What was Wing Chun designed for?

[KPM]

Because that is not the subject.

---What do you mean "that is not the subject"??? The topic of the thread is "What was Wing Chun designed for?"!!!!


To have an art that master movement and position at long range in order to either get close or win the fight... This you stated footwork in WC does not work as an undisputed fact.

---What? That makes no sense. I said that WC has a strategy for surviving at long range in order to close to close range. I said that WC was not designed for nor optimized to function at long range. It is a fighting art, so sure it has things to do at long range. But that is not the same as a method actually designed to work at long range. Wing Chun most certainly has not "mastered movement and position at long range", but that isn't Wing Chun's forte. Close range is Wing Chun's forte.


I say I don't agree it being a fact. Nor would I say BJJ is long range and yet Gracie's have shown closing footwork from long range. So they would be better off doing boxing?

---As I've already pointed out, plenty of BJJ guys cross-train in boxing/kickboxing to work on their feet before going to BJJ's forte....ground-fighting. No BJJ guy would claim that BJJ has "mastered movement and position at long range."


A close range art is not equal to not having long range game. In fact the close range fighter most often need to focus a lot on long range game. This is why I do not agree with KPM stated facts.

---Ok then. Please post video of a Wing Chun guy sparring and working a "long range game" equivalent to the boxing videos I posted.....using entirely Wing Chun.


Saying a close range art has no long range game because of it as a fact that must not be questioned is like saying a tennis player is just hitting a ball and as such does not need to move around because they never hit a ball they can not reach.

----No. Its more like saying a lineman in American football builds strength and explosiveness but doesn't worry about how well he can catch the ball or how fast he can run because he leaves that to the running back. Both are football players, but they have different roles and are specialized for a specific part of the game. Neither is expected to do everything on the field.

 

[Phobius]

---What do you mean "that is not the subject"??? The topic of the thread is "What was Wing Chun designed for?"!!!!

If the topic is, Wing Chun is not designed to be a long range boxing art. Then I would agree with you. However this I do not consider to be the same as saying WC is not good at long range game.

Nothing can compete with a long range boxing methology (correct word?) when it comes to having a long range boxing methology.

---What? That makes no sense. I said that WC has a strategy for surviving at long range in order to close to close range. I said that WC was not designed for nor optimized to function at long range. It is a fighting art, so sure it has things to do at long range. But that is not the same as a method actually designed to work at long range. Wing Chun most certainly has not "mastered movement and position at long range", but that isn't Wing Chun's forte. Close range is Wing Chun's forte.

You are very comfortable in saying what WC is and isn't. Especially given that there are more lineages and versions of WC than I can probably imagine. Saying that Wing Chun has not mastered movement I believe you may be wrong, and may be right. You are both and neither. What I do however agree with is that many of the known or mentioned clubs and purist lineages are not doing enough exercises to improve footwork. Not statying the movement is bad but if you can't walk a mile then being a master at running wont help you finish a marathon.

---As I've already pointed out, plenty of BJJ guys cross-train in boxing/kickboxing to work on their feet before going to BJJ's forte....ground-fighting. No BJJ guy would claim that BJJ has "mastered movement and position at long range."

Actually there are those that disagree. While there are many sport interested clubs this does not mean BJJ has no training about taking down fighters starting from long range. It does not mean that their takedowns are not practised and optimized to prevent them from being knocked out while going in for that takedown.

This would in my view be a long range game. Not all long range game has to be boxing, not all arts are boxing arts.

 

[KPM]

If the topic is, Wing Chun is not designed to be a long range boxing art. Then I would agree with you. However this I do not consider to be the same as saying WC is not good at long range game.

---Geez! Why do I have to keep repeating myself??? I already pointed out that....following the topic of the thread...I said that Wing Chun was designed to be a close-range fighting method. And after more than 11 pages no one has yet tried to describe Wing Chun in any other way and give an explanation and justification for saying it is NOT a close-range fighting method. People have only objected to me saying that it does not have as developed and effective long range method as boxing.


Nothing can compete with a long range boxing methology (correct word?) when it comes to having a long range boxing methology.

---Sure it can! Muay Thai, American Kickboxing, and even Tae Kwon Do have "long range games" that would give a boxer a run for his money! But since Wing Chun is primarily a punching method, it makes sense to look at a good long range game from another punching method.


This would in my view be a long range game.

---No. This would be a strategy for closing from long range to close range. Again, I've said this multiple times now....having a long range game means you can conduct the entire fight from long range. BJJ doesn't do that, therefore BJJ does not have a "long range game."

---I've had to say it over and over now.....having a "long range strategy" is NOT the same thing as having a "long range game." And I've defined what both of those are several times already.

 

[Phobius]

---Geez! Why do I have to keep repeating myself??? I already pointed out that....following the topic of the thread...I said that Wing Chun was designed to be a close-range fighting method. And after more than 11 pages no one has yet tried to describe Wing Chun in any other way and give an explanation and justification for saying it is NOT a close-range fighting method. People have only objected to me saying that it does not have as developed and effective long range method as boxing.

You have talked about footwork. I joined the discussion at that point. Since then I have talked about footwork. And the thread is about what Wing Chun was designed for.
If you are saying Wing Chun is not boxing then I can agree. But Wing Chun is also kicking, a lot of kicking, but not necessarily as high kicks. That is still long range game even by your definition.

Now any art that has a plan to handle long range fighting would in my view have a long range game. WC has long range punches and can be a long range art as well. It depends on how you train it.

Heck even boxers can be close range without a single solid long range technique other than an annoying jab.

And to highlight, I would argue that if you can move from long range to close range and back. It becomes nothing but labels. Labels are pointless as long as you do what must be done in the situation you are in.

Now if you want to learn sparring and not make it look like boxing while doing WC. Train harder is the usual tip I give. Most people doing WC would die from physical exhaustion just doing the regular warm up that an MMA fighter would do on near daily basis. Then they wonder why many WC practitioners have trouble fighting MT or boxers.

---Sure it can! Muay Thai, American Kickboxing, and even Tae Kwon Do have "long range games" that would give a boxer a run for his money! But since Wing Chun is primarily a punching method, it makes sense to look at a good long range game from another punching method.

This is very much a view you have. Do not know what to say other than it is good you share it, makes it easier to understand why you have your opinion.

---No. This would be a strategy for closing from long range to close range. Again, I've said this multiple times now....having a long range game means you can conduct the entire fight from long range. BJJ doesn't do that, therefore BJJ does not have a "long range game."

Do you desire to conduct a fight from long range? Learn Muay Thai or boxing. No need to incorporate it with WC to create a mix. A boxer does this better than any mix would do most likely. Or go for tae kwon do. They would argue that a boxer is short range. Now we are talking long range.

Even better, do long pole. Or archery, or guns... but those are kind of cheating.

 

[Phobius]

Also don't get me wrong. I am not a purist. Think your boxing project is interesting.

But I don't agree with some of your statements you claim to be facts, that is all.

It is all about building fighters and one art may not be suitable for all. I for one train BJJ as well.

But I still personally think being fit is one major problem to many doing WC.

 

[drop bear]

Do you desire to conduct a fight from long range? Learn Muay Thai or boxing. No need to incorporate it with WC to create a mix. A boxer does this better than any mix would do most likely. Or go for tae kwon do. They would argue that a boxer is short range. Now we are talking long range.

Even better, do long pole. Or archery, or guns... but those are kind of cheating.

I guess the idea is to get better at chun though. Not better at boxing. Which is the point of collaboration.

 

[wckf92]

It depends on how you train it..

Yup!!! Winner winner chicken dinner!!!!!

 

[KPM]

It is all about building fighters and one art may not be suitable for all. I for one train BJJ as well.

---So what is the difference between recognizing that Wing Chun wasn't designed for nor optimized for ground-fighting, and so training BJJ......and recognizing that Wing Chun wasn't designed for nor optimized for long range fighting? That makes no sense!

You have talked about footwork. I joined the discussion at that point. Since then I have talked about footwork.

---Then please go back and read the entire discussion. And the discussion on "Wing Chun Boxing" as well. Because I'm getting pretty tired of repeating myself over and over just because people haven't been following the discussion.


But Wing Chun is also kicking, a lot of kicking, but not necessarily as high kicks. That is still long range game even by your definition.

----No its not. Again, I have already described what the "long range game" is twice on two different threads. Go and read it and then maybe you can speak a bit more intelligently on the topic.


Now any art that has a plan to handle long range fighting would in my view have a long range game. WC has long range punches and can be a long range art as well. It depends on how you train it.

---Ok. Again, post some video of this "long range Wing Chun."


And to highlight, I would argue that if you can move from long range to close range and back. It becomes nothing but labels. Labels are pointless as long as you do what must be done in the situation you are in.

---Now you're just talking about semantics. Sure, it doesn't matter how you label it. But it is still a reality. And the reality is....once again....that Wing Chun was designed as a close range system. That is its forte and what it is optimized for. It was not designed for nor optimized for fighting from long range. Call it "in-fighting" and "out-fighting", or call it "compact fighting" and "extended fighting." Call it whatever you want. But the reality remains.


Do you desire to conduct a fight from long range? Learn Muay Thai or boxing. No need to incorporate it with WC to create a mix. A boxer does this better than any mix would do most likely. Or go for tae kwon do. They would argue that a boxer is short range. Now we are talking long range.

---I've already said that my approach is not for everyone, and that I would never want to see "classical" Wing Chun go away. I've only been saying that it is a valid approach and one that would improve Wing Chun. You may see the need and have the desire to improve what you can do at long range, or you may not. And that's Ok. But what everyone has been telling me is that Wing Chun has just as good an ability at long range as boxing. And that simply isn't true.

---Now, if you really want to know what I think and stop just making assumptions, go back and actually read the discussions and what I have written.

 

[Nobody Important]

Yup!!! Winner winner chicken dinner!!!!!

You cooking chicken bro? I'll bring the beer

 

[drop bear]

If your whole style doesn't have a long range game. Then you will never be able to develop one. Because you will not encounter anybody else with a long range game.

Both of you will just walk into each others comfort zone and fight.

You basically won't be able to develop your chun until you go outside your own system.

 

[Phobius]

---So what is the difference between recognizing that Wing Chun wasn't designed for nor optimized for ground-fighting, and so training BJJ......and recognizing that Wing Chun wasn't designed for nor optimized for long range fighting? That makes no sense!

The difference is very simple. I only say my way to train WC/WT is not optimized for that. I do not train BJJ for that but because I am interested in BJJ and what it can bring. I say nothing about what WC/WT has or does not have.

There are no statements from my side that my view is the only true view.

You said WC does not work in long range and then say that the only way to do long range game is to box from that distance.

I say do not outbox a boxer. And footwork/positioning is a large part of long range game.

---And it seems to me that the people that are having a hard time admitting that their Wing Chun doesn't have a "long range game" just aren't being honest with themselves.

This is my argument. You want the world in black and white. I can not agree with you about these 'facts'.

Then being unclear. You want WC long range game to be about outboxing a boxer. Boxers don't stand there to trade punches. They move in and out. Feeling an opponent out.

If you want an art to be having a long range game just because it can do jabs at distance then you of course need an art that does jabs. But that does not mean another art at some school can't be all about movement and footwork to maintain upper hand at those ranges and using kicks.


Now a boxing WC is interesting for other reasons such as if you can make that work without losing what you call close range. If you lose what you consider it's strengths are to you, you risk ending up chasing a holy grail.

 

[LFJ]

---So, you believe that Wing Chun is just as developed and optimized for long range fighting as it is for close range fighting? You believe that there is no difference in emphasis in the training for close range vs. long range? You don't see Wing Chun as an "In-fighting" system, as WSL referred to it??

That's not what I'm saying.

The core fighting strategy of VT is obviously to get in, overwhelm, and finish the opponent asap.

But, some times that is not possible, and in such a case, VT should not just fail.
Some times you are not starting at close range, and need an intelligent means of getting there.
Some times you will be outclassed at close range, and need an intelligent means of fighting on the outside.

For the above reasons and more, VT is a fully functional striking method capable of fighting on the outside when necessary. It would be stupid to fail at close range and have no recourse, or not even be able to get there.

Only fantasy fighters who've never had a scrap would imagine close-range striking only would make for a feasible striking system.

There is no forward leg and it's evenly weighted.

---There were plenty of times where he was hunched forward, leaning out over the forward leg and bobbing and weaving to avoid kicks. He did not stay evenly weighted.

Point to it between 2:13 and 2:26.

The only time there is a lead leg is after stepping forward with the punch.
Other than that, he is moving with lateral footwork on the outside with no lead leg and even weight.

This is VT long-range footwork.

---There is some boxing element there nonetheless.

It's VT.

----Portion? Isn't WSLVT a "stand alone" method that needs no "gap filling"???? Yet your example is a mix of WSLVT and MMA.....including some boxing elements.

There is no boxing. It's VT plus some grappling.

The VT striking stands alone. The grappling is cross training, adding functional method to functional method.
It would only be gap-filling if the striking method had gaps to be filled with other striking methods. It doesn't.

----Pure WSLVT? Heck, even Sean just admitted he was mixing things in and it wasn't "pure" WSLVT! Oh wait...you mean that small "portion"???

The striking method is pure VT. What is added is clinch, throws, and groundwork.

----Your example showed only the landing of the kick. We don't know how much "long range game" there was behind it at all. He could have just stepped up and kicked, just like people just step up and punch.

Doesn't matter. Kicks are long-range weapons. You keep moving the goalpost.
If at long-range and ending the fight there with one move, it can't be considered anything other than long-range.

And the "long-range game" was just demonstrated to you.
Distance management, evasiveness, long-range weapons.
The fight was conducted entirely on the outside.

Oh... This sounds like "surviving long enough to close in". Exactly what you said is not a long-range game!

---I've described what the "long range game" can consist of two different times now on two different threads. Once again, you are just being argumentative.

Not being argumentative. You just keep moving the goalpost whenever I get close.

You said;

"Long range fighting is more about how you control and maintain distance and choose when to close in to strike when its in your favor to do so."

But, if I do exactly this, managing distance on the outside and finding my opportunity to strike, you say that's "just surviving long enough to close in" and "not conducting the fight at long-range".

So, if instead I do this, stay on the outside the entire fight and end it with the longest-range weapons there are (kicks), that's "just ending with a kick" and doesn't count!

It seems you just desperately don't want to admit that VT has long-range strategy and tactics, because that is admitting the deficiency in other YM derivatives you've experienced, as I've been saying all along.

You could never bring yourself to admit that I'm right after all the fighting me you've done on here.

You could man-up and acknowledge the VT long-range game you never learned, then go on with your Wing Chun Boxing. No one's going to blame you for it. You only learn what your teachers know and teach you.

 

[Martial D]

Because that is not the subject. To have an art that master movement and position at long range in order to either get close or win the fight... This you stated footwork in WC does not work as an undisputed fact.

I say I don't agree it being a fact. Nor would I say BJJ is long range and yet Gracie's have shown closing footwork from long range. So they would be better off doing boxing?

Adding it, sure. That's actually a great example. In the beginning of UFC, BJJ was all he needed to dominate. Fast forward to his fight with Matt Hughs..

Some boxing sure would have helped!

The game evolved, and people cross trained to the point that no one style was diverse enough to compete any longer.

 

[wckf92]

You cooking chicken bro? I'll bring the beer

Come on down!
Either Corona...or Yuengling

 

[drop bear]

But, if I do exactly this, managing distance on the outside and finding my opportunity to strike, you say that's "just surviving long enough to close in" and "not conducting the fight at long-range".

So, if instead I do this, stay on the outside the entire fight and end it with the longest-range weapons there are (kicks), that's "just ending with a kick" and doesn't count!

It seems you just desperately don't want to admit that VT has long-range strategy and tactics, because that is admitting the deficiency in other YM derivatives you've experienced, as I've been saying all along.

You could never bring yourself to admit that I'm right after all the fighting me you've done on here.

You could man-up and acknowledge the VT long-range game you never learned, then go on with your Wing Chun Boxing. No one's going to blame you for it. You only learn what your teachers know and teach you.

A lot of styles have a long range game. I think that is the point. So ok. lets just say WT does not have a long range game due to a deficiency in their linage or whatever. They are no longer limited to learning VT to address that. They can outsource the best long range game. Creating a system that is stronger than VT or WC

You dont have to do any sort of VT grappling. you can go out and just pick the best grappling.

 

[Phobius]

A lot of styles have a long range game. I think that is the point. So ok. lets just say WT does not have a long range game due to a deficiency in their linage or whatever. They are no longer limited to learning VT to address that. They can outsource the best long range game. Creating a system that is stronger than VT or WC

You dont have to do any sort of VT grappling. you can go out and just pick the best grappling.

This is not the same between learning a secondary art for grappling or incorporating grappling bits and pieces to an existing art.

The first is the very essence of MMA and something I find rather good idea, the second option however is not gonna be a merger between the two but something completely new that may or may not work at all.

 

[KPM]

That's not what I'm saying.

---Then your whole post just proved that you are arguing for argument's sake alone!!!

The core fighting strategy of VT is obviously to get in, overwhelm, and finish the opponent asap.

---So, as I have been saying from the very beginning, Wing Chun is a close-range system designed for and optimized for that range. That is what I described at the beginning of this thread!

But, some times that is not possible, and in such a case, VT should not just fail. Some times you are not starting at close range, and need an intelligent means of getting there.

----And Wing Chun has a "long range strategy" for surviving at long range and closing to the preferred close range. As I have repeated many times now.

Some times you will be outclassed at close range, and need an intelligent means of fighting on the outside.

---Sure! Long enough to get away! And if you are out-classed at close range, which is what Wing Chun was designed to deal with, what makes you think it is going to work BETTER at long range???


For the above reasons and more, VT is a fully functional striking method capable of fighting on the outside when necessary.

---Agreed. "When necessary." That doesn't mean that it was designed for fighting on the outside, that doesn't mean it is optimized for fighting on the outside, that doesn't mean it has a fully developed "outside game." Boxing does. Kickboxing does. TKD does. But not Wing Chun....unless things have been added from elsewhere.


It would be stupid to fail at close range and have no recourse, or not even be able to get there.

---Which is why Wing Chun has a "long range strategy"....which, again....is not the same thing as having a "long range game."




Point to it between 2:13 and 2:26.

---So, you are saying that the only time you see any "long range Wing Chun" happening in that entire clip is in a 13 second timeframe??? Ok. How about at 2:17 when the guy throws a spinning back kick and the Wing Chun fighter leans forward on his lead leg ducks and bobs like a boxer to keep from kicking clocked in the head????





There is no boxing. It's VT plus some grappling.

---Yeah, whatever you say that helps you sleep better at night!


The VT striking stands alone. The grappling is cross training, adding functional method to functional method. The striking method is pure VT.

----Yeah maybe "portions" as you said before. That is, except for the high covers, bobbing & weaving, hunched forward posture with guard held in close to the face, etc.


Doesn't matter. Kicks are long-range weapons. You keep moving the goalpost.

---I didn't move any goalposts. I already explained. Landing a kick doesn't prove you have a "long range game." Anyone can kick. Heck, you can kick while holding both of the opponent's arms!


If at long-range and ending the fight there with one move, it can't be considered anything other than long-range.

--Again, you are just being argumentative again. You've read where I described what a "long range game" looks like. There is far more to it than that!


And the "long-range game" was just demonstrated to you.
Distance management, evasiveness, long-range weapons.
The fight was conducted entirely on the outside.

---You mean Sean's clip? Where the guy was bobbing & weaving, using high covers, a forward-weighted stance and other things from boxing???



Not being argumentative. You just keep moving the goalpost whenever I get close.

----Close to what? You have yet to demonstrate how WSLVT has a long range game equivalent to what I described and what is show in the boxing clips I provided. The "closest" thing you have come up with as a clip of Sean's guys training for MMA. A clip where both you and he have admitted that they are mixing in plenty of other things. A clip where anyone with a little common sense can see a boxing element being used at longer range. A clip that does NOT show a purely Wing Chun fighter conducting the fight entirely from long range, but closing in for takedowns!! And you think you're "close"? Heck, you can't even provide a clip of a "pure" WSLVT guy sparring with a non-Wing Chun guy, let alone a pure WSLVT guy fighting entirely from long range!!!



"Long range fighting is more about how you control and maintain distance and choose when to close in to strike when its in your favor to do so."

But, if I do exactly this, managing distance on the outside and finding my opportunity to strike, you say that's "just surviving long enough to close in" and "not conducting the fight at long-range".

----But that was not my entire description. Only a part. Again, you are just being argumentative and purposefully ignoring what I have written in the past. I'm not moving any goalposts. You just seem to be having a hard time remembering where the goalpost is!!


So, if instead I do this, stay on the outside the entire fight and end it with the longest-range weapons there are (kicks), that's "just ending with a kick" and doesn't count!

---The two short clips you provided showed only a guy landing a kick. They didn't show a pure WSLVT fighter staying on the outside for an entire fight. So what the heck are you talking about?


It seems you just desperately don't want to admit that VT has long-range strategy and tactics, because that is admitting the deficiency in other YM derivatives you've experienced, as I've been saying all along.

---Now wait just one minute! I HAVE been saying all along that Wing Chun has a "long range strategy"! So what you are even talking about???? It seems to me you just desperately want to defend what you believe, but can't really come up with any proof or justification for saying I am wrong.

You could never bring yourself to admit that I'm right after all the fighting me you've done on here.

---Heck, you can't even seem to follow a discussion logically! And you could never bring yourself to admit that I'm right after all the arguing you've done on here. Look, its just common sense after all. You yourself have admitted that Wing Chun is a close range system. That's its forte. That's what it was designed for. Why would you even expect that it would be able to do the same thing at long range as a method that was actually designed for and optimized for that purpose? Why would you even expect that it would be able to function just as well at long range as it does for close range, when these are two different approaches....and Wing Chun was optimized for one and not the other? I've provided a description of what a "long range game" is in boxing twice, on two different threads which you have obviously chosen to ignore. I have provided video clips showing the long range game in boxing. You have not been able to show equivalent video clips of pure "long range Wing Chun." And neither has Phobius, or White Crane, or anyone else that has been trying to deny the reality of what I have been saying.


You could man-up and acknowledge the VT long-range game you never learned, then go on with your Wing Chun Boxing. No one's going to blame you for it. You only learn what your teachers know and teach you.

----And you could man-up and acknowledge that having a "long range strategy" is not the same thing as having a "long range game" and that Wing Chun was not designed for nor optimized for long range. And there is nothing wrong with that! I don't see that as being "broken" or having a "gap" as you seem to. I just see it as an area that can be improved upon, should someone take an interest in doing that. But you are so dogmatic and narrow-minded that I know you would never admit that!!!

 

[drop bear]

This is not the same between learning a secondary art for grappling or incorporating grappling bits and pieces to an existing art.

The first is the very essence of MMA and something I find rather good idea, the second option however is not gonna be a merger between the two but something completely new that may or may not work at all.

If you understand your own aims. It should work out ok.

 

[KPM]

You said WC does not work in long range and then say that the only way to do long range game is to box from that distance.

---No I didn't say that! You obviously haven't gone back and read the entire discussion as I recommended!


Then being unclear. You want WC long range game to be about outboxing a boxer.

----I never said that either!! Geez!

But that does not mean another art at some school can't be all about movement and footwork to maintain upper hand at those ranges and using kicks.

---Ok then. Let's see it! Post a video of this "long range Wing Chun"!!

 

[LFJ]

----And Wing Chun has a "long range strategy" for surviving at long range and closing to the preferred close range. As I have repeated many times now.

VT also has the means to conduct a fight entirely from long range and end it there.

Some times you will be outclassed at close range, and need an intelligent means of fighting on the outside.

---Sure! Long enough to get away!

Close-range fighting is also just long enough to get away. How much longer should I stay?

And if you are out-classed at close range, which is what Wing Chun was designed to deal with, what makes you think it is going to work BETTER at long range???

VT was designed to deal with fighting. It believes close-range is most often the best way to finish quickly, but realizes one must also know how to handle the fight at longer range and can do so just as well.

---Agreed. "When necessary." That doesn't mean that it was designed for fighting on the outside, that doesn't mean it is optimized for fighting on the outside, that doesn't mean it has a fully developed "outside game."

Not true. It was designed and fully optimized for fist fighting, plain and simple.
That includes essential knowledge of the "outside game".

---Which is why Wing Chun has a "long range strategy"....which, again....is not the same thing as having a "long range game."

I have fulfilled your arbitrary requirements for both.

How about at 2:17 when the guy throws a spinning back kick and the Wing Chun fighter leans forward on his lead leg ducks and bobs like a boxer to keep from kicking clocked in the head????

There's no lead leg to lean forward onto!
His stance is clearly parallel and he's moving laterally.

You expect a VT fighter not to duck when backed into a corner, huh?
He should have stood up straight and taken a spinning heel to the face, otherwise it's not pure VT??

That is, except for the high covers, bobbing & weaving, hunched forward posture with guard held in close to the face, etc.

None of that is Western Boxing.
Some is Biu-ji, but none is outside of VT principles.

Landing a kick doesn't prove you have a "long range game."

The video of long-range fighting does.

---You mean Sean's clip? Where the guy was bobbing & weaving, using high covers, a forward-weighted stance and other things from boxing???

It was all VT, and there was no forward-weighted stance.

Not being argumentative. You just keep moving the goalpost whenever I get close.

----Close to what? You have yet to demonstrate how WSLVT has a long range game equivalent to what I described and what is show in the boxing clips I provided.

Close to your arbitrary definitions that seem to change whenever I meet them.

VT is not WB. The long-rage game is different because kicks are involved. So, you will not have equivalent.

The "closest" thing you have come up with as a clip of Sean's guys training for MMA. A clip where both you and he have admitted that they are mixing in plenty of other things.

The striking is pure VT. The long-range game is pure VT.

A clip that does NOT show a purely Wing Chun fighter conducting the fight entirely from long range, but closing in for takedowns!!

He was at long-range the whole time, evading and kicking.
Didn't even close in and follow up from the punch. Also never did a takedown.

----But that was not my entire description. Only a part. Again, you are just being argumentative and purposefully ignoring what I have written in the past. I'm not moving any goalposts. You just seem to be having a hard time remembering where the goalpost is!!

What part am I missing? Now you have a chance to clearly define the goalpost once and for all.

No changies once I meet your requirements this time, though! So, write it well!
Take your time to set all the necessary loopholes you might need.

So, if instead I do this, stay on the outside the entire fight and end it with the longest-range weapons there are (kicks), that's "just ending with a kick" and doesn't count!

---The two short clips you provided showed only a guy landing a kick. They didn't show a pure WSLVT fighter staying on the outside for an entire fight. So what the heck are you talking about?

Talking about how VT can be used.

The video showed a VT fighter staying on the outside the entire fight and using only VT methods.
If he happened to end that particular match with the knee kick he did another time, would that count?

You yourself have admitted that Wing Chun is a close range system. That's its forte. That's what it was designed for.

Wrong.

VT is a fully developed and functional striking method.
It was designed for fist fighting which obviously includes longer range.

Though aggressive close-range fighting is preferable from a percentage standpoint, this does not mean VT is any less developed or functional at long range.

Again, it is a fully developed and functional standalone striking method.
It doesn't need gap-filling for fundamental striking elements at long range.

I have provided video clips showing the long range game in boxing. You have not been able to show equivalent video clips of pure "long range Wing Chun."

I just did.