Wing Tsun vs...

[elbows_and_knees]

From what I hear, anything involving wong kiew kit is questionable... I can't view those clips for some reason, but several grappler acquantances of mine mentioned that page a while back and shot the clips full of holes because the person he was defending against had horrible technique.

I don't know any northern or southern mantis guys who have grappling inherently in their curriculum. Heck, they can't even trace shuai chiao throws, even though some people say they are in the system. They say there are 8 SC throws, but it's funny that nobody I know can name what they are...

[Traditional-Fist]

...but several grappler acquantances of mine mentioned that page a while back and shot the clips full of holes because the person he was defending against had horrible technique

The question was wether there was any ground fighting/grappling in Kung Fu and the answer to that question is an obvious YES. Wether it is as good or better than other grappling arts/techniques is irrelevant. That is another discussion for another thread. It is also irrelevant what some acquantances thought of its validity based on what they saw in the video clips. Furthermore their opinions could be subjective. The original question was regarding the existance of groundfighting training in kung fu and not anything else. That question HAS been answered.

I don't know any northern or southern mantis guys who have grappling inherently in their curriculum. Heck, they can't even trace shuai chiao throws, even though some people say they are in the system. They say there are 8 SC throws, but it's funny that nobody I know can name what they are...

There IS grappling in the Seven Star Nothern Mantis and probably in other branches as well. As far as Southern Mantis is concerned, it is possible, but I just don´t know. In Wing Chun it exists, at least in some mainland chinese lineages.

The problem, yet again, is the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom. There are some bad ones there are some not so bad ones. There are even some that are considered good when compared to what is available. What they all have in common is that they teach an incomplete kung fu. This, in the long term, helps create a general opinion of what is or is not kung fu, or what constitutes kung fu. That is, it influences public opinion about this great art, based on what is taught by sharlatans or at best mediocre teachers. Ironically when real information does appear about kung fu, many MA people seem to find it "questionable".

[elbows_and_knees]

The question was wether there was any ground fighting/grappling in Kung Fu and the answer to that question is an obvious YES. Wether it is as good or better than other grappling arts/techniques is irrelevant. That is another discussion for another thread. It is also irrelevant what some acquantances thought of its validity based on what they saw in the video clips. Furthermore their opinions could be subjective. The original question was regarding the existance of groundfighting training in kung fu and not anything else. That question HAS been answered.

you miss my point. The guy doing the takedown was SUPPOSED to be a grappler. But he couldn't have been, from the technique they say was displayed. You can't effectively train against takedowns if you aren't training with someone who can even do a proper takedown. Consequently, the question has not been answered.

The problem, yet again, is the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom. There are some bad ones there are some not so bad ones. There are even some that are considered good when compared to what is available. What they all have in common is that they teach an incomplete kung fu. This, in the long term, helps create a general opinion of what is or is not kung fu, or what constitutes kung fu. That is, it influences public opinion about this great art, based on what is taught by sharlatans or at best mediocre teachers. Ironically when real information does appear about kung fu, many MA people seem to find it "questionable".

No, but when it suddnely appears out of nowhere, yes it will be questioned, as has been constantly illustrated with the example of the existence of ground grappling in kung fu.

[Traditional-Fist]

you miss my point. The guy doing the takedown was SUPPOSED to be a grappler. But he couldn't have been, from the technique they say was displayed. You can't effectively train against takedowns if you aren't training with someone who can even do a proper takedown. Consequently, the question has not been answered.

An art that teaches defense against grappling attacks and ground grappling will also teach proper takedowns, independent of opinions made over the video clips. Are you now disputing the existance of "proper" takedown techniques in shaolin kung fu?

No, but when it suddnely appears out of nowhere, yes it will be questioned, as has been constantly illustrated with the example of the existence of ground grappling in kung fu.

Ground Grappling has existed in kung fu for a long, long time. Remember that the development of kung fu was an ongoing research in the Shaolin Temple with the ultimate aim of perfecting a COMPLETE and effective martial art system independent of cultural taboos (ground fighting, killing etc.). The fact that this and other facts are "questionable" has more to do with the quality of instructions available nowadays than anything else.

[elbows_and_knees]

An art that teaches defense against grappling attacks and ground grappling will also teach proper takedowns, independent of opinions made over the video clips. Are you now disputing the existance of "proper" takedown techniques in shaolin kung fu?

wrestling style takedowns, yes. Ground grappling, yes. And the fact that they do have some takedowns and throws is irrelevant if you aren't training them regularly. This will vary from school to school and lineage to lineage.

Ground Grappling has existed in kung fu for a long, long time. Remember that the development of kung fu was an ongoing research in the Shaolin Temple with the ultimate aim of perfecting a COMPLETE and effective martial art system independent of cultural taboos (ground fighting, killing etc.). The fact that this and other facts are "questionable" has more to do with the quality of instructions available nowadays than anything else.

From what it evidenced, it was not developed independently of social taboos. Killing was par for the course. Challenges and such happened - those were the times they lived in. Fighting on the ground was frowned upon. Such were the times they lived in. I will readily admit that most styles have ground fighting - striking from the ground to enable them to get up, or to disable from the ground - but this is not the same as ground grappling.

[Traditional-Fist]

wrestling style takedowns, yes. Ground grappling, yes.

As I have stated countless times before. In the mainland chinese lineage of Wing Chun that I practise GROUND GRAPPLING is taught as part of the WC curriculum based on its own distinct concepts and methodology. Furthermore, I have come across another WC stylist in another forum who has been practising WC grappling in his WC school since the 1980´s, well before the popularity of BJJ. And guess what, his school practises a mainland chinese lineage of Wing Chun.

And the fact that they do have some takedowns and throws is irrelevant if you aren't training them regularly.

First of all, they have a lot more than "some" takedowns and throws, a lot more than many martial artists realize.

Secondly, some schools will train them regularly and some won´t. I am sure that the worse amongst the McKwoons, such great "references" for kung fu nowadays, won´t even know that they exist, let alone practise it regularly. However, all good schools (the relatively very few) will practise it regularly.

This will vary from school to school and lineage to lineage.

Agreed. Good schools will practise it regularly, just like they would all the important aspects of their art, and the bad schools won´t.

Ground Grappling has existed in kung fu for a long, long time. Remember that the development of kung fu was an ongoing research in the Shaolin Temple with the ultimate aim of perfecting a COMPLETE and effective martial art system independent of cultural taboos (ground fighting, killing etc.). The fact that this and other facts are "questionable" has more to do with the quality of instructions available nowadays than anything else.

What I say here stands.

From what it evidenced, it was not developed independently of social taboos. Killing was par for the course. Challenges and such happened - those were the times they lived in. Fighting on the ground was frowned upon. Such were the times they lived in.

The religion/philosophy of the Shaolin Temple, i.e. Buddhism, the biggest no, no or sin was the taking of life. It is something that is more than frowned upon. For them it can inhibit the development of ones eternal soul or spirit. YET, they did practise and develope killing techniques up to such a level that even today, some of those methods are not completely understood by most of the, shall we say, the "outside" martial arts experts. Why develope such perfection in something that was such a taboo area? Well because they were perfecting a martial art. They even based them on other creatures, some of which also grappled. E.g. The praying mantis, the monkey, etc.

I will readily admit that most styles have ground fighting - striking from the ground to enable them to get up, or to disable from the ground - but this is not the same as ground grappling.

You are right. Because of certain striking methods, a kung fu stylist can deliver telling blows even from the ground. However, There IS ground grappling in kung fu. I know of its existance through my own research and as I have mentioned many times before, it is part of my school´s mainland chinese Wing Chun curriculum, taught at the latter stages of Chum Kiu. Yes it does have ground striking incorporated as well as the ground grappling, which includes the use of Chin-na techniques.

[Kajukenbopr]

I think if you take a Wing Chun guy and put him to train in full contact, he has a good chance of beating a muay thai guy.

the training most people see are not as complete as people would like it to be for a full contact match since a lot of Wing Chun hits are a seris of hits that include finger strikes to the face, neck and other areas, which you probably wont try against ur sparring partner

I have tried switching some of those strikes with punches and gotten great results specially when fighting against someone taller and heavier than me.

Also, I think people here misjudge WC by what they've seen and not what they've tried. WC is not as limited as you may think...

[EternalRage]

I think if you take a Wing Chun guy and put him to train in full contact, he has a good chance of beating a muay thai guy.

the training most people see are not as complete as people would like it to be for a full contact match since a lot of Wing Chun hits are a seris of hits that include finger strikes to the face, neck and other areas, which you probably wont try against ur sparring partner

The problem with the "deadly strikes in WC" argument is that yes, muay thai do not practice these things. Neither does WC, at least not against a fully resisting opponent where you can execute these techniques with proper power, accuracy, and contact. Most WC schools (I say this from first hand experience) do point of contact drills where they stop strikes like the bil jee before hitting their partner's eye.

The way you train is the way you fight. They train this way, with incorrect distance, timing, and without practice of true target accuracty, that is the way they will execute them. In fact, the practice of this can potentially lead to such bad distance/accuracy habits that perhaps a MT fighter who HASN'T done drills like this may do them better in a real confrontation than a WC fighter who has practiced jabbing the air in front of their partner's eyes.

On the flip side, I have heard of WC schools putting on goggles and jabbing eyes for real, which is far better than the alternative of striking air, but these are few and far in between.

[EternalRage]

Also, probably reiterating this, but style vs style comparisons are useless. Too many people these days crosstrain and have varying real life experiences and also competition experiences. Hence styles can end up encompassing a wide array of practitioners, from well rounded cross training competition seasoned fighters to the narrowminded newbie.

Can't compare anymore, it is all on the individual. How hard you train, how conditioned you are, how much resistance you have in sparring, how much crosstraining you do to counter inherent weaknesses in your style and your own physical attributes.

[Kajukenbopr]

I think if you take a Wing Chun guy and put him to train in full contact, he has a good chance of beating a muay thai guy.

the training most people see are not as complete as people would like it to be for a full contact match since a lot of Wing Chun hits are a seris of hits that include finger strikes to the face, neck and other areas, which you probably wont try against ur sparring partner

The problem with the "deadly strikes in WC" argument is that yes, muay thai do not practice these things. Neither does WC, at least not against a fully resisting opponent where you can execute these techniques with proper power, accuracy, and contact. Most WC schools (I say this from first hand experience) do point of contact drills where they stop strikes like the bil jee before hitting their partner's eye.

The way you train is the way you fight. They train this way, with incorrect distance, timing, and without practice of true target accuracty, that is the way they will execute them. In fact, the practice of this can potentially lead to such bad distance/accuracy habits that perhaps a MT fighter who HASN'T done drills like this may do them better in a real confrontation than a WC fighter who has practiced jabbing the air in front of their partner's eyes.

On the flip side, I have heard of WC schools putting on goggles and jabbing eyes for real, which is far better than the alternative of striking air, but these are few and far in between.

the eye gouge is one of the few strikes you cant use on an unprotected face of your partner/friend, however, WC has a lot of strikes to the body, the face is mostly used as a distraction.

With some good training, a WC guy could be able to stand up(I did say stand up, I did not say beat- that depends on the person) to a MT guy.

Remember it is not all about power, accuracy and speed is better by far- its not the same to kick someone's upper arm as kicking someone's elbow -