Anyone here do Jiu-Jitsu?

[Chris]

thats totally cool Ad to be honest i want to learn Tai Chi and the art of the sword at some stage, but wing chun is the Kung Fu i am most capitvated by and have the most faith in so i wish to study it throughout.

Anyways i have just started reading the most amazing book about Great Grandmaster Ip Man (by Ip Ching) and the Legend he was, and still is despite his early Dimise due to smoking his fav Cigerettes (Camel's)

in respect to the point you made about Kung Fu being like supporting a football team this is what Ip Man said to Leung Bik (although he did not know this at the time) when asked what style of kung Fu he had studied:

'The best Kung Fu in the world! but if i told you, you wouldn't understand.'

- Ip Man

Chris

[rosenrot]

I also think Ad's point about practicing different martial arts for what you get out of them is very true.

The reason I choose to train in Wing Chun at Uni is because I think it is a highly effective martial art for self-defence purposes. This is mainly due to its apparent emphasis on speed more than power (this may be mistaken, but seems an accurate description of chain-punching) and its 'no-rules' approach to neck and groin striking. I think a combination of fast and 'dirty' strikes will see you come out on top in a street fight with most opponents no matter what their size. Also the fact that Wing Chun techniques can be used in very limited amounts of space is an added bonus.

I've also trained I Aikido which I think is not as practical as Wing Chun for real fights (unless you've taken your training to a very high level), but has other benefits. The reason I train is mainly for the exceptionally calming effects of this gentle but powerful art. The performance of a technique properly that will put a big guy down with no effort is very satisfying. You can walk away from training, maybe not ready to take on everyone, but at least with a bit of the inner peace that Aikido's founder Morihei Ueshiba wanted to promote. That said Aikido locks and throws can be used effectively for self-defence depending on your own ability, confidence and the scenario.

Since coming to Uni I've also trained in MMA. My reasons for this are that it is simply a highly enjoyable pass-time and a good way of keeping fit. While there are elements of MMA that are effective for self-defence I view it mainly as a entertaining sport. The aspects of Gracie Ju-Juitsu it entails could be used in a real fight, but only really one-on-one (in which case you could finish a fight very quickly if the other guy has no ground training) as you're liable to get kicked pretty bad if you take down a chav with his four mates standing by. I think it is this that limits Ju-Jitsu's effectiveness in a real situation.

That was rather a long-winded way of saying, "As everyone gets something different from training in different martial arts there is no such thing as superiority from one to another unless you apply a specific, personal context (i.e self-defence, sport, spiritual benefit etc.)."

P.S
The Hughes v Gracie fight was mentioned earlier and someone used it as an example of how MMA beat GracieJJ. I'd just like to say that although Hughes finished the fight with a typical MMA 'ground and pound' he is a very skilled grappler in his own right (All-American Wrestler and GracieJJ expert) and without these skills he may have lost to Gracie and wouldn't have been able to nearly get a submission by armbar or get Royce's back to finish him off. Plus Hughes is BEAST, with freakish strength that makes him pound-for-pound UFC's strongest fighter!

[bennyboy]

Personaly, i think this UFC is quite a pointless, barbaric "sport", and is no way to determine the effectiveness of a certain marital art. i practise wing chun, but regularly train with people who train in other disciplines such as karate, aikido and nin-jitsu and also ju-jitsu. and i have found that although i do favour wing chun, other disciplines can be incooprated into the various forms learnt in Wing Chun. The empty hand forms in wing chun are learnt as a blue for how to deal with certain situations, and we are then shown how to apply the forms in real life situations. i have found the wooden dummy forms extremely effective as they can be applied in so many different ways. but if the forms are learnt thoroughly enough, they can be used in any combination and mixed up, like bruce lee says all that stuff about water and such like, that you have to flow and react to a situation as it develops, and this is what wing chun is all about. but from my training with other disciplines, other forms can be thrown into the mixer. for instance the deceptiveness and sneakiness of nin-jitsu go hand in hand and can be extremely effective. and as someone pointed out about ju-jitsu, all he needs is one of your arms to get you in a lock and to the ground, this can be used with various wing chun combinations, hence why it is often taught to various police forces.
i am rambling a bit here so will shut up, but thats my view, that basically all forms can be mixed together and used depending on the situation, but it appears to me that wing chun is very good as a kind of basis for which to apply other styles.

[Dan]

Yer there are some really good points here, and generally reflects alot of my opinion. Hence in wing chun things like an arm bar 'takedown' are tought even though strictly speaking they are not part of the traditional system but they are really usefull (particually if you dont wanna hurt the other person if say they are drunk), hence i try to encorage people to use wing chun (or any system) and dont let it use you in the sense dont do what is the clasic way of doing something do what you want and what you feel comfortable with. hence i like wrist locks coz they work nicely with some techniques from wing chun. So do what you are comfortable with OR If in doubt just bash em in the head in a real fight?

[superfoot]

I would suggest UFC is not pointless. The point of it is that it is entertaining to watch (if you like that sort of thing) which is reflected in the revenues created. The guys that take part in it are amazing athletes and you cannot argue about the level of skill involved.

The rules involved will mean a style of fighting that is optimal (when abiding by the rules) will evolve. Just like how in other sports such as olympic taekwondo the rules have caused an optimal way to fight. If an mma guy went into a tkd comp he would lose, not because he is a worse fighter in "real life", but because he would not be able to handle the different environment created by the rules. With UFC having alot more ways to fight (in terms of ranges; punch, kick, grapple, ground, etc) I think it often brings people to the (wrong) conclusion that MMA is the best way to fight. This way of thinking is of course flawed, as the fighting style of mma is based on an environment built on rules and so will never be directly comparable to real fighting.

This is why i like the way i learn to defend myself, by practicing under the rules that there will be "on the street"; namely NONE*.

(In truth though we practice taking the law into consideration, so things like 'reasonable force' and suchlike are kept into consideration.)

[rosenrot]

It is certainly true about rules creating a fighting style, which is one of the reasons MMA can be misjudged by those who watch UFC/Pride/K-1 etc. and don't appreciate how they have evolved since their origins in the 80s. I'm no expert on the subject, but I'll try to describe this evolution so that people don't automatically dismiss it as a modern brawl with no traditional basis.

When MMA tournaments first started 20 years ago there were a lot of 'traditional' styles (Kempo, Karate, Judo, TKD etc) represented along with the arts generally seen in today's tournaments (a mix of boxing, muay thai and Gracie Ju-Jitsu/submission wrestling). At this time the fights were open weight (no weight divisions) and bare-knuckle. I also think (but I'm not certain) that there were no restrictions on strikes except eye-gouging and fish-hooking, so you could go for the groin or even head-butt. It wasn't long before this form of fighting was banned, for obvious safety reasons, and the rules seen today were introduced in order to get it legalised. Gloves are now essential and there are now rules on targeting of groin, knees etc. Weight classes are now used except for the occaisional open-weight tournament held in Japan. Combatants are no longer allowed to wear a Gi which means that judo practitioners have prety much disappeared from competitions due to their tendency to use the Gi in various techniques.

It was when these rules were brought in that the fighting style of today's UFC began to evolve and the arts that had the most success (with a little modification to adapt to the scenario) became dominant. For some years GracieJJ specialists were very successful as most fighters from different styles could not defend against their take-down skills or ability to apply submissions on the ground. However, over the last few years more and more combatants have achieved good take-down defence skills so that they can make the most of their stand-up striking ability. As a result many more of today's fights will be decided on the feet than on the ground compared to 10 years ago.

I have no doubt that MMA will continue to evolve which is what makes it an interesting sport for those who appreciate the skills involved - not just an entertainment for guys who want to watch people get bloodied up, which is often how MMA is depicted.

This 'apology for MMA' was just to try and persuade martial-artists not to dismiss it as a brawl and having no 'traditional' element. it was just the case that styles of Kung Fu or Karate etc. were not favoured by the rules introduced. This does not mean that this will always be the case: it'd be nice to see someone with different skills compete and do well in MMA and see if boxing, muay thai and grappling can be toppled from their current dominance.

[Tom]

I'd have to agree with what Ad said, about rules shaping the style of fighting, which is why it annoys me when people dismiss Wing Chun based on what they know about jiu-Jitsu or MMA (and there are a lot of them, just look on the internet...). I can't see how you can compare BJJ in a UFC environment, or MMA, to Wing Chun in any way shape or form. they can't be compared. it's like judging a football player based on what you know about basketball players, we're talking totally different circumstances. The whole point of Wing Chun is that it utilises strikes that would be banned in competition. It's not meant to be a sport, it's a self defence.

I also find most Wing Chun guys aren't as dismissive of other martial arts as they are of us. I'm not sure where the stigma of Wing Chun comes from, but I do know that it's total bollocks. Anyone who devalues it as a system obviously doesn't know real Wing Chun. 10 minutes talking to Sifu would convince you that it works. Carlson Gracie knew it, hence the double impact seminars they did together.

The main criticism that seems to get levelled at us is that we don't advocate much in the way of ground fighting, as though ground fighting is the be all and end all of martial arts. Like someone said earlier, it won't do you much good grappling if the person you're grappling has 4 mates all about to stamp on your neck.

The point I'm getting at is that there is no "one true martial art" that covers all eventualities. The best you can hope for is that you don't come into a situation for which you are totally unprepared, but there seems to be a lot of ignorant people that think otherwise.

I appreciate the amount of training that it takes to be a UFC fighter, and it's definitely not something I could ever do, but again I'd have to say that being successful in the ring does not, in any way shape or form, mean that you can walk the streets at night safely.

[rosenrot]

I agree with what you say Tom. I didn't want to give the impression I was dismissing Wing Chun. If this were the case then I wouldn't be a member of the club.

Its just that MMA had been mentioned this thread and is probably one of the reasons people ask about the supposed superiority of either grappling or striking. I thought that it would be useful to provide a bit of a background to the sport for people who did not know a great deal about it.

I also wanted to show that, as you say, the presence of rules leads to the development of a style that cannot be compared to non-competitive arts, which will of course favour dangerous and therefore highly effective self-defence techniques (e.g throat strikes).

As I said earlier, I train in Wing Chun because I believe it is an effective, practical system. I train in MMA for enjoyment and fitness. I wouldn't seek to compare the two.

[Tom]

rosenrot said:

I agree with what you say Tom. I didn't want to give the impression I was dismissing Wing Chun. If this were the case then I wouldn't be a member of the club.

Nah you didn't. I was just venting my spleen ;D

[tjwingchun]

By the way Mike KIrkpatrick my student who is organising the seminar today in Carlisle and is opening a Wing Chun class soon, did Ju Jitsu for over 12 years before training with me, he plans to add his knowledge of grappling and groundwork into his teaching but using Wing Chun thoeries and principles in the application. He is very knowledgeable 'Badass', great guy but a demon in a fight.

Now he thinks Wing Chun is the ultimate but is just transferring his previous experience into a Wing Chun format, so it becomes more effective and devastating, lol.

When I get details of his class I will let you know for those who are interested in finding out about groundwork and grappling.