I'm not sure that distinction is entirely meaningful, nor entirely universal.
Over the years, we always hear or read about how Master or Sifu "so and so" only used about 3 or so hands or techniques or moves to win all his fights. (i.e. I've read that this was the case for Yip Man, and for WSL).
Is this the result of years of training what for some is a vast system containing forms, weapons, numerous drills, ancillary exercises, etc...?
Why is it this way? Is it necessary to train all three forms, muk yan jong, and the weapons, just to end up with "3 moves" that win all the fights?
Is it just the requisite process of having to go from A to Z; only to end up using 3 of the letters to get the job done?
Discussion is welcome! Thx!
Agree! There are many different ways to train from the information that you can obtain from a form.If you believe that the form just teaches "concepts" which are applied in infinite variations, i.e. the moves from the forms look different in application, then using it to develop muscle memory is a silly one.
Eh..it's different. Of course I drill everything at speed, with resistance, with partners, and I spar for a couple hours a week minimum(I'm old now) Also, I do agree that if your form movements are not the same ones you actually use, training them is detrimental.Martial D,
using the form to develop muscle memory is an idea which can be seen from different perspectives.
If you believe that the form just teaches "concepts" which are applied in infinite variations, i.e. the moves from the forms look different in application, then using it to develop muscle memory is a silly one.
If you are not going to use the motor patterns and muscle memory developed through forms practice in your drills and fighting, what function does it serve?
There is a certain group of people who believe everything is about cultivating the punch and that the moves from the forms are not techniques to be applied. Ironically, they say that if they have problems with a certain technique in their drills and fighting, they need to go back to the forms to correct the mistake...
I find this a very odd logic and not really well thought through. But that is of course just my opinion at this time.
Another thing, doing a form builds muscle memory to do the form. If you want to develop motor skill and applicability of the various hands, you need to take out the movement and practice it a gazillion times in isolation and then with a reference (an opponent) to master it.
Consequently, as long as you know the techniques and their purpose, you can just drill them. You actually don't need to practice the forms as such...
Either way, though... Whether it is one or the other, my point remains the same.
They are structured the same way (not too many techniques, but certain concepts, etc.)
There is a difference, but it's not as big as some folks think (including some folks in my own primary art). Good defensive fighting skills should be able to do okay with a similarly skilled person from another discipline, unless that other discipline hits in a gap in the style in question (like BJJ attacking boxing). Two striking styles ought to be competitive with each other, if both are well-trained. I think the issue we often have is comparing two fighters. I had a good private discussion with a member here to understand how they build fighters so quickly. In 3 months, their new fighter puts in as much training as many casual students (like those I usually teach) do in 2-3 years. And the focus a lot on fitness in that time, because they know the fights aren't likely to end in 60 seconds. And they train to extend the fight, unless they see a chance to end it. So, if someone I trained for a year gets taken down by someone they trained for 13 weeks, that shouldn't be surprising. Most of that comes down to the training level and commitment (and a bit to pre-selection - the kind of people who go for that 13-week fight prep for MMA are different). Their training to extend fights gives them an additional advantage, since we're training to end one someone is trying to end fast.In my opinion the problem is that people try to "spar" with the system, which will inevitably make you play a game you are not supposed to play as a Wing Chun stylist - and get the experience that the system doesn't hence the need to "improve"/modify it so it works in sparring or to face the modern day fighter.
---Fighting is fighting. Why should their be a difference between meeting someone on the floor in the gym wearing some protective equipment, and meeting them in a parking lot wearing none?
But you won't do well if you want to do some rounds of sparring with someone who is good at that.
---Do you mean good at using distance, timing, and footwork to avoid that pressing barrage of attacks you referred to? That's just good fighting. Something that can be isolated and developed in sparring. I fail to see why people want to separate out hard sparring from "real fighting" and say someone can be perfectly prepared for one but not the other. That just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.