Wing Chun vs. Hung gar?

I have friends that have studied both. Both like what they learned. Chi Sao (sp?) was a favorite of two friends that studied Wing Chun. My friend whom studied Hung Gar was a bit jaded that it is THE supreme art; however he is well focused and enjoyed the connection with a firm base to the earth.

Aksing which style to learn is like asking which tea to drink; each person has his or her own taste and many teas benefit many people.

Thanks for the input guys....

I can't just make a simply back and white answer.
How old are you?
What are the schools like? What lineage are they from?
What do they say they focus on? What do classes look like?
2 days a week isn't enough for real training. I would suggest 3 hours a day.. JMO
I have studied both WC and HG... WC isn't for most people.
What are you looking for in a MA?

I would take hung gar, but it depends on which school is actually better. In my opinion, I think Hung Gar has alot more long time benefits. While you might say WC is more fight oriented, it is too calculated, too precise, and too restrictive in its fighting aspects. I prefer hung gar, especially with its powerful chi gong, and conditioning. You never see true hung gar practicioners who aren't physically fit.

I practice karate,combat wing chun, capoeira, wushu, escrima, muay thai, bo staff, kama, and iado/kenjutsu. what you said about wing chun can be true but I like the art, it shows how to defend against alot of moves and is an extraordinarily fast art. It shows you how to get your opponents guard out of the way blast them in the face and then (this is combat wing chun by the way that is blended with juijutsu) take them to the ground and finish the fight then again, I have blended combat wing chun karate, and a little ground fighting to make a more all around art so I might not be the best source for information on this subject

not to get things off track but... what's the difference between combat wing chun and traditional wing chun?

A little background on myself, I am turning 26 in a month n a half...have taken tae kwon do for about 3 years, years ago...I am in decent shape, lift weights and do cardio...

The wing chun school i was lookin at is very street fighting oriented, full contact sparring... http://www.sifugrados.com/

The hung ga school i was lookin at is http://www.fonghungga.com/

Not sure wut style of kung fu, this is but here is another school http://www.shaolinkungfutemple.com/index1.html

Basically wut i am lookin for is an effective method to defend myself, increase agility and flexibility, and increase my fitness level...

I want a mix of art and combat. I want the combat aspect in that i want to be able to use it to defend myself (don't wanna be all show and no go) and i also want to have fluid beautiful technique (which is why i picked kung fu to begin with intead of muay thai or any of the other various "hard" systems)

If you are interested in Forms and animal styles Hung Gar is very good. Some WC are very combat intense.. while others arn't. The only way really see if a style or school is for you.. you must try it out.


http://www.wingchunkalisystems.com/
http://www.wingchunnyc.com/

Si-Gung Duncan Leung has a Disciple in Manhattan named Raul Zapata and he teaches privately.He trained with Si-Gung Duncan Leung back in the 70's in 3 Great Jone Street

Unfortunately, as many modern MMA's and MA's have discovered, alot of WC schools aren't very good. Even the "combat" oriented ones, often get grounded by MMA's or grapplers. I prefer Hung Gar, as long as they spar, and retain its real martial principles.

So is Hung Gar is any better at staving off people who try to get you to the ground?? What is Hung Gar's focus and method to fighting? I'm now curious i was thinking of taking Wing Chun after college. Any info about Hung Gar will be greatly appreciated.

You must realize that every art has at least a 50-60% Bullsh*T factor.

50-60% of every fighter of every MA/MMA/ any art is not worth anything at that art. Well maybe not worth anything is a little harsh but they aren't very good at it. (for many many reasons)

To say that WC or “Combat oriented” or “traditional” or “Applied” WC isn't capable of handling ground fighting is really crap.
( must people add names to their style? Why not call it something else?)

I know personally a couple Fighters who competed in King of the Ring (NHB comp) and did very well against Ground fighters. I know people who Cross train with WC. So to say that XYZ style can't handle a grappler. no its the fighter who can or can't. Chinese Martial arts have normally not been introduced to ground fighting.

The fact is if you don't train heavily for fighting you will not be able to fight.
MOST Kung FU schools don't do enough fighting.
I have taken Hung Gar for 8 Years.. They don't train to fight(JMO). I am not saying all Hung Gar doesn't, but most don't put enough. Yes we did basic training, but nothing like what I am doing in WC currently. Hung Gar is about Animal forms , Chi Kung and Iron Palm.

I would call every style of WC/Hung Gar /BJJ ect.. BS until you see someone fight with it. In real street "style" situations, if they seem realistic.. then I would say they train very heavy on fighting. My normal class training 80%-90% of class on full contact fighting.

Just to make a point.. Hung Gar has Just as much chance against a ground fighter as WC. These styles were not created with Ground fighting as a real threat. It is up to fighters today to take what they have and FIND in their style viable solutions to the new problems. (JMO)

I think WC is great for cross training, or becoming/adding as a foundation. Its just that in my experience, over the past few years, WC has gotten alot of bad rep due to the lack of results and sometimes its image. Often times if you find sparring clips its just two young kids, (or adults) rabbit punching eachother and kicking wildly. I've seen some very good WC though, but usually its from people who dedicate their lives to it. Personally, I'm going to add some basic WC skills to my repetoire later, but it depends on what your aim and objective is. Main reason for me would be to gain sticky striking skills (I do sticky push hands), and quickyness at the medium range. If your going to take WC as solely a fighting art, then cross train or at least don't be restricted by it. If you want a recreational thing, I think Hung Gar would be for me. Every movement in it is pretty much chi gong, it has extensive external chi gong, weapons, and forms, as well as some pretty intense sparring (with right school). Also, Hung Gar is a bit more rare (the good stuff at least), while WC schools seem to be popping up everywhere, from traditionalists to the uber "combat" schools.

Beware of WC schools that promise you will learn the ultiamte fighting art. And obviously any other MA for that matter. I think there has to be a good balance between the fighting aspects, and the other aspects. If its pure contact, there is both advantages and disadvantages. Alot of WC guys have gotten beaten by others because they expect the match to be a WC striking match, and end up getting taken down abruptly. I'm just talking from the ones that have actually been in FC competitions. But there are some good schools out there. Honestly, I could care less about winning competitions, so I train for my own personal acceleration and ways of achieving goals. Its completely up to what you want.

Hi,
I'm doing Hung gar and know very little about WC(only that most of the WC clubs seems to me McDojos - in my area).DragonPunch , I dont know how many kicks WC has but your statement that HG involves more kicks might be wrong because HG has only 3-4kicks at all. HG is highly focused on firm low stances and hand strikes. If you wanna to defend yourself in a short time I must tell you that HG is not about that(dunno whether WS is). But HG is really complex style which can be done for the whole life, its one of the tradition kf styles that are not changed into gymnastic by chinese goverment in past like most shaolin kf which are tought nowdays.
I'm fond of HG so my aspect of view is distorted but HG rulezzzz!!!:-))

Yeah, HG has kicks still is what I meant. Its certainly not a northern art, but its got a few. I agree though, alot of Shaolin history/knowledge/teaching is distorted, I realized you have to fill in the gaps through your own research and self-discovery. So much garbage out there...

Hey DragonPunch--

I just started Wing Chun, after doing the same kind of research. My focus was self defense at close combat range, since I work in a bad area of town and I'm a woman with absolutely no fighting experience. You're correct about the time involved--wing chun is faster to learn as long as you go to a school that emphasizes realistic fighting scenarios. I have heard of some wing chun training that requires 6+ months to learn just the first form, so just make sure you research the school before signing up.

My school does plan to incorporate grappling and other useful skills (although I've thought about looking into BJJ later on in addition to WC).

My school recommends a minimum of 2 sessions a week, and each session is 2 hours. I'd go more if my schedule allowed it. I can definitely see a difference in progression between me and the people who go more often, so I can only imagine how much slower Hung Gar would go. I'm hoping to be close to functionally competent before wintertime when I have to walk to the bus in the dark, and that would not be an option with Hung Gar.

The best self defense you can hope to utilize effectively before you get your black sash (or equivalent) is to use your head and not put yourself in a situation where you can get into trouble. The belief that you can take on someone sooner with one system than another is false. If one seems to move slower than another think about what you are being taught. If you only learn a good solid stance and a good punch and kick you will be better off than having learned a whole bunch of stuff with little depth.

Hey I am new here.
I have the 8/10 lvl of Wing Chun and I have serced a lot for Marcial Arts and I think that's a really good one.

I don't know about Hung Ger but if the pic I saw with their pose ( sorry for the Hung Gar guys) but it has many weaknesses

1) the frond hand cannot punce
2) the second hand is too behind and it cannot defent

This reasons are enought to end up the fight

i've studied both Wing Chun and Hung gar, and i believe wing chun is by far the better fighting form. I spoke to my hung gar teacher at the time and he agreed that wing chun is a better 'street fighting' system. i've been through a few scrapes and wing chun has helped me out. but it is always down to the person, you need to find what i right for you

I've been at wing chun for almost a year now, and I gotta say I'm amazed by the things I've learned. I have an excellent teacher and I owe it all to him, of course.
I don't know anything about rankings or 'sashes' though - we don't do 'em. Could someone explain this to me?

I have over 15 years of martial arts experience and I can tell you that real Wing Chun is very effective. While I have not personally studied Hung Gar, I have friends that have and it can be very effective also.

Many times it isn't the style, but the teacher that makes the largest difference. For example, I know a couple of Wing Chun schools in my area that I feel are dangerous for the students because the training is so poor. Its not really Wing Chun, but how would someone that doesn't have experience know the difference?

Visit the schools you are interested in and pay attention. Does what they teach make sense and actually work? If so then your in luck and you've found a real martial art. If it works its real martial arts.

Wing-Chun is quicker style to learn it is mostly a hand system that stresses mostly straight charging and close in fighting. A TKD man would feel uncomforatble at this range. But it would give you another prospective of fighting. Its strength is that it strikes and deflects at the same time.
It weakness is the same and strong circular attacks a corner of the center line, that begin with feints and fakes. Or exchanging contact with a stronger person, fighter depended. WC can get traped in its own method of controlling the center line.

Hun-gar takes longer to learn it is a more comprehensive art based on the Tiger and Crane. It stresses fitness, powerful straight and circular motions, it uses intertwinng blocking or body shifting to strike in one motion sometimes with the same arm. Some of the power moves are 1 then 2 to start of a flowing combinations.

My feeling is Hun-gar would make end result would be a more versitle fighter. Wing-Chun would make a fighter in the shortest time but he wouldn't be as versitle. Which is more effective would depend on the opponent and the fighter.

I'll end by saying that a ex-TKDer would feel more at home with the distance and movement or Hun-gar. Rather then the close in and precison moves of WC.

Wc has a history of individual fighters and of course Bruce Lees beginging and of course he felt JKD was needed to improve it.

Hun-gar and his clan use to protect a whole village with his art. Hun-gar does take longer to learn.

My 2 cent.

I find it amusing that some styles take longer to learn than other styles. I also find it amusing that we're even having this discussion.

It's another "style vs. style" debate when ultimately, there ARE no styles to begin with.

Regardless of style, the question is; are we training functionally or not? If not, it could well take forever to learn to effectively fight. If so, we can develop legitimate games within relatively short periods of time.

Why should one style take longer to learn when we all move the same way?

MY two cents


-John

My simple answer to that one John is that it takes longer to learn from a teacher who has decades of skill, experience and knowledge to pass on and much less time to learn from one who has been training only a few years but wants you to think he has all the secret techniques that you will need to win any fight.

Thats part of it. Good coaching matters greatly I would agree.



-John

Thats your concept of styles. Styles do exist and their cirriculum make the requirements take longer to learn. Just because one may teach a versitle system that covers more study material that would take longer to learn.

Just the simple fact that Hung-Gar teaches more forms and more weapons would make it take longer to learn, because of the limitation of the man.

Wing-Chun on the other hand teaches less forms and less weapons and concept is different would make it a shorter road to fighting but less versitle.

You can't put everybodies else method of training in your own prespective of no sytle, no methods and prime functonailty. Some teach styles that are more then just fighting they teach a peacful way of life. That does take longer.

Neko456 --

That's why I added: the question is; are we training functionally or not? If not, it could well take forever to learn to effectively fight. If so, we can develop legitimate games within relatively short periods of time.



-John

I was looking up Hung Gar and it looks really good. I love that they focus on root. Lower horse stance is a bitch to get under your belt but holy ravioli does it work your root. I do see similarities in WC and HG. Some of the hand positions are the same, large emphasis on root training and both take a lot of training to get used. This guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glt92cdrIoU&NR=1 looks like a badass mother to train with.

I still prefer (Fut Sao) Wing Chun, though. It just makes more sense to me. The energy conservation, the squared-off stance and theory behind the art make it the most logical and beautiful to me.

Fut Sao Wing Chun differs ever so slightly (it flows more) then Ip man's WC as WC differs even more so to Hungar. I know exponents from both systems that are very good fighters. I also know supposed fighters from these systems that are not so good. In the end its not the style its how much time you put in training live & realistic, remember the art has stayed mostly the same for 100s of years you have to make it fit in your world.

So FS WC may fit for you but the OP HG maybe your fit.

But if meer self defense skills are you main concern a Boxing and Wrestling repetorier may bring the fastest results, simple & functional.

UNLESS weapon defense and counters is of some concern and or some knowledge of what westerns call dirty/real fighting. Then HG or WC your boy.

Fut Sao Wing Chun differs ever so profoundly from Ip Man Wing Chun. IMWC doesn't focus as strictly as FSWC on internal power. FSWC has very different philosophies on stances, power generation, combat theory and the forms. IMWC doesn't have a Siu Bot Gua form. The second and third forms are very different from Ip Man WC. Fut Sao WC is a science of an art. Where as Ip Man WC is the pop music of Wing Chun.

http://futsaowingchun.info/history.html

There is no more Ip Man wing chun. That died with Ip Man. Truth is, WC is a concept-based fighting system. Forget about styles.
Ip Man's students only had as much influence as they did because it was developed and rooted in Hong Kong. MOST cultural impact comes from large cities.
But don't think for a second that any martial artist worth their salt hasn't heard of Fatsaan.