Wing Chun - an overview of its training methods and effectiveness.

[jubaji]

Well if your main criteria of how good a style is is how quickly it turns you into a good fighter, Wing Chun is not the best. For example a guy with 1 year of Krav Maga would do better in a street fight than a guy with 1 year of WC. However a guy with 5 years of WC would wipe the floor with the guy with 5 years of KM.

And a guy with 30 years of WC? Well he can defeat 10 black belts

You are apparently a grandmaster of LARPing.

[Blusta]

CMA and an explaination by an asian

Hi Thai Bri (and everyone else reading this),

If you had visting friends from the USA, and had beaten them at every friendly tennis match at your local club.... Would it be true then to claim every USA tennis player is crap? Or that tennis is a game for folks with lacking hand-eye coordination?

The past (humble and effective) Chinese Martial Arts (CMA) teachers I've encountered have always stressed to me that there is no 'best' or 'better' martial arts style or system. There are only 'better than us' students of the martial arts than ourselves.

Traditional CMA strives to educate that we do not fight others but ourselves as our greatest enemy. This is part of the CMA Philosophy that is rapidly fading away as more young asians become more 'westernised' in their way of thinking. I grew up in the UK and only when I lived/worked in South East Asia was I exposed to this stark differences in my western upbringing and ancestral culture (i'm of chinese descent).

Traditional CMA is stemmed with chinese Philosophy, similar to how Bushido is identified with traditional Japanese Martial Arts e.g. Kendo, Karate. Unfortunately many commercialised institutes or schools of the martial arts, stress more on winning and a kick-arse attitude to draw in more crowds with their 'winsome' reputation. Can't blame them really, more students usually equals to a rise in school/dojo income$.

Just as there are cowboys in the Restaurant/Food industry, there are flops in the martial arts business. These folks either water down the basics of a system to make it easier for newbies who want instant kick-arse capabilities (like instant noodles or instant coffee), or else they hide behind a rigid shell and dish out 'you are not yet ready youngling' proclamations to disguise their own shortcomings in skill and/or knowledge.

From the sounds of it, you had a brush with the wrong crowd, Thai Bri. Hopefully this experience with Wing Chun doesn't put you off from keeping an open mind and willing spirit to learn from other instructors of Wing Chun (or any other style).

Linking back to the given example of tennis, there is no 'better' or 'best' style. Only better students of that style than us. From my own passion with martial arts study, its always good to have a well-rounded exposure to the different styles to learn and develop contermeasures (e.g. boxing versus ground fighting, etc).

Bruce Lee quote: 'keep what is useful and discard what is not'.

Hope you keep it strong and positive!


Note:
i use the word 'Traditional' in this posted message, to describe the chinese cultural methodology of teaching CMA. To me 'non-traditional' implies an intentional removal of certain processes that had been previously adopted and passed down generations (from master to student) of CMA practioners; this in my view was done to accomodate non-chinese speaking students, as well as those paying students who need to see the physical results (i.e. need to love the bells and whistles!) without true understanding on how the system flows together (i.e. i don't need to know how it works!).

PS: the more visible Muscular attributes of displayed strength and agility, are only physcial aspects of CMA. The other half of the equation is the 'Chi' control which is manifest as 'Jing' (using the chinese language this sort of translates into the word 'energy' or using physics its like work-force). Regardless of whether its a 'hard' or 'soft' style (e.g. Shaolin Lo Han Quan versus Tai Chi Quan) all CMA strive to reach a balance of both Muscular and Chi control of the body. It took me a while (re)learning the chinese language to gain an appreciation of chinese Philosophy, and the latter is definately ingrained into traditional CMA.

[Tant01]

Wow... a virtual voice of reason! Good to read you! Welcome aboard.

[USArmyBJJ]

Hi Thai Bri (and everyone else reading this),

If you had visting friends from the USA, and had beaten them at every friendly tennis match at your local club.... Would it be true then to claim every USA tennis player is crap? Or that tennis is a game for folks with lacking hand-eye coordination?

No - but I would hope that your friends would at least ask the question, "Is there something superior in the other person's technique and/or training that might account for our consistent losses?" They may answer the question in the affirmative or the negative. The important thing is to consider it thoughtfully.

The past (humble and effective) Chinese Martial Arts (CMA) teachers I've encountered have always stressed to me that there is no 'best' or 'better' martial arts style or system. There are only 'better than us' students of the martial arts than ourselves.

I largely agree with this, but not all the way (more on this at the bottom).

Traditional CMA strives to educate that we do not fight others but ourselves as our greatest enemy. This is part of the CMA Philosophy that is rapidly fading away as more young asians become more 'westernised' in their way of thinking. I grew up in the UK and only when I lived/worked in South East Asia was I exposed to this stark differences in my western upbringing and ancestral culture (i'm of chinese descent).

If someone wants to be in the martial arts for some sort of ancient cultural immersion, then so be it. I don't see any reason to argue with them about their choice. I'm in no place to judge - after all, I am not in martial arts to learn self defense or philosophy. I am in martial arts because I love competition and think it's a great form of it. To each his own.

But the question raised in this forum (to my understanding, at least) is whether or not the fighting method is effective. That's a separate question from the one you are raising.

From the sounds of it, you had a brush with the wrong crowd, Thai Bri. Hopefully this experience with Wing Chun doesn't put you off from keeping an open mind and willing spirit to learn from other instructors of Wing Chun (or any other style).

This is certainly one possiblity that Thai Bri should consider.

Linking back to the given example of tennis, there is no 'better' or 'best' style. Only better students of that style than us. From my own passion with martial arts study, its always good to have a well-rounded exposure to the different styles to learn and develop contermeasures (e.g. boxing versus ground fighting, etc).

This is where I disagree. Going off your tennis analogy. It is generally agreed that there are particular techniques in playing tennis that maximize your effectiveness. There's a specific way to serve, a specific way to forehand and backhand, etc. Mastering the technique and perfecting your training will make you a better tennis player. This is true in all physical activities. Why do we assume it's somehow different in fighting? Why would we ever assume that all techniques and all training methods are the same - the only difference being the quality of student? If your ability is based solely on your own physical and mental attributes, what would be the point of learning "self-defense"?

PS: the more visible Muscular attributes of displayed strength and agility, are only physcial aspects of CMA. The other half of the equation is the 'Chi' control which is manifest as 'Jing' (using the chinese language this sort of translates into the word 'energy' or using physics its like work-force). Regardless of whether its a 'hard' or 'soft' style (e.g. Shaolin Lo Han Quan versus Tai Chi Quan) all CMA strive to reach a balance of both Muscular and Chi control of the body. It took me a while (re)learning the chinese language to gain an appreciation of chinese Philosophy, and the latter is definately ingrained into traditional CMA.

OK.