Wing Chun

you lot are misunderstanding. Bruce's style was the best. not JKD, but his individual style that had no gaps that could be used in all situations. his personal JKD may not have been the best it would have been greta if he had lived to develop it but he wouldnt have. i belive in an ideal Bruce Lee style people would come to learn this 'ultimate' martial art. the instructors would asses every student individualy and each would learn in a way a different martial art, one student would devote 3 times as much time to kicks as another. they would develop each students own personal martial art and allow him/her to blossom.

hello. KOF. i dont know whether im with you or against. ur confusing me. i think Muay Thai and Wing Chun would make an absolutely lethal stand up combination and i think would destroy any other as a stand up art. but we are talking about complete training, so bjj would be perfect to take care of the grappling side if it does go to the ground. that is perfect as it is then. but ok if u mean totally complete in terms of weapons training aswell then escrima (kali) is self explanatory. i was totally in ur supprt. then you changed. u were wrong there. let me explain. wing chun would be actually good with bjj, because of its lethal extreme close range power, ranges considered to be nothing but for grappling and grabbing, now ill refer back to this later. dim mak is nerve striking/ close range power etc. it is not a martial art. it is similar to 'iron palm' training. it is not a martial art it is a method very common method however of training the hands to become like iron. dim mak is a method of striking usually with fingers, it can be learnt seperately but is better as part of an art so you can learn better application and how others not trained would react etc. wing chun is one of the main martial arts containing dim mak, in wing chuns 3rd form, labelled as the emergency form, Bil Jee (thrusting fingers), it is basically dim mak. so i think therefor it is much better to learn wing chun and it other benefits, speed, leverage control, reflex tarining from chi sao etc than just to learn dim mak on it own. then u mentioned chin na. that itself is a sub style, style within a style it is called, it is a method of in a way grappling, but still u cant say a sub style would beat wing chun an i mean why is the bjj there then?? i still say Wing Chun, Muay Thai, and BJJ as the most dangerous and complete cross training style out there. Escrima yes for weapons training aswell but u cant get much better than that but lets stay with empty hand for now. i ask you which 3-4 martial arts would be the best to cross train in to make the ultimate martial art and why? thank you and sorry for such a long post

thank you jeffin i think it is possible. could you please give a description of both again with a bit more detail so i can really say how wing chun would deal with the hook if i have got it wrong. thanks. no one has answered the other question i posed about wing chun actually versus boxing in ring and on street.

i think lee would win but i dont think 'coz hes powerful' is the nest reason. Lee had adaptability, he knew a lot about different styyles and had his own personal style. also i think he had mor fighting experience. hey monkeygirl.. shes a sensai everyone so u better all show respect. lol

i think you have to respect the fact that they are so strong i mean simply with bodys that muscular and strong they could really Ko someone with a punch, imagine the strenght behind it. however UFC are trained fighters and i dont think they could take fighting pain esspecially well, i mean the pain is different. it snot pain from enduring a 200kg weight, its things which penetrate, i mean a sort of 'whipping' kind of power that Bruce Lee said. i really reckon however that grappler would have a very hard time, i mean lets see you apply the guard position on them, they would crush you. you have to imagine how strong they are. a striker would have a much better chance. another thing, many martial arts wer ebuilt on the basis of overcoming the stronger opponent, so if they dont work on there guys when will they? im sure they do. i mean a really fast martial artist could give a few really solid strikes everynow and then, i think a hit and run strategy would be required. a few eye pokes, punches and maybe wear him down with some kicks to his knee. it would be a good fight. i think this does say to grapplers though that sometimes you need striking, you cant always assume you can grapple just as you can always assume you can strike.

i still say ive found tan sao the most effective way to deal with a hook. you could from there chain punch him, elbow strikes or i thought how about minimizing his next hook if he gets one. at the point at which his hook meets your 'tan sao' his bicep muscle would be tense. if you've got a good chop and know how to strike with the 'chopping' part of your hand, you could chop his bicep, which will damage the muscle for a little while at least. so whats the opinions on wing chun versus boxing anyway? 1) in the ring 2) on the street my opinions are, in the ring obviouslyboxing coz wing chun cant really use gloves. on the street its hard, coz boxing is a tremendous art. but i think wing chun would win. wing chun does have kicks, low ones which can work. footwork is evry good in both arts. blocking wing chun has the advantage but boxers would be every fast but if the wing chunner is as fast as he should be, explosive then he should win. also if both are advanced it would be more interesting. the boxer would be faster more pwerful etc. but then so would the wing chunner but by that time he may have also be studying 'bil jee', the so called emergency form. the techniques in there are very powerful and i dont think a boxer would be able to handle them.

thank you very much Martial Artist. Treebranch how do you feel now? as for sticky hands it is a training thing, just like shadow boxing or katas. films may show the main 'hero' or whatever use such well known training methods for effect so people know he is training for a fight. wing chun can only look good to those who are really into simple fast movements. i mean some guy walking up a tight corridor and getting rushed he might use wing chun to very swiftly deal with them. but some wing cun techniques may be used for a second but wing chun primarily??? i dont think so. people liek seeing acrobatic moves and flowery movements that LOOK efficient, whats wrong with that? i like seeing them like that aswell. but trust me wing chun cant be modified to look acrobatic. some can enjoy watching it however but please dont put it in the same category of the arts that are used in films. thank you.

maybe he means to be garndmaster or something i dunno. but i think that is going too far. i know it is a lifetime journey but yeah, i mean you could even master it as in learn everything to do with it within 5 years, to be super proficient 10 years. 15 years i believe would really put you up there. if u havent mastered a system then how can you teach? that means that every hung gar sifu has trained for 25-30 years? i dont think so. ask your friend for a bit more detail.

okay im going to try rephrasing this so no one is 'ofended'. Treebranch my dear frind, if you do not know about a martial art then i think the most correct course of action would be to not comment at all. u were very very wrong, but that ur ur fault - u were simply misinformed anyway you mentioned how styles like wing chun are sused because they look good on film. that is very incorrect. films like flashy moves - high kicks, and long movements etc. wing chun is nothing like that, it revolves around simplicity with the sole purpose of destroying the opponent. jeet kune do maybe because some persons individual expression of jeet kune do may involve flashy moves. wushu yes. please may i every plotely ask where you got this informationt hat wing chun was style made to look good? also haveyoiu done any research on wing chun? and finally have i made you aware of this error. if you have any queries regarding wing chun please dont hesitate to contact me. thank you

well there isnty always time to 'read' what to do. you have to move on instict and reactions. and Anzie i think shootfighting basically is bjj/muay thai. i think that is a great combination and very efficient. not the bjj bit tho, bjj may be very effective but i think thats their purpose, lethal wise its about what can do the most damage, so i think muay thai is up there.

that was very well said Lee. i think us two just wrapped up the thread but might as well keep it going. so Lee do you do wing chun? and not whats yle? and where do you study?

ive told you again. do the wing chun method. let his arm meet you. position your tan sao, if your tan sao is positioned correctly and your torsu and footwork are also correct he will not be able to make the connection. so ok you 'meet' his wrist, arm or whatever. then you dont give him a hoo, you give hima straight punch , or should i say a turing punch. your hip should generate energy into the punch while the other side of your hip in effect moves you back. but ok if you are fast enough you could simply move back and dodge it.

dim mak is usually considered the highest form of pressure and nerve attacks but it isnt an art as such, its an art the same way as 'iron plam fist'. its not a sperate 'martial' art. but manys tyles do incorpoarte dim mak or prssure strikes. my wing chun school does but we are free to experiment so we learn from each other. but i would say make a list of all the dojos in the area, you are most likely to find the stuff your looking for in a chinese art but still list the arts, then visit them and ask general questions, ask about the art, then you simply ask does it involve dim mak or pressure/ nerve strikes. preying mantis may also meet your criteria.

i dont know too much about the plot but in the film jet li beats a lot of karate black belts. now jet li markets wushu, which some people consider a generic term for chinese martial arts. and that guy obviously thought that karate represented the japanese arts. so when he saw wushu beat karate in a way he thought it was trying to portray chinese martial arts superiority .over japanese martial arts. ::EDIT by monkeygirl - keep it respectful. EDIT::

yeah bjj is good. but if you mean lethal as in destructive direct power, then it would geenrally have to be a striking art. i would say something like wing chun, muay thai, san shou would be lethal.

yeah it cant cover every possible scenario. infact that would be a weakness to learn how to get out of every situation in a fixed way. its about learning concepts and principles that would suffice at every situation. also thers no point in knowing the basics of loads of different arts, that is good but only if you have a strong core art first. i think the best martial art is the individual martial art that makes the martial artist complete and so he has no weakness. crosstraining is another way of phrasing it however.

yeah im pretty sure william cheung had it but somewhere i read the most was 11. i understand the theory behind punches and myself train to get faster punches and i can comprehend 7-8 but 10 seems like a bit oo much, can you imagine 10 punches a second. i think if its has been done the power has been sacrificed a lot however i think up to 5-6 punches a seconds can be done with each punch having the full maximum power as just a single punch. any other views on this?

yeah even though we'll discuss this furthet another time. i read you do TKD. now from what ive chatted with you about, our lively WC versus MT debate etc. and your response to already having a direct powerful style. i would have thought doing a practical, powerful direct style of fighting would have been more your cup of tea. then why did you take TKD?

lol, im actually suprised it was kinda sly of me. i just wanted to see how you would react, cmon u gotta admit it was a good try. anyway, id be every interested to hear your views on this topic even though i can kinda guess what stance your gonna be taking.

yes you are very right in some cases. i believe 100% in bruce's philisophy of discovery. i ebluve in having a core martial art and then techniques and concepts adding ot that that will allow your own personal evolution as a martial artist to blossom. the best techniques are the ones that work for you, you must experiment and then keep what will prove useful and excell in those concepts or techniques. woing chun is similar for example in some schools elbow strikes are not taught, or manybe some other strikes but whne practicing feeding techniques we should experiment with tecniques we feel may be effective then decide whetehr we could use them. however that doesnt mean that fighing is aone big dream where if u 'believe you can', you can make any technique effective, wing chun has the core principles which hace been tried and tested on logic and have been proven to work. after these few basics the whole learning process becomes iimmense and flexible, you carry on learning but these is so much flexibitlity and you have the opportunity to experiment. however as i said they must fit in with the tried and tested principles of wing chun, if not then wing chun wouldnt even be a martial art, it does have a core foundation. by all means if you think dancing is going to help you fught then go for it but you cant associate them with wing chun ebcuase they do NOT fit in with the principles, centreline etc. if they do not then they cant be wing chun. thank you

you posted this then stold caught you out by posting another post that you made...... DokterVet: Yeah, that seems like the only option. But we are taught to look over the principles and theories real well before we decide to do something that kind of goes against them. TJS: I never said it was impossible. I said if you try and nlock a real boxing hook wrist to wrist you are still going to get punched somewhere in the head. so its clear for all to see how blatantly you contradicted yourself. and look at you how your trying to change the subject and go on about how im 'frustrated' you were just trying to be funny, you knew you messed up you were just trying to bring the attention away from yourself. so now you can admit you got caught out.

lol, TJS u ot done haaaaaarrrrd. stold caught u out so badly. u directly contradicted urself so blatantly. anywaystold, i find the boxing hook quite nice actually, since ur a fellow wing chunner ull understand my terminology, IM me if u wnat any more information. ok now remembr a boxing hook is like a normal hook but obviously but swifter and better executed, u just have to keep with the principles. as he throws the hook, lets say a right hook, turn your whole body, rotating at the hip and let your left hand shoot out into tan sao, remmeber not to lock out the elbow. now one thing which all thes epeople are saying wrong even the wing chun guy, they are saying meet the arm here, or meet it at the wrist or whatever, dont meet the arm.....let the arm meet you. that is the wing chun way, your tan sao should be solid, maybe a little higher or lower but make sure it shoots out protecting your face, he either will miss or he will hit ur tan, in which case its all good because tan sao will not collapse. make sure tho that you do turn ur hip and your footwork is correct to eliminate the threat of getting hit at all. alos remember your right hand should have also shot out into a punch aswell and from there its easy to follow up, punch-chan sao-fak sao......whatever you want. anymore trouble let me know.

good arguement martial artist but then again i said it could happen. but i still reckon it unlikely i bet far more people in this thread of forum have ended fights with fists though. i know what you mean about limitations tho, you should try to have the right skills to handle any type of situation, you should have ur main way of fighting but should also have other skills that enable you to survive if another sort of situation does arrive. however there still is now doubt that is is better to punch, i love kicks (high) aswell but how sure can you be with a kick compared to a punch? come on you can so easily be taken care of with high kicks, esspcially if the opponent has any sort of training whatsoever. you sacrifice balance and the risk if you get caught out are tremendous you are finished. also i doubt those 3 men in the parking lot were the most fastest and dangerous of men, they must have been slow drunk and stupid and weak and dont even try saying they were dangerous, how can the other two just standf back allowing you to kick one at a time, if they ahd anysense they would have pounced on you while you were throwing the first kick, as for the others well you were lucky and i bet you had loads of space, but still i respect that it is good to know how to kick.

i dunno, the thing is if your doing it for practical self defense i really reckon 60:40 to punches is the best. u are most likely going to punch in a real fight and i would rather be better of knowing punches than kicks, you can slowly bring up your kicking knowledge and you wouldnt be in too much danger if u got into trouble but not knowing how to use your hands could prove to be a problem. high kicks yeah you cant discount them, they can do the job but then so can theadbutting the guy in his groin, in theory, but really theese comments are so stupid, they canw ork but they are not gonan ahppen, its is so impractical to do that in the middle of a big ruckus. the only high kick i see as having a value which may be likely to come to use is a nailing staright kick or super kick or wotever u wanna call it. like a straight punch going straight to the guys face thta could be useful. kicking itself as in ow kicking is very usefula nd should be trained.

our stance is a training strance, as someone mentioned b 4 it help condition our legs and helps us to better understand the concepts such as triangulation and centre line. it is a training stance so we wouldnt fight on the street in it.