The Road to Wing Chun applied in Combat Sports

[AndyMaBobs]

On the bareknuckle boxing video, Thai's already do this in Kard cheuk fights:

 

[TheMaster]

This isn't really true either.

We didn't see high level muay thai fighters in MMA because MMA was illegal in Thailand for a long time. We do see more top level Thai's in MMA nowadays. Rambaa Somdet is the consensus best 115lb guy, which isn't an especially deep division, but what can you do with guys that small.

Now we see a handful of them in ONE FC, but at the moment Thailand is still coming up in MMA, the Thai's that are competing in MMA tend to be older. I don't know that Thailand will ever be a huge nation for MMA, but it's not a matter of muay thai not working.

Alistair Overeem, Matt Brown and Demetrious Johnson all made extensive use of muay thai style knees, elbows and sweeps in the clinch and used them to dominate opponents.

So basically it is true, but "Thais are too small,and MMA is not popular in Thailand so we haven't seen it yet".

We haven't seen high level MT guys from Europe or US make any impact.
Overeem yes, but considering MT is widely considered now as one of the 4 combat sport bases in MMA, it is almost non existent as a base crossover art.
Not anywhere near what you would expect considering how much more suited to MMA than boxing it would appear to be.

But when you consider about clinching and how grapplers dominate that area, maybe not surprising.

I will mention Wanderlai as another but probably not considered high level MT.

 

[Sanserif]

You know, I agree alot with what you are saying, and it is refreshing to actually hear someone enter the discussion who has WC experience and can see the potential benefits and knows its power.

I have said from the beginning that this is about developing sport WC or 'WC BK boxing' which will be an incomplete version of the art but can at least be tested much more and sparred in competition so the basic combat level of practicioners will go up.

Martial sportmen from the 4 main combat sports that comprise MMA (Submission Judo/BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing and Muay Thai) love to go on that they train 'for real' and how bad TMA is that dont spar.
This is well understood.

What they have failed to realise though is

-Sparring of 'outlier styles' like Karate has been proven to make it work at the top level and there are plenty of indications the same can be true of WC especially with how much overlap with MT/dirty boxing.

- Martial sport is not exactly the same as martial art. It's not just WC that has techniques 'too dangerous for the ring'. Karate had these methods as does other traditional styles and banned Judo techniques.
Jigoro Kano knew about these methods and excluded them, now his followers laugh at the methods but don't realise he never said they don't work just that you can use them in sport competition.

It takes people out of their comfort zone to recognize that martial arts is bigger than what they know and practice,so they prefer to ridicule it.
Or they really bought the idea that UFC 1-4 Gracie infomericals 'proved' that all traditional standup martial arts don't work.<Lmaoo>

So I agree that Southern kungfu is really based on this self defence mentality in an era when peoples lives may have depended on it and they could have been attacked with weapons or outnumbered. The idea that they would have passed on systems and techniques that 'dont work' when the stakes were much higher is foolish. How about recognizing that MMA has rules for a reason and that when you remove these rules you have versions of fighting that looks different?

Just like rough n tumble fighting was a real thing at one time. And it didn't look a whole lot like MMA (apart from maybe 'eye catching' moments from Cormier and Chuck's fights)



Imagine going for a Thai clinch or a body lock in a rough n tumble match...

A brutal style related to WC which also uses chi sau is Praying Mantis. Again, it's mainly not really allowable in MMA so does that mean it doesn't work? It's a similar approach and they train hardcore it is obviously a 'street focussed' style.



If anyone thinks this stuff doesn't work at close quarters their in denial. Again, I'm not saying they would own MMA fighters in a real fight, but if they sparred more and worked on their entries and conditioning these methods work.
Yes there was a movie industry around these arts but that's doesn't mean they don't work when trained properly for real life.

We are just scratching the surface of Southern Chinese kungfu systems in the west and their potentials in and outside of the ring.

I agree that Chinese martial arts definitely worked in their original context and against the arts they were designed to counter. I also agree they embody in a certain cultural dependent form timeless principles that are applicable to all times and contexts. IMHO the trick is to update to the contemporary context those arts to take into account the following (non exhaustive list) :-

1. The urban modern setting
2. Fully unarmed combat and mon battlefield context and no weapons other than knives
3. The need to appeal to the mixed martial arts market
4. Unarmed fighting systems designed from the ground up to be for unarmed application as opposed to wingchun and most other kungfu styles that were adapted from older weapon styles.

Xinyiba has ideas that are good.



Things that make sense like checking kicks with the shin etc. He even includes the proper defence of gripping the back of your head, as Samson Isaan would teach it. Check the kick throw a kick back from the same side. It's all stuff you'll learn in Muay Thai.



However as you can see in this demonstration the issue is again, the same as in most kung fu styles, The lack of defensive responsibility. It's never just a quick parry and return, it's parry, now slap with the other side to make sure you DEFINTIELY parried that shot you just parried, and go for a slappy move that will not do the same amount of damage, based on out of date ideas about what sort of strikes ACTUALLY cause damage.

In Muay Thai, you'll learn how to parry and elbow over the top, like Tony Ferguson does frequently. You'll learn those same principles from Xinyiba, but you will learn them in a setting in which they are immediately pressure tested. Kung Fu isn't practical for fighting, it has great concepts, but ultimately they are concepts you will learn in any combat sport.

Offensively, you can lead, you can half beat counter, you can full beat counter.
Defensively, you can evade, you can block, or you can intercept.

Those are the only things you can do in striking. The tools you use to perform one of those 6 actions will differ depending on your style and your approach, but that is it. There isn't actually anything in Kung Fu that strong Muay Thai fighters don't already know in principle, their execution will be different, but combat sports will never be shaken up by a kung fu guy coming in and wrecking everyone. If the day ever comes that a non-sanda MMA fighter comes along and performs very well, they're going to look like a kickboxer, maybe with some fancy backhands or unorthodox parries here and there - but they're at best going to be another Lyoto Machida, someone we respect as a great fighter, but Machida didn't drastically change the landscape of MMA by any means.

I think the non-delusional top kung fu guys know this as well. There is surely a reason that Master Hu holds sanda classes at his school. Interestingly, Ranton, the YouTuber who spent 3 years at Shaolin, and indeed Shi Yanzi, a 34th Generation disciple, both agree if you want to really learn how to fight. Sanda is the way.

It's not impractical. It's not a slap after the parry- it's a check. The point is to maintain contact with the attacking limb of the opponent to monitor it while the other hand breaks contact to stroke. This is descended from its origins as a weapon art and is similar to eskrima because if you ignore the sword or blade while you counter strike without monitoring it, it can kill you even while you strike the holder of the weapon. At higher levels there is also a swallowing energy motion at the initial party before it is spat back at the opponent.

The differences with muay thai and boxing come from the fact that they are more purpose built to be unarmed combat styles as opposed to most kungfu styles that are descended from older traditions which are battlefield combat styles built around the sword , shield, spear etc and which are adapted to unarmed combat. This also is the cause why mma styles like boxing and muay thai seem more practical and work better because we are assessing them in a 21st century urban civilised context as opposed to earlier times when nobody serious would be fighting in an unarmed fashion.

If we were assessing mma in earlier centuries, the mma styles would be reverse adapted to weapons with poor results and knowledgable people then would find them impractical and dangerously stylised.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

So basically it is true, but "Thais are too small,and MMA is not popular in Thailand so we haven't seen it yet".

We haven't seen high level MT guys from Europe or US make any impact.
Overeem yes, but considering MT is widely considered now as one of the 4 combat sport bases in MMA, it is almost non existent as a base crossover art.
Not anywhere near what you would expect considering how much more suited to MMA than boxing it would appear to be.

But when you consider about clinching and how grapplers dominate that area, maybe not surprising.

I will mention Wanderlai as another but probably not considered high level MT.

Erm? No... I literally just gave you examples. Also pretty much every MMA fighter trains Muay Thai. I gave you like 6 gifs of the clinch being used the same way its used in Muay Thai.

High level Muay Thai doesn't exist in America. It's better in Europe but not great. The likelihood of many cross-overs from another professional striking sport is the same as boxing, it's not a matter of it not working, it's a matter of finances, that being said there are far more examples than there are from boxing. Though I'm sure you will ignore them.

As for as strong Muay Thai fighters in MMA (talking about those that make use of more advanced Muay Thai techniques like clinch work, elbows and teeps, because nearly every MMA fighter uses Muay Thai as a basis for kicking), we have all these guys (those who are specifically known for using clinch tactics in MMA I've bolded in red)
Alistair Overeem
Matt Brown (best example IMO)
Rambaa Somdet (Stadium fighter)
Rafael Dos Anjos
Demetrious Johnson
Tony Ferguson
Jorge Masvidal
Brandon Thatch
Paul Felder
Jon Jones
Valentina Shevchenko (Champion)
Joannae J. (Champion)
Karolina K.
Germaine De Randamie (Champion)
Joanne Calderwood
Loma Lookboonme (Stadium fighter)

 

[AndyMaBobs]

It's not impractical. It's not a slap after the parry- it's a check. The point is to maintain contact with the attacking limb of the opponent to monitor it while the other hand breaks contact to stroke. This is descended from its origins as a weapon art and is similar to eskrima because if you ignore the sword or blade while you counter strike without monitoring it, it can kill you even while you strike the holder of the weapon. At higher levels there is also a swallowing energy motion at the initial party before it is spat back at the opponent.

The differences with muay thai and boxing come from the fact that they are more purpose built to be unarmed combat styles as opposed to most kungfu styles that are descended from older traditions which are battlefield combat styles built around the sword , shield, spear etc. This also is the cause why mma styles like boxing and muay thai seem more practical and work better because we are assessing them in a 21st century urban civilised context as opposed to earlier times when nobody serious would be fighting in an unarmed fashion.

I understand the idea behind it, it doesn't make it more practical for unnarmed fighting though, it commits the sin that a lot of TMAs do. It forgets that the opponent has two hands. I have no idea if xinyiba specifically comes from an armed style though. I will ask MonkeyStealsPeach to find out more.

 

[Sanserif]

So basically it is true, but "Thais are too small,and MMA is not popular in Thailand so we haven't seen it yet".

We haven't seen high level MT guys from Europe or US make any impact.
Overeem yes, but considering MT is widely considered now as one of the 4 combat sport bases in MMA, it is almost non existent as a base crossover art.
Not anywhere near what you would expect considering how much more suited to MMA than boxing it would appear to be.

But when you consider about clinching and how grapplers dominate that area, maybe not surprising.

I will mention Wanderlai as another but probably not considered high level MT.

Israel adesanya comes to mind immediately.

 

[Sanserif]

I understand the idea behind it, it doesn't make it more practical for unnarmed fighting though, it commits the sin that a lot of TMAs do. It forgets that the opponent has two hands. I have no idea if xinyiba specifically comes from an armed style though. I will ask MonkeyStealsPeach to find out more.

My point is that it was fine in earlier times as a unarmed system because nobody fought unarmed unless a a last ditch resort and other styles had the same kind of origin as systems adapted from weapon styles so that they had the same drawbacks. However once the world transitioned to a more safe and law governed global context where most places were under law and order most of the time and especially with the advent of firearms, unarmed systems that were purpose built to be unarmed systems came to the fore and in an unarmed world (in terms of blades long weapons), the older systems were more anachronistic because someone carhing you with a glancing blow or touching you wot hurt you much but doing that with a sword could cut you wide open.

However the underlying combative principles at their base are still valid - however to apply them more directly their techniques will need to be adapted more fully to an unarmed world to adapt the ranges and to eliminate touches that are necessary for weapons but not so for pure unarmed application. I dont like saying the cma systems are "impractical" because it can reflect our tendency to look down on the people and arts of the past and to assume that we are more advanced than they are when the truth is rather that every art has to fit into a cultural and historical context and is perfect for it's own context but once it is put in a different context it looks like a fish out of water.

 

[Sanserif]

I understand the idea behind it, it doesn't make it more practical for unnarmed fighting though, it commits the sin that a lot of TMAs do. It forgets that the opponent has two hands. I have no idea if xinyiba specifically comes from an armed style though. I will ask MonkeyStealsPeach to find out more.

Being shaolin in origin makes the weapon origin more likely i suspect.

 

[aerius]

What I've learned from this thread so far is that every single martial art is WC.
And that when you can't defend WC as a martial art you just drop the Judo card.

Wing Chun is the chicken of the martial arts world; everything tastes like chicken and everything looks like WC.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

Being shaolin in origin makes the weapon origin more likely i suspect.

It's certainly possible - but I don't know, so I don't want to say one way or the other until I find out for sure

 

[Sanserif]

Erm? No... I literally just gave you examples. Also pretty much every MMA fighter trains Muay Thai. I gave you like 6 gifs of the clinch being used the same way its used in Muay Thai.

High level Muay Thai doesn't exist in America. It's better in Europe but not great. The likelihood of many cross-overs from another professional striking sport is the same as boxing, it's not a matter of it not working, it's a matter of finances, that being said there are far more examples than there are from boxing. Though I'm sure you will ignore them.

As for as strong Muay Thai fighters in MMA (talking about those that make use of more advanced Muay Thai techniques like clinch work, elbows and teeps, because nearly every MMA fighter uses Muay Thai as a basis for kicking), we have all these guys (those who are specifically known for using clinch tactics in MMA I've bolded in red)
Alistair Overeem
Matt Brown (best example IMO)
Rambaa Somdet (Stadium fighter)
Rafael Dos Anjos
Demetrious Johnson
Tony Ferguson
Jorge Masvidal
Brandon Thatch
Paul Felder
Jon Jones
Valentina Shevchenko (Champion)
Joannae J. (Champion)
Karolina K.
Germaine De Randamie (Champion)
Joanne Calderwood
Loma Lookboonme (Stadium fighter)

In fact justin gaethje was a wrestler but never used it in mma and was easily overpowered on the ground by khabib.instrad he uses boxing and the roundhouse kicks of muay thai much more.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

In fact justin gaethje was a wrestler but never used it in mma and was easily overpowered on the ground by khabib.instrad he uses boxing and the roundhouse kicks of muay thai much more.

I don't think he was overpowered, Khabib is just super technical, and Gaethje never really got a chance to wrestle with him

 

[Sanserif]

It's certainly possible - but I don't know, so I don't want to say one way or the other until I find out for sure

Looks like xingyiba is like the other xingyi arts in being descended from spear forms.

 

[NAKMUAY18]

Yes, but the rule sets make all the difference. Probably a reason we don't see any high level MT fighters in MMA is because as it is practiced it is not realistic when you add grappling. Being in close like that to knee or 'swing and knee' will get you foot swept or thrown as you mentioned.

Although with Judo grip you can hit them if strikes are allowed, the position is much more stable than a 'thai clinch'. You're not getting thrown or footswept, and you can keep moving and even handfighting to stop being punched. You can also of course punch yourself also, and as we have seen now numerous occasions in BK, grapplers who have learned to punch tend to outstrike strikers from clinch positions. This is because they can control balance better and offset the base of a striker to be able to throw punches while setting up opportunities to hit.

A good example of this is from a BK fight last night where Barnett used this strategy to bust up Rozalski.


Roz was catching him at range, but Barnett would use the opening to clinch and then dirty box and wrestle to outland him despite being the inferior striker and this worked.
Though there were no knees, elbows allowed in this one.
This format would actually be ideal for a well trained WC or MT guy to do well in.

I just dont think you understand the idea of concepts in clinching and striking, and now you are just arguing not to be wrong.

The video you posted showed alot of techniques that could be used in an MT fight. Head side underhook with a far side overhook, Shoulder bumping for space and throwing punches, head control with the collar tie. He probably learned most of that from Catching Wrestling, but they are universal grappling concepts no matter where you learn them. As for him being the inferior striker, Barnett was the better infighter, and moved straight to were he was best. There's generaly outside, the pocket, and inside. A fundamental concept of fighting is to move the fight to the range or postion you have the advantage. Outside, inside, against the cage, takedown to side control, pull guard. Its fighting 101.

The same way you talk about being footsweept from the "Thai Plum". If i grab a double collar tie and you posture up, you are going to lift my base and then you could well sweep me. If i have my elbows pivoting on your collarbone and pinched together tight, i need to breakdown your chin to your chest, then get your head to below mine. At that stage i control your head and posture. A universal concept of grappling is that if i control your head i control your balance. Your hip should be back and your spine bent over and weak. If you attempt to sweep or shoot, i use my elbows as a frame and drive your head down or swing you. I can now knee, release a collar tie to elbow/punch, or snap down to a front headlock.

You talk of these this positions like they are static, and doing X results in Y. There are counter to everything, there are counters to those counter and so on. If i stay anywhere too long and don't defend the counter im going to end up at a disadvantage.
There is strenght in questiong what you "know" to be right. Thats how you get better

 

[AndyMaBobs]

I just dont think you understand the idea of concepts in clinching and striking, and now you are just arguing not to be wrong.

The video you posted showed alot of techniques that could be used in an MT fight. Head side underhook with a far side overhook, Shoulder bumping for space and throwing punches, head control with the collar tie. He probably learned most of that from Catching Wrestling, but they are universal grappling concepts no matter where you learn them. As for him being the inferior striker, Barnett was the better infighter, and moved straight to were he was best. There's generaly outside, the pocket, and inside. A fundamental concept of fighting is to move the fight to the range or postion you have the advantage. Outside, inside, against the cage, takedown to side control, pull guard. Its fighting 101.

The same way you talk about being footsweept from the "Thai Plum". If i grab a double collar tie and you posture up, you are going to lift my base and then you could well sweep me. If i have my elbows pivoting on your collarbone and pinched together tight, i need to breakdown your chin to your chest, then get your head to below mine. At that stage i control your head and posture. A universal concept of grappling is that if i control your head i control your balance. Your hip should be back and your spine bent over and weak. If you attempt to sweep or shoot, i use my elbows as a frame and drive your head down or swing you. I can now knee, release a collar tie to elbow/punch, or snap down to a front headlock.

You talk of these this positions like they are static, and doing X results in Y. There are counter to everything, there are counters to those counter and so on. If i stay anywhere too long and don't defend the counter im going to end up at a disadvantage.
There is strenght in questiong what you "know" to be right. Thats how you get better

arguing not to be wrong has been his whole thing this thread

Well said though, very good explanation

 

[j123]

Wing Chun is the chicken of the martial arts world; everything tastes like chicken and everything looks like WC.

 

[Dece]

Exactly that

Thai clinch is not a thing, it's a term literally only used by guys who don't know anything about Muay Thai

As a wrestler I always called it a thai clinch to be more specific.

Wrestlers and mma guys think of it as neck wrestling

I've heard the term neck wrestling before but never like it. If I wrestle someones neck there's gonna be a lot of nelsons and cranking going on.

 

[Sanserif]

Essentially, the thread ended here. There's nothing else to discuss.

Just looking back st some older posts that I missed reading. After you reach the point of combat effectiveness in your base art so that you can defend yourself then apart from continuing your improvement there you ideally should begin to cross train in other arts once you find teachers who are able to Express a certain cognitive attribute or principle in a way that you are unable to do. That's what many here do and same for you I expect and that is why learning wingchun for example from the right teacher can be a plus. Using what I learned from wing Chun for instance I have applied aspects of it to other completely different arts and found them beneficial but in a way that the person I sparred with or observers had no idea I was using wingchun to achieve it.

I have crossed hands with some of the finest cma masters in the world - who can express attributes to a level that is awe inspiring. That doesnt make them invincible in a boxing match but once you see it and know that such a thing is even possible and you know it is combatively useful and for continual improvement then you want it for your arsenal and that's what a martial artist should always do to improve his combative attributes IMHO.

Of course if u learn from the wrong people and there are many of those in any art but especially in cma then it will be a waste of time. Does that make it a waste of time to look for good ones? If you have never seen what is possible you could say it isnt worth the aggravation but once you find it you may change your mind...

So I realise you're not arguing in favour of this, but I tend to think that 'sensitivity' is not a thing that actually exists. I don't think Muangthai is lacking in sensitivity with his clinch and trap work that TheMaster has, put it that way

Clinch is position, and your chosen techniques are gonna depend, but as far as actually clinching goes, a wrestler isn't going to be lost and confused with the positions of muay thai - tho he won't be used to finding elbows

I agree with a lot of what you are saying about clinching is clinching adjusted for what different rules in different martial sports allow. I just wanted to comment on your post on there being no such thing as sensitivity. Unless you are speaking of terminology differences, I would suggest sensitivity is indeed a combative attribute that becomes vital the moment you come into physical contact with your opponent for any sustained time. The experienced nak muay who clinches can feel the energy of what his opponent is trying to do to resist and he can adapt to it to reverse him or unbalance him or sweep him. Just as the wingchun adept can feel what his opponent is doing as their hands and forearms come into contact in the parrying zone and he uses that to gain the centreline and penetrate though his guard.

 

[TheMaster]

I agree that Chinese martial arts definitely worked in their original context and against the arts they were designed to counter. I also agree they embody in a certain cultural dependent form timeless principles that are applicable to all times and contexts. IMHO the trick is to update to the contemporary context those arts to take into account the following (non exhaustive list) :-

1. The urban modern setting
2. Fully unarmed combat and mon battlefield context and no weapons other than knives
3. The need to appeal to the mixed martial arts market
4. Unarmed fighting systems designed from the ground up to be for unarmed application as opposed to wingchun and most other kungfu styles that were adapted from older weapon styles.



It's not impractical. It's not a slap after the parry- it's a check. The point is to maintain contact with the attacking limb of the opponent to monitor it while the other hand breaks contact to stroke. This is descended from its origins as a weapon art and is similar to eskrima because if you ignore the sword or blade while you counter strike without monitoring it, it can kill you even while you strike the holder of the weapon. At higher levels there is also a swallowing energy motion at the initial party before it is spat back at the opponent.

The differences with muay thai and boxing come from the fact that they are more purpose built to be unarmed combat styles as opposed to most kungfu styles that are descended from older traditions which are battlefield combat styles built around the sword , shield, spear etc and which are adapted to unarmed combat. This also is the cause why mma styles like boxing and muay thai seem more practical and work better because we are assessing them in a 21st century urban civilised context as opposed to earlier times when nobody serious would be fighting in an unarmed fashion.

If we were assessing mma in earlier centuries, the mma styles would be reverse adapted to weapons with poor results and knowledgable people then would find them impractical and dangerously stylised.

Your theory is interesting but I see little evidence of it. In Escrima the weapons are taught first and empty hand last.
In WC it is empty hand first and weapons last. So unless there was a historical reversal where the double knives were originally taught first it wouldn't make sense.

But your points about monitoring the other hand to control a weapon arm and an attitude of not being hit at all make sense for armed combat and is why there is a traditional cross training of WC and Escrima.

Even if your idea is partially true, it would explain not why WC "doesn't work", but rather that it isn't for sport.
I have explicitly avoided this angle because this is about adapting WC in combat sports with rules and because it provokes the usual comments about "illegal strikes".

Buy let's take your comments at face value, that weapons were taught first.
Then this could explain the rapids fire approach of styles like WC and Southern Praying Mantis to finish the fight very quickly and brutally at close range.
There is no time to get into a 'fight' or to jab and move.
It is in and finish.
From this mentality, from a descending heirarchy of attacks starting with weapons there are many empty hand tools that can end the encounter fast at that range aside from punches.
Clavicle grab, chops, finger strikes, elbows etc as well as punches.
When you add these attacks, new angles become available and new ways to hit that you won't see in the ring but you do in WC training scenarios and anyone who has felt them even lightly at that range has no doubt they work and would finish the encounter.

One example I can give is that with chi sau skills , very few can stop me getting a clavicle grab be they from wrestling, bjj or boxing. MT guys would have a better chance due to some crossover in sensitivity. This is chi sau sensitivity in action and without it you just cannot stop the hand getting in there and into the centreline.

For WC in the ring, the pace will be slower, footwork more mobile at range and use of the wider variety of WC attacks including uppercut and hooks.
So the issue is there are really two 'versions' of WC and the strategy is being applied in the wrong setting. We need to see a sport version for the ring which yes, can learn some things from ring sports about fighting at more range.

 

[TheMaster]

As a wrestler I always called it a thai clinch to be more specific.



I've heard the term neck wrestling before but never like it. If I wrestle someones neck there's gonna be a lot of nelsons and cranking going on.

Noooo...you destroyed his whole 7 page thesis now.