Wing Chun Boxing

[Martial D]

There is no such thing as a superior method, it's the person behind it that is responsible for success or failure. Techniques, biomechanics, theory and principles mean absolutely nothing without a sound strategy employed by a seasoned, well conditioned, mentally fit and intelligent being. No style can do that for you, you have to make it work by working.

With all due respect, this(the bolded part) is PC trash. Of course some methods are better than others. This is true not only of martial arts, but of literally every single results driven activity a human can partake of.

Can you do surgery equally as well with a tea spoon as you can with a scalpel? Can you run as fast by hopping on one leg as you can by using both legs? Can you generate as much power with a limp wristed slapping motion as you can with a proper boxing punch? Can you maintain balance just as well with your feet together as you can with a wide, braced stance? Could even 100 years of training the best possible people make a difference in any of these examples?

Yes, some methods are superior to others.

The rest of your post following the bold is also true, but if you are flat out doing something in a way that makes no sense vis a vis desired result, you will have a much steeper, or impossible, hill to climb regardless of applied effort or natural talent.

 

[Nobody Important]

With all due respect, this(the bolded part) is PC trash. Of course some methods are better than others. This is true not only of martial arts, but of literally every single results driven activity a human can partake of.

Can you do surgery equally as well with a tea spoon as you can with a scalpel? Can you run as fast by hopping on one leg as you can by using both legs? Can you generate as much power with a limp wristed slapping motion as you can with a proper boxing punch? Can you maintain balance just as well with your feet together as you can with a wide, braced stance? Could even 100 years of training the best possible people make a difference in any of these examples?

Yes, some methods are superior to others.

The rest of your post following the bold is also true, but if you are flat out doing something in a way that makes no sense vis a vis desired result, you will have a much steeper, or impossible, hill to climb regardless of applied effort or natural talent.

If you take it out of context, yes, you're right. But we are not comparing the efficiency of spoons to knives or hopping versus running in the conventional manner. We are comparing one fighting method to another and how someone can effectively use that method. Doesn't matter if you do boxing or wing chun, tae kwon do or jujutsu, you get out of it what you put into it and how you understand it cannot be underestimated. I've seen trained martial artists from respected styles lose fights to fighters who had no formal training at all. IMO, it's the person who counts not the method,. Its the will, desire and understanding of how to accomplish something that needs done that's most important.

I've seen combat medics patch up soldiers with parachute silk & paracord, I've seen monks paint buildings with spoons, I've seen an old man patch a leaky radiator with pepper, I've seen dogs climb trees to catch a raccoon & a man play the guitar with his feet. All unconventional methods to accomplish what needed to be done, but at the time they had no better alternative. They didn't let the situation better them just because they didn't possess the the "proper" hardware. They had the know how to use what they had to their benefit. Lacking a "better" method isn't a valid excuse to accomplish a task that needs to be accomplished.

 

[geezer]

Forgive me, but this thread has taken a few turns. What exactly would the weigh-in be about?

Oh not important really. To be honest, sometimes I get equally lost in the twists and turns of LFJ's and KPM's arguments. In this case, I believe LFJ was saying that he had accurately described WSL-VT, and that KPM had disputed that.

I simply added that you other WSL-VT guys seemed to back up LFJ on his presentation of WSL-VT concepts, etc. and as an outsider I would have to go along with that. And that's where I invited you other WSL-VT practitioners to "weigh-in".

On the other hand, I took KPM's objections not to be about LFJ's discussion of WSL-VT, but rather against LFJ's claim of WSL-VT's greater authenticity and its superiority to other versions. It seemed to me that KPM was objecting to that, and saying that LFJ had not provided convincing evidence to back up those claims.

Anyway, I would have concur with that statement as well.

But, as these arguments go on and on, and the parties involved get angrier, and the names and accusations start to fly... Well, frankly I lose track of what the heck they are fighting about!

 

[KPM]

Actually, KPM arrogantly told me pointblank that what I showed and described in our forms and working in sparring is not VT.

---No I didn't. You showed a video with a fighter training in MMA and at long range doing high covers, ducks and weaves that looked very very close to western boxing. You called this "pure WSLVT". You then equated it to movements in the Biu Gee form that looked nothing like what was happening in that clip. When pressed, you said it was a use of the concepts and the physical way it was done didn't matter. When I proposed that the physical way it was done was inspired as much by western boxing as it was from the Biu Gee form you continued to maintain that it was "pure WSLVT" and had nothing at all to do with WB. I didn't "arrogantly" tell you it was not VT, you "arrogantly" denied that it had anything to do with WB and was not inspired by WB and maintained it as "pure WSLVT." I was willing to accept that it was a modern evolution of those concepts from the Biu Jee form inspired by WB and MMA, but no...you wouldn't have that! So I never "pointblank" said..."this is not VT." I simply questioned your claim that it was "pure" VT. You seem to have a very selective memory.

 

[Martial D]

If you take it out of context, yes, you're right. But we are not comparing the efficiency of spoons to knives or hopping versus running in the conventional manner. We are comparing one fighting method to another and how someone can effectively use that method. Doesn't matter if you do boxing or wing chun, tae kwon do or jujutsu, you get out of it what you put into it and how you understand it cannot be underestimated.

So you are asserting each of these methods are exactly equal, that none excel in any way shape or form? And not only these, but every system of 'fighting' ever thought up by anyone, anywhere?

I've seen trained martial artists from respected styles lose fights to fighters who had no formal training at all. IMO, it's the person who counts not the method,.

Unfortunately, the cold hard truth of the matter is that a vast quantity of martial arts schools and styles never address 'fighting' at all. You could just as well be saying an untrained chef can make a better souflet than some 'trained martial artists from respected styles'.

Its the will, desire and understanding of how to accomplish something that needs done that's most important.

Exactly.

I've seen combat medics patch up soldiers with parachute silk & paracord, I've seen monks paint buildings with spoons, I've seen an old man patch a leaky radiator with pepper, I've seen dogs climb trees to catch a raccoon & a man play the guitar with his feet.

Sure, improvisation is great. Yet, that monk will never do with that spoon what an artist can with a brush, and that man will never play as well as a musician with hands.

Lacking a "better" method isn't a valid excuse to accomplish a task that needs to be accomplished.

Surely not, yet unless you know everything, and believe there is no more room for advancement, there is always a better way.

 

[KPM]

Also, if you look at 3:45 - 4:05, you will see Alan explain using the boxing high cover with both hands in terms of the principle seen in the final movement of Biu Tze form (as did Sean and LFJ previously in reference to the clip Sean provided). Like you, I believe Alan's usage of this technique here, much like the way Sean's guy used it, owes more to boxing than WC/VT, but the reference to the BT form shows that is is an evolutionary adaptation totally consistent with WC/VT's DNA.

---Absolutely! I like the way your phrased that...."evolutionary adaptation consistent with Wing Chun's DNA"! I do not at all believe that Alan would ever make the arrogant claim (as LFJ did) that "this has nothing to do with western boxing"....or wrestling/MMA. I'm sure he would say that this is taking concepts from the Biu Jee form and using them in a way that is consistent with and inspired by MMA/wrestling/WB training.


IMO, only a person who is a VT creationist and not an evolutionist could find a way to view this as a traditional application of Yip Man WC/VT, and I don't waste my time arguing "creation science" with religious zealots!.

----Good point!


Now, let's look how this approach is applied in MMA by one of Alan's fighters: Josh Kaldani. Whenever Josh gets his opponent against the cage such as at around 8:00 - 8:50, at 11:00 - 11:15, or again at 14:15 - 14:55, you can see this applied.

----Are we missing a video link?

 

[geezer]

...Of course some methods are better than others. This is true not only of martial arts, but of literally every single results driven activity a human can partake of.
Can you generate as much power with a limp wristed slapping motion as you can with a proper boxing punch?

I agree totally with your point that some methods are inherently and obviously better than others. But the bolded part above stood out for being a questionable example. Well maybe not if you mean a light foppish slap with a lace glove. But what about gettin smacked with a big honkin' dead fish? See below:

In my experience, some people can slap really hard! So if you are just talking power generation, a very relaxed swing, even with an open hand, can develop knockout power.

Now I'm not suggesting it would work in boxing. And it might not be as applicable to fighting in general. But flexible weapons like flails, nunchaku, saps, big dead fish, and so forth really develop considerable power. Many martial arts have equivalent empty-handed movements. Do you think they are worthless? Even fried with chips?

 

[jobo]

Unfortunately, the cold hard truth of the matter is that a vast quantity of martial arts schools and styles never address 'fighting' at all. .

but despite insisting on the scientific method, this claim is unsupported with any evidence at all , fairs fair if you want everyone to prove their claims you should do the same

 

[drop bear]

The burden of proof is on anyone who makes a claim.

My claim is boxing has a weath of evidenve it works.

VT is different to boxing.

VT does not have the same evidence it works.

What would you like me to prove?

 

[drop bear]

I agree totally with your point that some methods are inherently and obviously better than others. But the bolded part above stood out for being a questionable example. Well maybe not if you mean a light foppish slap with a lace glove. But what about gettin smacked with a big honkin' dead fish? See below:

In my experience, some people can slap really hard! So if you are just talking power generation, a very relaxed swing, even with an open hand, can develop knockout power.

Now I'm not suggesting it would work in boxing. And it might not be as applicable to fighting in general. But flexible weapons like flails, nunchaku, saps, big dead fish, and so forth really develop considerable power. Many martial arts have equivalent empty-handed movements. Do you think they are worthless? Even fried with chips?

lets put it this way. When we see chunners fight they do tend to start winding with their punches.

which becomes this fun game of yes he did. No he didn't. But still.

Classic example of the VT hook punch at play here.

 

[LFJ]

the reference to the BT form shows that is is an evolutionary adaptation totally consistent with WC/VT's DNA.

How so? If two different lineages have the concept in their system, how are you determining that it was not originally in there, if not through bias?

IMO, only a person who is a VT creationist and not an evolutionist could find a way to view this as a traditional application of Yip Man WC/VT

And how do you know at what point this evolution happened? How do you know it was later than sooner? Again, just bias.

You then equated it to movements in the Biu Gee form that looked nothing like what was happening in that clip. When pressed, you said it was a use of the concepts and the physical way it was done didn't matter.

I posted images showing the exact same position in form and sparring.

I didn't "arrogantly" tell you it was not VT, you "arrogantly" denied that it had anything to do with WB and was not inspired by WB and maintained it as "pure WSLVT."

It is not arrogant to state facts.
It is arrogant to make bald assertions.

I was willing to accept that it was a modern evolution of those concepts from the Biu Jee form inspired by WB and MMA, but no...you wouldn't have that!

Because it's not true and you are unable to support your claim.

So I never "pointblank" said..."this is not VT." I simply questioned your claim that it was "pure" VT. You seem to have a very selective memory.

In fact you did by telling me it came "straight from boxing" without offering to support that bald assertion.

 

[LFJ]

I do not at all believe that Alan would ever make the arrogant claim (as LFJ did) that "this has nothing to do with western boxing"....or wrestling/MMA. I'm sure he would say that this is taking concepts from the Biu Jee form and using them in a way that is consistent with and inspired by MMA/wrestling/WB training.

Afaik, Alan doesn't train boxing and didn't create his style of WC.

In fact, he has gone a long way to show how his WC is not WB.

So, it's best you ask him, than arrogantly tell yet another person where they must have gotten their stuff.

 

[drop bear]

I have shown VT forms and explained how they are different.
I've shown VT sparring that is obviously different.
I've shown and explained long-range strategy and tactics that most WC you've seen doesn't have, and as you admit is why it often fails.

Then you arrogantly told me all of that is not VT precisely because it's different.

So, whatever.

Which is nice for VT. But has nothing to do with wing chun or boxing.

You have said VT is unable to be cross trained with a working striking style. It pretty much already removes itself from consideration in this thread.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make here.

 

[LFJ]

My claim is boxing has a weath of evidenve it works.

VT is different to boxing.

VT does not have the same evidence it works.

What would you like me to prove?

Nothing, as long as you aren't saying VT doesn't work or has no evidence that it does. Both are demonstrably false.

 

[Martial D]

but despite insisting on the scientific method, this claim is unsupported with any evidence at all , fairs fair if you want everyone to prove their claims you should do the same

The claim is self evident. Many schools do only drilling and forms, which are a completely different activities than fighting. It would be upon the one making the claim that these obviously dissimilar activities are the same activity, or that one could prepare you for the other, to demonstrate that.

 

[drop bear]

lets put it this way. When we see chunners fight they do tend to start winding with their punches.

which becomes this fun game of yes he did. No he didn't. But still.

Classic example of the VT hook punch at play here.

Alan Orr's Iron wolves.

I dont see a unique striking style. I am not even sure which one is the chunner.

 

[drop bear]

Nothing, as long as you aren't saying VT doesn't work or has no evidence that it does. Both are demonstrably false.

Ok. So we are talking about wing chun cross training with a working style. So why have we included VT in this?

I don't see what it brings to the table.

 

[jobo]

The claim is self evident. Many schools do only drilling and forms, which are a completely different activities than fighting. It would be upon the one making the claim that these obviously dissimilar activities are the same activity, or that one could prepare you for the other, to demonstrate that.

you said VAST amounts so its up to you to show that the numbers are indeed VAST. How were you thinking of evidencing that?

 

[LFJ]

I dont see a unique striking style. I am not even sure which one is the chunner.

The knockout punch was what they call a "whipping punch" that starts wide and drops the elbow as it comes in.

Not a WB punch, or a common punching method, anyway. As I said, he has gone to lengths to show that his WC is not WB, but Chinese Boxing. They are not the same.

 

[Martial D]

I agree totally with your point that some methods are inherently and obviously better than others. But the bolded part above stood out for being a questionable example. Well maybe not if you mean a light foppish slap with a lace glove. But what about gettin smacked with a big honkin' dead fish? See below:

In my experience, some people can slap really hard! So if you are just talking power generation, a very relaxed swing, even with an open hand, can develop knockout power.

Now I'm not suggesting it would work in boxing. And it might not be as applicable to fighting in general. But flexible weapons like flails, nunchaku, saps, big dead fish, and so forth really develop considerable power. Many martial arts have equivalent empty-handed movements. Do you think they are worthless? Even fried with chips?

Sure. you can knock people out with a fish, or a slap. You can also swim across a pool without using your arms, or eat soup with a fork.