've laid them out, taking care not to let this degenerate too much.

The issue of 111 lessons still making me feel like a novice is a part personal thing, but also a point of concern. Being a novice does not necessarily entail helpless incompetance in the face of a real life physical threat. From what I have seen, and as I learn it, WC is not an easy art to pick up, learn and apply - and yes, this does concern me. I know that others disagree with me here.

Re: art having too much 'art'. Agreed. A few senior members in my academy have commented on the way in which they spend time selecting what works for them from WC (and other arts) and concentrate on those techs. Once they've stripped that down, its sometimes surprising at how little they pick for their preferred arsenal. I guess that's a leaf from the Geoff Thompson book '3 second fighter'.

The accurate description of the 120kg weight of a larger opponent was a point made re: the extra power of a 'trad boxing punch' vs a 'trad wc punch' with regards to the power advantage of the former and the speed advantage of the latter (all things being equal). RE: weight and strength - I agree, that if used properly, weight and strength it will usually be an advantage regardless of combatitive style. This can apply to styles that in some ways 'do not rely on strength' such as WC and BJJ.

Conditioned arms are essential for a WC practioner (just as flexibility is for TKD or abs for a kickboxer or shins for a Kyokushin knock down specialist) - not to sustain hits from an opponent, but to be able to use them effectively to execute the techs. There is a lot of emphasis on closing the gap and using the arms to both deflect and strike. Thus my point that that wooden man is a valuable aid in this aspect of the art.

Regarding bare knuckle vs a boxer: hand vs hands, I'd be wary! And for good reason as you have pointed out. Boxers are dedicated hands specialists as I too discovered when I trained boxing. It was a humbling lesson that I learnt when I made the transition from TKD to boxing / kickboxing. Of interest to me was the fact that early Western boxers used WC style straight punches (well not quite but similar). I gather they have diverted from this partly due to the introduction of gloves and the subsequent need to throw more weight behind the strikes. There could also be arguments about how the modern boxing style punching links combinations in a manner that can be more fluid than that of say, WC. Interestingly enough, without gloves it does not necessarily take a lot of force to knock someone out, blind or stun someone if the strike is accurate. There is of course also the other extreme where I have heard of WC novices pattering away with quick but gutless straight punches, and waking up in our local hospital.

You've said that WC seems to work best against compliant WC practitioners. I don't quite agree (though 6 months ago I would have agreed), however I do have concerns that some WC classes do not place enough emphasis on cross training - some also don't believe in sparring and so lend an overly weighted focus to the air drills that you mentioned in your initial post.

There is a lot of emphasis placed on the success of various MA's in the public sphere. And WC certainly does not have a strong profile there. One of the problems is that therefore many of the real life success stories surrounding WC are suspect as you have to take someone's word for it. Having seen it work first hand I'm not in that basket, but until things change its going to be an ongoing perception for many people.

I think one danger of this sort of posting is this: you will probably never respect WC whereas I have come to respect it, so my posts are primarily geared at offfering a counter view of some of your statements in the hope that others on this forum can see another opinion. Me trying to convince you of any virtues of WC is pretty well pointless.

**Thai Bri** · 03-05-2006, 06:39 PM

Theres less for me to pick up on now, coz we do seem to broadly agree.

When you think about it, in what way is WC quicker? It certainly looks quick, and the simultaneous blcok/counter "should" be quicker. But how many of 'em flick out damaging jabs anywhere near as quickly as a good middleweight boxer? WC is quicker on paper. But, especially with the poor footwork of the lineage you study (other WC has a more even distribution of weight) you quick punches won't be hitting any targets.

Your point re conditioned forearms fo WC is just as important as flexibility for TKD etc. is a circular argument. Its like saying "Doing a Handstand is just as important for Hand-Stand Do". Maybe it is - BUT WHO SAYS IT IS RELEVANT FOR REAL FIGHTING?

I know it doesnt take a lot of force to knock someone out. If you get the targeting right, and they are not expecting it, it takes surprisingly little. But you gotta be real good with deception and pre emption to get that. In the middle of a rumble? You'll get neither.

If WC depends on cross training, then WC is not as effective as people make it out to be. There is nothing wrong with cross training. It is the way to go. AS LONG AS PEOPLE STOP CREDITTING THEIR CHOSEN ART FOR THEIR PROWESS. Who remembers Kimo when he nearly killed Royce Gracie in UFC3? He appeared to be a steroided up wrestler on Jesus Juice. But he gave his chosen art as TKD. Nonsense.

I will never respect WC? Maybe, maybe not. But take a look through the thread at the guys who've suypported it (you excepted). What a bunch of knobs.

Anyway, no harm done. This is my message for all you Aussies out there -

"Haw Haw Haw Ya Wankers!" -

**phenom** · 03-05-2006, 07:45 PM

thai bri you seem to be quite clued on at times but you spoil it with childish remarks a true person of the arts never envolves himself in that type of conduct you post like you are a man of the martial world but you ruin yourself by kiddy name calling cmon mate.From your friend in australia cheers

**Thai Bri** · 03-08-2006, 04:26 AM

What the fook is a "true person of the arts?" Are you one of those idiots who goes all mystical and implies you have some Monk like Buddhist knowledge, merely because you learn a vaguely oriental fighting art?

PS - The word you are looking for is "involves", not "envolves."

Cheers -

**bcbernam777** · 03-26-2006, 08:22 AM

This is my first post on this forum, and I would like to add something to this disscussion late as it may be.

I study Wing Chun under my Sifu who was a former student of Yip Man, I have been studying under him for almost 2 years now. There are several point I wish to raise here.

1. The time misconception: There seems to be a misconception that Wing Chun can be mastered in three easy steps and takes very little time to "master". This view has, as far as I am aware, never been put forward by any legitimate student of Sigung's (Yip Man). There is a saying (or kuen kuit) basically that the techniques are easy to learn but hard to master. There are only 6 forms in Wing Chun, and anyone could be taught these forms in only a matter of days, all of the forms could feasibly (if ones retentive memory is sufficcient) be taught the forms in as little as a month. These 6 forms, when compared with the multitude of forms in other CMA's mean that this system could be learnt quickly, but to fully understand the system, that is a lifetime event, and to learn them properly, to lead you to a place of sufficient understanding where you can take the system for your own will take a decent practicioner between 10-12 years. Even then constant practice is needed to further understand and absorb the system. As Sifu once told me, never call yourself Sifu, only after 10 years can you call yourself Sifu.

2. The structural misconception: Part of the problem sith much Wing Chun being taught, is that it makes the use of the wrong structual biomechanics. This problem was highlighted to me after I had studied with Sifu for a year, and had the oportunity to "touch hands" with a student of 2 different schools of Wing Chun who had studied for 6 years. This gentleman that I trained with, despite his 6 years of training, had no ability when pushed into a semi sparring situation with myself, and he was at a loss to understand why, the answer was simple he was utilising the wrong structure, and was working with the wrong energy, this was something that I showed him, and he told me that of all the places that he had visited, that my Wing chun was the best (of course it was Sifus wing Chun not mine which I pointed out to him), this is because Sifu is stringet on key elements of the system that many others dont understand, and the reason they dont understand it is because they rush past the Sui Lum Tao thinking that it is boring and a waste of time. Even now after almost 2 full years of concentrating on the Sui Lum Tao i am only now beginning to see its potential, it is a foundation, but it is a strong foundation, and it is partly (whencombined with the three other forms) the engine behind the system. When this is learnt properly it lays the foundation for a STRONG structure, meaning that punches indeed become strong. When I first started studying with Sifu, one of his former students that he taught for 18 years punched me in the chest during chi sau, I can say as a martial artist with at least 15 years behind me in several different martial arts, that punch was the most penetrating destructive punch that I have ever felt, when I was punched in my chest it felt like it had gone straight through my chest and he had punched my heart, Iwill never forget that punch as long as I live, that is power, and that is why I study under sifu.

3. Learning one form: In and of itself is not enough, there are 6 forms in Wing Chun for a reason, these forms hold within them the keys and the seeds of the system that will only be properly unlocked when three key elements are combined A) A dedicated Student B) A teacher who not only can teach but can also display the very things that they are teaching C) A properly developed curriculum that contains all of the elements of true Wing Chun, not just partial elements. The reality is that the SLT as good as it is is still only a beginning, not an end, the form that really teaches you fighting is the Chum Kui, the SLT develops the tools, but it is the CK that teaches you how to use those tools that you have developed, these are further developed agin in Bui Jee (Bill Gee). Then these tools are further refined through the use of the wooden dummy, and find a sharper focus in the weapons. In this way the progression is as such, Energy, Structure, concept and then technique, being the last consideration.

4. Wing Chun has no ground game incorrect, there are many concepts that are contained in the System that can be utilised in the event of a ground fighting situation, most of these concepts are contained within the Bui Jee form.

**Thai Bri** · 03-26-2006, 09:06 AM

Interesting stuff.

1. I did not imply that anyone in WC said it could be learned to a combat profficient level quickly. In fact the opposite is true. They go all starry eyed at how wonderful the system must be because it takes so long to learn. It is merely my view that this is false logic, and that the better a system is, the quicker it will be to learn to a level of combat profficiency.

2. Whoops! We seem to be contradicting ourself now! Suddenly 1 poxy year of training is enough to overcome a guy who has 6 years? Because he has the wrong "structure" of course....... I studied under the same lineage as you by the way. You know the one. It's the one where you have so much weight on the back leg that you have to hop around like a one legged chicken to get anywhere.

3. Learning one form may, or may not, be "enough." Personally I think that learning something else gives you more chance of learning enough to defend yourself. But we all have our own opinions.

4. So, Wing Chun has a ground game. Isn't it funny that this only emerged after the initial UFCs, where the Gracies beat the cack out of everyone with their own ground game. Oh yes, Wing Chun had it all along but, mysteriously, chose not to display it. They even fail to display it to MMA andd BJJ grapplers nowadays. It is from the Bui Jee form. Of course it is. The Wing Chun "ground game" is poke 'em in the eyes and hope for the best. One problem though. A reasonable grappler won't let you. He'll have your arms wrapped so far up yer jacksie that the only eyes you'll poke are your own, from the inside -

No offence mate. You stick with WC if that is what you wish to do. Good luck to ya!

**bcbernam777** · 03-26-2006, 09:35 AM