Is Wing Chun completely useless in an MMA setting?

[GrahamB]

Good article:

http://fightland.vice.com/blog/wing-chu ... the-center

I find this quote really interesting:

"The principles which Wing Chun is built on are sound as a pound, it is taking the style as a complete system which is dangerous."

...Because, that's the exact opposite of the position you hear from any traditionalist! (Especially on this board, but more so in days gone past) that not knowing the 'whole system' (or being "orthodox") is the problem

[dspyrido]

The problem is not in wc. The problem is with anyone who claims a system is truly complete. There is no such thing as a complete system because it signals an end point insular view on learning.

After all how many "pure" boxing, karate, mt, bjj, wrestling or any stylists exist in mma today? Even cma evolved and grew by exchanging, testing and cross training well before the acronym mma existed.

[GrahamB]

There's a few other good quotes in that article, especially:

"Challenge matches pretty much a stupid affair—you essentially have two men taking pride in refusing to broaden their horizons."

[Ba-men]

Whoa.... CAN YOU SMELL WHAT THE ROCK"S GOT COOKING!?

nice thread... where is my popcorn... think I'll pull up seat.

Edit" I don't think Wing Chun is useless at all. (as I've said before Imo so many spend too much time on sensitivity drills and not enough on general fight skills.. Also IMO WC was designed for crowded walkways or confined spaces/alleyways. (As so many southern fist were designed to be) Putting it in an Octagon is stretching the system's design.

Instead of a caged octagon... How about a 3 foot wide caged hallway/alleyway... Hmmm? (now there is something to think about... seems WC and other Southern fists would be seen in a different light ay?)

Ever notice on the internet when MMA guys slags WC(or other CTMA) if/when they ever do meet in the ring.... the MMA guy never tries to measure and weigh WC( or the TCMA he was slagging ) but instead... takes it right to the ground. What's up with that? Seems to me if your calling something shit... you should demonstrate it's shit!

Right?

[Bill]

Wrong.

If I'm an MMA guy and I consistently take you down and beat you up then I have proved what you're doing is worth little.

[yeniseri]

MMA requires a high grappling level with finishing moves as in BJJ, immobilizations or a knockout! WIng Chun does not fit the bill unless the practitioner has similar box of such under his belt.
Isn't the skill set obvious through objective criteria? Just sayin"!

[Ian]

I disagree with the whole article.

It's not the movements that make wing chun useful or useless. It's the fact that the wing chun community doesn't have national or international competition circuits, hence no clear goals and large stables of adversaries against which to prove and improve one's own practice.

Showing clips of boxing, muay thai, combat sambo, and mma using techniques which look vaguely wing chun-like does nothing to prove wing chun's efficacy. Even if everyone's using the same techniques, the wing chun practitioners and sport fighters are using different training methods and are immersed in different environments, with respectively different philosophies, core beliefs, attitudes, and levels of competitiveness.

Even the analysis is wrong:

In Muay Thai hand traps gain more importance each year. Muangthai PK Saenchai, 2014's Fighter of the Year, looks nothing like a kickboxer—instead stepping in with his hands over his opponents and landing knees.

Hands fighting is classic muay thai. Checking or stuffing a strike is classic boxing.

[Ba-men]

Wrong.

If I'm an MMA guy and I consistently take you down and beat you up then I have proved what you're doing is worth little.

I understand your logic Bill... but isn't how your looking at it more from a certain perspective?
So using that logic.. (you might agree with this logic... IDK)

If MMA guy tries to take you down and beat you up and you consistently pull your knife and make a mess of them... then what MMA guy is doing is worth little... right?

or even with less ambition or hassle ... you consistently pull you 9mm, 10mm or 45acp and put a hole in them the size of a basket ball... then what's MMA guy is doing is worth little.... right?


The two example given are actually what happens away from a sporting venue everyday... In my view MMA BJJ & WC and any other MA... are kinda recreational endeavors.. I lump then all together. One can designed a venue where WC has the advantage (as the example given above) instead of the MMA guy... or any art.

[GrahamB]

Ian, I'd agree what when he's talking about "hand trapping" and using examples from MMA fights, what the fighters are doing is nothing like the "hand trapping" of Wing Chun - however it's still 'hand trapping' so I don't know if that's just splitting hairs or not.

[MaartenSFS]

This is exactly what I was talking about in the gloves thread. The problem is that these people simply never learned how to use their art to fight. Chishou and Tuishou, etc. are not fighting. Slapping each other around at low intensities is totally different than hard sparring with someone that wants to punch you really hard in the face and doesn't care if he's trapped your hands or not. I've fought some WC chaps here and had some good bouts with them. Wouldn't take them all so lightly..

[Ian]

Graham, no doubt hand fighting / grip fighting / trapping / bridging / sticky hands / spinning hands / whatever hands has its place in MMA... but using classic muay thai hand ties to show that wing chun works is kind of silly. Or just because Emelianenko threw an overhand right and it cleared Zuluzinho's forearm, that doesn't legitimize iliqchuan or wing chun or white crane or any other forearm to forearm style.

Again, the movements are inconsequential as similar movements can be found in most styles; humans are fantastic pattern recognition machines. The important stuff is how you learn, what you focus on, what problems you're given to solve, the learning environment. For example, the average wing chun practitioner will not learn how to hold his center and strike with short power (a wing chun man's bread and butter) while a nak muay's clinching him and throwing KO knees, as well as a nak muay would. Both are in their technical and tactical comfort zones, but one will come out on top 9 times out of 10, for obvious reasons.

The important stuff is not "we have fuk sau in our style. Look, Machida used fuk sau in that fight", nor even "we emphasize taking the center in wing chun. See? [Favorite fighter] is taking the guy's center".

Just my opinion.

[Bao]

What I would like to know is if MMA is completely useless for chisao against a skilled Wing Chun practitioner.

[GrahamB]

Ian,

I think how you train it is up to you, isn't it? If a Wing Chun person wanted to ruck with MMA/Muay Thai chaps on a regular basis, it's entirely possible in the modern world - most modern western cites have both styles available. I think that's entirely up to the individual.

I think you can address the content of different styles as discrete entities.

[Ian]

Graham, I think you've misunderstood. If a wing chun guy wanted to train regularly in an MMA format, he'd improve a lot faster, and gain a deeper understanding of his style. If an MMA guy borrowed from wing chun to add to his arsenal, that'd be cool too. I'm all for it.

What I disagree with is this article, like so many analysis articles, assumes that techniques and individual movements are the key. They're just a fraction of the problem. The same ne waza exist in traditional jj and bjj. The same kicking techniques exist in muay thai and some karate. You could argue that all of boxing's repertoire exists in a taiji form. Do you see my point?

[GrahamB]

Yes, I see your point, but my point is that the article can still stand on its own - there's validity to comparing techniques, if for nothing else then interests sake. Perhaps it's an issue of the article's title not matching the content?