Does Wing Chun fail against boxing most of the times?

I remember seeing a video of two wing chunky "masters" who got into a fight and nobody won. The only loser was Wing Chun.

 

Cheung v emin by any chance..lots of scuffling and falling to the floor?

One of those guys was the self proclaimed best fighter in wing cbun, the other 300 street fights and publicly challenged the Gracie's

And this is what happened when the feared masters met

 

The interesting thing about that video- which I saw years ago but completely forgot about- is that any first year judoka or high school wrestler would absolutely have their way with either of those guys.

I recently saw a Silat fight on another forum that was of the same quality. Two guys swinging sloppy, slappy punches until they get stuck in a school yard headlock for some minutes.

For me these kinds of things are a testament to the fact that you can’t learn the martial aspect of a martial art without serious pressure testing.

And- to try to weed out personal bias- I feel this is true to the places I train as well. Some people go to judo class to work their throws but tend to duck out when it comes time for Randori. Same with BJJ and rolling.

And in the karate dojo I’ve been training at some people stick to kata but don’t spar. Or some people only work point fighting but never put the bigger gloves on and see what happens when the red doesn’t stop things on first (often very light) contact.

If you’ve never performed under full pressure I don’t see you magically pulling it out when the time comes. I mean, this is almost universally true of people during their first competition. Why would it be different otherwise?

 

That would never have happened to Master Wong

 

The advantage a judoka, bjj guy or kick boxer has is even if they never spar or randori they are at least drilling proven techniques and good mechanics

If you are never drilling good techniques to start with you have no where to go but down, even if you do some form of pressure testing its against guys with equally bad techniques

 

I agree with this. But I also think, even if you’ve drilled good technique to perfection, the first time you hit a pressure situation most if not all of it goes out the window with an adrenaline dump.

Used to see it all the time in judo. Someone could have a couple really slick throws locked down, but in their first competition they’re all stiff arms and trying to muscle everything. Just human nature.

 

I think icefield makes a good point. On a related note, I’ve often found that emphasising technical padwork improves my sparring even more than emphasising sparring in training.

That said, I agree with BR that you need some pressure testing too.

 

That's another point I made to another WC instructor recently when he pointed out that he trains his guys to work against non-wing chun techniques because he's a BJJ blue belt and pops in to Muay Thai. If your stock of people to train with and against aren't competent fighters, the fact that you spar isn't a huge boon. If no one can pull off a good double in your school, even if you spar, good luck doing that against an actual wrestler.

 

Oh I agree but they although scruffy and muscled are starting with good technique and downgrading as pressure levels go up

If you started from a downgraded position even before pressure is added where do you go?

 

Systema? ;-)

 

Remember, I've interacted with plenty of Wing Chun people, and I loved them all. Some of them were real boxers.

Is a gross generalizations something that I don't agree with, or we shouldn't agree with?

 

Its not a gross generalisation when it's taught ad one of the arts main principles and pushed by its most senior teachers

It's really not

 

Wing Chun is one big happy school that agrees with each other? That's news to me. They seem to fight with each other a lot online compared to other arts. I don't think senior teachers are exempt from making gross generalizations, either.

What do you mean by "it's"? Pronouns are hard to figure out sometimes.

 

Actually on the main principles of the style they do, centerline economy of motion, scientific rational etc they all use those terms even if one lineage does it differently from others ...William cheung springs to mind.

But every single school uses centerline straight line etc how they train it is a different thing but if you have found one that doesn't follow centerline thinking economy of motion and so on please please post it! Some mainland versions are different but yip man is pretty much uniform across all masters

 

Attitudes like this are also why wing chun fails a fair bit
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1429

...ok

OK

okkkkk

 

That’s an incredibly depressing read. If ever there was an illustration of why CMA need to move with times, this article was it.

 

That article was hilarious.

 

Cant decide which is worse: the article or the baseball cap and gi combination.

 

Well, if the author of that article has all of the answers he should have no problem demonstrating them against a resisting opponent to clear up all of our collective misconceptions.

 

The Kung Fu magazine article received a positive response on another forum

I suppose you’d expect a positive response on a kung fu forum. However, why do people still think that spending ages holding a static stance is better than dynamic exercises like squats? Sports science has moved on since the 6th century!