Errr....

[black and blue]

http://www.lo-man-kam.de/galerie05.htm

:eek:

[red5angel]

Yes?

[black and blue]

Red5Angel - of all the people on all the websites, I thought this page of mpegs would provoke a comment from you.

Does this not raise an eyebrow from anyone?

Was thinking of RR's "I've seen bad students from good instructors" comment.

Each of these mpegs made my eyes bulge. (Errr... you are clicking the yellow badge links, right?)

:rolleyes:

[red5angel]

still checking them out, it just sounded like you wanted to say something :)

[red5angel]

How do these guys root with such a high stance!?

[black and blue]

Flapping arms and high stance... it's the crane influence right?

Wing Chun: a different variant in every club. It's kinda funny. I know a number of people that practise Shotokan Karate from different clubs - all practise the same way and look the same when running through drills etc.

Is anyone able to post an mpeg of what they consider to be good Wing Chun? Most of what I find on the net is... different... to the Wing Chun I practise.

Duncan

[dezhen2001]

guess everyones different then :)
took a while to get those clips working though :eek:

david

[aelward]

Disclaimer: This is not intended to be a Sifu-worship post.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much like many of the people here who said they gave up what they were studying to learn under a great teacher, the instructor in the school from the clips, Marc, came from another Wing Chun lineage, but gave it up and started from the beginning to learn with Sifu Lo Man Kam. I am not 100% sure, but I am fairly certain that it was the day after he had won the international kuoshu leitai (full contact sparring) championships in Taipei (1998, if my memory serves me well).

So what did he see in Sifu Lo's approach? While I am only guessing, I would figure that it was emphasis on fundamentals, a focus on principles, yet a flexibility in teaching and application. Follow the principles in training, you will not always end up with the same product because people are different! Just like if you teach two artists the fundamentals of watercolor painting, they will most likely come up with two different approaches and styles that may be equally aesthetically pleasing. Or if you give the same ingredients to two different master chefs, they will come up with different dishes that will still taste wonderful (ok, I've watched one too many Iron Chef episodes). And I can tell you that I have come across far more variety among the students in Sifu Lo's school than in the dozens of schools I've visited, and the several hundreds of people I have rolled with.

That said, in the three clips I looked at, I see aspects of Sifu Lo's approach: correct arm positions, mobility, and fluidity. Even rooting-- look how the knees are bent, feet parallel, and sitting back in the horse; and if you drew a straight line between their feet, it goes toward the opponent's centerline as bridge arms are established.

I will also point you to Duncan Leung's website, which many people have a fit over: http://members.tripod.com/~Wing_Chun/ Look at the video clips there, and you will see something different. Is it fundamentally sound? I do believe so.

[red5angel]

aelward said - "I see aspects of Sifu Lo's approach: correct arm positions, mobility, and fluidity. Even rooting-- look how the knees are bent, feet parallel, and sitting back in the horse"

What about economy of motion? Elbows in?

[gnugear]

My first thought was that it looked like karate/wing chun.

The movements look very large and open.

[fa_jing]

Very, very, VERY nice site. I especially enjoyed the clips of Lo sifu's teaching (second section). My only complaint is that I kept having to restart my browser every few clips.

You guys are nitpicky. Yes, there are obvious flaws in some of the action clips. For instance, I saw a lot of extraneous arm movement in the elbow defense. Sometimes there seemed to be extraneous footwork, moving back to defend, then move forward but your opponent stays in the same place? Unrealistic. And the defender seems over-excited, perhaps contributing to the flapping arms syndrome. BUT, still a very nice site considering what else is out there on the net! Much better than say, that Wing Tsun clip we were looking at a few days back - which I still enjoyed. I think it's been hashed out already that whenever you make a clip with your students, the attacks are unrealistic. True also in this case, but better than a lot of others I've seen.

It seems that no one that has trained outside of China demonstrates the cleaness of movement, deep understanding of basics that I've seen from the Chinese masters. Closeness to Yip Man and his senior students may be the factor here. Just that one clip of Lo sifu performing the Huen Sao from Sil lim tao, increased my understanding. Lo's mastery is also evident from the other clips.

Now, for the wierd: what kind of ready stance are they using in the action clips??? Looks like a cross between the Cheung front stance, and the JKD ready stance. You'll notice that in most of the clips, the defender is waiting with the back heel raised off of the floor. Well, it's different from what I have seen before.

-FJ

[red5angel]

Fa_jing said - "You guys are nitpicky"

You have to be man, how do you think you get precision and accuracy, fluidity of motion, etc? You have to be nitpicky at all times, paying close attention to where you are and what you are doing, eventually it all becomes second nature but you have to keep hammering away at it.

[fa_jing]

Red5Angel - your comments were correct regarding economy of motion, and elbows in. I just am against the whole tone of this thread - I mean, the practioners are decent, if not masterful, there may be some other influence like JKD, we have no idea 'cause we can't read German (help here!) And the second section was really nice as I stated, even the photo galleries were nice. Nothing wrong with constructive criticism, but let's give credit where credit is due - it's a nice looking site, and Lo impresses fully. One area where I would criticize is the use of sashes for even the beginners - goes against my philosophy, but hey, some people like to dress up!

-FJ

[fa_jing]

OK, I'll say it before anyone else does, "dress up and make believe" :D

[aelward]

Here is a step by step analysis of the defender's motions.

Video one, step by step
1. Intercetion with left fak sao. Fak sao elbow should be extended because it measures your long bridge.

2. left Lan, right da- In lan sao, the elbow is out. In this case, it is lifted as well to hit under the bridge.

3. right lap sao- starting from fak position, it is covering the upper gates.

4. left neck pull into right elbow. Okay, the elbow is out.

-------------------------------------------

Video two, step by step
1. right jum sao-- the elbow is out, and arm straight, plus I would personally never use it against a roundhouse kick.

2. left fak sao-- covers the mid and upper gates as you enter

3. left inside lap sao-- elbow is more or less in

4. right sweeping leg (biu jee form)- the left arm is out; it would probably be better to have the left hand placed against the opponent's right shoulder or lower back for better leverage

Video three:
1. left tan sao, elbow is in; w/knee guard

2. left pak sao with right punch. the body is not aligned, but the elbows are in.

3. left hand press to shoulder with right na sao to take down; right foot is sweeping (biu jee form application)


Some of these motions are not executed with precision; then again, could you so the same at that speed?

Now I know what you mean by "floppy" hands, and I will have to say that it is completely acceptable in the framework which I studied. It is called long-bridging, as opposed to elbow in short-bridge.

Is it good Wing Chun? Maybe sloppy at that speed, but given that Marc has plenty of fighting experience, who is to question its efficacy other than through trial and error? The question is, can his students apply the TECHNIQUES (i.e., physical expression of principles) that he teaches to defend themselves?

Can YOU use the techniques that your Sifu teaches you to defend yourself? Before you say yes, have you actually tried against someone from another style (in a controlled or non-controlled environment) with an equal amount of training? As a test for people who were overconfident in their skills, I have taken people with 1-5 years of Wing Chun training and fed them quick jabs, and they were still getting hit. And I suck at boxing. They faired even worse when hooks were added to the fray.

[red5angel]

Fa_jing - they may be nice guys, and some of them may even be able to fight, we were just discussing what we are observing in the pictures and videos. Its a good website but the wingchun just looks a little sloppy.
Aelward - hopefully we all mix it up a little in time, with each other as well as other styles......

[fa_jing]

Off-topic: As my Sifu likes to say, realistic fighting "isn't always pretty." And if someone can't deal with quick jabs or hooks from an amatuer after a moderate amount of study, you need to examine the teaching approach.

That's why I like my teacher's approach - because the answer to

"Can YOU use the techniques that your Sifu teaches you to defend yourself? Before you say yes, have you actually tried against someone from another style (in a controlled or non-controlled environment) with an equal amount of training? "

is a resounding YES, in my case. Although, it might not look pretty, see above.

-FJ

[planetwc]

They look like they can fight, especially:

http://www.lo-man-kam.de/videos/technik05.mpg

The first 4 clips appear more like Karate though. Perhaps it is because the goal was to showcase a specific technique, so it appeared more recipe like. Too much open arm movement and not enough economy of motion.

Technik7 is a nice fast entry, just lose the posing at the end. :)

And clip 9 shows these guys have a great sense of humor as well.


Originally posted by red5angel
Fa_jing - they may be nice guys, and some of them may even be able to fight, we were just discussing what we are observing in the pictures and videos. Its a good website but the wingchun just looks a little sloppy.
Aelward - hopefully we all mix it up a little in time, with each other as well as other styles......

[Alpha Dog]

I wouldn't be too quick to make any blanket statements about Lo Sifu's Wing Chun. Not only is the guy highly regarded in Taiwan and Hong Kong by martial artists, the police, and the military, he has taught a myriad and been doing Wing Chun, free of North American marketing gimmickry, for generations. Moreover, he doesn't run off at the mouth about how "great" or "authentic" he is. In fact, you would be hard pressed to get much information from the man at all.

If you see anything in his videos that looks strange, maybe you should look again.

[byond]

i have to agree with Alpha....lo sifu was a direct student of yip man....if you had the fortune of learning from him ,lineage wise, it would be like learning from leung sheung. so for someone who is a student of a student of a student of a student (whats that 4 generations from yip man?) i feel it might be hard to make an honest assesment of his skills. lo sifu started learning in 1954 if im not mistaken..perhaps a little before,...he was already at the school when wsl joined. lo sifu is yip mans nephew as well.
just because someone "looks" sloppy doesnt mean jack. ive seen ken chung students who dont have to actualy go into the deep stance to generate huge amounts of force...so if i was looking at a video of them i would say..."hey that looks sloppy ..look how shallow his horse is "....but in real life it works out that you cant tell what is gong on internaly with masters............

[aelward]

r5a writes:
> What about economy of motion? Elbows in?

How would you define economy of motion? I would say it using the least amount of energy to accomplish the most. It is not a concretely fixed position of hands, since everone has different body types. It is a fallacy to believe that just because Master X has to move his hand one inch to accomplish his goals that all of his students will as well. Economy of motion is an idea-- along with the other concepts of Wing Chun-- are a compass that point us in the right direction and let us find our own way; not a set of directions that tell you how to get from point A to point B. To do so would contrain the art, and turn us all into cookie-cutter practitioners.

The second section of Sifu Lo's form is more like "standard" Yip Man Wing Chun, and less like Sifu Ken Chung's (who I believe uses very minimal motion). It is, conceptually speaking, SNT's long bridge section, where you measure your maximum reach to the sides (sat sao), front (biu sao), back (ho gum sao), down (bian gum sao), and frontal distance between the waist and shoulders (mok sao and jao sao). For all of these aforementioned motions, the elbow are out and the arms straight. Yes, the elbows are out.

Now r5a, you can criticize all you want, but if you want to be constructive, you can provide what YOU would do in the circumstances, and maybe even put a video clip online for people to evaluate. And when some people slam you, you will realize that not everyone believes the same interpretation of the "truth" as you. It is not to say you are wrong, just that you express WC principles differently.

[dbulmer]

A couple of observations - I haven't seen them all yet.

a) There didn't seem to be any kicks used against kicks.
b) In some cases a straight punch could have been used yet the counter seemed to be the extension of the arm (look at 08)
The defender left himself very, very open to counter attack if the original was attacking by drawing in the opponent.
c) Guard position didn't seem amenable to small hand movements
and looked a little tense -

For the experienced guys - why use that type of guard? (it looked a little tense) where would chisao training have helped with that kind of guard?

The hand movements looked a little too slow - I would have thought an experienced WC guy could have taken advantage of the long hand movement.

These are personal observations from a novice.

[old jong]

We don't have to be more "catholic" than the pope and criticise every little details about a particular school. I think that they are pretty good from what I have seen.Their focus is not on rigidity,that's all! ;)

[aelward]

Sifu Lo says that he joined in 1950, and his handwritten listing of Yip Man students places him in the REstaurant Union association, fourth after Lee Man, Leung Sheung, and Lok Yiu. I have not verified this elsewhere, but I know that Yip Chun's biography of Yip Man dates are wrong with regard to when LMK started (1954).

In a biography of WSL (http://www.cnvt.com/mysifu3.htm), he states that he first came to Yip Man's school in 1953, around Chinese New Year when most students were not present. He made short order of some beginning students, and was told to fight LMK, who YM referred to as being "someone with deeper martial understanding." Apparently, WSL beat him as well; according to TST's account on the VTAA website, Yip Bo Ching "took care of Wong," and Wong joined the school.


As for nitpicking, Sifu Lo is one of the biggest nitpickers out there. He expects 100% precision in forms and applications at his school. On the other hand, he allows for a lot of flexibility. And doesn't set down exact curriculum for his student's schools. As long as they follow a certain framework (SNT, basic chi sao, turning, free chi sao, CK, BJ, dummy, weapons), they are given a free reign in how to teach applications. For this reason, some of his students aren't as stringent as he is in teaching. I have been guilty of this (but actually, working out with some of Sifu Ken Chung's students motivated me to really go back to basics and fundamentals).

He can be very critical of other Wing Chun people, but at the same time, he does not talk about himself. When I first went there, I had no idea he was the nephew of Yip Man, or even a student of Yip Man, until someone told me two months into training. He teaches openly and freely, because, in his words, "it is better to have several good students teaching abroad, than just one old man in Taiwan."

But for those among you who think the earlier video clips were a travesty, be sure to check out his book "Police Kung Fu" (there is a link from the mainpage of KF Online); you will see how far Wing Chun principles can be manipulated, and you can all b*tch and moan about how it isn't Wing Chun (which it wasn't supposed to be).

[Alpha Dog]

I am planning to visit Lo Sifu during Chinese New Year. With luck he will be around. Any idea if he will be in Taipei then or does he leave the island at this time?

[yuanfen]

Some of you might want to dig up pics of Lo sifu throwing hard chopsticks into boards. Impressive throwing power witha light object like a chopstick.

Forget the bull in a china shop threads and foot in mouth disease.. Can you guys do what Lo sifu can do.? Urge you not to be in the way when he throws.

[Grendel]

Hi Aelward,

Good analysis.


Can YOU use the techniques that your Sifu teaches you to defend yourself?

Yes. At times, I've found applications in chis sao immediately after learning a technique. This said, no technique works all the time, or we'd be wise to use just that one when it counts. :)

Why was it do you suppose, that your boxing jabs were so effective? Were the subjects in any sort of ready position, for example with a wu sao up? If there's one thing Wing Chun should be good for, it's dealing with a jab. Hooks, however, are another matter. They require a lot more experience it seems.

Regards,

[aelward]

Grendel writes:
> Why was it do you suppose, that your boxing jabs were so
> effective? Were the subjects in any sort of ready position, for
> example with a wu sao up?

I should start by saying that in every case, it was with someone who was overconfident with their skill, which is why I proposed the experiment. People who trusted their teachers SO much that they didn't actually test to see if the techniques worked, or at least how they could make them work; in a handful of the cases, they were told that their techniques were "too deadly" to practice against other styles.

Yes, these people's guards were up, but covering only up to the chin. success often relates to the range-- if they are already within range of the jab, the chance of hitting increases. If you have to close first, the success drops. On the other hand, circling footwork, fading back footwork, and feints all have high hit percentages. The easiest targets are all those who have been told to enter with chain punches ("if the guy is being pushed back, he won't be able to mount an attack").

[aelward]

Unfortunately, Sifu Lo is rarely in Taipei during Chinese New Year. He usually uses that time to go teach seminars abroad. We are trying to get him to do Las Vegas and San Francisco next year :)

[planetwc]

John,

Please let us know when he is in the area (SF) and if his seminars will be open to the rest of us. It would be quite interesting for me personally to see and feel one of the old masters at work.

regards,

David Williams


Originally posted by aelward
Unfortunately, Sifu Lo is rarely in Taipei during Chinese New Year. He usually uses that time to go teach seminars abroad. We are trying to get him to do Las Vegas and San Francisco next year :)

[dbulmer]

Aelward,
I think if you go into any WC school anywhere in the world it would be easy to nitpick. It does not follow that the WC is bad because someone finds something different.

I liked what I saw but I also saw things which I think other WC guys and other stylists could take advantage of. IMHO this is always the case.

The problem with videos is that they show a brief moment - they don't show what a teacher teaches to the class nor as you point out what the teacher corrects.

best wishes to you!

[black and blue]

Some interesting responses.

IMO - the video footage on the first page still sucks. High stances, arms flapping out wide, a blend of Karate, WC and JKD. Each to his own, but it's not my cup of tea.

I just find it interesting how, whatever the lineage, WC around the world looks so different. I taped myself training with some friends and, on looking at the footage, said: "Urgh... my footwork's awful."

I'm sure none of us are as good as we'd like to think :)

Someone spoke about their WC students of 1-5 years having trouble with jabs and esp. hooks. These are attacks we practise in pretty much every lesson. A couple, well three, people I train with have boxing experience. What they hate more than anything else is being smothered. They can put out very powerful jabs and hooks but don't like this distance being closed to a few inches. There first reaction is to try and hug - a response that isn't suited to an opponet prepared to utilise low kicks (to ankle, shin, knee cap) and man geng sau with knees (to groin and stomach).

Most people in the class have a little Karate experience and some have done TKD for a few years. I've not tried my Wing Chun in a 'live' situation with other Kung Fu styles.

I have dealt with a couple of hooks on the street, but I can't really count this as practicle experience. The guy was very drunk and punched like a drunk (ie. his punch was way off target and followed the biggest arc I've ever seen). His second hook was equally as 'rough' only with almost no power.

Alpha Dog - I went back and had another look at the mpegs as you suggested. The first page of footage... it still sucks! A couple of those guys were big - so I wouldn't particularly want to face them - but I still thought their motions were un-Wing-Chun-like.

Like I said - each to his own. Was just interested to see what others here thought.

Duncan

Ps. Just a quick note. It seems every branch of WC and every other martial art (JKD, Ninjustsu, Jujitsu, etc) has been shown to police forces and combat units. This information appears on every arts' main sites. Doesn't validate a martial art in the slightest.

[12345]

I think the videos show people that are good at what they do. There are a couple of sequences that are questionable, notable number 2, where the movements are a bit too large and sweeping to be classic wing chun - but like someone else said it is done at speed and sometimes we all (well me anyway) do make bigger movements than are necessary in the heat of battle (or in this case the heat of a demo).

This is nitpicking but why does demo 2 feature chopping a kicking foot/shin with your hand? I would have thought that was a bad idea. Also I don't want to reopen the debate but I notice he steps back to avoid the kick - so presumably this guy is not bound by some convention that you never step back - good for him.

I also thought number 8 leaves himself a bit open.

They also like sweeps don't they.

Much better than I could do though and better than most stuff that gets posted on the net. I applaud anyone willing to show what they do openly - actions speak louder than words - nice.

[Alpha Dog]

Originally posted by 12345
I I notice he steps back to avoid the kick - so presumably this guy is not bound by some convention that you never step back - good for him.

He steps back?:eek: What could he possibly have been thinking??

B&B -- you take me too literally. I don't mean "go back, look at the tapes, and you will suddenly change your mind." Looking again would be make a more concerted effort to find out how Lo teaches Wing Chun.

Cheers

[red5angel]

Aelward - no need to get mad, or frustrated, its what we do here. Looking at any videos we all look for certain things we would or would not do.......

As for economy of motion you said -

"How would you define economy of motion? I would say it using the least amount of energy to accomplish the most. It is not a concretely fixed position of hands, since everone has different body types. It is a fallacy to believe that just because Master X has to move his hand one inch to accomplish his goals that all of his students will as well. Economy of motion is an idea-- along with the other concepts of Wing Chun-- are a compass that point us in the right direction and let us find our own way; not a set of directions that tell you how to get from point A to point B. To do so would contrain the art, and turn us all into cookie-cutter practitioners. "

I agree with using the least amount of energy, which includes the distance moved plus the energy used to accomplish a particular goal. It may be a fallacy to hope a teachers students can do what he does, but most students dont put the time or energy thier instructors do or have into it. If you did, you coudl accomplish the same thing at some point whether you may have to work harder to get thier or not. Once you are there it becomes the same thing. The "ideas" of wingchun are being interpreted to loosely in my opinion. It sounds nice to say that each and every person makes it his own but I think that idea has been taken too far. I think to even expres sit in that way is going down the wrong road, since in the beginning you must have faith in your teachings and your teacher until you truly understand what it is you are learning. Its not about cookie cutter its about doing things correctly, and understanding them thoroughly before deciding what is best for you.

[Chum Kil]

Not to bad, just different than the way I do it. I saw alot of take downs, not to much punching (hand strikes) or follow ups. There are so many application drills in wing chun, so which ones you use is up to you. The way I learned was the drills are first pre-arranged then random. It looks to me these drills are pre-arranged. It takes alot of practice to pull off applications in the random setting. They still did a good job, especially if they were in a random setting. Someone mentioned something about jabs and being in the man sau/wu sau position. I feel very confident in this position regardless of distance, but with my hands down and the distance is to close I'm skeptical. I also have a little problem with hooks.

[fa_jing]

Does anyone know why in the first page of clips they have a raised rear heel in the ready stance?

-FJ

[yuanfen]

Who knows who knows red5angel knows

[aelward]

r5a writes:

> Aelward - no need to get mad, or frustrated, its what we do
> here. Looking at any videos we all look for certain things we
> would or would not do.......

r5a: no anger or frustration at all on my part, only amusement. In all honesty, I would not advocate using the applications that they came up with in those videos myself. But who am I to say:

> The "ideas" of wingchun are being interpreted to loosely in my
> opinion.

Then again, who are YOU to evaluate?

Instead of just saying "that is wrong" because of whatever reason, why don't you also be more constructive and offer an idea of what YOU would do, and why that approach is better for YOU? In fact, why not put a video clip of yourself up? It takes a lot more bravery, and open-mindedness to put yourself up to public scrutiny as these people have.

[yuanfen]

In fact, why not put a video clip of yourself up?
-------------------------------------------------------------
A video clip? Oh I am so excited about wing chun.

[yuanfen]

Then again, who are YOU to evaluate?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why he is someone with 2 years of a wing chun study group
experience.
Arent you excired?

[Alpha Dog]

at the thought of calling my school a study group instead. that would sound so much less pretensious and snooty. then i can laugh at people! i can say, "Look at the people on their way to SCHOOOOOOL! Whooohooo, aren't they special?"

[yuanfen]

School days- great days. My school is better than your school-
or is it the other way around. But I am excited. I just remain excited. Any thoughts?

[TjD]

well.. i've looked over #1 and #5... and im not quite sure its wing chun

i definately couldnt find any in #5!?! wheres the wing chun stance? the guy on the left has all his weight on his front foot, then he steps back but his front foot is still the only one planted; i think i saw something which looked slightly like a tan sau but i cant be sure

the guy on the right just wasn't rooted at all; and appeared to be demonstrating karate


however all that being said, i dont think you can really judge someones wing chun by a few application clips - clips of actual chi sau would show a great deal more about the quality of their wing chun

peace
travis

[Mr Punch]

Sorry. Of course IMHO!

I'm not saying Lo Man Kam is bad. But I hope these people are 1/2 year students, except the scary hairy geezer (oh, sorry Yuanfen!: the scary hairy possible sifu, or scary hairy possible somebody else's sihing!)

1: The fak sau to lap sau Aelward spotted (well done! Couldn't recognise them myself!:D ) were not covering the upper gates. They were covering the possibility of someone dropping something on your head (something I never practice for: guess those falling pianos'll get me every time!) Far too high and completely open.

2: Looked kinda like a high gaun for the full force of a kick. So the rest of the moves should have been done with the left hand only, cos his right would have been broken. The step in with the (Aelward says) fak + left inside lap, starts with the left going too far up again, and the right is completely drawn back to the waist = completely open. The takedown is completely sideways: there is no centreline connection, and they both start in the same position = the other guy could do exactly the same move.

3: First; honest mistakes: the intercepting leg comes too high (it goes higher than his waist, so why didn't he convert it to a kick to the post/nuts rather than standing on one leg? Maybe because he's doing a set drill, not free san sau: in which case he should still change, or he'll be pracitising nonsense!), and tan sau going outward, not forwards (not important in this case, there's nothing else coming in). Then his left hand comes right back before he turns the corner; and as he steps in he leans too far back, using his opponent as a balance to steady himself. At this point, his opponent's leg is inside, and his opponent has a more stable posture (albeit sideways). Also, BTW, the opponent painfully obviously can't kick that high!! Why bother!

4: Nice. But he still waits in the kwan sau for the full force of the kick to come in.

5: Possible kickboxing influence from 'defender'? Too relaxed. His kicks are coming round, and going sideways. He finishes sideway each time... in fact dangerously close to being backwards on! The second kick, furthermore, makes a gift of the inside of his left knee: good job his 'opponent' isn't actually doing anything.

6: Nice; but after the pak, he brings his hand right back to the shoulder again leaving himself completely open. The throw is more like number 2 should have been.

7: Seems OK but very tense (both of them - maybe the left-hand guy is a beginner: or should I say the left-hand somebody else's possible future sihing/sifu/sigung?!)

8: The 'opponent' is doing nothing!!! Is that a punch?? Somebody fetch my grandmother to ***** slap this mofo (possible future old mofo) back from cloud cuckoo land! Left hand guy is AGAIN left hand up, right hand down = completely open.

Again. I'm not saying Lo Man Kam is bad (I would love a chance to train with him to see for myself). I'm not even saying these students are bad (I've never trained with them either!). But these vid clips suck.

And to say 'ooh diddums, but aren't the lickle wingchunners brave for putting themselves on the net, and why don't you?' is no excuse for putting BAD vids on the net. Who am I to evaluate? Another eternal student! If you don't evaluate, you don't learn. I've just been very critical of these vids, but I'm even more self-critical, and if I were to put footage of myself up on the net I would be the first to rip it to pieces. Doesn't mean I'm bad. We all make mistakes, but some of these bloomers look like they've been drilled, not just messed up in the heat of the moment...

Please feel free to go mad and flame away, or surprise me, and take it with a pinch of salt, coming back with reasoned criticism :D .

[aelward]

Mat writes:
> Please feel free to go mad and flame away, or surprise me, and
> take it with a pinch of salt, coming back with reasoned
> criticism .

Hmm, I never thought myself as a flamer; but then I guess incompetent people never realize it. I am sorry if I seem mad and flame; I am certainly not angry (maybe be a little exasperated at r5a).

That out of the way, let me try to surprise you with reasoned criticism.

Two points of this post:
1. should these clips be up?
2. who are we to evaluate, and how should we do it?


> And to say 'ooh diddums, but aren't the lickle wingchunners
> brave for putting themselves on the net, and why don't you?' is
> no excuse for putting BAD vids on the net.

We measure good and bad through our own understanding and interpretation. While there are some objective standards, evaluation is completely subjective. That said, I am sure there is at least one Wing Chun practitioner out there who will object to every single video clip on the web.

> Who am I to evaluate? Another eternal student! If you don't
> evaluate, you don't learn.

You can see these videos as a chance to evaluate and learn then. If anything, you can readily say, "I'm glad I don't do Wing Chun like that," and so the clip has served its purpose.

Now, like I have said before, I would not do what those guys were doing in the videos, even though I come from the same lineage. (In all honesty, I did not have time to even download and watch all of them). But just because I do not do these techniques, or even necessarily agree with them, does not give me the grounds to say they are BAD (I did this in my younger years, and really regret it because it kept me from making friends with and learning from certain instructors). I might say it does not mesh with the way I learned for xxxxx reasons; but I am not going to say it as if I were an all-knowing Wing Chun expert, but rather from a position of modesty and an undertsanding that things are interpreted differently. Maybe if I were a Tsui Shang Ting or a Lok Yiu or a Sum Nung then I would feel more confident in writing something off so quickly. But I am not, and neither are the majority of people who post here.

Now, your criticism, unlike that of say, r5a, breaks things down point by point, technique by technique; instead of just making a blanket statement about "elbows out, no rooting." In some places, you even made your own suggestions. I don't know who you are, or where or how long you have been learning, but I am willing to bet that you have more experience both in WC and with dealing with other WC families than some of the people here.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by aelward
Mat writes:
> Please feel free to go mad and flame away, or surprise me, and
> take it with a pinch of salt, coming back with reasoned
> criticism .

Hmm, I never thought myself as a flamer; but then I guess incompetent people never realize it. I am sorry if I seem mad and flame; I am certainly not angry (maybe be a little exasperated at r5a).


Hi aelward. Wasn't aiming that part at anyone, but most people are so prissy on this board...


Originally posted by aelward
That out of the way, let me try to surprise you with reasoned criticism.

Two points of this post:
1. should these clips be up?
2. who are we to evaluate, and how should we do it?

> And to say 'ooh diddums, but aren't the lickle wingchunners
> brave for putting themselves on the net, and why don't you?' is
> no excuse for putting BAD vids on the net.

We measure good and bad through our own understanding and interpretation. While there are some objective standards, evaluation is completely subjective. That said, I am sure there is at least one Wing Chun practitioner out there who will object to every single video clip on the web.


Yep, that's me I'm afraid. Usually I don't bother because there is no point in arguing things like this: as you say evaluation is subjective, and the proof is in practice. I hope that one day, I'll have made my way round a lot more high class wingchun teachers, and I don't mean to alienate myself... which is why I said that I don't mean any disrespect to Lo Man Kam (who the hell am I??!).

I was just making the point that I would put vids of myself up if I thought it would do any good to the wingchun community. So, yes, bad vids do have a purpose (so mine certainly would have!!:D). Please see below!


Originally posted by aelward
> Who am I to evaluate? Another eternal student! If you don't
> evaluate, you don't learn.

You can see these videos as a chance to evaluate and learn then. If anything, you can readily say, "I'm glad I don't do Wing Chun like that," and so the clip has served its purpose.

That's what I was saying!


Originally posted by aelward

Now, like I have said before, I would not do what those guys were doing in the videos, even though I come from the same lineage. (In all honesty, I did not have time to even download and watch all of them). But just because I do not do these techniques, or even necessarily agree with them, does not give me the grounds to say they are BAD (I did this in my younger years, and really regret it because it kept me from making friends with and learning from certain instructors). I might say it does not mesh with the way I learned for xxxxx reasons; but I am not going to say it as if I were an all-knowing Wing Chun expert, but rather from a position of modesty and an undertsanding that things are interpreted differently. Maybe if I were a Tsui Shang Ting or a Lok Yiu or a Sum Nung then I would feel more confident in writing something off so quickly. But I am not, and neither are the majority of people who post here.

Now, your criticism, unlike that of say, r5a, breaks things down point by point, technique by technique; instead of just making a blanket statement about "elbows out, no rooting." In some places, you even made your own suggestions. I don't know who you are, or where or how long you have been learning, but I am willing to bet that you have more experience both in WC and with dealing with other WC families than some of the people here.

My apologies if I sounded high-handed, but too many people make excuses for their wingchun. I have been practising (not just) wingchun for long enough to know my (too many!) failings!

But no, this does not mesh with my wingchun. And some of these things look like serious problems, maybe engrained by some training method to me... (like leaving yourself wide open when you step in because you have deliberately moved one arm up and the other back) so I think they are BAD!

But that's why I said at the top 'Of course: all IMHO'! I usually don't put that, because people use that as an excuse to spout crap, but I was hoping to provide some reasoned argument to the supposition that 'it's all just a bit different'... sorry if I failed. I did mean the H though, and this is why I usually refrain from such opinionated discussions. I am just another eternal student but sometimes, I don't think 'it's a bit different' should be taken without criticism.

[AdrianUK]

I have noticed whenever someone posts a clip everyone jumps in with detail it picking, fair enough I guess, but what I would like to see either on a web site or if someone knows of a video of it, wing chun (any lineage) being used to win full contact, limited no rules competition fighting (real street fight would be best but lets be realistic). I say this because I have had it said by a previous wing chun instructor (who loves to fight and also does NHB) that a lot of the detail goes out the window in the few seconds when a fight starts. Me, I am nowhere near the level to prove or deny this and all the 'masters' seem to have retired and done all their fighting off camera. So can anyone step forward and show wing chun (VT, WT whatever) in non staged action ?

Thanks All
Respect

[urban tea]

REDANGEL,

To answer your question about rooting, TST has a very high stance. It looks like he is basically standing up and they also feel the melting root.

Tai chi doesn't sink too low either on their standing post and they can root. Hsing yi only bends their knees a little bit.

My sifu told me... " It's not how high you are or how low. It's your alignment that counts."