Ever since Bruce Lee met Dan Inosanto, there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts--Escrima, Arnis, Kali and the like. My first love was Wing Tsun, but after about five years, I began studying Latosa Escrima. My Si-Fu tolerated this, but sure didn't approve. As for myself, I love training in both arts. What do you make of the Wing Chun-FMA connection?
Wing Chun/Tsun and FMA's
- Thread starter geezer
- Start date
KamonGuy2
Master of Arts
I completely dissagree that there is any particluar special connection between these arts
Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this
I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this
I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to
BJJ is one of the best as BJJ practitioners use stick when rolling and ground work is missing from the wing chun system
Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this
I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this
I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to
BJJ is one of the best as BJJ practitioners use stick when rolling and ground work is missing from the wing chun system
" Just because Bruce Lee trained/trained with Dan Inosanto does not mean that the rest of the wing chun world mimics this"
Who said anything like that?
I'm talking purely on body / hands / foot movement similarities and most of all mindset.
" I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this"
Actually this doesn't prove anything.
Bjj is far away from the purpose/spirit of either Wing Chun or FMA or Silat. I agree on the sticky aspect, but for me, ground is the area that needs the less training.
If I had to set priorities then my list would be:
- Striking
- Grappling (stand up)
- Weapons
- Ground
" I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to"
I'm not talking about application, but similarities.
But I agree, Wing Chun's tactics and strategy apply to any style with the same goals.
Who said anything like that?
I'm talking purely on body / hands / foot movement similarities and most of all mindset.
" I train escrima on a personal level but know of no-one else near me who does this"
Actually this doesn't prove anything.
Bjj is far away from the purpose/spirit of either Wing Chun or FMA or Silat. I agree on the sticky aspect, but for me, ground is the area that needs the less training.
If I had to set priorities then my list would be:
- Striking
- Grappling (stand up)
- Weapons
- Ground
" I have found other arts to be more similar in style, or arts that you can apply wing chun to"
I'm not talking about application, but similarities.
But I agree, Wing Chun's tactics and strategy apply to any style with the same goals.
dungeonworks
Black Belt
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 540
- Reaction score
- 18
I have been seeking Wing Chun in my area and nearly every instructor I have talked with or read about in said area has some FMA in their repertoire or background. I would love to train in either/or WC or FMA.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #6
Hey Kamon, no need to get grumpy. I just meant that here in the States you see an awful lot of schools that teach Wing Chun and FMA's. I know that the European WT guys in the EWTO also teach both arts, as does Bill Newman in England. I've seen no such connection in the Karate and Taekwondo schools around here.
As far as combining different martial arts goes, I think you've got it about right. I feel that my plate is full with WT and Escrima, but if I were younger and talented enough to handle a third martial art, it would be BJJ. I wrestled in my youth and I highly respect the role of grappling in learning a complete self defense program. And, as you said regarding BJJ and sticking, it's true that in grappling you learn to stick and feel you opponent's body position, his balance and weaknesses in a manner somewhat akin to Chi Sau. These are the only two arts I know in which you can effectively compete blindfolded. It seems to me that they would complement each other nicely.
CuongNhuka
Senior Master
Wing Chun and Filiphino styles have many similarities. Similar method of teaching (drills), similar focus (hands, kinda sorta), and they do blend well. The Wing Chun drills can be done with sticks (on a conceptual level), and they become very effective. Filiphino drills can be done disarmed, and then blend well with regular Wing Chun drills.
Cuong Nhu guys some times cross train in Wing Chun (which is a major style of influence) or Filiphino styles. And when we teach either style, we often teach both together.
Cuong Nhu guys some times cross train in Wing Chun (which is a major style of influence) or Filiphino styles. And when we teach either style, we often teach both together.
I'm not sure I'd go quite that far, but there are certainly lots of analogies, and working FMA improved my WC (when I took it) and vcie versa. Jeet Kune Do shows how well they can be blended together.
KamonGuy2
Master of Arts
The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'
This disturbed me a great deal
It would appear that people are saying that wing chun is derived directly from Bruce Lee (ie what about the countless wing chun schools that have never had any involvement with Filipino Arts?)
You can train ANY art with wing chun (even karate) but it does not mean there is any special link
Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range? Because if you are talking about guns you aren't going to stand much of a chance anyway
You should never set priorities when training - if you build up strikes, that should deal with weapons.If you train clinchwork, you should be using strikes to assist you.
Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc
Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc). As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that
Well if you are talking of similarities, why not mention Tai Chi rather than Escrima?
way I heard it, long ago the Chinese were selling combat ideas to the Filipinos for silk.
This story comes from a Chinese teacher, who was teaching out of Mr. Inosanto's school for a while. so why would Lee and Inosanto not find familliar ground in working with each other?
This story comes from a Chinese teacher, who was teaching out of Mr. Inosanto's school for a while. so why would Lee and Inosanto not find familliar ground in working with each other?
@Kamon guy:
The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'
This disturbed me a great deal
Well, I didnt say that. You cant blame me for other peoples quotes. Im just talking about similarities.
Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range?
Definitely. I always assume that the opponent(s) is armed in my training. I advise you should too.
You should never set priorities when training
Well I do and I disagree with your statement. For example, why should I spent 3 years training in nunchaku, when there is no way Im ever going to use it. Or why should I train to disarm firearms, when the possibility of such an occurrence is rare where I live. If I was living in Beirut that would be my No.1 priority. Why spend time & energy, to develop combative tools that are probably never going to happen to me and not use that time effectively to develop other aspects of combat?
Priorities have another level in our training. We should set our priorities in order not to attempt the wrong things at the wrong time. When its the right time to hit, to grab, to disarm, to sacrifice etc.
Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc
Yep, thats mostly stand-up grappling (like freestyle, Greco-roman, etc), not ground necessarily. Grappling is no.2 in my priorities, remember?
Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc).
Most deaths occur due to lack of awareness. Most fights ending on the floor, is a myth.
As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that
I agree, thats why you should train in a grappling art. Thats the only way.
Well if you are talking of similarities, why not mention Tai Chi rather than Escrima?
Im sure it has too, but I only talk about stuff Ive trained at.
The original comment was that 'since Bruce met Dan there has been a link between Wing Chun and the Filipino Martial Arts'
This disturbed me a great deal
Well, I didnt say that. You cant blame me for other peoples quotes. Im just talking about similarities.
Weapons? You think a person will use weapons at close range?
Definitely. I always assume that the opponent(s) is armed in my training. I advise you should too.
You should never set priorities when training
Well I do and I disagree with your statement. For example, why should I spent 3 years training in nunchaku, when there is no way Im ever going to use it. Or why should I train to disarm firearms, when the possibility of such an occurrence is rare where I live. If I was living in Beirut that would be my No.1 priority. Why spend time & energy, to develop combative tools that are probably never going to happen to me and not use that time effectively to develop other aspects of combat?
Priorities have another level in our training. We should set our priorities in order not to attempt the wrong things at the wrong time. When its the right time to hit, to grab, to disarm, to sacrifice etc.
Ground is an extremely important aspect in any fight. Most fights you see end up against walls, floors, against car hoods, etc
Yep, thats mostly stand-up grappling (like freestyle, Greco-roman, etc), not ground necessarily. Grappling is no.2 in my priorities, remember?
Most deaths in fights occur on the floor (ie people being kicked to death etc).
Most deaths occur due to lack of awareness. Most fights ending on the floor, is a myth.
As it stands, wing chun has no ground game. You can mention anti grappling all you like, but it doesn't work. If you show me any video of a wing chun person fighting his way off the floor in a sufficient manner then I'll retract that
I agree, thats why you should train in a grappling art. Thats the only way.
Well if you are talking of similarities, why not mention Tai Chi rather than Escrima?
Im sure it has too, but I only talk about stuff Ive trained at.
KamonGuy2
Master of Arts
You queried my comment, I gave a response
You asked who had said that there was a link between WC and Escrima.
Hence why i quoted the above
What I meant by that was that if you approach someone ina bar fight, you shouldn't let him even get to a weapon. If he goes for his pockets, he is going down. If he does anything out of the ordinary I am going to blast the guy til he is subdued. Hit first, ask questions later
Don't wait until he gets a weapon and then engage him
I do not understand - if you are training in one area, you are setting priorities. I was saying that you should be training everything.
It is no good focusing in one area and forgetting the rest.
No it wasn't. You stated clinchwork was your second priority, groundwork was your fourth
For me they go hand in hand
Are you joking!!!?????
Every fight I have ever seen or been in has involved someone going to the floor. Think about it - how else would you win (ie if you punch someone and they don't go down they are just going to hit you)
Completely agree
Geezer,
All that I've ever heard is how great these two disciplines compliment each other - showing different aspects of, in many ways, similar movements.
I don't understand why your Si-Fu would have any hard feelings towards this style, especially if you wanted some solid weapons training.
All that I've ever heard is how great these two disciplines compliment each other - showing different aspects of, in many ways, similar movements.
I don't understand why your Si-Fu would have any hard feelings towards this style, especially if you wanted some solid weapons training.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #14
Who can say why? Pride? Money? Tradition? He's a Chinese Grandmaster and he feels that his art is the best. For one of his instructors to study or teach something else really bothered him. He felt that if you wanted weapons training, put in a decade or two of serious training, teaching and a lot of money, and then you could learn his version of the Bart Cham Do or "Butterfly Swords". I admit he was, and is, a superb martial artist, but eventually, I reached a point where I needed a more open minded instructor... I believe I sent you a PM with his name. Sure I have to either travel to his state or help get a seminar together and fly him in to train, but it's worth it. Same for my main FMA instructor.
Geezer,
How effective is the the weapons side of wing chun? Is there a significant number of wing chunners out there who could take their weapons skills and implement them w/ objects they would find in a real scenario?
Also, do you think that the same kind of exclussion exists in other styles that you have found w/ certain wing chun Si-Fu's?
How effective is the the weapons side of wing chun? Is there a significant number of wing chunners out there who could take their weapons skills and implement them w/ objects they would find in a real scenario?
Also, do you think that the same kind of exclussion exists in other styles that you have found w/ certain wing chun Si-Fu's?
@Kamon guy
Weapons: Its another thing to say that you dont believe a person will use a weapon at close range and another thing that you are not going to let him access one. Decide what you want to say.
Priorities: I cant explain any better. My areas of training are the 4 I mentioned before. Train in Everything cant happen at least in one lifetime.
Grappling: I divide it in stand-up and ground. If you dont thats fine with me. BUT, I spend more time on stand-up than ground.
Kills: No Im not joking, lack of awareness is the reason that gets you killed. (sudden attacks with a weapon) Most fights that youve seen isnt the end all, is it?
Ground: Most fights dont end up on the ground. They either stop in a couple of strikes and people get into the way, or we have KOs. Ground is the less probable thing to happen. It's a hype. You should train in it, but that would be like 10% of my training.
As I said thats just my opinion in all of the above, so you should relax, we are only talking here.
Weapons: Its another thing to say that you dont believe a person will use a weapon at close range and another thing that you are not going to let him access one. Decide what you want to say.
Priorities: I cant explain any better. My areas of training are the 4 I mentioned before. Train in Everything cant happen at least in one lifetime.
Grappling: I divide it in stand-up and ground. If you dont thats fine with me. BUT, I spend more time on stand-up than ground.
Kills: No Im not joking, lack of awareness is the reason that gets you killed. (sudden attacks with a weapon) Most fights that youve seen isnt the end all, is it?
Ground: Most fights dont end up on the ground. They either stop in a couple of strikes and people get into the way, or we have KOs. Ground is the less probable thing to happen. It's a hype. You should train in it, but that would be like 10% of my training.
As I said thats just my opinion in all of the above, so you should relax, we are only talking here.
KamonGuy2
Master of Arts
two different scenarios - one is where a guy approaches you weapon in hand (ie in a mugging)
Another is where you engage an empty handed attacker and he then draws a weapon
The first scenario is simple - strike hard and fast (enough to drop him) then worry about the weapon. You should't be training specifically for weapons
The second scenario is simple - do not let him get to a weapon
If you can't do these, then be compliant and hope for the best
'Everything' is a concept that you have taken too literally
In my class, I don't train in just punching for the whole lesson
We work stancework, footwork, striking, clinchwork, fighting techniques, drills etc. You can't say to people 'train primarily in striking and play around with grappling for ten minutes at the end'. You should train these areas equally, especially as they intertwine
Lack of awareness is a fault concept
Working for who I work for (the police), I am privvy to numerous crime reports where people are attacked. These people are very switched on people (of course elderly and teenagers get attacked a lot - but that is more to do with their physical weakness rather than their awareness)
People who are attacked in shopping centres or who are assaulted on a bus - you wouldn't expect attacks like that to happen but they do
The ones inside nightclubs are usually over silly things
I was beaten to within an inch of my life several years ago in a very public place
It is good to be aware, but it will not save you
Have you never seen anyone punched to the ground? I am not talking about a complete KO (ie where the guy loses conciousness) but where the guy is knocked down. It happens
There are plenty of other scenarios, (rugby tackled, grabbed by a bouncer, kicked over, etc) People go to ground all the time
I myself have gone to ground on numerous occasions, despite being very good at keeping my feet
I would dare you to go into any BJJ school and say that fights hardly ever go to ground
If my posts come across aggressive, that is not my intention - I am typing fast as I am on lunch
The FMAs are less formal, so I'd say they're easier to switch to, in my opinion.
