Does Wing Chun fail against boxing most of the times?

In this video, we can see a fight between a boxer and a wing chun guy. It seems as if the boxer didn't even take the fight seriously:

 

All other factors being equal, I’d agree that boxing would generally beat wing chun. (I’ve cross-trained in both.)

Boxing works well under pressure. Whereas wing chun’s trapping relies on fine motor skills and sensitivity, which don’t work well under adrenal stress.

 

Speaking of trapping, I'm not sure whether or not it is a bit hard to trap with the gloves the wing chun guy wore

 

The reason I created the thread is because I notice certain people rumor that Wing Chun supposedly doesn't work against boxing all over the internet ( on youtube videos comments, in other forums, etc ). And thus, I'd like to know whether that is true or not.

 

Personally, I found wing chun highly impractical. YMMV, but I reckon it’s easier to find a good boxing club than a good wing chun club.

If only David Haye had practised more forms in preparation for the fight

 

The guy speaking on the video I posted says that one of the wing chun guy's mistakes was using certain wing chun moves at the wrong time...

 

He looks like he had zero exposure to actual pressure from a competent fighter.

Win or lose the guy's structure, footwork, distancing, timing and strategy looked like he'd never had a fight in his life.

If you can get to master level in an art and move like that then I'd say there is a systemic problem, either in the art, org, school or all of the above.

 

When one person loses to another but there are plenty of examples of that persons art doing well in similar situations we can safely say its the person doing badly or having a bad day

If the art can't produce many clips of itself working then its not the person its the art.

That is just plain common sense wishing it was otherwise because your art includes parts of the art in question doesn't make it so

 

You fight like you train. Not many recreational martial arts schools keeping up with the sparring and hard work of boxing.

 

Supportive like you were with Matt F's videos?

There is a thread going on right now where people are sharing their favourite kata and forms, and no-one has said anything negative in it: Post a video of your favorite form from your style

I don't really care about vs. videos, because the TMA that loses will always find a million reasons why the loser "wasn't doing it right". Might have been fun the first few dozen times but hundreds later it's boring and obvious. But this thread started as a question, and people who have experience in both systems have given their honest opinion about the comparison. I don't get what is so bad about that.

Sometimes it is appropriate to judge a system purely by its own standards, and I think MAP members are generally good at being respectful of that. I also think it's appropriate and acceptable for people to give an honest opinion when a member is asking a question. It sounds like you are advocating some kind of "safe space", where people are not allowed to share their bad experiences with systems in response to a question.

 

That made me laugh thanks!!

 

Shots fired.

Where is he anyway? I like anyone who posts videos. Would like to see more videos. Moriks log is absolutely bangin'.

 

I'm not looking for a fight. just thought it was a bit pot/kettle.

 

I was just trying to answer thegoodguy’s question, since I happen to have cross-trained in both boxing and wing chun.

Please can we stop shooting? I haven’t mastered my taiji form for gun disarms yet

 

Maybe wing chun in the traditional way it is difficult to make it work in a fight with full resisting opponents ( either on the street or on full contact competition fights ). Perhaps if some adjustments ( to adapt it to our current time ) are made it might work better.

So, how can I know whether a particular wing chun school or dojo has a more realistic approach ( because many people all over the internet argue that most of wing chuns moves or techniques are difficult to make them work in a real fight ) in its training?

 

Without knowing a thing about Wing Chun, and a little about boxing, I both agree and disagree with parts of the video breakdown. Timing, footwork, distance, OK USA, you have me. When the guy starts talking about "widespread belief among the Wing Chun community" it sounds like stereotyping, which often means the reviewer has no personal experience with the art (or whatever they're generalizing about). I haven't seen this channel before, maybe they are Wing Chun people criticizing themselves, but it's important to be careful when saying "all" or "most" about a particular subgroup. Boxers have a history of being considering unintelligent. MMA fighters are labeled by some as all brutal monsters. The "Fight Science" channel host is ignoring a basic rule of observation, avoid making grand generalizations. An errant generalization today is a thousand specific errors to fix tomorrow.

It's not nearly as helpful as eliminating all that discourse and focusing on the dynamics of the one fight, which are as simple as 1 guy got his face pummeled and it was because he decided to make a fight with a boxer his first experience fighting a boxer. Even I am not that stupid.

That said, this video would have a lot more weight if it came from someone inside the Wing Chun community. Otherwise, it's nothing more than one person's opine about a particular fight, that attempts to make universal generalizations about what must be millions of peoples and centuries of history.

 

Observing prevailing and pervasive ideologies within a community of people doesn't strike me as being an especially erroneous statement or breaking any fundamental rules of analytical thought.

And yes, he is a chunner.