Do you have a progressive mind set?

[geezer]

Yeah. But that also isn't a very good application of ground fighting.
You can't just say you are doing it and that is the end of the discussion. You kind of have to do it right.

I'm not sure what I'm looking at with that approach to ground-fighting. Perhaps something adapted from Turkish wrestling? Definitely not jits. Seems to have very different methods and objectives. It would be nice to know.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I feel that many, perhaps most TMA are like this. Obsolete skills. Cool, artful, demanding and entertaining, but essentially obsolete by any practical standard, including as fighting methods ...at least in their traditional forms.

Are they Obsolete, or just trained improperly, meaning no longer trained as they were traditionally because so many no longer have the patients, in our fast food, drive though window, microwave, computerized society.

Example; train Xingyiquan like most do today, it is obsolete and likely ineffective, train like it is supposed to be, "traditionally" it is rather effective and quite nasty. Taijiquan, same thing, how many actually train the martial arts of it, or for that matter train the forms "traditionally"

 

[geezer]

You’ve got to define what is meant by “complete”. I personally don’t believe a good and meaningful definition exists, without being linked to a specific context, which can be meaningless in other context. I certainly do not agree that engagement in competition gives some kind of priority to the definition.

True. "Complete" could mean a lot of things depending on context. It could mean that your style or system has everything in it. That's not how Leung Ting used the term though. Wing Chun (and Wing Tsun) is selective. It is defined as much by it's relative simplicity as by it's complexities.

Then there is the old saying that all kung fu should encompass "ti da shuai na" or kicking, punching, throwing, and locking ...if it is complete. This is true up to a point with Wing Chun. It has some techniques addressing of each of those categories ...enough to be a "complete" system in that sense, but you'll notice that ground-fighting is not really addressed when you say "ti da shuai na".

And then, "complete" could simply mean that your system may be limited, but still has what is necessary to deal with whatever you will confront (again "ti da shuai na).

Interestingly, a lot of Chinese martial arts don't seem to include ground-fighting in their definition of what is "complete". Could be a cultural thing. One time I brought this up with my old sifu and he implied that such fighting was somehow "primitive" and "low class". Kinda like the way American men from the WWII generation thought of boxing as "the manly art of self-defense" ...like the way my old uncle John (now deceased) dismissed any fighting that had kicks or low blows as being cowardly and just wrong.

I suppose if you grew up in the late 1800s and early 1900s in southern China like GM Yip Man, when the streets of the working-class areas of crowded cities like Fo'shan were likely filled with filth and dung, the thought of rolling on the ground was not the proper way to fight, especially for a gentleman.

Anybody have any info on this?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Later on, politics and money soured our relationship some, and my life situation changed. I married, started a family and career, so I couldn't really continue as before and left off training WT.

About 15 years later I gave it a second go and ended up training with my old si-dai who had reached "master" or "practition" rank in the interim and was running LT's organization in the US at the time. On the positive side, he had trained both directly both under GM LT here in the States and also for some years with the EWTO in Germany, including time directly with GM Keith Kernspect. On the negative side, shortly after I started training with this man, he broke with LT so both he and his group (including me) got "excommunicated".

Now I'm kinda independent ...of everybody. I still travel about 1,000 miles to train with my si-dai about once a year, but he is rigidly traditional and authoritarian in his teaching, and I like to explore ideas and try different things. So we don't totally see eye to eye. I'm still happy to learn from him, but he's no longer so happy to share stuff with me since I'm independent and don't run a school branch for him anymore. Funny how history repeats itself, eh?

The real poison of TMA.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yes ...kernsprecht has moved into his "Blitz Defence"...honestly embarassing and most who trained here in Germany all left his Sekt. Money making. Some have adopted ground fighting into their WT. Mainly his Turkish students but all left the EWTO.
Suc as this guy..

The logic of 1:28 makes no sense to me. Why would someone let that choke go for the purpose punching the person in the back of the head.

Yeah. But that also isn't a very good application of ground fighting.

Ground fighting isn't even my strength and a lot of that stuff had me scratching my head. It was almost like someone decided to wrestle and decided to release the wrestling technique to do WC just so it can be identified as WC. If that's what is going on then that's not a healthy thing for a system to be functional. It would ultimately means that function is being ignored for the purpose of "claiming a technique"

I suppose if you grew up in the late 1800s and early 1900s in southern China like GM Yip Man, when the streets of the working-class areas of crowded cities like Fo'shan were likely filled with filth and dung, the thought of rolling on the ground was not the proper way to fight, especially for a gentleman.

ha ha ha.. There's nothing wrong with having cuts scrapes and bruised why rolling around in animal and human waste. That bacteria in your wounds will make you stronger lol. You make a good point about the context of street conditions. Even today there are some streets that I would probably be more concern about me not being on the ground than the fight itself.

Just taking a look at some of these pictures make BJJ useless for me lol. And you know without a doubt that all of that isn't just dirt and mud lol.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I suppose if you grew up in the late 1800s and early 1900s in southern China like GM Yip Man, when the streets of the working-class areas of crowded cities like Fo'shan were likely filled with filth and dung, the thought of rolling on the ground was not the proper way to fight, especially for a gentleman.

My thought is that being on the ground was always seen as something bad both physically and culturally. Those who were on the ground were often seen as undesirables, beggars, diseased, dead, or servants. The act of kneeling before another man is seen as lowly. Might I add that these streets look fairly clean. It's what one does when they submit to another man. Some say it's done out of respect for title, but I'm sure in most cases that's said to make the reality of it easier to deal with.

Not saying that these people or anyone on the ground are animals. But even in the animal kingdom, animals will lower there body posture when submitting to an Alpha or a group of attacking animals.

Being on the ground is also the universal position for taking a beating by multiple attackers. So with all these things to consider. I don't think it was just the poo on the ground even thought that's still a good reason not to willingly go to the ground. Antibiotics were invented in 1928 so I can see the concern for infection being on the "Another reason not to be on the ground," But the core reasoning is probably older than that.

 

[Steve]

From my own experience, I would disagree that TMA methods are obsolete skills. I do believe that they may not be well received by the modern, Western mindset so they may have a more limited appeal, compared to modern competition approaches.

One of the first things I told my students was that our system does not look like what people raised on a steady diet of MMA expect a combat method to look like. It is strange. I can admit that from the get-go.

But when you understand why we do the things we do, what those exercises are meant to develop, and then how we apply those skills, it becomes apparent that there is a sensical methodology in place. And those skills that we develop are effective and absolutely relevant. What matters is that we find a method that speaks to us, personally, never mind what others may think of it.

By the way, I’ve also done a bit of flint knapping, pottery, archery, and love archaic weaponry. I rebuild sword hilts and scabbards, by way of example. Just sayin’.

This is all super cool as long as you don’t tell folks they’re learning to fight or defend themselves. Unless you do those things at least a little.

 

[Steve]

Are they Obsolete, or just trained improperly, meaning no longer trained as they were traditionally because so many no longer have the patients, in our fast food, drive though window, microwave, computerized society.

Example; train Xingyiquan like most do today, it is obsolete and likely ineffective, train like it is supposed to be, "traditionally" it is rather effective and quite nasty. Taijiquan, same thing, how many actually train the martial arts of it, or for that matter train the forms "traditionally"

Sometimes it’s a function of need. Sometimes it’s a function of opportunity. Sometimes it is just simply a lack of interest.

 

[Alan0354]

I just response to the ORIGINAL post #1:

This doesn’t limit to Wing Chung alone, there are a lot of moves in other styles that don’t make the best sense either like Monkey style scratching their head occasionally!!!

I am a Chinese and was living in Hong Kong till 1973 after Bruce Lee died. Kung Fu is very popular in Hong Kong, I talked to enough people with MA background. It's the pride. People glorified in copying the exact form, keeping up with the tradition that was invented hundreds of years ago. They don't want to change, that's the mentality in general. Center line, fighting with elbow squeeze together is a good example of self limitation imposing on themselves. The other part is the sticky hands, I just cannot see it's practical in real fight against a boxer or other MA that move around, in and out, side to side. It's good only if both party doing WC and follow the same self imposed limitations.

It was ok to blind follow in the older days. BUT now, it's a different world, people record the fight, sit back and analyze, find ways to break the puzzle and improve on it. Just like Football coach analyze the opposing team by watching their games, create the strategy to explore their weak point. If you insist on keeping the tradition, you'll be eaten alive in no time.

There’s nothing wrong learning from other style that works. Forget the stupid pride. Look at Bruce Lee combined the best of WC with boxing hands and TKD kicks and really dominated at his time. MA really followed that......Until UFC1 when Royce Gracie cleaned the clock of all the strikers. All or a sudden, the whole MA got turned up side down. They started to look for ways to break the new puzzle(BJJ) and they did. Look at Royce Gracie got creamed, destroyed by Matt Huges in the first round. BUT, then Huges got his clock cleaned within a few months. MA is a constant evolving thing now. You just watch and compare the UFC fights a few years back with the new ones, people fight differently already. You have to look forward, not looking back. Bruce Lee was great for his time, you think he can even last one minute in the Octagon even with no rules?

I don't like to use the word progressive, but I absolutely think every discipline or style needs to be humble and start learning instead of insisting their style is the best like in the older days. Spend more time in learning and improving instead of wasting time defending the pride.

In all fairness, I don't think WC and Chinese MA are like that alone, seems other MA have the same problem also. Only one that really doesn't have self imposed limitation I can think of is Muaythai in striking, they are very practical, doesn't necessary look good nor artistic. I wish I learn that instead of Tae Kwon Do. I already chose a school that really follow Bruce Lee style, no tradition katas, boxing hands and no deep stands. But Muaythai have elbow and knees that I missed.


JMHO

 

[caped crusader]

My thought is that being on the ground was always seen as something bad both physically and culturally. Those who were on the ground were often seen as undesirables, beggars, diseased, dead, or servants. The act of kneeling before another man is seen as lowly. Might I add that these streets look fairly clean. It's what one does when they submit to another man. Some say it's done out of respect for title, but I'm sure in most cases that's said to make the reality of it easier to deal with.
View attachment 27584
Not saying that these people or anyone on the ground are animals. But even in the animal kingdom, animals will lower there body posture when submitting to an Alpha or a group of attacking animals.

Being on the ground is also the universal position for taking a beating by multiple attackers. So with all these things to consider. I don't think it was just the poo on the ground even thought that's still a good reason not to willingly go to the ground. Antibiotics were invented in 1928 so I can see the concern for infection being on the "Another reason not to be on the ground," But the core reasoning is probably older than that.
View attachment 27585

A lot of nonsence to be honest. Kids are Wrestling all the time.
Sorry but your 2 posts are just nonsence.
Bacteria in your mouth tramps on the ground or Beggers ! Made me laugh though.

 

[Flying Crane]

Then there is the old saying that all kung fu should encompass "ti da shuai na" or kicking, punching, throwing, and locking ...if it is complete. This is true up to a point with Wing Chun. It has some techniques addressing of each of those categories ...enough to be a "complete" system in that sense, but you'll notice that ground-fighting is not really addressed when you say "ti da shuai na".

This has never been said where I have trained. It has apparently not been emphasized in my lineages. We simply view it as a methodology that approaches combat in a certain way, and that is what we do.

And then, "complete" could simply mean that your system may be limited, but still has what is necessary to deal with whatever you will confront (again "ti da shuai na).

This is more in line with how we/I have always viewed it. Within your methodology you ought to have solutions for what you are likely to encounter. That does not mean that you have every tool imaginable, that you will match your enemy’s methods and out- perform him in his own game. It means that you will beat him, using your methodology.

When people start making a list of what is necessary in order to be “complete”, it can very quickly get unrealistic. Where do we draw the line? Do we need to include massed cavalry? Battle tank tactics? Air assault? Ballistic missile defense? I’m giving extreme examples of course, but my point is, there is always something else in the martial arena that a fellow does not know. I don’t think it is possible to objectively define “complete” and I don’t really worry about it.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Sometimes it’s a function of need. Sometimes it’s a function of opportunity. Sometimes it is just simply a lack of interest.

sometimes its a lack of patients too...also can be a lack of properly trained teacher as well

 

[caped crusader]

also can be a lack of properly trained teacher as well

nah..it´s society. there was hard guys in the 70s/80s/90s but the whole climate has changed & not just the save the planet stuff ..LOL
Teachers now are not like in my day. won´t bore people with details but most were old school.
I even remember as a small kid we had a Headmaster Mr Bell who wore the black cloak & hat like in the pink floyd video. He canned your *** if you laughed saying grace before dinner. was simply another world.

 

[Callen]

also can be a lack of properly trained teacher as well

nah..it´s society

Unfortunately, the Wing Chun community absolutely has an issue with poorly trained people teaching an incomplete understanding of the system.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Kids are Wrestling all the time.

I don't know about you, but when I was a kid, I wrestled on grass and dirt. I didn't wrestle on street in the 1800's or 1900's that was covered with urine, human feces, mud, and horse manure.

Streets in 1900's London

"In the 19th century, London was the capital of the largest empire the world had ever known — and it was infamously filthy. It had choking, sooty fogs; the Thames River was thick with human sewage; and the streets were covered with mud.

But according to Lee Jackson, author of Dirty Old London: The Victorian Fight Against Filth, mud was actually a euphemism. "It was essentially composed of horse dung," he tells Fresh Air's Sam Briger. "There were tens of thousands of working horses in London [with] inevitable consequences for the streets. And the Victorians never really found an effective way of removing that, unfortunately."

In fact, by the 1890s, there were approximately 300,000 horses and 1,000 tons of dung a day in London." - Source: 'Dirty Old London': A History Of The Victorians' Infamous Filth

During this time people were also throwing human waste onto the streets from pans and people would also use the bathroom in the streets. Even in some villages and slums it's not uncommon to see people use the bathroom right there on the street in public.

This is the manila slums. How many kids do you think wrestle in the street here? How eager would you be to get on the ground for some BJJ? Like I always say, context is everything.

 

[geezer]

The logic of 1:28 makes no sense to me. Why would someone let that choke go for the purpose punching the person in the back of the head?

....Um, ....maybe because you can't double-stomp the groin easily from that position?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The logic of 1:28 makes no sense to me. Why would someone let that choke go for the purpose punching the person in the back of the head.

To prove that he is not only a grappler. He knows how to punch too.

It's cool to get someone in a head lock, you then use uppercut and overhand to knock him out.

https://i.postimg.cc/ZKFq8CDq/clinch-uppercut.gif

 

[Hanzou]

Yes ...kernsprecht has moved into his "Blitz Defence"...honestly embarassing and most who trained here in Germany all left his Sekt. Money making. Some have adopted ground fighting into their WT. Mainly his Turkish students but all left the EWTO.
Suc as this guy..

If that's the "ground fighting" they adopted, they shouldn't have bothered. In this day and age, there's literally no excuse to make up stuff when you can simply go someplace and actually learn actual submission grappling and bring it back to your students.

To prove that he is not only a grappler. He knows how to punch too.

Except punching someone in the back of the head when you have the RNC is pretty dumb. You're in the most dominant position possible, so why are we possibly giving up that position and the choke to punch some more? He literally created space for his opponent where there was none, giving his opponent space to escape and potentially counter.

Of course we're assuming he had a decent choke and body lock engaged in the first place. Spoiler alert; He didn't.

 

[JowGaWolf]

To prove that he is not only a grappler. He knows how to punch too.

It's cool to get someone in a head lock, you then use uppercut and overhand to knock him out.

https://i.postimg.cc/ZKFq8CDq/clinch-uppercut.gif

I'll take your word on it ha ha

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I'll take your word on it ha ha

You only use uppercut when your opponent escapes your head lock. The head lock is used to switch a striking game into a wrestling game. It should not be the other way around.