Which is better, modern Wushu or ancient Wushu?

The real actual combat is to kill people (unarmed or cold weapons), not to fight, so you can't see the real actual combat at ordinary times (if "awesome" means killing people). I'm afraid the real battle can only be seen on the battlefield of life and death.

China's ancient martial arts have long recognized this problem, and most of them came from bloody battlefields. Therefore, it is precisely because China's ancient martial arts are too practical (for example, to strike a fatal blow, take the key, want to win, seek self-protection, ensure that you have no flaws first, then win, etc.), so it is difficult to enter the ring. On the contrary, some modern boxing, wrestling, taekwondo and judo in the west are the embodiment of this idea. Although that kind of competitive sport is beautiful and imposing, it is really not actual combat. For the simplest example, in a real life-and-death battle, if you get a hundred punches from your opponent and you don't lose the ability to resist, you hit him with one punch (or faint or die), then you win, but not in the ring. Then, if you can kill each other with one move, why do you need so many moves? This is not the same as actual combat.

It is this pure practicality that makes the actual combat (that is, killing people) of ancient Wushu gradually decline (modern society relies on the law, and violence has little effect), while routine performance is booming. In this sense, only masters were real in ancient times, because the original intention and essence of China Wushu was really to fight with people. After being castrated, martial arts, no matter how beautifully practiced, may not be considered a master.