Alan Orr Fighter

[KPM]

 

[LFJ]

Interesting...

 

[Kickboxer101]

Those elbows looked like normal elbows to me something you'd see in any fight what specifically made them wing chun elbows

 

[Tames D]

They looked like JKD elbows to me

 

[Transk53]

They looked like JKD elbows to me

Yeah. Kind of just a series of smashes with a final follow through. That JKD though?

 

[Vajramusti]

Yeah. Kind of just a series of smashes with a final follow through. That JKD though?

==========================================
An application is not necessarily exactly the same as the form. Alan Orr does and teaches wing chun. His student's elbows were good applications of wing chun.

 

[drop bear]

Are we discussing the ground and pound elbows that finished the fight?

 

[Juany118]

@Kickboxer101 I think the reason is this, Orr (the guy following his fighter into the ring) is a WC instructor who, while some will say it stops being WC, uses WC techniques and principles to also teach MMA fighters. He actually has a lot of videos where he speaks to how he applies WC techniques and principles to MMA.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[LFJ]

He actually has a lot of videos where he speaks to how he applies WC techniques and principles to MMA.

And once again, we don't see what he talks about most happening in the fight.

He's always on about bouncing the opponent around by controlling their arms to disrupt their balance and open them up for strikes, like they do in chi-sau, and this being directly applicable to free fighting.

That's their biggest WC thing. The "Force Flow" stuff. We never see that.

And those elbows are indistinguishable from those any other MMA fighter would smash someone on the ground with. I guess calling them "Wing Chun Elbows in MMA" is to market his school.

What they do otherwise works and they win fights. They should just drop the WC stuff and double down on their MMA, stop wasting time on unbalancing bridge skills that don't get used in their fights.

 

[guy b]

Doesn't this guy train in the UK and not with Alan Orr? Looks like standard MMA striking

 

[KangTsai]

I think the only discernable wing chin aspect was that brief moment of head framing in the clinch.

 

[KPM]

No doubt, this is MMA. MMA is its own "thing." Some people train Karate, or TKD, or kickboxing as their base going into MMA. Alan's guys train Wing Chun as their base going into MMA. But they also do MMA-specific training just like everyone else. Would they look like this in the ring without MMA-specific training? Probably not. But there are Wing Chun concepts and biomechanics that are still being utilized even when they do MMA. At least that's my take on it!

 

[KPM]

Here's another CSL fighter in the ring. This one trained by Duane Harper, who is a student of Alan Orr:

 

[Danny T]

Which of these elbows are from WC?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Elbows weren't impressive. I thought the anti takedown techniques(takedown counters) were a better highlight.
Elbows are like jabs so the flow almost the same way across many fighting systems.

Techniques for countering takedowns usually does a better job of representing the system a person trains in.

 

[Nobody Important]

And once again, we don't see what he talks about most happening in the fight.

He's always on about bouncing the opponent around by controlling their arms to disrupt their balance and open them up for strikes, like they do in chi-sau, and this being directly applicable to free fighting.

That's their biggest WC thing. The "Force Flow" stuff. We never see that.

And those elbows are indistinguishable from those any other MMA fighter would smash someone on the ground with. I guess calling them "Wing Chun Elbows in MMA" is to market his school.

What they do otherwise works and they win fights. They should just drop the WC stuff and double down on their MMA, stop wasting time on unbalancing bridge skills that don't get used in their fights.

KPM Said --- No doubt, this is MMA. MMA is its own "thing." Some people train Karate, or TKD, or kickboxing as their base going into MMA. Alan's guys train Wing Chun as their base going into MMA. But they also do MMA-specific training just like everyone else. Would they look like this in the ring without MMA-specific training? Probably not. But there are Wing Chun concepts and biomechanics that are still being utilized even when they do MMA. At least that's my take on it!

I agree with both assesments here to an extent.

I believe Wing Chun is conceptual, though I practice the forms, I see them as an ideal to strive for. I call this chasing Tai Chi. We are constantly striving to achieve an ideal model. However, we are not perfect, nor are situations always ideal to allow us to implement perfect execution. That being said, selecting bits & pieces to represent an entire art as justification to support a narrative, is misleading. IMO, at a minimum, 75% of an art needs to be represented to call it as such. One cannot simply say that because they are implementing some theory & techniques from a given art, that it is solely that art. Just because you use a technique found in an art doesn't mean you are doing that art. Also, if you modify the theory of the art to support a certain activity, is it still the same, even if the techniques used are similar?

A good example is XMA, kicks & punches added to gymnastics to look like martial arts. The base is gymnastics, exercises far removed from the battlefield. The idea is to look good, not be practical.

When I see individuals like Orr, it reaffirms my hypothesis that Wing Chun is an art that was designed to elevate a more base gross motor method. In this case it is being used to elevate MMA. While Wing Chun can certainly be used on it's own, it's real value may actually lie in it's ability to refine. To strive for an ideal method of movement, power generation, efficiency etc. The idea of chasing Tai Chi, to strive for ultimate perfection of execution based upon certain ideals.

I hold other arts such as Taijiquan, Xingyi & Bagua Zhang as similar methods of refinement. I do so because of their complex theory and unique approach to application, not unlike comparing Judo to Aikido. This approach, however, comes at a cost. If such arts are truly tools of refinement, can the refined method be called that art? In essence, I would say no. If I use a hammer & chisel to sculpt a hammer & chisel out of stone, is what I created a hammer & chisel, or just a sculpture? This bears the question is Wing Chun the art, or is it the method used to create the art?

 

[guy b]

I hold other arts such as Taijiquan, Xingyi & Bagua Zhang as similar methods of refinement. I do so because of their complex theory and unique approach to application, not unlike comparing Judo to Aikido. This approach, however, comes at a cost. If such arts are truly tools of refinement, can the refined method be called that art. In essence, I would say no. If I use a hammer & chisel to sculpt a hammer & chisel out of stone, is what I created a hammer & chisel, or just a sculpture? This bears the question is Wing Chun the art, or is it the method used to create the art?

Xing Yi as I understand it from Yiquan amounts to a way of using the body. There are similar elements in VT but it isn't teaching the same thing. Yiquan can certainly help your VT but I can't see how the opposite would be the case.

VT without the system approach would be perhaps the worst martial art in history. The most basic idea of VT is very dependent upon its context within the system, and it is difficult to see how it could develop, or if it could what advantage could be gained, outside of that context. Yiquan shorn of the system within which it arose is not even a martial art, just a stand alone method of using the body that you can learn and which might help your MA (or other physical activity). The idea from Xing Yi that is distilled into Yi Quan is a much less system specific one than the base idea of Ving Tsun, in my opinion of course.

 

[Nobody Important]

Xing Yi as I understand it from Yiquan amounts to a way of using the body. There are similar elements in VT but it isn't teaching the same thing. Yiquan can certainly help your VT but I can't see how the opposite would be the case.

VT without the system approach would be perhaps the worst martial art in history. The most basic idea of VT is very dependent upon its context within the system, and it is difficult to see how it could develop, or if it could what advantage could be gained, outside of that context. Yiquan shorn of the system within which it arose is not even a martial art, just a stand alone method of using the body that you can learn and which might help your MA (or other physical activity). The idea from Xing Yi that is distilled into Yi Quan is a much less system specific one than the base idea of Ving Tsun, in my opinion of course.

I understand what you are saying, however, that isn't quite the point I was trying to make.

I'm looking at arts like Wing Chun, Xingyi, Taijiquan & Bagua Zhang as each in their own rights, methods of refinement. Not as means to refine each other. I say these arts because each has a unique & profound theory to them, not present in other arts around them. This of course is debatable, but I see how Taijiquan would serve more benefit to Long Fist than vice versa. The same holds true to Hung Gar benefiting more from Wing Chun than vice versa. I see no benefit with, for example, Wing Chun & Taijiquan or Xingyi, because these methods are at the pinnacle of their expressed theory already.

 

[guy b]

I understand what you are saying, however, that isn't quite the point I was trying to make.

I'm looking at arts like Wing Chun, Xingyi, Taijiquan & Bagua Zhang as each in their own rights, methods of refinement. Not as means to refine each other. I say these arts because each has a unique & profound theory to them, not present in other arts around them. This of course is debatable, but I see how Taijiquan would serve more benefit to Long Fist than vice versa. The same holds true to Hung Gar benefiting more from Wing Chun than vice versa. I see no benefit with, for example, Wing Chun & Taijiquan or Xingyi, because these methods are at the pinnacle of their expressed theory already.

I think the Xing Yi idea can help with any physical movement; the method is not specific to martial arts. Xing Yi consists ideas for how to use it in fighting, which are a bit outdated in my opinion. Yiquan is focused on developing the idea alone, not a martial art. More like learning a breathing method for example which could then be applied to weightlifting, mowing the lawn, lifting furniture, endurance exercise, and so on, (although more difficult, and not a breathing method). VT by comparison is a system built around its little idea. Remove the system or transplant the idea into a different system and hard to see what use it would be. Yiquan can help VT certainly.

 

[Nobody Important]

I think the Xing Yi idea can help with any physical movement; the method is not specific to martial arts. Xing Yi consists ideas for how to use it in fighting, which are a bit outdated in my opinion. Yiquan is focused on developing the idea alone, not a martial art. More like learning a breathing method for example which could then be applied to weightlifting, mowing the lawn, lifting furniture, endurance exercise, and so on, (although more difficult, and not a breathing method). VT by comparison is a system built around its little idea. Remove the system or transplant the idea into a different system and hard to see what use it would be. Yiquan can help VT certainly.

Any of this of course, is contingent on what methodology is used & expressed when applying it to the art you wish to optimise. If a key element is missing that element cannot be optimized.