Kung Fu Grappling

[shogeri]

kudos kzshin...lol

[Traditional-Fist]

I'd love to ask you for more detail about your wing chun training but i gather that on these forums, such questioning isn't always appreciated. In any case, you have stated that you've only ever seen it; as in, you don't actually know what it is that they were doing so me asking for more detail probably wouldn't get me much.

And I know what it is it is. It is Wing Chun grappling - using WC concepts and methods - as taught by my sifu and it is a part of our Wing Chun (written) syllabus and is studied during the latter stages of Chum Kiu. It is right now VERY obvious that many other schools and lineages of Wing Chun do not teach it and that is a pity because this aspect makes this art an even more formidable system than it already is.

[Traditional-Fist]

Ground fighting DOES exist in kung fu that is a fact. Another fact is that chin-na techniques ARE applicable to ground fighting. That of course depends on the depth of one's knowledge as well as style and school/instructor.

they CAN be applied, but many of the techniques can NOT be directly applied. This is obviously because of the different dimensions involved between standing and being on the ground. The techniques need to be modified in order for them to work, as that's not what they were intended for. Fighting on the ground goes against CMA mentality.

I practise a lineage of Wing Chun (mainland China) that teaches grappling based on Wing Chun's own theories and concepts i.e. Wing Chun grappling. Many people do not know that it exists and some of them, when told that it exists seem to go into some kind of denial. But it does exist and it is taught at the later stages of Chium Kiu level. I had to move before I got to the advanced stages of Chum Kiu and my current instructor does not teach it. However I did see advanced students practising it in my first school. Ground fighting also exists in Northern Praying Mantis and I suspect in a few other major Shaolin styles.

ground grappling in mantis is not from mantis. There may be some schools who have integrated it today (which is great), but it is not indigenous to mantis. This goes against their mentality as well. I know several that will dispute it's original existence in WC as well. It was incorporated later. the fact that a few schools do it does not make it a part of the system. It just means that those few schools took the time to look into applying their art to the ground... Notice you said ground fighting, however. This would imply striking and is different from grappling on the ground. this topic is about ground grappling in kung fu...

The sol object, at least in the Wing Chun grappling, is not to make the opponent tap out, eventhough that is also one possibility by using chin-na techniques to immobilise him. Alternatively the WC fighter will defend himself and use telling ground strikes to finish his opponent, and by this I don't mean mounting his opponent and trying to connect with his covered face for half an hour, I mean one or two well aimed strikes. For those to work other aspects of kung fu training have to be present i.e. (real) iron palm, etc.

you have just stated the very purpose for using bjj on the street. You have also stated what we have been saying - most kung fu ground work is striking based. ALL kung fu styles likely have that in some form. That, however, is not ground grappling.

Ground grappling in the street is NOT for making people "tap out". I'm sure you realize that it takes much more time to tap someone out than it does to break his limb, choke him out, etc. Why? pressure. If we are in a competition, I will apply pressure slowly and with control, so you have a chance to tap before I hurt you. In the street, this is not the case. At the club I bounce at, I have choke people out - takes about three to five seconds. In competition you don't actually want to choke the person, so you do it slower.

EDIT: I just read ovine's post and noticed he explained the mentality I mentioned. He also mentioned the different dimensions between grappling standing and on the ground.

As pointed out in a previous post. Killing is against Shaolin/Buddhist principles yet it is taught, because the temples dedicated themselves in perfecting the various styles of kung fu as a martial art and this unfortunately involves using techniques that can kill.

Killing techniques are part and parcel of any effective martial art as is ground fighting and grappling which exists in Shaolin Kung Fu, and yes even in some Wing Chun and Northern Praying Mantis schools/lineages.

For further relevant information please click here:

https://www.wongkk.com/video-clips/wrestling/overview.html

[ovine king]

It is right now VERY obvious that many other schools and lineages of Wing Chun do not teach it.

Is it?

The big point that i think you have missed, is that fighting whilst on the ground, IS taught except that other wing chun people don't go around proclaiming it to be PROPER ground fighting, nor do we go around saying that it is on the same level as a full on ground-fighting/grappling art. Even you have gone as far to say that the ground fighting that you practice, is on one level, how to hit someone whilst one or both of you are on the floor. Correct me if I'm wrong but don't all wing chun styles teach you how to continue the fight once:

i) opponent is on the floor

ii) you are on the floor?

In fact, all martial arts should be teaching these stages of fighting and this is the crux of the debate.

It isn't that these elements aren't there in the system, it is that in most cases, these stages aren't taught purely because of the incorrect assumption that once one of you is on the floor, the fight is over. The two biggest and most prominant examples is the tai chi puch hands game and the wing chun chi sau game. Look at the competitions of these and you'll see that the situation gets worse. If we apply your logic to what we see in these games, then we can say that both tai chi and wing chun don't actually contain striking.

You seem to imply that just because you can apply chin-na in wing chun makes wing chun grappling. Only thing you have missed is that chin-na is a seperate entity. If you are doing chin-na locks and stuff during wing chun, you are doing just that. It is chin-na, not wing chun. Granted that there are certain locks and controls and throws that seem to flow more easily during certain movements but that doesn't mean much. Within the core forms of wing chun itself, there are less than 10 arm controls/locks/throws and even then, these are secondary techniques to the initial contact.

Again, I'll point out the title of this thread is grappling.

Show me a wing chun person that has grappling aspart of their syllabus and I'll show you a person who has cross-trained outside of wing chun.

[Traditional-Fist]

Is it?

Yes it is. Based on this same ongoing discussion/argument that has been going on, in one form or another for many months. If it was so common then there would not be an argument would there?

The big point that i think you have missed, is that fighting whilst on the ground, IS taught except that other wing chun people don't go around proclaiming it to be PROPER ground fighting,

And that is because....the REAL big point missed here is what I said before, and that is that there GROUND FIGHTING AND GRAPPLING techniques do not seem to be present in many other Wing Chun lineages/schools.

nor do we go around saying that it is on the same level as a full on ground-fighting/grappling art.

It EXISTS, wether it is on the same level as other grappling arts can be discussed and argued until the cows come home. That is not the argument. It exists but many schools don't teach it as I suspect is the case with Shaolin Kung Fu which supposedly has no ground fighting either. Please see the link provided in my previous post.

Even you have gone as far to say that the ground fighting that you practice, is on one level, how to hit someone whilst one or both of you are on the floor.

Yes and in another level it is grappling and immobilisation of the opponent using techniques based on Wing Chun concepts. I.e. ground fighting/grappling. Hitting the opponent when you yourself are also on the ground gives Wing Chun the added advantage over pure grappling arts.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't all wing chun styles teach you how to continue the fight once:

i) opponent is on the floor

ii) you are on the floor?

I don't know if ALL WC styles teach that nowadays, but of course they should, but I am not talking about just fighting when you are on the floor, I am talking about using ground fighting/grappling techniques based on Wing Chun concepts and methods when BOTH fighters are on the ground and where it is required that the opponent is subdued through Wing Chun ground fighting techniques. I.e. No getting up before your opponent and striking him while he is still down nor resuming combat from stand- up position.

In fact, all martial arts should be teaching these stages of fighting and this is the crux of the debate.

All REAL martial arts do.

It isn't that these elements aren't there in the system, it is that in most cases, these stages aren't taught purely because of the incorrect assumption that once one of you is on the floor, the fight is over.

Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

The two biggest and most prominant examples is the tai chi puch hands game and the wing chun chi sau game. Look at the competitions of these and you'll see that the situation gets worse. If we apply your logic to what we see in these games, then we can say that both tai chi and wing chun don't actually contain striking.

Most people who practise or at least know about these two great arts know that chi sao and pushhands are not real fighting. As you know, there have been huge discussions in this same forum over wether there is ground/grappling in Wing Chun or at least in some lineages. These discussions came into being because everyone concerned knew that the ground fighting techniques in the discussion did not refer to finishing your opponent when they are on the ground or hitting him when you are on the ground with him. The grappling discussed went far deeper than that, and that is what created the controversy, as otherwise there wouldn't have been any point in discussing the obvious.

You seem to imply that just because you can apply chin-na in wing chun makes wing chun grappling.

I did not imply nor say that Wing Chun is a grappling art. I said that there is ground grappling (and standup) in the lineage of Wing Chun that I practise and that it does not seem to be so in most other lineages - mostly based on what I have heard in this forum and others.

Only thing you have missed is that chin-na is a seperate entity. If you are doing chin-na locks and stuff during wing chun, you are doing just that. It is chin-na, not wing chun.

You could make the same statements about Iron Palm training, does that mean that Wing Chun fighters cannot break bones with their punches? Of course it doesn't. Obviously some lineages and schools will stress Iron Palm more and others less. I am sure that you know that each kung fu style adapts Chin-na and Iron Palm to fit within its own individual concepts and methods. E.g. Tiger Claw Iron Palm training will stress different aspects to that of Wing Chun, hence identifying their methods as Tiger Claw Iron Palm training as opposed to Wing Chun. The same is true when it comes to Chin-na.

Granted that there are certain locks and controls and throws that seem to flow more easily during certain movements but that doesn't mean much.

....and these, and OTHERS, are the ones that are adapted and become Wing Chun grappling.

Within the core forms of wing chun itself, there are less than 10 arm controls/locks/throws and even then, these are secondary techniques to the initial contact.

Of course they are, because Wing Chun is primarily a striking art, no one is disputing that, but its other aspects that include stand up and GROUND grappling which it seems some lineages have "lost".

Again, I'll point out the title of this thread is grappling.

Well I hope so because it seems like I've been typing about Wing Chun grappling for hours.

Show me a wing chun person that has grappling aspart of their syllabus and I'll show you a person who has cross-trained outside of wing chun.

I can actuall show you many wing chun people who cross-trained in grappling. It just proves my point that many lineages/schools do not teach grappling as part of their syllabus and hence and as it is apparent, many of them do not know that it exists.

Of course you also know that many Shaolin and Karate practitioners cross-train because they are not taught Shaolin and Karate grappling either in their respective schools and hence are not aware of its existance in their core arts. Of course we all know now that ground fighting does exist in Shaolin kung fu and most of us will know that it exists in the older karate styles.

Is it the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenon that is behind this? Well, I suspect that this does play a big part, but there are other significant reasons, but I think that I have written enough for now.

[shogeri]

The two biggest and most prominant examples is the tai chi puch hands game and the wing chun chi sau game.

When taiji push hands or wing chun chi sao are done as competitive or sport, it is actually not what those 'skill training' methods are for.

To me the top ranked master of Taijiquan (with emphasis on the quan part) does not push. They use pressure point fighting combined with taiji chin na, hao chuan, and various other centerline based fighting methods.

It (Taijiquan) is a striking art. The best striking art master would more than likely beat the best grappler, who only knows how to grapple. However, the striking art practitioner must take precautions to avoid getting locked up with a grappler.

Thus, they would have to avoid many throws, or locks, etc, even if they are integrated into their system.

If they practice some type of flowing combat, then perhaps they stand a chance.

However, if by chance the Taijiquan master goes down, and if their sensitivity to pressure (and qi) is so great, then they might have a chance against the best grappler.

However, eventually, I believe the grappler would win, assuming their endurance holds up.

Having practiced Okinawan Goju Ryu, I have realized that it has grappling in it, but it is Jujutsu based (Okinawan Tuite Jujutsu), and has influences from Chinese Kempo, which has Shui Chiao or Chin Na. Which are joint locking, strike-down, centerline, and throwing based systems. That is, 'standing grappling.'

One has to compliment their training.

In my view the average karateka, or kung fu practitioner would not hold up against a decent grappler who had good footwork, and avoided most strikes.

I read over and over than BJJ students or practitioners must learn an effective striking art. Just as I have heard that those who practice striking arts, must learn bjj, or take roman-greco wrestling along with judo in order to compliment their training as well.

No one method of fighting is THE method.

Because it takes a lifetime to master either striking or ground fighting (not ground striking), it is really hard to say one way or the other.

We can only theorize in regards to Masters. Since in my mind, all the great masters of the striking arts are fading fast or getting older, being replaced by those who do not fully grasp their system of Martial Art or methods of fighting. Or they simply see no need in going to the mat in order to prove what they do is sufficient in most cases.

To me, most fights go to the ground because someone (one or both) do not know how to strike effectively. That is, fight dynamically, and effortlessly. It takes a certain set of skills and training to strike efficiently, just as it does to do Jujutsu, judo, and or BJJ, etc.

However, if I had no skills, and I 'felt' the other person didn't either, then more than likely it would be a strike or two, and then a take down or strike down, followed by either grappling or banging their head on something, etc.