Is Wing Tsun Leung Ting the best branch of wing chun? [Archive]

John Weiland

08-27-2002, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Texas chili?Ugh... specially with frijoles- mas ugh ugh!
The best chilis in the US are grown in and around Hatch, New Mexico.Mi amigo- Tejas chili con frijoles is good only for jet propulsion west where they really californicate chili. ugh ugh ugh. For cooking it los indios in nuevo mexico and arizona(Pueblos and O'Othams) make supremo chili. Si.
Finally, a worthy topic on which we disagree. :)

Yuanfen, I've seen you make that claim before about the chilis around Hatch. I disagree, California has the best. Likely New Mexico got theirs from us, but not the varieties.

As for Texas, you're right of course. Do you remember LBJ's gruel that he used to pass off as chili? Nuff said. But, back on the subject of BBQ, California still leads. Heck, in Texas, I've been served BBQ with "BBQ sauce." That's amateur stuff. :rolleyes: The best BBQ starts with the best marinade, which naturally gives us more enlightened Californians the lead. :)

Regards,

John Weiland

08-27-2002, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by red5angel
from what I have seen and experience WT is far from the best. Its very external. What I found odd was that while visiting a school they claimed to be able to teach small people to fight but all the small people were getting their butts kicked by the bigger people hands down, including the instructor! They had all sorts of "neato" drills and stuff though, looked very "fun". Oh yeah and they could teach me to fight effectively against 90% of attackers in the first 9-10 months, whatever that means.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2218456.stm

Jedi Knight is the religion of 70,000 Australians.

Jedi Knight is even being included on the list of religions by UK census authorities.

Congratulations. You're not alone anymore.

red5angel

08-27-2002, 11:05 AM

John W I have never been alone, just one of the few. I think you should stick with chili my friend. ;)

UltimateFighter

08-27-2002, 11:15 AM

To be honest, most styles of wingchun have a lot of corruption. WT has split into two, the EMBAS organisation is basically taking over America. WT is essentially Wing Chun evolved. There is a place for restraints and some grapplling. I am interested in what the US bracnh of WT does, without lat sau?

red5angel

08-27-2002, 11:29 AM

"WT is essentially Wing Chun evolved."

Sounds too much like WT propoganda to me Ultimatefighter, what do you mean? Are you talking about the focus on grappling?

John Weiland

08-27-2002, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by red5angel
John W I have never been alone, just one of the few. I think you should stick with chili my friend. ;)
And I think you should stick with your fantasy of being a Jedi Knight. As I told your soulmate, Rolling Hand, don't ever change.

Tristan

08-28-2002, 07:55 AM

Oh yeah, we don't do the lat sao in the States any more. Just the "Traditional" methods here. I'm not sure what I think of it yet, but that's where I'll have to rely on the experience and wisdom of my Sifu and Sigung.

The "traditional methods" also uses "lat sao". But it differs from the made up stuff by Kernie. Latsao is practiced in the higher programms (technician) to applicate the chisao sections you learned before.
Think you´re not that far yet, just wait and see...

T.

red5angel

08-28-2002, 08:20 AM

Hmmmm...Dont know if this helps but the EBMAS school I visited in Minneapolis about 2 months ago was using Lat sao, or some version of it anyway.

jweir

08-28-2002, 09:15 AM

I would absolutely agree that Leung Ting's Wing Tsun is the best. It seems completely obvious to me, especially since I've been doing it for 5 years and I've never tried another lineage. I don't understand why it's not obvious to all of the WC people who are clearly just jealous of WT's success and obvious superiority. In case you didn't see it, this paragraph was a joke. Do not reply to it as if I just insulted you.

Seriously though UltimateFighter, you have to look at the school as well as the lineage. I've met WC people from good lineages, and some of them knew there stuff quite well. I've also met some people from lineages that were so far removed from any decent sifu that the students never had a chance of getting a solid WC foundation. I've visited four other WT schools. Three of them were teaching horrible stuff and one of them was absolutely wonderful. If WT is taught badly, it sucks, but when it is taught well, it's as good as any lineage can be. So is it the best? Yes, but only if your Si-fu has his sh*t together. Which school do you train at?

Right now the Leung Ting branch in the US is changing a lot. For one thing, the three crappy WT schools I visited are no longer in the organization. The curriculum has also changed to put a lot more emphasis on softness and the basic principles. The EWTO lat sau program has also been de-emphasized or removed altogether.

UltimateFighter

08-28-2002, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by red5angel
"WT is essentially Wing Chun evolved."

Sounds too much like WT propoganda to me Ultimatefighter, what do you mean? Are you talking about the focus on grappling?

Hey, I am definately NOT one who buys into propaganda. I hate to say it, but WT is full of propaganda in their efforts to expand. The split with EBMAS has hit the organisation hard.

From my experience however and discounting propaganda, when I say 'Wing Chun evolved' I mean that WT is a development of traditional Wing Chun. It is less "mechanical". Training is street orientated. Yes, part of this is the emphasis on grappling. When you realise that the joint head of the system and 10th level master Kernspecht is a former Freestyle submission wrestler, of course WT will be more grappling orientated than other branches. Grappling is a HUGE part of fighting. But it is not just that. 'Evolved' in that the emphasis is on street defence. Links to Special forces groups means WT has had the input to discover what works and what doesn't. That is why some of the old 'lap-sau' drills from WC were thrown out in WT, because they were deemed ineffective training drills.

When I look at some branches where they don't even teach a hook punch, I think to myself that that is not a practical fighting system. WT could be improved further however. They should do more sparring.

John Weiland

08-28-2002, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter

Hey, I am definately NOT one who buys into propaganda. I hate to say it, but WT is full of propaganda in their efforts to expand. The split with EBMAS has hit the organisation hard.
No kidding. :)

From my experience however and discounting propaganda, when I say 'Wing Chun evolved' I mean that WT is a development of traditional Wing Chun. It is less "mechanical". Training is street orientated.
Yip Man Wing Chun puts its emphasis on precision, structure, position, sensitivity, and power. This is less mechanical than the WT approach. So called street orientation just allows for sloppy techniques.

Yes, part of this is the emphasis on grappling. When you realise that the joint head of the system and 10th level master Kernspecht is a former Freestyle submission wrestler, of course WT will be more grappling orientated than other branches.
More propaganda. What does this business of granting themselves "nth" level master titles have to do with skill levels?

Grappling is a HUGE part of fighting.

Only among grapplers. In Yip Man Wing Chun, it is not emphasized because it is not needed and not often effective against a real fighter.

But it is not just that. 'Evolved' in that the emphasis is on street defence. Links to Special forces groups means WT has had the input to discover what works and what doesn't. That is why some of the old 'lap-sau' drills from WC were thrown out in WT, because they were deemed ineffective training drills.
DEVOLVED to street fighting. As for the lap sao drill being ineffective, any drill taught incorrectly would be ineffective training. I have seen Emin do lap sao and it appeared effective, or does he belong to a different branch of WT from you? Perhaps he missed the memo that lap sao doesn't work.

When I look at some branches where they don't even teach a hook punch, I think to myself that that is not a practical fighting system. WT could be improved further however. They should do more sparring. Trying to do hooks against good Yip Man Wing Chun is a sure way to lose. Please continue to advocate them. As for sparring, how many years of paying club dues does a WT student have to have before they get to chi sao, let alone sparring?

UltimateFighter

08-28-2002, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by John Weiland
No kidding. :)
[B]Yip Man Wing Chun puts its emphasis on precision, structure, position, sensitivity, and power. This is less mechanical than the WT approach. So called street orientation just allows for sloppy techniques.
[B]
Only among grapplers. In Yip Man Wing Chun, it is not emphasized because it is not needed and not often effective against a real fighter.
[B]DEVOLVED to street fighting. As for the lap sao drill being ineffective, any drill taught incorrectly would be ineffective training. I have seen Emin do lap sao and it appeared effective, or does he belong to a different branch of WT from you? Perhaps he missed the memo that lap sao doesn't work.
[B]Trying to do hooks against good Yip Man Wing Chun is a sure way to lose. Please continue to advocate them. As for sparring, how many years of paying club dues does a WT student have to have before they get to chi sao, let alone sparring?

Unfortunately, your comments prove you have never been in a real fight and know very little about real martial arts. Grappling is involved in all fights. It doesn't matter what style you do, grappling will take place. If you don't believe me, watch the supposed top Yip man student William Cheung grappling and rolling around the floor with Emin Boztepe, before Emin kindly elbowed him into submission (from a mount position on the ground). You really are going to be in for a big wakeup call if you ever get into a fight, much less with a wrestler or Judo practioner........
As for hooks- Yip man taught hooks, so what is your problem with them?

And I started Chi -sau within 4 months of training WT. Maybe if you get to my level one day you will realase that it is not how much you learn, it is how you apply what you have learned that counts.

aelward

08-28-2002, 01:01 PM

John Weiland writes:
> Besides, I believe we proved the worth of Leung Sheung style
> BBQ on Saturday.

I hope you realize I was speaking in jest, about "all the Leung Sheung people..." as I am sure we have all seen and experienced, a "lineage" is not necessarily defined or even practiced by the most vocal descendants.

>It was a pleasure meeting you and your students.

Likewise. Sorry we didn't get a chance to roll, maybe next time, when our stomachs are not likely to purge their contents from a gentle ab-shot.

red5angel

08-28-2002, 01:08 PM

Ultimatefighter, while I may agree with you on your assessment of John W, I would have to disagree with the idea that ALL fights go to grappling. I think if you are in MMA or a grappling school you might be more apt to believe it, much like a TMA guy may be more apt to think the opposite. I think the chance is always there and you should be prepared, but take some time cruising all the sites that have video of street fighst and such. In my own personal experience , the fights I have seen have rarely gone to the groud, although normally the looser ends up on the ground after a good shot or two.
I say the best choice is that while you should be prepared for any eventuality, you should always train to control a fight and play on your own terms and not on theirs. Before John W goes off on an inaccurate judgement of what I just said, let me say that I dont think you always have control, but you can train to have it most of the time.
I dont like the way WT seems to always take it to the ground, its yet another thing I think is not very wingchun like. If you train for eventualities most of your fights on the street will not go to the ground.
There is another thread about WC getting its butt kicked by MMA. here is I think why, MMA guys train to go to the ground, they want to tie you up and either submit you or ground and pound you. Thats not necessarily wing chuns fighting strategy but the only guys I have seen use wc in the ring try to play on these MMA guys terms and the shouldnt. They should be prepared for it. In the ring they may even have to train hard for it.

John Weiland

08-28-2002, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter

Unfortunately, your comments prove you have never been in a real fight and know very little about real martial arts. Grappling is involved in all fights. It doesn't matter what style you do, grappling will take place.

The thread asked a question about WT which I tried to answer. Sorry if you can't bear the truth. :rolleyes:

I have been in martial arts for more than 30 years, and unfortunately for my karma, I've been in many real fights, often against multiple opponents. Before training Wing Chun I did get surprised ONCE and got taken to the ground where I knocked out one opponent and then recovered my feet and chased his three friends away after ruining their day. I admit in my other scraps, I kept my feet and encouraged my opponents to go to the ground the hard way.

If you don't believe me, watch the supposed top Yip man student William Cheung grappling and rolling around the floor with Emin Boztepe, before Emin kindly elbowed him into submission (from a mount position on the ground).

I don't consider that incident to be proof of anything, but what I've been saying. No trained Wing Chun fighter goes to the ground. Their fight demonstrated that neither knew what to do. Boeztepe's attacks were clearly ineffective. Cheung wasn't hurt, let alone knocked out. Clearly Boeztepe's training up to that time in WT was insufficient.

You really are going to be in for a big wakeup call if you ever get into a fight, much less with a wrestler or Judo practioner........
Judo was a lot of fun, but I found jiu jitsu was more practical. As for wrestling, I don't consider it fighting, just sport, rough maybe, but just sport.

As for hooks- Yip man taught hooks, so what is your problem with them?
A hook is a formidable weapon for some people. The problem with hooks is that they deviate from the centerline and in my boxing experience, most people cannot deliver them properly. If hooks are being emphasized in Wing Chun, it's because the teachers don't understand Wing Chun principles.

And I started Chi -sau within 4 months of training WT. Maybe if you get to my level one day you will realase that it is not how much you learn, it is how you apply what you have learned that counts.
I've only been studying Wing Chun for five years, but I suspect you don't know what you don't know. Sorry if I've burst your bubble. I have met many WT folks and after they have experieced what Wing Chun is, I've seen many of them defect to better instruction.

Regards,

red5angel

08-28-2002, 03:25 PM

30 whole years!:eek: And you only got surprised once!:eek: Mayeb you and Boztepe should hook up and compare fight records, he has 300 undefeated.:rolleyes: But it does sound so very impressive on the internet.

anerlich

08-28-2002, 03:31 PM

Jedi Knight is the religion of 70,000 Australians.

I am pleased to say I am not one of them.

tnwingtsun

08-28-2002, 03:35 PM

"No trained Wing Chun fighter goes to the ground."

WT 101 as explained to me,"don't go to the ground,if you end up down there,get up ASAP!"

"And I started Chi -sau within 4 months of training WT."

IMO,MUCH TOO SOON!!

John Weiland

08-28-2002, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by red5angel
30 whole years!:eek: And you only got surprised once!:eek: Mayeb you and Boztepe should hook up and compare fight records, he has 300 undefeated.:rolleyes: But it does sound so very impressive on the internet.
Once again, you have impressed me. :confused: Wish you could have made it to the Bay Area WC picnic. There is more to Wing Chun than Minneapolis.

John Weiland

08-28-2002, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by anerlich

I am pleased to say I am not one of them.
Little wonder why the government tracks them though. If they get big enough, look to see a Yoda for PM campaign. :)

Cheer up, all. Winter's coming on and Minneapolis communications should be subject to weather outages. Hang in there.

planetwc

08-28-2002, 04:39 PM

Red5,

Please consider the following:

1. John trains within the SAME lineage as YOU DO for 5 Years.
2. John has trained longer in THAT lineage than YOU HAVE.
3. John has cross trained in Judo AND Ju Jutsu.
4. John has streetfighting experience.

Something for both you and your new buddy "Ulitmate Fighter" to understand before you make assumptions about people you don't really know and have never crossed hands with. I have spent many years training with John in Wing Chun and have an actual perspective to draw upon in that regard.

So before you PUBLICALLY disparage your si-hings, you might want to do some homework before continuing to stir things up.

regards,

David Williams

Originally posted by red5angel
30 whole years!:eek: And you only got surprised once!:eek: Mayeb you and Boztepe should hook up and compare fight records, he has 300 undefeated.:rolleyes: But it does sound so very impressive on the internet.

anerlich

08-28-2002, 07:58 PM

If they get big enough, look to see a Yoda for PM campaign.

Some of our senior politicians resemble him physically. And many have the charisma and intelligence of a renovated green glove puppet with funny ears.

Arguably he could manage the country as well as some of the incumbents. Jeez, even Jar Jar could.

I'd say you guys have an equivalent situation with Dubya ;)

John Weiland

08-28-2002, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by anerlich

Some of our senior politicians resemble him physically. And many have the charisma and intelligence of a renovated green glove puppet with funny ears.

We have the former president who does a fair impression of Jabba the (Pizza) Hut.

Arguably he could manage the country as well as some of the incumbents. Jeez, even Jar Jar could.
We just sent one of our congressmen (Jim Trafficant) to prison for his Jar Jar hairstyle or some such transgression.

I'd say you guys have an equivalent situation with Dubya ;)
Maybe so. :) I haven't seen the stats on mental misfits...er...Star Wars worshippers who voted in the last election. I think that on a recent thread, it was noted that most are in prison or Minnesota in this country. Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck are reportedly frequent top vote getters in Minnesota, where they have a cartoonish former pro wrestler as governor. :rolleyes:

Regards,

Rolling_Hand

08-28-2002, 08:54 PM

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Red5,

Please consider the following:

1. John trains within the SAME lineage as YOU DO for 5 Years.
2. John has trained longer in THAT lineage than YOU HAVE.
3. John has cross trained in Judo AND Ju Jutsu.
4. John has streetfighting experience.--from PlanetWC
---------------------------------------------------------------------

History is mostly guessing; the rest is prejudice.

The intellegent man never underestimates his opponent!

planetwc

08-28-2002, 09:58 PM

Roger,

Perhaps those lips may disclose your decoder ring.

Course if History is to be our guide: you're ****ed to repeat peeking through your own keyhole!

The eyes still have it...even when you bow!

Don't go changin, tryin to please me.

Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

History is mostly guessing; the rest is prejudice.

The intellegent man never underestimates his opponent!

dbulmer

08-29-2002, 01:38 AM

John Weiland,

I am a WT guy and like all WC guys you meet the good, the bad and the downright ugly! The only reason I want to get involved in this thread is to point out some misconceptions you have re WT. PS this is not a John Weiland bash - I respect you and your lineage but you did make one or 2 brash comments about the Wing Chun.

"Yip Man Wing Chun puts its emphasis on precision, structure, position, sensitivity, and power. This is less mechanical than the WT approach. So called street orientation just allows for sloppy techniques. So called street orientation just allows for sloppy techniques. "

We practice against sloppy technique that has no rhythm or sense behind it - that is street orientation. We practice footwork against resisting attackers to improve the precision of our body structure and to hone our defensive and attack skills. To assume we are sloppy is about as sensible as saying that every beginner can pick up WC in 5 minutes. You practice, if you are rubbish (like me) you stop, take stock and try again - it's hard work Gung Fu my man :)

The WT approach is far from mechanical though it might look that way particularly when viewing inexperienced WT guys who constitute the largest grouping in any one class - most WT guys including the EBMAS guys won't recognise your description because we do concentrate on precision, structure position and power.

Sensitivity is usually trained later when you are deemed good enough in basics to appreciate the skills being acquired. Chi sao after 4 months is unusual.

snip .. "Only among grapplers. In Yip Man Wing Chun, it is not emphasized because it is not needed and not often effective against a real fighter.

To not train grappling is just plain silly, to incorporate grappling but to concentrate on core standup skills is sensible. Grappling is a range we don't want to be in but to dismiss it doesn't sound wise. Where I train, core WC skills are emphasised at all stages and at all times - we train Wing Chun, we train anti-grappling because it can and does happen in the street but the anti-grappling is not the be all and end all.

As for hooks, they exist and they are trained - they can be effective in certain situations but they are not overemphasized (nor should they be IMHO).

As for grappling, it's right that we should be taught it,

Neo

08-29-2002, 04:19 AM

I dont like the way WT seems to always take it to the ground, its yet another thing I think is not very wingchun like. If you train for eventualities most of your fights on the street will not go to the ground.

Your statement smacks of "my wing chun skills will make it impossible for a grappler to take me down" syndrome, yet you then say MOST of the fights wont go to the ground. What happens when it does?

WT doesnt always take it to the ground the key emphasis at that range is ANTI-grappling. WT trains this both at stand up and then if you are still unfortunate to have been taken down. personally, if one of the fights I have is the one that goes to ground, I'd like to think that I can rely on skills and experience learnt at that range to get me out of there, instead of getting my head stomped by all and sundry.

Sihing73

08-29-2002, 06:14 AM

Hello Everyone,

I just got a chance to read through this thread and I must say that I am both saddened and unsurprised. It started out with a somewhat inflamatory statement. Still, it seemed to move along without getting too out of hand. People were actually able to respond without dropping to the lower levels. Then, there comes along the my way is better crowd and the bashing begins. Some posts have become personal attacks against others. In all of this the actual concept of comparing WT to other lineages on a technical level vanishes. Oh, it tries to pop back up from time to time but there are those who will be quick to beat it down. :mad: Why open your mind and discuss something when you can place your head in the sand and keep spouting a single point of view??

Now to return to the topic of the thread;

WT has "evolved" or changed over the the years. I have been priviliged to train in and obtain my instructor level in Leung Tings Wing Tsun. While graded "officially" to my Primary Level, not that high I admit. I did train all three empty hand forms, the pole and the dummy prior to leaving WT. I left WT for personal reasons more politics than anything else. My training was under Sifu Keith Kernsprecht and Sifu Allan Fong. Allan was with Leung Ting when WT was introduced to Germany. I not only trained with Allan but I got to live in his home for a period of time. This does not mean I am any good, but I was exposed and fortunate enough to train with some who should know what they were talking about. I would hope that I was able to pick up some small bit of that knowledge and apply it to my Wing Tsun/Wing Chun.

Wt changed several times while I was training in it. Most noticiable the forms would have minor differences from one seminar to the next, with Sigung Leung Ting. Some of these changes were due to LT's exploration of the art and visits to the mainland. Most were surface variations only with no real deviation from the actual principles taught previously.

One of the greatest strengths, IMHO, was the "sections" of Chi Sau training. Each section taught one how to deal with not a specific attack but a different type of "energy. Many seem to lose the idea and turn these into "mechanical drills". IMHO this i incorrect as I always felt the goal was to incorporate the methods of playing with the energy and then become a free flowing responsive person basing your responses to what the opponent gave you.

I found that much of the "weakness" of the system was the narrow minded approach to some things. I always found it interesting that the Bic Bo with 100% weight on the rear leg was the exclusive footwork and the trademark of WT. However, when one gets to the knives the footwork deviates and takes a wider approach along with more of a 50/50 weightedness. But, the key weakness IMO is the mentality, the attitude of superiority which seemed to permeate the system. In Germany there was a genuine feeling of family which was also missing in the US.

As to the subject of ground fighting I will say that my current Sifu teaches it as part of his Wing Chun. However, I still feel that I would rather fight on my feet and if taken down will try to get up as quickly as possible. At least that is my goal :D

Wing Chun or Wing Tsun or Ving Tsun or whatever you choose to call your art and approach is a wonderful art. It is a conceptual system which will allow the intelligent student and Sifu to mold the art to their body type and needs without breaking the basic concepts. Which lineage is the best??? What car is the best??? If I am single and have no children I may find that a small two seater is good for me. However, as I have six children I find a small car, no matter how good to hardly be the best for me and my needs. No, I find a minivan to be best for now. My point is that each lineage has exponents who are good at that approach. But, I do not believe in the "One True Way". If there were such a thing that met everyones needs then I feel such an approach would become obvious and all would be doing it. Because, those that did that way would be unbeatable. Yet no lineage has been able to claim to be undefeatable, and none ever will.

One last thing, WT was very soft when I trained in it. There were plenty of drills to aid one to become a spontaneous free flowing practicianer. However if one focused on the drill then one would and did become mechanical. The drills were only a stepping stone to mastery, not the end goal.

Sorry for the length of this post. Hope some of it made sense.

Peace,

Dave

Chum Kil

08-29-2002, 07:09 AM

Excellent post, Dave.

AndrewS

08-29-2002, 09:42 AM

Hey Dave,

nice post. One thing which is getting more and more emphasized by sifu Emin is his approach to footwork. 0/100 is still used, but change stepping (the knife footwork) when distance is broken too far has received increased emphasis. In this vein, something sifu seems to really push is *much* footwork against different styles of body motion, learning to press and stick with the body without hand action. I know this isn't just his thing, but I would definitely say WT spends a hell of lot of time on footwork (and in fact, at this point , from one angle I really look at all the sections I know as footwork exercises).

FWIW- the split has really brought those of us who stayed with sifu much closer together. Seminars are rougher, but more friendly and cooperative.

Later,

Andrew

hunt1

08-29-2002, 10:51 AM

The Yip Chun influence over WT the last few years in amazing alot has changed since some Germans were exposed to Yip Chuns methods it seems.

UltimateFighter

08-29-2002, 11:22 AM

That was a good post sihing73, apart from the false claims about what you have learnt. There is no way you would have learnt the WT long pole and complete dummy form if you were only a primary technichian. The way WT is graded, the primary level technichian is when you START learning biu Jee. Maybe you mean you have seen it and learnt aspects of it. But there is absolutely no way you would have been formally taught it. It is reserved for a much higher level.

There is indeed a constant modification process in WT. That is the meaning of an 'evolution'. If that was not the case things would not progress. Knife footwork is something that is being tsught earlier in application of the empty hand fighting,due to the restrictive nature of 'arrow walking' as a sole means of closing the range.

The emphasis on grappling and 'anti-groundfighting' will continue to grow and grow. It has been proven beyond doubt that grappling is a vital range that must be learnt. The evolution of WT willcontinue in this direction if it is to truly become an ultimate fighting sytem.

dbulmer

08-29-2002, 11:41 AM

UltimateFighter,

Dave posted a very honest post of Wing Tsun.

The syllabus in WT changes quite a bit - for example chisao now starts from grade 3 when it used to start from grade 5.

If Dave says he learnt it, that's good enough for me and you should accept his word.

From the tone of this thread, you would do well to learn a little humility because right now you are an embodiment of why others outside WT don't like us.

Sihing73

08-29-2002, 12:08 PM

Hello UltimateFighter,

You are at least partly correct, the Primary Level is the beginning of a much longer journey. Please re-read my post. I stated that I was "officially" graded at Primary Level. I received my Primary Level in 1988 and had permission to teach WT in 1887. I continued to train and live with Allan Fong until 1990-91. Allan trained me and you could always call on him to ask what I did or did not learn from him.

Just to insure that we are clear on this; I did not see the Biu Tze and pole and dummy I was taught them. I was also taught seven sections of Chi Sau. Also my training was mostly one on one with my Sifu not in a group environment. Maybe I did not "learn" it to your specifications but I will take personal training with my Sifu over group training most days of the week.

Since leaving WT I have been able to study and train with others. I have tried to learn from them and look beyond my preconceptions. While I am far from the best I would hope I am safe in saying I am far from the worse ;) . If you wish to make accusations regarding the time I spent or what I learned I would ask that you verify your facts first. While I have been know to make mistakes I do not intentionaly try to mislead others in order to build myself up.

Peace,

Dave

Tristan

08-29-2002, 01:36 PM

I was also taught seven sections of Chi Sau.

I suppose the 7 Chum Kiu sections. What about the Biu Tze? There are 4 nowadays in the LT system and 1 section consisting of all the variations. Although I think Alan Fong teaches only one (traditional) large Biu Tze section consisting of all the five modern sections.

Alan Fongs pole is superb (I heard).

T.

AndrewS

08-29-2002, 02:21 PM

UltimateFighter,

Before you call someone a liar check your facts.

as a couple of others have mentioned, the WT curriculum is highly mobile. The HK guys learn through the weapons way earlier than the Europeans. My understanding is that Allan Fong had the whole system when he was touring Europe as LT's assistant in the mid-70's. Leung Ting has, at various times, taught bits of the knife footwork and pole exercises in seminars. Biu Tze mechanics are taught in KK's old 4th and 5th lat sao programs. Yup gherk and bong gherk (and the idea of chi gherk) used to be the provenance of wooden dummy.

Later,

Andrew

AndrewS

08-29-2002, 02:21 PM

Tristan

08-30-2002, 12:10 AM

The Yip Chun influence over WT the last few years in amazing alot has changed since some Germans were exposed to Yip Chuns methods it seems.

What are you saying:confused: :confused: :confused: :( :(

TRON

09-02-2002, 10:43 AM

thatz what it boilz down to WT iz the only FORMAL training i took so i can't speak on any other school but what i DON'T like iz that you have to spend more money the more you move up in levels
[??? iz that a common practice in schools?]

i'm not even a good enough WING CHUNER 2 realy speak on what's what but i know a BUSINESS when i see it i saw that....

IF I WANTED 2 MOVE UP IN WT I WOULD HAVE TO..............

A-pay more $$$$$

B-teach., which means i would have to preach the WE'RE THE BEST SCHOOL gospel [i don't believe that]

.................................................. .................................................. .....

i found it [WT] kind of CULTISH....BUT............................the little bit i learned helped me hang with TAE KWON DO heads,ESCRIMA/ARNIS heads,JUDO headz,and a bunch of other improv sparring sessions with other disciplines my wife as well learned alot so i guess it'z worth the $$$$$$..if you have it

BUDDAH FIST broke down alot of the politics that'z going on right now .....I'M GLAD I'M NOT APART OF THAT

seems like they try tto keep you down
EG....BAZTEPE? [did i spell that right?] how iz some one like that going to be kept at a certain level? if he can't move up who can???

any wayz thatz longer of a reply then i wanted to leave

PEACEnRESPECT

tron
[ol skool popper]

ps
LEUNG TING IZ LIVYN LARGE so the more students he gets the fatter his castle getz

UltimateFighter

09-02-2002, 11:10 AM

I agree that there is a 'cult' like nature of WT. Leung Ting and Kernspecht are almost seen as deities by some of their followers. The political **** is very off putting. That is one of the reasons I was dubious of joining at the begining. Almost no one has ever any bad words about the top guys or the system. Even to question their ideas is severely looked down upon. I still think that the system is probably best branch of wing chun, but I don't get brainwashed. The split by Boztepe was good in a lot of ways. It shows that people will not put up with Kernspechts arrogance and shows that they do question the system.

As far as I am aware, Boztepe never learned the Knife form whilst in WT. That shows how info is kept back. If the most famous Wing Chun/Tsun fighter in the world does not even learn the complete system, it shows the 'secretive' nature of it.

old jong

09-02-2002, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
If the most famous Wing Chun/Tsun fighter in the world does not even learn the complete system, it shows the 'secretive' nature of it.
1)..."secretive" is an understatement!
2)...For witch fights is he the "most famous Wing Chun/Tsun fighter in the world"?...Apart the W.C. thing?...
3)...Quite a few members of this forum do know the complete system.There are no secrets in Wing Chun with a Sifu willing to teach when the student is ready to learn more. If you have to endure humiliations,serve a cult,pay LOTS of cash or lick ass to advance in Wing Chun or any martial arts....Go see somebody else!

AndrewS

09-02-2002, 01:40 PM

Tron,

the money thing has gotten out of control with some people in Wing Chun as a whole and WT in particular. Nonetheless, if you want to advance in WT, you pay your monthly school fee, and drop $20 to test each SG 1-6, $40 for 7-12, and a couple of hundred for your primary and d-license. Figure you can do two grades at a time and have to test at seminars ($80) your basic fees through primary are $1040. If you take a reasonable stretch and work 5 years to do your primary, and pay $80/mos for school fees, added to test costs, you'll drop $5540 over five years- a little over a grand a year, or approximately $25/wk.

$25/wk. On a hobby. Even my brokest friends, on food stamps and unemployment, used to be able scrape more than that together for beer and and pot.

Call around to some martial arts schools in your area and compare fee structures.

I'm perpetually amazed at those who expect not to have to pay to train.

As to the cultish thing- one of Simon Meyer's I presume?

Ultimate-

sifu and the knives. That's an interesting little saga. I'll hold my tongue. Suffice it to say that holding sifu back would be . . .uh. . . difficult.

Later,

Andrew

Tristan

09-02-2002, 02:04 PM

No offence, but it was stated on his own website (ebmas) that he (sifu Emin Boztepe) never learned the pole and the knives. Now I can´t find it anymore (probably taken off), but I was not the only one who have read this. The weapon matter regarding to sifu Emin was extensively discussed on the German forum. On wich everybody agreed he was never thought the WT-weapons. This was also made claer by several letters from Emin written to Kernspecht wich were publicated on the EWTO website.

Nevertheless, I think sifu Emin is a great M.A. who has done more for the EWTO than the ETWO itself is aware off.

T.

AndrewS

09-02-2002, 03:39 PM

Tristan,

my understanding is that sifu did not learn the knives from Leung Ting. Long pole on the other hand he knows, learned within the system, and was incidentally accused of demonstrating on one of the escrima tapes. The stories of sifu spending 3-4 hrs at a time performing the preparatory exercises for long pole date back to my start in WT in '94. Moreover, sifu Emin has received instruction in long pole from Leung Ting on a number of occasions since I've been out in LA- and a significant number of hours at that. I wandered by that on a couple of occasions and gracefully made my exit (a *painful* exercise in etiquette given my insatiable curiousity).

Later,

Andrew

TRON

09-02-2002, 09:13 PM

yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnn SIMON wuzz the POPE in my skool i liked him learned alot we [meNwife] were being taght by SI HING MARk [good man] .SI HING PAUL n GERALD were teaching the Berkeley school it was to big so we did the Oakland School SImon i liked..LOOK
DREW....
itz not just the $ itz the tyme me and Buddah Fist hooked up n it's like i can't even do THAT as much as i want to [i'll call u BF] got a kid uknow? what works for me is hooking up with different folks n sharryn n sparryn
i learned alot at the WT and i respect it 3000% just don't have the tyme yu know???

PEACEnRESPECT

TRON
olskoolpopper

AndrewS

09-02-2002, 11:42 PM

Tron,

Simon has his good and bad points. I've generally had good experiences dealing with him, and have a fair amount of respect for his technical skill.

It is, IMHO, very hard to learn the subtleties of basics without good hands-on instruction.

Time- children are a serious responsibilty and a major investment of time. Nonetheless, if you want something badly enough, you find a way to do it. If you have other priorities, cool, but in the main, when I hear excuses from people involving time, money, and "can't", "can't" generally means "won't". There's a difference, and to fail to make the distinction is self-deception.

Later,

Andrew

Neo

09-03-2002, 01:51 AM

Tristian

I can confirm what AndrewS said - Si-fu knew the pole but didnt learn the knives under Leung Ting. He has now learnt the knives from a different source. In fact, I had heard from Master Steve Tappin that Sifu Emin was accused of showing the WT weapons to the LatosaEscrima guys. Oh, and Master Steve knows the pole and the knife forms from what I gather from speaking to him ;o)

Why not post the question on his guest book at www.ebmas.net (http://www.ebmas.net) He is always happy to respond to questions.

Tristan

09-03-2002, 09:04 AM

Why not post the question on his guest book at www.ebmas.net He is always happy to respond to questions.
Let me guess what his answer will be... ;)

Hey, they were his own words!

T.

UltimateFighter

09-03-2002, 10:18 AM

Boztepe has always said he learnt the pole from Leung Ting. He just said he never learnt the WT knives. The issue is not how much you learn but how it is applied in any case. It is very easy to learn the complete Wing Chun system from a variety of sources. In fact, Yip Chun has been known to teach the entire 3 empty hand forms, wooden dummy, pole and knife form in a single year, and then leave it for Chi sau to improve the students! (read his book Wing Chun martial arts where he states this as one method of teaching). That method is one that in my opinion is not very progressive.

So as can bee seen, learning all the forms from a particular branch is not difficult. It does not mean you will ever be able to apply it properly though. It happens however that to learn all the WT forms takes over 15 years.

I have here a very good interview by Kernspecht (WT second in command). If you do WT you will probably already have read it, but for non-WTers it talks about some of the differences of WT, and a bit about how it deals with wrestling.

http://www.wtdefence.com/wt/gmkk/gmkk.htm

TRON

09-03-2002, 10:25 PM

BRA
if u had the scedule i had u wouldn't B training itz not an excuse itz a reason
PEACEnRESPECT

TRON
olskoolpopper

PLAYBOYZ INC / NAMELESSnFACELLESS

AndrewS

09-03-2002, 10:43 PM

Tron,

after my first year of karate, I came to the decision that training less than 15hrs a week was a waste of my and my teacher's time. I've held to that for the last 11 years, perhaps not as intelligently or efficiently as would be ideal, but barring two months of some health difficulties, I'll take at best a week or two off every 4-6 months (and now also cycle the nature and intensity of my training foci). My first six years of WT were medical school and residency training. I have had many weeks of my life where I trained more than I slept.

I have no problem with someone having different priorities, but to me, "I don't have time" is almost always an excuse.

Later,

Andrew

TRON

09-04-2002, 01:00 PM

DREW when u have kidz you'll see but itz not an excuse i'm lucky enough 2 of hooked up with BUDDAH FIST and i can BABY SIT n get BEAT DOWN at the same tyme so itz all good i'm making tyme i work 5 [now 6] jobz and when ever my baby goez 2 sleep i either DANCE,WORK OUT or TRAIN
i'm a dancer 1st BIG BAD GUNG FU DUED 2nd [lol] and i have to train cuzz no one respects a FAT dancer so i DO make tyme i have 2 make tyme 2 bad schools arn't that flexable with tyme OR money
ey!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i wanna make a charge 2 all you more experienced fighterz if u run across some one in my situation [broke,limited tyme,hungry 2 learn] and u can hook up n train with em DO IT
BUDDAH FIST
isn't trying 2 get rich he likes WNG CHUN..simply thatz why we're training......no motives
when u start gettyn N2 SCHOOLS/ORGANIZATIONS you'll never know the teacher'z motives
any wayz another long post from someone who'z MA history isn't that long
PEACEnRESPECT

TRON
olskoolpopper

AndrewS

09-04-2002, 10:29 PM

Tron,

kids are a huge responsibility- one I'm glad not to have.

Dancing is a great base for any martial training- some of the most talented students I've seen have had a base in gymnastics or dance.

Good luck with your training; maybe we can catch up when I'm up in SF.

A last caution- I've never charged a junior for training. During my first few years in I made one request of my juniors, one 'fee' - be there and work when you train, and show up either 3x a week or 2x a week and do 20 minutes 'homework' 2-3x a week. No one ever lived up to it. It takes a lot of energy and focus to teach, and can distract you from working on your own material and problems (especially if you're a conscientious teacher). Hence the caution- don't undervalue something just because it's free, put in as much work as you can.

Yeah, I'm being preachy, but flaky training partners p&ss me off.

Later,

Andrew

Grendel

09-05-2002, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by AndrewS

kids are a huge responsibility- one I'm glad not to have.

You don't know what you're missing. :D Kids are great and you sound like you've got some good values to pass on to them. I don't think a man grows up until he takes responsibility for a family.

Good luck with your training; maybe we can catch up when I'm up in SF.

If you're coming to SF, there's a lot of Wing Chun. If you have the time, I'd like to invite you to visit San Jose Wing Chun, just south of Frisco.

Yeah, I'm being preachy, but flaky training partners p&ss me off.

Me too. :) You sound as if you train seriously. More power to you. :)

Regards,

AndrewS

09-05-2002, 01:28 AM

Hey Grendel,

Dunno if I'll ever do the family thing. I respect it greatly, but am not in the place where it would be the right thing to do.

Thanks for the invite, I'd like to take you up on it next time I'm up that way.

Later,

Andrew

BTW- Grendel- from Beowulf or the old Mage backup story?

Grendel

09-05-2002, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by AndrewS
Hey Grendel,

Dunno if I'll ever do the family thing. I respect it greatly, but am not in the place where it would be the right thing to do.

None of my business regarding you, but in general I think families have a civilising effect on society, and a lack of same, an uncivilising effect. Families are the best place to teach values. A family offers its members a lot of support.

My kwoon is like a family to me. :) My sifu, Ben Der, has six children of his own. All but the youngest two are now married.

Thanks for the invite, I'd like to take you up on it next time I'm up that way.

You'd be welcome any time. :)

BTW- Grendel- from Beowulf or the old Mage backup story?

From Beowulf. What is the old Mage backup story? Last time someone asked me, they asked if the name came from the Matt Wagner comic. Ugh. :rolleyes:

AndrewS

09-05-2002, 10:20 PM

Hey Grendel,

I hear you on the importance of family- I just tend to wind up making my friends into my family (er, actually, more like the Addams family). The level of commitment involved in raising kids is past what I'm healthily willing to do now- after the last couple of people with children I've dated, I've realized that it's not in me to stand by while I see something done poorly by a child.

Yup- Grendel was a backup story in the original Mage series by Matt Wagner, inked by Rich Rankin, published by Comico. It's gone on to be a franchise and is actually extremely cool. Mage was a modern retelling/re-examination of the Arthur/ Fisher King legend. Grendel (the backup) was chronicle of the life of an incredibly dapper criminal and assasin, an intellectual and physical prodigy who became an acclaimed author, while unifying control of a number of organized crime families by the sword. The conflict centers around a misshapen semi-human mystic who stalks him while maintaining a friendship with his adopted 7 year old daughter. The art was a spectacular riff on art deco.

Err, yes, I've read too many comics.

Later,

Andrew

Grendel

09-06-2002, 12:07 PM

Hi Andrew,

Originally posted by AndrewS
Hey Grendel,

I've realized that it's not in me to stand by while I see something done poorly by a child.

Good for you. You find out a lot about people by how they treat the old and the young.

Yup- Grendel was a backup story in the original Mage series by Matt Wagner, inked by Rich Rankin, published by Comico. It's gone on to be a franchise and is actually extremely cool. Mage was a modern retelling/re-examination of the Arthur/ Fisher King legend. Grendel (the backup) was chronicle of the life of an incredibly dapper criminal and assasin, an intellectual and physical prodigy who became an acclaimed author, while unifying control of a number of organized crime families by the sword. The conflict centers around a misshapen semi-human mystic who stalks him while maintaining a friendship with his adopted 7 year old daughter. The art was a spectacular riff on art deco.

Err, yes, I've read too many comics.

LOL! You seem to know a lot about the comics business. :)

Thanks for the explanation of Matt Wagner's comics. I couldn't make heads or tails of 'em on my brief perusal at the local comics store, but I found them disconcerting since Grendel is my chosen nom-de-plume here on KFO.

Regards,

reneritchie

09-06-2002, 02:19 PM

Hey Andrew,

I always enjoyed Grendel (& Argent) more than Mage (still have the graphic novel around somewhere), but I hear tell the Mage movie is in development. Maybe there'll be a cameo for Grendel (either Wagner's or this boards ;) )

RR

AndrewS

09-07-2002, 10:50 AM

Hey Rene, Grendel,

Mage and Grendel both rocked, IMHO. Hopefully the Mage movie will come off. After X-men and Spiderman, appearantly the studios have bought the rights to everything humanly possible, in yet another insane Hollywood goldrush.

As a recovering comic collector- I managed a store back in high school when Mage and Grendel came out - (I only do graphic novels now, man, not the hard stuff, no issues, keep the monthlies away, I'll get out of control, I'm in a group, really, look put the issue away. . . I think I need to call my sponser), I still feel the need to make you jealous , Rene. Mint run of Mage. Grendel graphic novel- hardcover, limited edition, signed by Matt Wagner, and Rich Rankin (friend of a friend at the time).

Yes, I am a complete geek.

****, I should probably have included something on Wing chun in this post.

Catch you later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-08-2002, 02:29 AM

This conversation has gone totally off topic. If you want to discuss child rearing I suggest you go to a family counceling forum not a wing chun one.

yuanfen

09-08-2002, 06:24 AM

well ultimate fighter- you have struck out so far in showing any depth of understanding of wing chun yourself and little interest in learning it.. Surely there must
be another forum which will provide you with greater "happiness"-
however defined.

UltimateFighter

09-08-2002, 09:14 AM

I find it ridiculous that you think you can decifer ones wing chun ability from posting on a forum. But you have much too say. The substance of it is another matter.

Grendel

09-08-2002, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
I find it ridiculous that you think you can decifer ones wing chun ability from posting on a forum. But you have much too say. The substance of it is another matter.
You don't know how well you've scriven. :rolleyes:

Back to the WT thread, check out what Emin Boeztepe said.
www.ebmas.net

He said Wing Chun is a complete art. Emin said "Kernspecht does Blitz Defense which doesn't work at all." He goes on, "We have some Wing Chun guys teaching another style, as say jiu jitsu, as Wing Chun anti-grappling to get them on the cover of a magazine, selling an illusion of Wing Chun and that's a lie."

Emin goes on to say that Kernspect changed his techniques every two years to gouge his students for more money and admits that this is what stretches out the system's learning time.

Many people have known and said the same things over the years, but maybe you should believe it when it comes from the most notable exponent of WT.

Ultramat Fighter, you've been had. Go ask for your money back.

UltimateFighter

09-08-2002, 02:14 PM

Considering Kernspecht taught Boztepe most of what he knows, I don't think his comments are entirely justified.

Secondly, I have repeatedly stated that I do not by all the bull**** that WT spews, or any branch of Wing Chun. But there is a reason WT is the biggest WingChun branch in the world. It is up to you to find out.......

old jong

09-08-2002, 06:12 PM

It is so stupid that it is vain to try to bring some common sense to it!...will we have enough of this bull**** some day?

Miles Teg

09-09-2002, 02:10 AM

But there is a reason WT is the biggest WingChun branch in the world. It is up to you to find out.......

Yes, its called marketing.

red5angel

09-09-2002, 09:13 AM

Ultimatefighter, I have said this before, WT is a marketing machine. They have guys at the top who look good doing it and who have a lot of athletic ability. I have visited two of thier schools and attended a seminar with Emin Boztepe (who has his own company now but teaches the same stuff) and what they offer is a quick flashy fix. It all looks cool, its fast, and you get to start sparring almost right away so it can be exciting, but it is heavily reliant on athletic ability and strength which to my understanding is not one that wing chun adheres to. while what they teach may work very well for someone who is at the top of his game, it is practically useless to those who are small and light and it should not be. On top of all this they have jumped on the grappling band wagon and so draw people in who are looking for something "more" then wingchun or grappling.

Grendel

09-09-2002, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
Considering Kernspecht taught Boztepe most of what he knows, I don't think his comments are entirely justified.

What about Boeztepe's statement that that Kernspect changed his techniques every two years to gouge his students for more money and admits that this is what stretches out the system's learning time? :confused: In which two year period did you learn?

Secondly, I have repeatedly stated that I do not by all the bull**** that WT spews, or any branch of Wing Chun. But there is a reason WT is the biggest WingChun branch in the world. It is up to you to find out.......
Uh, no. If true, it's up to you to find out. :rolleyes: The "bull****" just might be embodied in its teachings. If you think WT is the best lineage, then Leung Ting must have been the best student, whoever his teachers were. :o

Regards,

UltimateFighter

09-09-2002, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by red5angel
Ultimatefighter, I have said this before, WT is a marketing machine. They have guys at the top who look good doing it and who have a lot of athletic ability. I have visited two of thier schools and attended a seminar with Emin Boztepe (who has his own company now but teaches the same stuff) and what they offer is a quick flashy fix. It all looks cool, its fast, and you get to start sparring almost right away so it can be exciting, but it is heavily reliant on athletic ability and strength which to my understanding is not one that wing chun adheres to. while what they teach may work very well for someone who is at the top of his game, it is practically useless to those who are small and light and it should not be. On top of all this they have jumped on the grappling band wagon and so draw people in who are looking for something "more" then wingchun or grappling.

No, the reason WT deals with grappling is because grappling is involved in real fighting, an area semingly neglected by many WC schools. Now, I don't know which 'lineage' you belong to but I am not one to put down other branches. If you don't feel grappling is necessary then by all means don't train it. But don't blame me if you get caught in a clinch or thrown to the ground and don't know what to do.

Yes, WT is marketed very well. I do not agree with all the propaganda nonsence. But I will say that the huge emphasis WT has put towards grappling and anti-grappling is the true meaning of an 'evolution'. Yips Man's Wing Chun was designed for dealing with mainly standup Kung-Fu styles. In the West, wrestling is one of the most effective and widely used styles. If you only learn how to deal with dragon style and hung gar kung-fu, you are not practicing the essence of wing chun and are misleading yourself.

red5angel

09-09-2002, 10:59 AM

Ultimate Fighter, I never said grappling experience wasnt necessary, just that it is over rated. Its not a hole that needs to be filled so much as an understanding that needs to be reached. Wing chun has the answers, a person just has to be patient and diligent in its study and those answers will come. WT's blending of grappling and wing chun is grossly over advertised. I have seen very few videos or demos where some WT guy doesn't go to the ground. My problem isnt with the system they teach in and of itself, as I stated it works for some very well, just dont advertise that your art can do things it cannot, grappling is almost dependant on being applied by a larger or atleast stronger person to work. How do you teach this stuff to those smaller people who come to WT claims that wing chun or in their case wing tsun works well for smaller people?
As for evolution, well, all arts evolve, some just change completely.

AndrewS

09-09-2002, 12:50 PM

Red,

the extent of your ignorance is amazing.

'Going to the ground'- controlling a single person and dropping them to the floor while striking, remaining in a position where one can rapidly stand? Which tapes are you talking about? Sifu Emin's "Realistic Self-Defense"? KK's demo with the Bulgarian olympic wrestling coach? What? Demo's?

Believe it or not, you may need to kneel on someone to control them or finish them on occasion.

As to grappling favoring strength and size- um- *fighting* favors strength and size. Skill can make up for a lot, but mass adds to your power, makes you harder to move, and helps you absorb a shot. You can argue this as much as you'd care to, but you're arguing with Newton, so I'll just kick back, laugh, and enjoy the show. And if you want to claim that grappling is a strength game, check out Jean-Jaques Machado's showing in the *unlimited* weight class at Abu Dhabi.

Lastly, the technical art of WT is not 'strength-based' in the way you imply. Fighting, on the other hand, requires a degree of strength and conditioning. Sorry if my line views those things as important, just keep doing what you're doing and go hit the san shou ring.

Later,

Andrew

red5angel

09-09-2002, 01:02 PM

In ALL of the demos I have seen, you name it its in there. why would you have to kneel? Your feet arent working?
As for mass, you are correct, but I like to think of wing chun as the equalizer in self defense, because most of your attackers will probably not be world class wrestlers or fighters, tha average person on the street SHOULD be able to use wing chun to good effect in defending themselves. Grappling is DEFINITELY a strength game, a good example would be my last birthday when some freinds were trying to play a joke on me that recquired I submit. Not going out without a fight it took 5 of them 20 minutes, one of them being a greco roman wrestler with 13 years experience under his belt, to get me into a position where they could get me to submit. I am a fairly big guy and they were using leverage points and such but I fought the whole time. Like any art there are a few examples of techniques and such that might not recquire a larger size or more strength but in general this is very true of grappling.
Would you lie another glaring example? A greco Roman wrestler freind of mine who was a large man, tall and heavy used to just stand up when smaller guys tried to wrap him up, he would stand up, pick them up or carry them with him and then dump them.
The technical aspects of wing chun do not recquire strength, the fighting aspects of wingchun do not recquire strength. Check out Atleastimnotyous' signature..........

AndrewS

09-09-2002, 02:09 PM

Picking someone up off the ground, or pinning them to it is not the beginning and end of grappling. American wrestlers are notoriously power-based and have confounded many people with the approach as they're quite good at it. Watch Frank Shamrock pick submissions (like on Kevin Jackson)- is what he uses 'strength'? Playing with your friends at a birthday party doesn't quite count as a great depth of knowlege and experience of the methods of grapplers, btw.

Wing Chun doesn't require strength? Then how do you stand up? Move? Hit?

Later,

Andrew

red5angel

09-09-2002, 02:17 PM

"Wing Chun doesn't require strength? Then how do you stand up? Move? Hit?"

Please dont tell me this is part of your argument? If it is we can stop discussing now because you either dont know what I am talking about and aren't trying, or dont understand what I am talking about and aren't trying.
Any good WC person knows what that means. As for grappling, its mostly strength based, sorry guy.

AndrewS

09-09-2002, 02:42 PM

Yes, Red, my argument *is* that use of muscles is needed for Wing Chun, and that once one has learned to use those muscles to maintain the appropriate body alignments, while keeping others relaxed, muscles are be used to generate significant power, over and above what one may get from mass alone (or why little guys can hit **** hard). As muscles are involved, strength is used. The question is how. Interestingly, not all strength requires hypertrophy, though some will occur. There are a variety of types of strength, and ways to train it.

It seems nothing will change your mind on grappling, hmm. Amusing. Stupid, but amusing.

Later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-09-2002, 02:45 PM

No, no no!!!

Redangel, you are seriously misguided. Whether this is the fault of your sifu or just misinterpretation of the art, somewhere down the line you have become very confused about fighting and wing chun. And I must say that examples of birthday party play fighting are embarrassing as lines of argument.

First up, NOWHERE does it say Wing Chun does not require strength. All physical activity requires some degree of strength. If you have no strenfth, how can you ounch someone and cause damage? How can you apply things like pak sau or any atacking movement? They moto of Wing Chun is Do not apply strength against strength. In other words, do not meet your attackers strength head on. Move outside, yield to greater force, then use your own strength in attacks to defeat him. Read Yip Chuns book "Wing Chun Martial Arts" where he talks about Wing Chun based on the principle of conserving energy and only using it when you need to. This is 'explosive force'. In Wing Chun as in any fighting system, if technique is equal, greater strength will always be a big advantage.

And as for your arguments about grappling requiring strength.....just watch early UFC tapes of Royce Gracie beating guys who out weighed him by over 50 pounds including wrestlers. As MMA has progressed, it has been proven that technique can overcome strength. But again, in grappling as in standup fighting size and strenth is a crucial factor. Why do you think they have weight catagories in boxing as well as wrestling?

The grappling emphasis in WT is one of its best assets. In fact, I think more grappling and how to defend against grappling should be done to improve WT's street effectiveness.

red5angel

09-09-2002, 03:03 PM

LOL! Of course you have to use muscle power to motivate your limbs, and of course to stand or move you have to utilize your muscles, thats biology, but like you said ultimate fist, you never meet force with force, in both WT schools I went to and in the demos I have seen on the net of your top guys it all looks the same and looks very external
My personal example is a very good one if you had been paying attention, one of the 5 guys was the captain of a college wrestling team.
You cant convince me you aret using too much strength, you have demos all over the internet, look at those guys faces and the way they are straiing to punch and push and pull. It LOOKS like wrestling, with the addition of some chain punches!
All I am saying is that I hope you guys are both big strong guys, if you are I am sure it work sgreat for you, but dont tangle with someone bigger then you and stronger, or you are dead meat period!
Ultimate fighter, I also conceded that there may be a few techniques using leverage and such in grappling but it pretty prevelantly relies on you muscling the guy into a position you want him in, dont tell me it doesnt if you can sit down to watch a couple of grapplers grunting and straining for a good position and trying to wrap each other up and tie each other into pretzels......
But, you can continue to do it your way and I can continue to do it mine, I say if you swing through Ohio Check out Carls school there and see what I mean, I think you will be surprised.......

UltimateFighter

09-09-2002, 03:25 PM

Grappling and striking require some strength. Full stop. WT does not use force against force. Leung Ting himself is 5"6 and 135 Ibs. He is a small guy. Of course his system is not based on strength vs strength. Like I already said, it is about using your strength when you need to, and not meeting force head on.

I advice you to go to a few WT classes or even a WT seminar and learn about the system. You will then get a proper perspective of the system.

rubthebuddha

09-09-2002, 05:01 PM

ultimate,

you sure about that 5'6" thing? i had sushi with gm leung ting and my sisok back in june (mmmmmmmm, sushi) and then a group lesson, and i can't see him as 5'6". ;)

and as far as wt being external or not soft, anyone with a clue about soft vs. hard styles should know not to base judgment on a friggin movie on the internet. so don't worry if red5 is arguing based on such movies, especially if the video's he's going off of are emin's.

i don't know who your sifu is, but if he's anything like mine, there's no question as to internal vs. external, soft vs. hard. just keep training and let those who wish to judge before understanding do their own thing.

Grendel

09-09-2002, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by rubthebuddha

you sure about that 5'6" thing? i had sushi with gm leung ting and my sisok back in june (mmmmmmmm, sushi) and then a group lesson, and i can't see him as 5'6". ;)
Sushi? Yuch. :D 5'6"---too tall or too short? At any rate, he is not overly large, so he must have some good Wing Chun under his belt to have achieved the success he's had.

and as far as wt being external or not soft, anyone with a clue about soft vs. hard styles should know not to base judgment on a friggin movie on the internet. so don't worry if red5 is arguing based on such movies, especially if the video's he's going off of are emin's. [B][QUOTE]
I agree with you about not making judgements based on vidcaps on the Internet. They are often misleading, but I believe that in addition to citing vidcaps of Boeztepe, Red5Angel mentioned KK's vidcap on LT's site against the Bulgerian wrestler, so at least he's seen more than one example. In addition, R5A has said he has attended WT schools for visits, and Boeztepe seminars from which he bases his opinions. How far does one have to go before they become convinced of this WT superiority?
[B][QUOTE]
i don't know who your sifu is, but if he's anything like mine, there's no question as to internal vs. external, soft vs. hard. just keep training and let those who wish to judge before understanding do their own thing.
It isn't clear from this thread whose understanding is lacking. Utramat Fighter :) clings to his beliefs while he admits never having experienced plain vanilla Yip Man Wing Chun. Remember he started the thread with the question: "Is Wing Tsun Leung Ting the best branch of wing chun?" Despite evidence piling up to the contrary, he continues to boast about things which he doesn't understand, showing no insight into the advanced reaches of the art of Wing Chun, but holds to a view that whatever "Sifu sez" is valid.

So, I stand to be corrected. Please show me where and how I'm wrong, along with Boeztepe and his intra-lineage claims, of course, because many of us reading this with an open mind believe it's just a matter of marketing, not substance. :)

I don't want to criticize WT unduly---at least they're doing wing chun---but stating it's the best, given the many lineages with more redoubtable Sigung than LT, is implausible.

red5angel

09-10-2002, 08:31 AM

UltimateFighter - I have said this before, I visited two WT schools, one twice, and attended two seminars, one with Emin Boztepe (I know he is not with the organization anymore but his stuff is the same) and a WT guy from Chicago. This experience as well as the videos I have seen and demos I have seen show me that WT is a hard, external style and does not follow the basic Wing Chun precepts.

dbulmer

09-10-2002, 10:05 AM

R5A,
Off to training in a mo, but what is your idea of the basic Wing Chun 'precepts'? (I prefer the word concept or idea).

red5angel

09-10-2002, 11:04 AM

Check with KJ or any of the strings she has about the 5 concepts in our lineage that are specific. AtleastImnotyou has a saying in his signature that applies as well.
Never attack force with force, or strength with strength, proper alignment of structure, precision is important, can overcome strength, and can deliver power when needed.

Thats the most important that I think WT has missed. They claim to not do this but I watched in both classes as the smaller people and the women and smaller students struggled with some of the drills against larger or stronger opponents.
Structure is key to this and in my opinion WT can be really lax about this, just watch some demos to see what I mean. All of this of course makes the root weak as well. It seems to me that WT practices the mobility approach, prefering to be light on the feet then well grounded, or rooted.
Wingchun is about being precise, with precise structure you can be 'powerful', you can absorb alot of energy without harm. Look at chain punching for instance, I look at the chain punch as effective but sloppy and dangerous ot the person doing it. Its too committal. You can be aggressive and not commit yourself 100% like that.

UltimateFighter

09-10-2002, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Grendel

Utimate Fighter clings to his beliefs while he admits never having experienced plain vanilla Yip Man Wing Chun
I don't want to criticize WT unduly---at least they're doing wing chun---but stating it's the best, given the many lineages with more redoubtable Sigung than LT, is implausible.

Yip man is dead, so there is no chance of me experiencing his Wing Chun. However, when you say 'plain vanilla Yip Man Wing Chun' I assume you are talking about the Yip Chun version. To say that is a 'true' expression of Yip Mans Wing Chun however is a very foolhardy comment. Yip Man also taught Victor Kan, so his Ving Tsun is also direct 'Yip man lineage'. William Cheungs Wing Chun organisation is also Yip man Wing CHun. And so is Leung Tings WT, as he was Yip Mans final closed door student. So you see, I am indeed learning 'Yip Man wing chun'. You will notice a trend here. All these lineages are different, and yet they are all formed by direct students of Yip Man. How can this be the case? It is becasue Yip Man was constantly modifying his Wing Chun and taught different versions and different techniques over his life time.

Yip Chun, though Yip Mans first son, initially shunned wing chun instead persuing a career in law. He only started learning Wing Chun from his father at the age of 37. So his 'version' is by no means the most refined and 'pure' as regards to Yip Man. An obvious example would be that Yip Man teaches no hook punches, whereas Leung Ting does and I am quite sure William Cheung does as well. Yip Chun actually commented that his understanding of his fathers wing chun was not great, and that differenet versions were taught in his lifetime. So be careful when making accusations about who is and who isn't 'Yip Man' wing chun.

As for redangel, I find it very unlikely you attended any Emin Boztepe seminar and left with such a biased and frankly ignorant opinion. Most of your comments sound like those made from watching mpgs only. WT is definately a soft style. All of the literiture and conceots taught are centred around not using force against force. The small amount you have seen is not an indicator of the system. Chainpunches are used a lot, but they are taught as an excellent beginners strategy and are only the tip of the iceberg in WT.

UltimateFighter

09-10-2002, 11:33 AM

I actually should have posted Yip CHUN teaches no hooks whilst Yip Man taught them to Leung Ting and Cheung.

AndrewS

09-10-2002, 11:56 AM

Sooo, Red,

you don't think that when teaching 'women and smaller students' an application or drill, and they train against their larger classmates that they should struggle?

Mobility is a disadvantage to the smaller practitioner?

Interesting.

Ultimate,

don't take him seriously. He only will see what he wants to see. If you've caught the grappling thread, Red, speaking from his vast birthday party wrestling experience, is proclaiming grappling to be a vulgar exercise dependant solely on muscle and lacking in softness.

Another delusional schmuck who really, really wants to have the only one true magic way.

Later,

Andrew

red5angel

09-10-2002, 12:00 PM

Ultimate fighter - "As for redangel, I find it very unlikely you attended any Emin Boztepe seminar and left with such a biased and frankly ignorant opinion. Most of your comments sound like those made from watching mpgs only. WT is definately a soft style. All of the literiture and conceots taught are centred around not using force against force. The small amount you have seen is not an indicator of the system. Chainpunches are used a lot, but they are taught as an excellent beginners strategy and are only the tip of the iceberg in WT."

Regardless of how unlikely you think it is it doesnt change the fact that I wa sthere, and he was there and it was a seminar. He was rough, his wingchun was strength based. It worked for him of course, he is a big guy and well muscled, lots of weight training to get there. The "Eye Opener" only showed me that if this guy is the top of what WT has or had to offer, then he must be doing things the way they want to teach it, or am I off here?
Exaclty how much would I have to see to know? do I need to attend classes long enough to get the "real" lessons? Is it that when a new person walks into a WT school they all clam up hide the 'true' WT? I dont understand your statement here, since visiting a school a few times should give you an idea of what they are all about, much less seeing all of the advertising and such they do to go along with it?
Ultimate Fighter - as much as this may sound insulting to you, I just dont think you realy understad what soft means in the artial arts. The things you have said and the way you have argued shows me that you just dont really understand what it is some of us are talking about. I think if you get the chance to visit someone who uses the 'girlhands' of wingchun, you should jump at the chance, I think you will see the difference.

Grendel

09-10-2002, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
I actually should have posted Yip CHUN teaches no hooks whilst Yip Man taught them to Leung Ting and Cheung.
Hi Ultimate Fighter,

I wasn't referring to Yip Chun. I don't know why you assumed that. It is well known that he began his Wing Chun study late in his father's life, shortly before his father retired from teaching. As for Leung Ting being Yip Man's closed door student, it could only have been for a very short time. Leung Ting should have very respectable Wing Chun for his total time in Wing Chun study. The same is true of William Cheung, who was noted for his challenge matches in his teen years. It's telling, however, that the examples you chose had to fill in the gaps in their knowledge with outside arts and tacked on ideas in their own teaching endeavors.

All that aside, my concern over WT is the frequent remaking of the curriculum and the tacking on of other arts. Even so, the grappling elements added will likely not be as effective as studying directly BJJ or another grappling art.

Note that Yip Man did not say, go forth and study grappling or Blitz Offense, or whatever. He seems to have taught at least a few a complete and effective martial art. Just as in any study, the students who got the most attention, who worked hardest, who possessed greater native intelligence or insight, learned the most and subsequently could pass on what they learned.

I do not mean any disparagement of these individuals you've mentioned. I am only trying to make plain my (mis?) understanding of what is happening in those lineages.

Regards,

AndrewS

09-10-2002, 12:28 PM

Hey Grendel,

I dunno about the European experience with revising the curriculum- I've heard some things from various eras- but my experience has been that changes in teaching focus are simply stressing different pieces of the same art. Leung Ting is notorious for showing one thing different ways on successive occasions. This drives the Germans crazy, it seems ;-). If you're capable of going, hmm, two ways to do things, cool, now why did that sneaky . . . hmm. . . ahah!. . . it's actually kind of fun. Personally, I prefer my seniors' approach of 'here, this is why, here are some basic variations, a few ways to isolate if you get hung up, some fighting drills, and the common mistakes' but a good student can get very good piecing together what is taught.

The anti-grappling- really, it does follow the mechanics and strategies of the art. Because of that overlap, and the incredibly high yield one gets knowing some basic floorwork over knowing none, it proves effective at what it's supposed to do- keep you intact in a fight. Learning to defend a guard pass to banana split knee bar to heel hook transition may require some of your own study.

Later,

Andrew

Atleastimnotyou

09-10-2002, 12:53 PM

the reason there are so many different types of wing chun out there is because yip man's students changed things to the way they saw fit. Also, towards the end, yip man stopped giving a **** when it came to teaching wing chun. he just wanted to smoke opium. He didn't care if all his students "got it." Yip man was a great wing chun practicner, but a poor teacher.

UltimateFighter

09-10-2002, 12:55 PM

redangel, I think you are picking at straws and making too much drama of too little fact. You admittedly have very little experience of seeing WT, so I fail to see how you can make any judgement about whether it is 'soft'. Boztepe is explosive and agressive. That epitomizes WT. But from all accounts he is one of the softest guys at chi sau accoriding to people who have 'touched hands' with him. Wing chun can look extremely 'hard' when on the offensive. It is when in close that the 'softness' plays a part. If you think you have a better understanding of 'softness' then so be it. I am not too concerned with arguing the finer points of whether a style is 'soft enough', only whether it works, and from my experience WT is the style of wing chun that 'works' best, based on soft principles. But please explain how you can attack in a 'soft' manner? I feel that it is you who may have misunderstood the soft principles behind wing chun.

For anyone who has not seen it, here is the famous training session featuring Keith Kernspecht using 'WT grappling' against the Bulgarian former Olympic Silver medalist and world champion at Greco Roman wrestling.

http://www.wingchun.com/video/wt/KeithKernspetch.mpeg

red5angel

09-10-2002, 01:11 PM

Its not about drama UF, its about my stated opinion based on experience. If you want to call it too little experience then go ahead but give me some hard time lines as to when I could make an informed decision on what I see, or maybe you could explain to me why all the things that I see just dont gel with what you think I should be seeing?
Whether something is fine enough is exactly the issue, precision is the key in wingchun, if you dont have it you dont have wingchun and need to muscle it instead, thats my point. I never denied that WT works, it does, and for those who are well built, large or into weight training and such, it works excellently, I just dont agree that it is wing chun, or that it follows the ideals and principles of wingchun. These ideas and principles are what make wing chun what wingchun is.
As for Emin being Soft well, like I said, I dont think you really understand what that means. I think you should go out of your way to look for it a little and have a basis for comparison. I think you would be surprised ot find out what it really is all about.
You say WT works best in iwng chun from your experience, what is your experience? not time put into WT but time investigating what it is al about, getting out and really looking around to see what is out there?

UltimateFighter

09-10-2002, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by red5angel
As for Emin being Soft well, like I said, I dont think you really understand what that means. I think you should go out of your way to look for it a little and have a basis for comparison. I think you would be surprised ot find out what it really is all about.

Well, if you are so knowedgeable, perhaps you would care to explain what exactly softeness 'is all about' in your opinion?

red5angel

09-10-2002, 01:30 PM

tit for tat my freind, I asked you some questions, feel free to answer.

Tristan

09-10-2002, 01:30 PM

I just dont agree that it is wing chun, or that it follows the ideals and principles of wingchun. These ideas and principles are what make wing chun what wingchun is.

The deciding factor that really constitutes the core of WingTsun is the all-encompassing concept. WingTsun is not the sum of its individual techniques, as brilliant as they might be. What really makes WingTsun so ingenious - and I am now speaking specifically about the Leung Ting system of WingTsun - and so effective that a weaker person (perhaps a woman) can use it to defend himself or herself against somebody much stronger, is the overall concept which can be summarised in the form of just 4 logical, progressive fighting principles and 4 so-called "strength principles".

T.

09-10-2002, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by red5angel
Check with KJ or any of the strings she has about the 5 concepts in our lineage that are specific.

Could be a reference to the following, which I last posted verbatim to the joke section of this forum (don't ask why).

"If a small woman cannot do it, it isn't Wing Chun."
"But tom, but why." Don't be greedy; don't be afraid.
"Loy lau her soong; lut sau jik choong." Retain it when it comes, deliver it when it goes; charge forward when pressure is released.

Our colloquial reference to ground connection is "energy from the floor."

Our stance relies on 5 basic checkpoints, plus much detail implied therein.

Kim Sut knees in
Lok Ma sink in the stance
Ting Yu hips rolled under and forward
Dung Tau head up
Mai Jahng shoulders down, in all dimensions

More detail on all of the above 5 checkpoints can be referenced in the article The Soft Force of Wing Chun (http://www.wingchun.com/Ken_article.html) by Chris Eckert.

Shoulders must be down and relaxed throughout.
Body and mind are settled.

Practice, training progression, and application are based on:

Position
Sensitivity
Power
In that order. With Timing and Speed as functions of Position and Sensitivity.

The most important 3 of these are

Position
Position
Position
[/list=1]

Aims, in the following order, are:
[list=1]
Neutralize
Utilize
Optimize
[/list=1]

And for good measure:

[list]
Don't aim to be powerful. Let power be unintentional.
Hard work is the only secret. Savor the bitterness.
Learn to "listen" and "read" the opponent with your body, mind, and every sense.

Enough for now. Maybe we ought to do a new volume in the Nutshell series, LOL.

All credit and my gratitude owed to Ken, Leung Sheung, and Ip Man, who IMHO, understood the basics and their importance very well.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

planetwc

09-10-2002, 01:52 PM

So what are WT's 4 so-called "Strength Principles"?

What is the all encompassing concept?

Originally posted by Tristan

The deciding factor that really constitutes the core of WingTsun is the all-encompassing concept. WingTsun is not the sum of its individual techniques, as brilliant as they might be. What really makes WingTsun so ingenious - and I am now speaking specifically about the Leung Ting system of WingTsun - and so effective that a weaker person (perhaps a woman) can use it to defend himself or herself against somebody much stronger, is the overall concept which can be summarised in the form of just 4 logical, progressive fighting principles and 4 so-called "strength principles".

T.

rubthebuddha

09-10-2002, 01:54 PM

i fail to see how ultimate fighter's lack of experience on other families of wing chun constitutes a lack of ground for having a legitimate perspective, but a minimal amount of seminar time is automatically ground for forming an opinion of an art. if not understanding an art isn't valid, then it doesn't matter if your experience level is nil or l'il.

in addition, if the seminar was open to the general public, why would emin bother teaching the advanced and subtle nuances of the style when students may not even have the gross motor movements down or a basic understanding of where the technique is coming from. nearly every family from yip man has its differences, and those qualities need to be addressed if one is to jump from family to family. going into a yip ching seminar after spending the last five years with leung ting leaves so much go be desired as the qualites that make the families different are usually overlooked as one jumps into the new material. doing so puts one at a disadvantage, because yip ching's teaching may presuppose certain aspects that leung ting's omits for reasons that the grandmaster may know, but not the student.

in addition, one can't overlook the typical, "well, we did it this way, so what you're showing me is wrong" mentality either. every one of us does it, some just to a greater degree. try to empty your cup, and there's still a residue from its previous contents, no matter how slight.

and to say that WT doesn't work for smaller women is bubkus. i have three sije, none of whom is taller than 5'4" and i can bench any two of the three on any given day. however, put us together, and any of the three makes me look silly nine times out of ten because of technique and skill. if they relied on their strength, i'd smoosh them. i've been doing martial arts for more years than not, and no matter what flavor i pick, be it kickboxer, wrestler, wt student or anything else, i am properly humbled and reminded of why skill and technique are more important than big pipes.

or better yet, look at leung ting. he's no where near a big fellow, and each time he works with his students, his prowess is easily evident. he has some pretty large senior students in the states (not even touching germany :); my instructor is about 6'1" and solid as heck) and there's no question how good his technique is.

wt being best? i think the jury said screw it and stopped caring about this question years ago. wt being soft? took the jury 21 seconds to decide -- ten seconds to walk to the chamber, 1 second for everyone to nod their head, and 10 more seconds to walk back.

red5angel

09-10-2002, 02:05 PM

rubthebuddha, his experience is in question because he uses my own to invalidate my belief. It also can establish where his point of reference is. I am more liable to trust the opinion of someone who has been out to look around and compare notes, then with someone who hasn't. You are correct, the level of ability determines how clear someones opinion can be, but if evidence is consistant then that can be sufficient grounds to determine something is what it seems to be.
As for them not showing the finer points, it sounds empty to me, why wouldn't you show people you may be introducing the finer points of your art so they can see where the real skill and ability are? I dont buy it, doesnt make any sense to me why you would ham it up for a crowd when seminars are for disseminating information, exposure, and for going over the finer points with students you dont always get to train with.
If the women who train with you (and I assume here by your context you study WT or EBMAS?) are doing ok with the larger students in your class, then first I would clarify one thing, are they getting the same amount of pressure your larger students are? Then if that passes the organization may want to start looking at why some schools are not teaching this way?

I am as curious as planetwc to hear what the "strength principles" are as well. Thanks to KJ for posting exactly what I was talking about.

dbulmer

09-10-2002, 02:55 PM

Kathy Jo,

Thanks for your post. WT uses the same principals. We are no different in these principals. We may state the principals in a different way but the principals remain the same.

R5A,

In WT the more proficient you are the softer you are. It takes time and practice. You see WT as strength oriented - yes it might look that way but isn't. I know someone far better than me that failed a grading because he was not soft enough. Softness is vital in WT - I have done some sparring and know that softness is the way - what WT guys try to be is soft but it does not come to most people overnight. That said, we are soft in defence but hard in attack. If I have to outpsycho a pyscho so be it! I'd hope to use minimal energy and use skill to do it but if I cannot I won't worry about it.

Emin Boztepe said in the Combat interview that hard training was to enable you to relax in a real fight. A perfectly sensible thing to say IMHO.

Your description of grappling was mind boggling - I agree with AndrewS. Grapplers are very skilled - Judoka/BJJ guys learn points of balance - they learn how to get around guards, how to choke/strangle and it's not about brute force, a lot of time and practice goes into technique and they are often in better physical condition than we are.

As for training with women, once a woman conquers her fear of getting hit, nothing hurts more than a woman wanting to outdo the lads. I have seen it happen and it hurts!

rubthebuddha

09-10-2002, 02:57 PM

red5,

agreed on the perspective -- ultimate doesn't have a base. but i don't think you do, either. my point was that little background isn't much better than no background. it'd be like crossing hands with you, then basing my opinions on your family's quality purely on that.

as far as not showing the finer points -- when emin gave the advanced students at my kwoon a seminar, finer points abounded. but that was because he knew that the students he was working with understood the basic WT concepts he wanted them to and he could trust their ability to grasp the deeper stuff. but if he had a mixed crowd -- some his students, some from WC, and as is often the case, some from different styles altogether -- delving into subtley is usually a lost effort, because you leave those who don't understand the basic principles behind.

please understand i'm not talking about WC principles, i'm talking about WT principles. again, yip chun has principles far different than leung ting, and without acknowledging this, you do yourself a disservice.

red5angel

09-10-2002, 03:02 PM

The differences are exactly what I am talking about. WT would say they have the same principles as WC but I do not believe that they do not.
As for enough experience, ever tasted a food once and know you dont like it? Can you explain why? ever seen a movie you saw once or twice or a tv show you saw a couple of times and found you didnt like it? what I am saying is that if you are to go out and compare notes on wing chun, and have a basis for understanding, then you can make a fairly educated guess as to what is going on. You are right in saying you might find things different if you were to stay longer or whatever, but in this case things are too consistant across mutliple experiences for me to believe that is drastically so.

rubthebuddha

09-10-2002, 03:40 PM

differences? no one will dispute that. but simply because wt is different doesn't make it internal or external. taichi's different. does that make it external?

while the typical "stay with what comes, follow through when the way retreats, etc." hold true to wt, different applications of said ideas are what make each family unique.

and this is not meant in disrespect, but your profile says you've been doing wing chun for 2 years, but only the last bit in earnest. i don't think that's anywhere near enough time to make an educated guess on the differences between families. my impression is that you've observed them and tried them out a little bit, but haven't, in earnest, learned them well enough to make an educated guess about them, either. again, not being rude. i got you beat by a whole whopping year (for a grand total of three) doing wt, and i don't think i'm anywhere near ready to make presumptions about other styles.

i credit your diligence in your own style, and i credit your desire to compare and contrast. it's definitely better than those who have nothing but one school to base their universal martial arts opinion on. but i personally don't feel that either of us is in a boat of general wing chun knowledge that holds much water.

by the way, how's your tan sau? :)

Miles Teg

09-11-2002, 02:26 AM

I have to agree with Red here.
Ive also been in WT for a while and a respected branch at that, and it does rely heavily on phsycal fitness and strength. All though Im no authority I believe there are many fundamental things missing from it: structure, rooting, relaxed muscles etc.

I also agree with Red about grappling, no one is saying that it isnt needed, but there are enough skills to be gained studying w.c for a whole class alone, if I wanted to get some grappling experience behind me I would go to a grappling instructor (which I will probably do as I moved to Japan and there aint no W.C here).

If you mix different things into the class it just gets messy and youll end up practicing something that looks alot like JKD.

AdrianUK

09-11-2002, 04:39 AM

I just felt I should put my bit in here

I have trained WT for 4 years now, with an instructor much shorter and 5 stone lighter than me, can I get him ? No, because he is soft and mobile, then when he strikes he is rooted. I don't know where you study to find WT requiring physical strength to work but it could just be a question of some instructors hiding a lack of ability (yeah some are not so good) by using strength. I have crossed hands with Keith Kernspecht, again very soft but hits like a sledgehammer, also other senior german grades, and they are all very soft but powerful. I would think before you judge a whole system, try the top man first.

Peace

Adrian

red5angel

09-11-2002, 06:49 AM

Rubthebuddha - still stiff, yours? :)

I am not saying that if it is different from wing chun it is external, taichi is different and it is an internal art. I am saying that WT is different form wingchun because it is external. Actually that profile is off by a year since I created a year ago ;), but I say this about making determinations on other families, lineages, styles. I have been in the martial arts, or interested in it, long enough to see the obvious differences in most of them and some o fthe subtle ones. I still have a long long way to go, I know that, but in making my opinion on WT, I have seen it enough and even experienced it enough to be comfortable with the conclusion that it relies more on strength and blasting through then on recieve what comes, escort what leaves.
I should reiterate, I am not saying WT doesnt work as an art, just reputing some of its claims is all. I think their description, as told to me or described on websites and such, is inaccurate and leads some people down the wrong path.
To sort of accentuate what I am trying to say here, in my class I have a mate who is smaller then I. He is shorter and I outweight him by probably about 70 lbs. When we are drilling, say doing rooting drills, he can hol dhis own very easily and I would say i smuch stronger in those areas then I am. I saw no evidence of this in the WT classes I attended. I saw smaller people andlarger people of varying experience, and in all cases the smaller people were being walked on.
AdrianUK - I would almost agree with you except that beyond the classes I attended and seminars, I havent seen any evidence of it. Your instructor may be a diamond in the rough however and I would allow for the idea that not all WT instructors are created equal.

Miles Teg

09-11-2002, 07:28 AM

Adrian
You may be right, but if the Ling Ting WT video is anything to go by then WT confirms what I think.

I was told by my old W.T teacher that there are deliberate mistakes in the video........but still

An example is the bong sau Mr Ting does when being striked, it is completely collapsed and would onle work if your oponent was dumb enough to follow through with the punch.

Have you seen the video? If so what did you think? Does it resemble what you train?

Im just asking because it definitely looked like what I trained in and the old sifu of my school was the most senior participant in the video besides Ling Ting
.

Miles Teg

09-11-2002, 07:40 AM

I dont think I explained the bong thing well.
So ill just add this: with a collapsed bong the pucher could turn the puch towards the bong arm (instead of following through) and he could punch through the bong and trap the arm in the process( all with one arm).

I know this to be true cause thats what people used to do to me when I bonged that way.

rubthebuddha

09-11-2002, 09:47 AM

my tan sau? just like my teen years -- stiff at all the wrong times. :o

personally, i can't argue with saying that some wt schools aren't all that stellar. many of the schools are small -- a dozen students if they're lucky. what happens is that i get to certain level and am certified to teach, but they've really only been doing the art for four or five years, but then move to a different area and try to open their class and help wt grow. however, wt has a buncha students around that level, but as in all martial arts, those who have been doing it for ten, fifteen, twenty years or more (my instructor has been doing wt for 18 years, i think), are fewer and ****her between. visiting a school of a recently appointed instructor versus visiting a school of a seasoned veteran is hugely different. i'd wager you noticed quality differences among each of the instructors during your travels. of course, this goes for any style and flavor. just think of the typical chump who teaches kung fu at a college.

and seminars? i've never really been all that fond of them. i'd rather spend my seminar money on private lessons and work one-on-one with my teacher. however, seminars are how our org prefers to promote, and since i love the stuff, i have to live with seminars.

and yeah, wt's been criticized for being too soft. we like to really emphasize the sticky part of chi sau. even some changes gm leung ting made (back to what he wanted after emin changed them in the first place) after the split demonstrated the importance of this soft and sticky approach.

red5angel

09-11-2002, 10:03 AM

LOL!@rubthebuddha! I hope you are washing your fuk sao before class!
Well, the last WT class I visited had a guy who had been with the org for all of 3 months and was teaching, he had some background in other lineages and walk into EBMAS and got a cert to teach or something, I wasn't real impressed by that.

crimsonking -
a.) I never said they werent.
b.)and your point is? I have met plenty of people who learned under others, doesnt mean they walk the walk.
c.)never heard that claim except by WT people.

UltimateFighter

09-11-2002, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by red5angel
tit for tat my freind, I asked you some questions, feel free to answer.

LOL! What a cop out! The reason redangel cannot explain what 'softness' is, is becasue he has no idea at all. I think I have answered all your 'questions' about WT it is just a case of you understanding them.

Seriousty though, it is ridiculous to argue with redangel about something he clearly has very little knowledge about. I am beginning to wonder if he actually trains wing chun at all or is just a troll...........

And for his arguments about graplling......also moronic and clearly an area he has no experience of, which is why he seems so frightened in discussing it. I have trained Judo for over 5 years so I know what I talk abot in grappling terms, and its strength requirements.

The general consensus from WT and former WC practioners who have switched to WT is that it is one of if not the most soft style of wing chun. I too have heard criticisms that it is 'too soft' in its approach. Redangel has very little understanding of wing chun (if he does indeed train it!), and certainly cannot make any claims about WT from watching mpg's or visiting a few classes. In either case his opinion is irrelevent.

Crimsonboy, I realise that Kernspecht tries to make money, but he is undoubtedly one of the best wing chun practioners in the world, and his reputation is warranted. If you don't think WT is good, thats fine. You are entitled to your opinion, but the idiot is you if you make any more presumptuions about an art you do not practice and sink to redangels level.

UltimateFighter

09-11-2002, 10:28 AM

On a final note about grappling and WT.....Judo and Ju-jitsu both rely on skill rather than strength. But there are elements of strength involved in each, just as there is strength involved in executing a wing chun punch or any striking movement. I repeat again, a soft style does not use strength against strength, which is the principle of WT and most braches of WC. But once you are not using strength vs strength directly, the stronger you are the better! This is the case for any style, whether soft or hard. There is NOTHING wrong with being strong!

red5angel

09-11-2002, 10:50 AM

Well ultimatefighter if that is the way you want to be, then so be it. I thought we were having a semi amicable discussionon different beliefs but the name calling and accusations just arent wrth getting into. If you feel like you still want to discuss it like a gentleman and a martial artist then so be it but I wont get into a flame war with you. Speculating on what I do or do not know does not get you anywhere and doesnt help the conversation. up until now, although we disagreed I thought you were being pretty cool. Ah well, can't win em all can you? ;)

Atleastimnotyou

09-11-2002, 10:51 AM

a soft style means they don't use muscle at all except to keep from going limp. You rely on your structure and positioning for everything. there is nothing wrong with being strong, but there is something wrong with useing strength. if you use strength you are giving your opponent something to use against you. You become a lever. A soft style means you never use muscle to fight, even when punching. when you punch you should use your bone structure and bone alignment. If you do that your punch will be solid and substantial, but not because you used muscle to hit. When you punch somebody with 2 units of force, 2 units must be coming back into you(physics). So if you are using muscle, the 2 units coming back in will go out our back, meaning you just punched with your arm. but if you are relaxed and in position and utilizeing your structure and stance, you can beend that 2 units to go down your body and into the ground. that is where you get energy from the ground, because energy goes both ways.

UltimateFighter

09-11-2002, 11:05 AM

Ateasrimnotyou,

what you have just described as a 'soft style' including 'not using muscle at all, even when punching' is physically impossible.

Red, I am not the one which started trolling and criticising other arts with no background in them. If you want an amiable discusion, post some sense and we can continue!

Atleastimnotyou

09-11-2002, 11:16 AM

UF, it is not physically impossible because a whole lineage does it. you just arent looking at the whole picture. You use muscle as far as extending your arm, but when you punch, you are not punching with your strength. You are punching with your structure, your arm being in position and you utilizing your stance(which falls under "position"). When you pundh you use elbow energy too. I realize this might not make sense to you, but that is just because you've never seen it. Go meet Ken Chung, Ben Der or Carl Dechiara.
If you see pyrite, you are going to think it's gold... untill you see the real thing.

dbulmer

09-11-2002, 11:39 AM

AtLeastImNotYou,

I agree with you - WT does exactly the same. We're no different! If you are doing WT properly it's as you have outlined. Some muscle tension is used in punching in WT - (at the end of the punch for penetration). WT is actually carbon until it's polished by the individual then it becomes a real diamond! :)

red5angel

09-11-2002, 11:43 AM

UF, Corey knows what he is talking about, he has been doing wing chun for longer then you and I both. I believe he was assuming that we all realize that bone cannot be moved without muscle but that it should be the least amount used to do what we need to do in wingchun. The difference is that fine precision and body control. You whittle away at it until you have it down to a minimum, then 99% of that power is from structure, not muscle.
this is exactly the thing I have been talking about on this forum from time to time, UF you believe you know what soft is, but we are telling there is someone out there that knows how to refine even what you believe is soft.

dbulmer

09-11-2002, 11:44 AM

Actually more I think about it ! It isn't muscular tension but I cannot think of what it is. Maybe wrist tension!

rubthebuddha

09-11-2002, 11:44 AM

UF -- i can't recall red5 saying anything bad about our family. saying external vs. internal is not an insult, and he's said time and again that our style works. while he's a bit overzealous (to an infuriating degree to some) about his own family, i can't recall a negative thing said about wt.

and as far as understanding, i don't think your two years are any better than his.

in regards to your softness - get a little further in your chi sau programs and you'll understand what atleastimnotyou is talking about. there's a certain soft springiness you'll develop the further you get (i'm really starting to appreciate it -- i start level 12 when i get back from vacation in two weeks). this springiness is quite different than a pushiness, and i'd wager you're already gotten a bit of it with first section.

red5angel

09-11-2002, 11:46 AM

how 'bout a bacon sammich rubthebuddha?

rubthebuddha

09-11-2002, 11:52 AM

only if the bread is lightly toasted.

if so, GIMME GIMME GIMME.

oh, and save one for ewallace. it's his birthday.

UltimateFighter

09-11-2002, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Atleastimnotyou
UF, it is not physically impossible because a whole lineage does it. you just arent looking at the whole picture. You use muscle as far as extending your arm, but when you punch, you are not punching with your strength. You are punching with your structure, your arm being in position and you utilizing your stance(which falls under "position"). When you pundh you use elbow energy too. I realize this might not make sense to you, but that is just because you've never seen it. Go meet Ken Chung, Ben Der or Carl Dechiara.
If you see pyrite, you are going to think it's gold... untill you see the real thing.

I have to totally disagree with you and redbudha on this one. The structure adds power to the punch, however the strength of the punch depends on its speed. The faster the punch and the more weight behiond it, the more powerful it is. This is the same for all straight punches, wing chun or boxing. The power comes from the extension of the triceps. Thus, the stronger the triceps, the stronger the punch. Fact.

redbudhha, I thing that the 'relaxation' you talk of adds speed and a 'whiplash' effect. However, what you have said as regards the power of a punch coming only from structure is incorrect. The STRONGER your triceps, the STRONGER the punch. Hence, whilst punch power is not entirley dependent on strength, stronger tricep muscles make a stronger punch. If you don't believe me, read this article by Leung Ting himself. You will find it agrees with what I have been saying.

http://www.wtdefence.com/wt/articles/power/power.htm

red5angel

09-11-2002, 02:42 PM

ok UF I will bite, I am going to read this article and then get back to you.......;) however, I beg to differ on speed being what power is based on......

By the way, how did Dr. Leung Ting get his Doctorate?

red5angel

09-11-2002, 02:49 PM

"of the fist is fixed, and for a powerful punch, we have one variable i.e., the speed of delivery."

incorrect

Also, while reading the article I noticed a distinct lack of discussion on power generation from the ground, or through the structure of the entire body. These things are integral to develop and utilize soft power. While he does discuss the generation of power through the joints, his focus is almost totally on the arm and the tricep/bicep.
To me, the article only reinforces the idea that LT is practicing a hard style of kung fu. anyone else?

Also, If any o fyou WT guys could point me to some sources other then WT people who say WT seems to be to soft. This subject was brought up often, but it always seems to be by WT people. Just like to see who is saying these things form the outside.

Buddha_Fist

09-11-2002, 03:34 PM

Red5angel wrote: "however, I beg to differ on speed being what power is based on......"

Red, it's simple Physics:

Power = Force x Speed = Mass x Acceleration x Speed

Yes, proper structure allows to put the whole body wheight (mass) into the punch (you could talk here about the importance of the structure and rooting to enable it), but speed is also quite important. If you lack speed you can compensate with structure, but both together - Wham!

rubthebuddha

09-11-2002, 03:45 PM

UF -- are you talking to red5, or me, because redbudha doesn't exist (at least to my knowledge). as far as power and strength, triceps aren't ultimate gauge on power. i still think relaxation is a better test. i have very strong triceps. that would equate to a stronger punch, in theory, than someone with weaker triceps. but i have a couple sihing who punch much harder than me yet are not my match in strength by quite a bit. why? my biceps are even bigger, and they're a bit stronger than my triceps (an imbalance i've been correcting). but that stronger bicep inhibits full punching power. not until i can relax it fully (as fully as possible) can i unlock what those triceps can do.

but, as you know from your own training, that takes a bit of time. and i totally agree about that whiplash effect. i felt sigung leung ting demonstrate the difference between a regular punch and a more whippy punch. my sternum wasn't the same for a few days. ;)

fa_jing

09-11-2002, 04:33 PM

All I know is my sifu is very strong, not like a weight lifter but big arms, chest, legs, and he punches extremely hard. He also advocates tensing up at the end a la Karate. Up to that point, and on the withdrawl, completely relaxed. He is one of those guys that hits the bag and it barely moves, knows how to transfer the power without pushing. I do think practicing air punches with minimal muscle power is useful, since it trains you to use your structure to whip the punch out. Anyway in my limited experience, those who are physically stronger tend to punch the hardest, if they have a similar technique level. They won't always be the fastest or most fluid though - you have to look for a balance.

Atleastimnotyou

09-11-2002, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter

I have to totally disagree with you and redbudha on this one. The structure adds power to the punch, however the strength of the punch depends on its speed. The faster the punch and the more weight behiond it, the more powerful it is. This is the same for all straight punches, wing chun or boxing. The power comes from the extension of the triceps. Thus, the stronger the triceps, the stronger the punch. Fact.

That is true. But you're talking from a totally external point of view. If you are talking about an internal martial art you're wrong.
the less arm tension the better, as you can let your power from your legs
and qua, and dantien come into being.

AndrewS

09-11-2002, 11:16 PM

Umm, guys, you're off.

UF- the triceps thing. Watch what Leung Ting does, don't listen to what he says all the time. The model he uses for punching locally is basically wrong, isolating elbow extension into biceps and triceps action. Local power comes 'from the elbow'extending from into the target and the body simultaneously (hence the 'shoulder pulling back' which some people exaggerate to get that kinetic link), and involves extensor forearm, triceps, probably some brachioradialis, *biceps* (which do some shoulder elevation), deltoid, some lat, and pieces of trap (plus maybe some rhomboid). Grab someone good and feel their muscles as they punch. This is for punching with *local* power- something we sometimes do, and a tool with certain uses.

Rub- strength imbalance in the other direction will also mess up your punch. Weak biceps will lead to an inhibition of triceps as mechanoreceptors will sense that motion at a certain speed has the potential to injure the joint/muscles, and the motion will be slowed at the level of the triceps (for *example*) because the biceps are not strong enough to protect the joint past a certain speed.

At least- I think you're off on the 'internal/external' thing here. There are a bunch of mechnisms for generating power, based on the biomechanics, strategies, and targets of an approach. I as you a question- if your hand which releases power (either locally, from Chen style low back/ hamstring/etc 'unbowing', or from the spine usage of Wing Chun) has force put on it *immediately* after power release, will it collapse back to your body? Or is the structure releasing power stabilized somehow? The mechanism you're describing seems more akin to White Crane and JKD than what I understand is going on in most of Wing Chun. Perhaps the analogy of a series of hanging steel balls might be useful.

Later,

Andrew

rubthebuddha

09-11-2002, 11:53 PM

andrew -- i'm a little confused on your question, but i'll try to paraphrase it:

when an obstacle keeping us from punching (a bong sau, e.g.) our target is removed and our hand springs forward toward our target, but a new obstacle comes in the way, do we relax to our previous state which we were springy and waiting for/seeking an opening through which to extend?

my answer? heck no. my technique has been crap lately. however, as i understand softness in theory (not in practice -- that has many years to go), the concept of always going forward has nothing to do with your arms, but your mind. i'm stuck in my arms, and as soon as i feel an opening, i automatically spring forward. if i encounter resistance, it takes a moment to relax my arms back (very brief, but someone with more sensitive arms would make lunch of me. my personal problem is that when i feel the way open up, i'm all gung ho about filling the gap with strikes and such, instead of simply allowing the hands to spring forward and renew the quest for a strike while still relaxed. i understand the goal is to always be relaxed even as my punch strikes through someone, but i haven't figured out how to do that all that well.

always the student. i know my family teaches the constant relaxation, but i'm still trying to relax things piece by piece, because wholesale relaxation isn't working for me. thus, as more and more of my stuff relaxes, it comes easier.

AndrewS

09-12-2002, 12:03 AM

Rub,

you punch with your right hand. Force goes in. Immediately after force goes into your target, it puts force right back into you through your striking hand, moving into you. My question is- what happens then? Does your arm collapse back to your body? I'm trying to point something out about At Least's model for power evolution.

Later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-12-2002, 02:29 AM

Rubthebud and redangel,

The physics of a punch is the same regardless of what 'style' you do. It is due to tricep extension, and the more developed these are, the more powerful the punch. This has nothing to do with 'softness'. This is an attacking movement and the mechanisms are the same, you do not need to confuse yourself with 'mystical chinese' nonsense.

redangel, I again find your comments incredibly arrogant as you are saying, in effect that with your 2 years wing chun knowledge you have a greater understanding than people on this forum who have trained longer than you, and even Leung Ting. In actual fact, I feel you have less basic knowledge than most people here if you cannot except the basic truths of physics.

Force = Mass x Acceleration.

Acceleration comes from tricep extension. The softeness of the punch stems from it being relaxed on impact and thus incurs a whiplash effect. Note also that the fist must be left extended for a full tenth of a second for the shockwave to travel down the arm. This is again a practice of WT (and I think most wing chun schools).

BTW, Redangel, what lineage are you under? It is of interest to know which school has propogated incorrect ideas to you, unless it is you who has misinterpreted what has been taught.

Frank Exchange

09-12-2002, 06:39 AM

Power in punching does not have to come only from the triceps. If you train it that way, then you are limiting it.

Wing Chun is a form of kungfu, and like any good kungfu, it takes power from the ground, via the legs. This is not a mystical idea. Body mechanics, nothing more.

The most powerful punch comes not just from the extension of the triceps, but utilizes power from the waist, and most importantly, the legs. The legs contain possibly the biggest and certainly the strongest muscles in the body, and to exclude the use of these is to ignore a major factor in power generation.
And let us not forget movement, a punch which has the weight of the moving body behind it has far more mass than that of the arm only. All punches should use the full bodyweight.

In my opinion, the triceps strength is a relatively minor part of the power of a punch.

At the risk of coming off all anecdotal, anyone who knows exactly how dam hard Wong Shun Leung hit will also be aware at how undeveloped his arms were. It was the strength in his waist and legs he would boast about, not his arms.

yuanfen

09-12-2002, 07:48 AM

The mechanics of the wc punch is different from western boxing...but even in the latter---Sugar Ray Robinson may have been the best ever--- knock out power in either hand from any angle----stiringy upper arm! Same for Hearns...."muscles" do playa role but it is only one thing in a complex chain of motion.
Yuanfen

red5angel

09-12-2002, 07:53 AM

UF, Buddha_fist, trust me guys I get the physics but its speed PLUS mass that is important unless you are using structure when referring to the human body and that is the crux of this whole conversation. You can swing as fast and as hard as you want, but if you arent using structure, and assumedly you do not have the mass, you wont do that much damage.
Speed goes with the whole external thing in my book by the way. As you get older you start to slow down. Same with strenth, they both start to ebb late rin life, with internal power you can continue to grow in it for much longer. thats the important difference in my book.

Frank Exchange, you managed to explain what I was getting at! Thanks! Ultimate fighter, why wouldnt you want tp put your whole body behind it, instead of just using yoru tricep?

Buddha_Fist

09-12-2002, 10:56 AM

red5angel wrote: "UF, Buddha_fist, trust me guys I get the physics but its speed PLUS mass that is important unless you are using structure when referring to the human body and that is the crux of this whole conversation."

Buddha_fist wrote earlier: "Red, it's simple Physics:

Power = Force x Speed = Mass x Acceleration x Speed

Yes, proper structure allows to put the whole body wheight (mass) into the punch (you could talk here about the importance of the structure and rooting to enable it), but speed is also quite important. If you lack speed you can compensate with structure, but both together - Wham!"

Red, don't you even ready the posts of the other people? I mentioned the whole structure thing and how it fits into the Power generation from the Physical point of view. You are more concerned about rejecting other's points of view and praising your opinion as the gospel truth, than actually use this board to learn something.

I've heard once an old saying going like this:
"Keep silent until your words are worth more than your silence"

Go figure...

red5angel

09-12-2002, 11:22 AM

Actual BF I was talking more about Ultimate fighter who seems to be stuck on the whole speed and tricep thing. I had read your post all I had to comment on was the fact that I understood what you were saying as far as physics goes but that there was more to it then what you were saying. Actually I have learned a lot from the people who seemed open minded enough to talk about it, and avoid assumption. I thank MP, Yenhoi and a few others who have tried to keep it civil and have understood that this is a discussion and its ok in the end to disagree. ;)

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 11:35 AM

andrew,

i always thought it was more of using your hand like a baseball -- a baseball has no body to anchor it, so by correlation, it is REALLY relaxed. but it's damage is done by it's force, speed, mass and all that happy crap. so in essence, i thought we're supposed to "throw" our punches out there with nothing holding them back. if they hit, hello dental work. if they meet an obstacle, they bend in the necessary direction of bong, tan, jum, kau, etc. but there's hopefully no tension tying that hand -- the projectile your launching -- back to the body and thus slowing it down.

but heck, i could be wrong. i've only been doing wt for a bit over three years, and as this thread blatantly points out, people with only a couple years experience are often out in left field.

red5angel

09-12-2002, 11:54 AM

Rubthebuddha, you keep bringing up the fact that most of us only have a few years, which can sometimes be a relevant point but not always. There is no magical time when you suddenly get it all right? Granted as you move along you get to know more but the information you get also depends on several things, how hard and how smartly you ar training, how well your instruction is, as well as many others. This all adds up and sometimes it doesnt take people as long as it might seem to understand some things, especially things as basic as we have been talking about.
I have used this in the past and I will use this example again, have you ever met an old guy who just doesnt seem to get it? Or someone who insist on doing something one way because thats how they have done it for the last 20 years, even though its obviously wrong in your eyes? how about those kids who just seem to get it? Falling back on time isnt necessarily the best way to look at it. I hae said before that the things I have learned this past year have gone ****her and been more correct then what I learned in my entire first two years.

Just because you have been doing it a long time doesnt mean you are doing it right.

Not trying to be an a-hole, still willing to share my bacon sammich, just had to get that off my shoulder.

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 12:54 PM

red5,

i'm playing the inexperience card because i'm inexperienced, too, and i'm playing it on both you and UF. i think that two or three years of solid study is good to get a foundation in your art. however, i don't think it's anywhere near enough time to be able to discern much from other styles on a purely visual basis or brief experiential basis. i don't think my three years is, either. if i walked into your sifu's school tonight and checked out some of your classes, i'd be able to look at your techniques and point out visual differences (tan sau a little higher, bong sau has a little more bend, stuff like that, hypothetically). but the depth behind it that took you two years to garner will not come to me overnight, nor in just a few experiences.

to me, it's like a legislator saying the welfare system is flawed, but having done little or no social work in their life. after they put in the hours and still think it's flawed? fine by me. but until then, categorizing something without getting a little dirty with it doesn't do that topic justice.

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 01:15 PM

oh, and red5 -- wt does put it's body behind the punches. and that's where i'm having the problem differentiating between a big pushy punch with all of my weight behind it and a arrow-like punch that penetrates deep that just happens to be relaxed and has my body behind it. :o

UltimateFighter

09-12-2002, 01:16 PM

I think some people here are confusing power for structure. Power transferrence comes from correct structure. Yes the hips are involved in correct alignment, and so is being 'rooted'. But the point of this argument was to elaborate on the fact that a strong punch is a large part due to tricep extension. Having stronger triceps will dramatically improve the power of the punch.

redangel, you didn't answer my question as to which lineage you belong to.

Tristan

09-12-2002, 01:37 PM

Some of you (WT) guys heard of this? This and putting your body weight behind the punch (like a "falling step") will result in a powerfull but elastic punch!

T.

UltimateFighter

09-12-2002, 01:42 PM

The falling step is used a lot in WT to generate 'inch power'.

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 01:50 PM

how about this, red:

you toast me up a bacon sammich, i'll toast you one up, too?

i like the bacon extra crispy. :)

red5angel

09-12-2002, 01:56 PM

rubthebuddha, I know were you are coming from, not to worry I understand. notto worry, just didnt want you to think us disagreeing meant I wouldnt make you a bacon sammich if you stopped by :) Extra Crispy bacon! I take mine sort of chewy...

UF - I think thats the difference in approach, I dont believe the tricep plays a large part. I believe the tricep plays a small part in a much bigger picture. There are so many muscles in the body why use the one when you can get them all behind it?
I study under the Leung sheung Lineage. I still havent got any other references to WT being the softest wing chun lineage by the way? Still waiting on that.

by the way Rub, I assumed ou guys probably got your bodies behind it, I have noticed that in the past, I think that is an idea no one in wingchun could ignore.

AndrewS

09-12-2002, 02:08 PM

UF,

you are way off base- listening to Leung Ting not watching him. Ever seen him demo a short power with an extended arm, elbow 'locked'? Speed can definitely be a useful tool in evolving certain types of power- but speed implies velocity- acceleration over distance- 'wind up' - something we try to avoid. Likewise speed and some weird torque stuff can be generated with little motion and summing multiple forces. Hence the 'it uses all the joints' line.

FWIW- Red is from Leung Sheung to Ken Chung to Carl Dechiarra. Leung Sheung was Leung Ting's teacher (and there's political bs there, too). There's been a fair bit of contact between our lines in the US, and we're generally fairly friendly and share some fairly deep commonalities in mechanics, but differences in strategy and training methodolgy. You'll probably hear much objection from the parties in question, but check out Ray Raamsdonk's articles on sifu Emin and Ken Chung, or e-mail him or Mustafa Uczogi under Allan Fong (HK student of Leung Ting) for people who've touched hands with both.

Rub-

'throwing' the punch is a nice way to think about it- a visualization. Don't mistake a mental trick for physical reality. Drive with your elbows, imagine your forearms have been cut off, throw your punch, reach for a glass of water, *cut* like your forearms are knife blades- there are tools to trick your body into doing something right.

Lan sao may make things more obvious. You should be able to replace on lan with the other, 'chaining' elbows together, while someone one presses in on you without loosing space. The lan which takes pressure should still be 'relaxed' (able to move slightly up down and side to side) in all directions but in, and pressure on it should result in pressure on your back foot. Each lan should have this quality as you replace one with the other- as say, someone tries a sloppy front bear hug. And yes, application would be lan to tan dar from CK.

After you 'throw' the punch, can the *briefly* extended arm still form tan/bong/fook/jum/jut/lop/kao/etc when it feels structure in its way or will it collapse? As the former is ideal, and what you actually do, there must be some muscles involved in determining the shape of the at structure and the nature of the force it expresses. Ergo, you aren't just whipping out a towel with a rock on it to hit. Something else is going on.
While all of you are at this little scrap, could you perhaps step back and examine your knowledge of physics, please? The trauma research I've seen favors discussion in Joules not Newtons, basically 'cos it's an easier discussion to have. This is pretty flawed when you then look at ballistics literature where higher energy projectiles (smaller and faster moving) notoriously cause less damage than lower energy (larger, slower) projectiles because the slower projectiles tend to be entirely decellerated by the body in unpleasant and gory ways. The physics of a boxer's ko (hitting the jaw) involves a pretty little problem in imparting angular velocity (bottom line- the back of the brain is ****her away from the axis of rotation of the head than the 'sweet spot'. Do the math.).

So are trying to move someone, intercept a jab thrown while you're sitting down, break ribs, bruise the heart, blow out a verterbrae (At Least- you're my type of guy)? You might be using your body differently, depending on what you're doing.

Later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-12-2002, 02:17 PM

Someone asked previously what the 4 Strength Principles of WT were. We all know that knowledge on WT is tightly kept and progressive. But here is some that is open to all:

The 4 strength principles of WingTsun

1/. Free yourself from your opponents force

i.e avoid getting hit, and move around his attacking movements.

2/. Free yourself from your own force

(Do not use strength against strength to achieve your aim)

3/. Use your opponents force against him

(Get him off balance, re-divert his energy back to him. This is the highest form of wingchun technique)

4/. Add your force to that of your opponent

Having additional strength helps in adding to your opponents force that is used against him. So in WT, being strong ONLY helps in the final stage. But the previous 3 stages of energy manipulation should be sufficient to win a confrontation.

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 03:05 PM

red5,

andrew's right -- ray van raamsdonk gave emin a rather flattering review here:

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/journal/columns/vanraamsdonk/viewpoint04_boztepe.shtml

the good thing? emin wasn't our best, but to give him credit, he's **** frickin good.

i also remember a thread on here where someone not in my lineage gave a brief breakdown of what individual lineages are known for, and i believe softness and/or stickiness was one of two or three characteristics they gave us. does anyone remember who did this or what thread it was under?

as far as wt being the softEST? i don't believe i've heard that claim coming from anyone who's been around for any length of time. it's soft, i will give you my word on that. but whether or not it's softer on average than twc, vt, wsl-wc, your family's or whatever, i have no clue.

personally, i think softness is an attribute just like skill and strength -- you only get it by working it. i don't know of any master of a lineage who isn't soft. wing chun simply doesn't work as well when rigid. however, just HOW soft you are i think has less to do with your lineage and far more to do with yourself -- how har you work, how many long hours you've spend practicing, how much time you've spent with someone who really knows their stuff.

Buddha_Fist

09-12-2002, 03:47 PM

AndrewS wrote: "While all of you are at this little scrap, could you perhaps step back and examine your knowledge of physics, please? The trauma research I've seen favors discussion in Joules not Newtons, basically 'cos it's an easier discussion to have. This is pretty flawed when you then look at ballistics literature where higher energy projectiles (smaller and faster moving) notoriously cause less damage than lower energy (larger, slower) projectiles because the slower projectiles tend to be entirely decellerated by the body in unpleasant and gory ways. The physics of a boxer's ko (hitting the jaw) involves a pretty little problem in imparting angular velocity (bottom line- the back of the brain is ****her away from the axis of rotation of the head than the 'sweet spot'. Do the math.). "

Andrew, could you explain this a bit further. Joules are units of heat (as are calories), so I don't see the relation to mechanics (being a structural engineer). I could try to visualize it with "bio-mechanics", but still fail to see the connection unless you're using some energy-base concept (which I would be eager to see). So, if the discussion is that much easier talking in terms of heat, explain this.

Regarding ballistics, I think that larger (low energy projectiles) are decellerated by air friction rather than anything else, so it makes sense to minimize the area facing it or even work on the whole bullet shape (see fluid mechanics).

AndrewS

09-12-2002, 03:55 PM

Buddah,

Heat + Work = Energy in a closed system

Work is expressed in kg* m2s2.

KE= 1/2 mv2

Air decellerating a projectile does you little damage. Your body decellerating a projectile is what we're talking about here.

Later,

Andrew

Buddha_Fist

09-12-2002, 04:09 PM

Andrew: Reciting the Energy Method's formula is easy. But explaining further how the whole thing should be looked at is what I asked for.

By the way, given we're already in this 1 Joule = 1 Kg-m2 / s2

I see why to use energy concepts (given it covers the whole system's energy), but besides of naming Kinetic Energy CAN you fit it into the whole discussion about power?

Body decellerating a projectile. OK, I get that: Body receiving the punch. But what's the gory way that a body has to decellerate the "projectile" if it's a low energy one? Shouldn't a higher energy - smaller projectile penetrate more? Pressure is higher.

Steven Lamb

09-12-2002, 04:15 PM

First law of thermodynamics! hey i remember that class...
let's see....
Heat - Work=change in internal energy+change in kinetic energy+ change in potential energy.

"a system possesses energy, but it does not possess heat nor does it possess work"

time rate basis (power)

heat - work=change in energy over time....

man, that's why im not an ME major.........

B.S.

John Weiland

09-12-2002, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by rubthebuddha
red5,

andrew's right -- ray van raamsdonk gave emin a rather flattering review here:

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/journal/columns/vanraamsdonk/viewpoint04_boztepe.shtml

the good thing? emin wasn't our best, but to give him credit, he's **** frickin good.

Ray rates Emin very highly. Since we're talking about Ray, he rates Ken Chung's Wing Chun even more highly. Here's an article from the same site from Ray about Ken. Ray sounds a little like Red5 describing Carl. LOL! :D

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/journal/columns/vanraamsdonk/viewpoint07_chung.shtml

Regarding this thread about LT, Ken was LT's senior in Leung Sheung's school. When I've discussed things with folks in LT's lineage, they tend to be looking for the same traits and describe things in much the same way as my teachers do. I think we're different, but not as far apart as some suggest. This isn't surprising. Even students from many other lineages, such as Augustine Fong and Wong Shun Leung, have quickly adapted to our stance and style when they've moved to San Jose to study with us. Good Wing Chun is good Wing Chun. Good individuals demonstrate that they've had good instruction.

i also remember a thread on here where someone not in my lineage gave a brief breakdown of what individual lineages are known for, and i believe softness and/or stickiness was one of two or three characteristics they gave us. does anyone remember who did this or what thread it was under?
Although I haven't studied LT's WT, the softness should be a component of his Wing Chun coming through from Leung Sheung.

personally, i think softness is an attribute just like skill and strength -- you only get it by working it. i don't know of any master of a lineage who isn't soft. wing chun simply doesn't work as well when rigid.
Correct. It just isn't maximizing Wing Chun's potential without the "soft" feature. And this is true of many martial arts

however, just HOW soft you are i think has less to do with your lineage and far more to do with yourself -- how hard you work, how many hours you've spend practicing, how much time you've spent with someone who really knows their stuff.

Right. And this is what's been observed about Leung Ting and Emin. :)

As far as the physics goes, I know good Wing Chun when I feel it. :)

Regards,

rubthebuddha

09-12-2002, 08:39 PM

john,

thanks. at least we're staying on topic, while those OTHER guys get caught up in some discussion about physics 'n crap.

what's up with that? :confused:

:D

AndrewS

09-12-2002, 10:03 PM

Buddah,

my initial point was that not only are the discussions of physics here primitive to the point of uselessness, some portions of present clinical models are also flawed. Trauma literature thinks in joules, generally (notably automobile trauma literature) while the discovery in ballistics is that lower energy slugs tend not to go through people and hence hang out and do more damage.

Thinking about hitting, I don't think there is one general model. What are you trying to do- break ribs, move someone, knock someone out, spasm muscles? Target and goal have a fair bit to do with this.

Personally, I think the elasticity of the struck target matters a good bit, and extent to which the struck area is better able to absorb impact over shorter or longer periods. Impulse- the duration of time over which momentum is imparted seems a useful concept in this light.

Fun with physics aside, the way I put this together is with a partner and several stacked focus mitts. "Pushy" "Did that go in" "Um are you ok"

Later,

Andrew

Buddha_Fist

09-13-2002, 12:55 AM

I know that that's the normal way to go ("Does this work?... Hmmm..."), as you have to create the feeling of what you're doing.

I do think that you can apply simple Physics to explain some of the things we do quite good from a general point of view. You can't do so precisely, without having to go through some complicated stuff (as you mentioned), becoming a terrible waste of time. But a torque is a torque and relationship of power with speed/mass/acceleration is simply that.

Anyways, enough with this!

:)

John Weiland

09-13-2002, 01:01 AM

Thanks, Rubthebuddha, may I call you "Bud?" :)

Hi Andrew,

Originally posted by AndrewS

my initial point was that not only are the discussions of physics here primitive to the point of uselessness, some portions of present clinical models are also flawed. Trauma literature thinks in joules, generally (notably automobile trauma literature) while the discovery in ballistics is that lower energy slugs tend not to go through people and hence hang out and do more damage.
If you guys make me pull out my old physics textbooks, we'll all be sorry. :)

Thinking about hitting, I don't think there is one general model. What are you trying to do- break ribs, move someone, knock someone out, spasm muscles? Target and goal have a fair bit to do with this. With enough power, there's a lot of damaging effects one can imagine. Would you rather be struck by a tiger's paw or run over by an elephant? ;)

Personally, I think the elasticity of the struck target matters a good bit, and extent to which the struck area is better able to absorb impact over shorter or longer periods. Impulse- the duration of time over which momentum is imparted seems a useful concept in this light.
[B][QUOTE]
If we're thinking the same, then this is contigent more so on structure and timing, and that word again, softness (i.e. relaxed delivery), less so on speed. However, I don't think we've reached a good model yet so far in this discussion of Wing Chun power as I understand it.
[B][QUOTE]
Fun with physics aside, the way I put this together is with a partner and several stacked focus mitts. "Pushy" "Did that go in" "Um are you ok"
LOL! That sounds about right. Your grasp of physics does too, and I agree that some of us sound a tad confused about the subject. :) Do you think we can get to a good physical model, or has somebody done so, but I've missed it? :)

Regards,

AndrewS

09-13-2002, 02:21 AM

Hey John,

my favorite quote from one of the Uechi family asked about vital points- 'hit hard enough, whole body vital point'.

That being said, the more precise your focus, the better your power. One of the the lines from KK involves aiming for individual whiskers on a guy's jaw- trying to put your power in a very small place. Another little visualization, I keep in my box of tricks to try and get my body to run right.

Physical models- I haven't seen a good one, and think that there are actually multiple ways to do things well, within principles based on each experience and target. Personally, I think a few important things in a punch are:

-not letting force* come back into you
-imparting force over as brief a time as possible
-putting force over as small a place as possible (the whisker thing)
-a feeling of effortlessness in the hit
-aliveness in the strike- feeling and emitting power at the last moment, not just throwing a punch out there and abandoning it.

*NOT in the f=ma sense

On the flip side of this, if you say, wanted to break ribs, compressing them then applying some shock seems to work pretty well. There some gum (pressing) going on there.

Faks, shoulders, elbows, I really don't feel I have a decent enough understanding of to say much right now.

Later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-13-2002, 02:51 AM

Leung Sheung was Leung Tings senior kung fu brother when they were both under Yip Man. as far as I am aware it was an age thing with Leung Sheung having started training under Yip man first. The firection Leung Ting has taken WT since that time however is suitably large, mainly due to the influence of Kernspecht.

I think that the dicussion of joules etc is a a bit off when trying to discuss the mechanisms of a punch. The brain shaking thing is important however. A punch to the jaw transferrs the shockwave upwards causing the brain to bounce of the back of the skull which casues a KO. This does not occur punching the forehead or generally above th eye line. The only exception to this is the soft area of the temple on either side of the head. A good punch or pheanix eye here can be devastating.

The elemnt of surprise is also critical in rendering a KO. The snapping back of the neck adds to brain shaking and this is maximised if the opponent is unaware of the punch coming (i.e a pre-emptive attack).

rubthebuddha

09-13-2002, 08:28 AM

after 847 pages, i think we're getting down to agreements. :cool:

and ultimate -- don't forget a simple palm to the ear. the damage this can to to one's ear workings is vastly dwarfed by the fact that there are few things more immediately painful than having your ear drums ruptured with the swing of a palm -- or more disorienting. it may sound like a petty attack -- "so what, they can't hear any more," but with that amount of pain so close to your brain and your other sensory functions, the rest of you won't work anywhere near as well.

Steven Lamb

09-13-2002, 11:04 AM

Why is physics important to the study of m.a.?
because all styles must obey its laws, regardless of lineage...

to generalize and with some assumptions made, what do we know?

constants:
Mass, Distance

Variables:
Force, velocity

Things to consider (this is where the argument lies):

how to generate the maximum amount of force
How to generate the max. amount of velocity

placement of attack
purpose of attack
When to use what

The argument of physics is pointless.

just my two cents....

Chops.

Buddha_Fist

09-13-2002, 03:46 PM

UF: Leung Sheung was Leung Ting's teacher (for several years), prior spending LT his famous 9 months (twice a week according S. Ladarola) under Yip Man, correcting and refining his previous knowledge. Given that Leung Sheung was for so much time LT's Sifu, you can't talk about being it just an "age thing".

rubthebuddha

09-13-2002, 04:35 PM

indeed, and in roots and branches, leung ting said that leung sheung was his first sifu. yip man made an exception cause ... well ... cause he was yip man and could darn well do whatever the heck he wanted. :)

Buddha_Fist

09-13-2002, 11:09 PM

Yeah rub, but it seemed that UF didn't know this, so I was just informing him. No ofense.

Grendel

09-14-2002, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
Leung Sheung was Leung Tings senior kung fu brother when they were both under Yip Man. as far as I am aware it was an age thing with Leung Sheung having started training under Yip man first.
Not to nitpick, but for the sake of accuracy of the historical record, there was never a time when Leung Sheung and Leung Ting were contemporaneous students of Yip Man. In the years following Yip Man's and Leung Sheung's split, Leung Ting was Leung Sheung's student, which I've heard confirmed by three of Leung Sheung's students, and later on LT claims he studied with Yip Man, which gained, in some people's minds, a higher ranking for LT in the lineage, as UF's comments suggest.

It's comparable from someone down in the WT hierarchy jumping over his sifu to go study directly from LT. Not a bad idea in the latter case; probably less consequential in the former.

Regards,

Tristan

09-14-2002, 10:05 AM

...and later on LT claims he studied with Yip Man, which gained, in some people's minds, a higher ranking for LT in the lineage, as UF's comments suggest.

I read this on another forum ;) and therefore looked it up myself to be accurate: In the interview with Yip man by Mok Pui On published in the "New Martial Heroes" (coverstory, issue 56, feb. 1972), Yip Man mentioned Leung Ting as his closed-door student.

So this is no claim of Leung Ting, but are the words of Yip Man!

T.

rubthebuddha

09-14-2002, 01:02 PM

buddha_fist,

i was just backing you up. UF gets a little overzealous sometimes, and the best way to reel him back in is to use leung ting's words:

in reference to his early school ...
"The location of my so-called 'kung fu school' in Hung Hong was too remote, and too simple, and too crude, to accommodate a great grandmaster like Si-kung Yip Man."

:)

Grendel

09-14-2002, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Tristan

I read this on another forum ;) and therefore looked it up myself to be accurate: In the interview with Yip man by Mok Pui On published in the "New Martial Heroes" (coverstory, issue 56, feb. 1972), Yip Man mentioned Leung Ting as his closed-door student.

So this is no claim of Leung Ting, but are the words of Yip Man!

T.
I don't doubt it.

Regards,

UltimateFighter

09-15-2002, 03:20 AM

I have not read roots and branches, so if that is what it says, then so be it.

As regards 'heiracrhy', any student of Yip Man is essentially equal in the 'heirarchy'. And in any case the direction of WT and the Leung Sheung school or any other WC branch are large enough now to say that they are no longer practicing exactly the same art.

rubthebuddha

09-15-2002, 09:36 PM

UF,

the situation between our grandmaster and his instructors is a unique one, and he addresses thoroughly it in either roots and branches or in kuen (can't remember which, and i'm trying to find it). i know that in roots and branches, he says that he and yip man avoid the issue of calling two people "sifu" entirely by calling yip man "man kung," or grandpa man.

and if you haven't read roots and branches, do so. borrow it from a brother or sister if you can, or if you're ever in washington, i'll lendja mine.
:)

Tristan

09-16-2002, 04:20 AM

You really should, listen to RubtheB.

T.

UltimateFighter

09-17-2002, 10:28 AM

Just a question for the WT guys here, particularly Andrews as he has been training the longest. What is contained in the first 6 sections of chi sau? So far I have only learned the first 2. Generally, we are told that each section contains some attacks, defences, and a grip break (anti-grappling idea). But they are witheld until technician level I am told until you are taught the entire sections.

AndrewS

09-17-2002, 02:38 PM

Hey UF,

the sections, my take on 1-4- all lessons to be taken back to basic poon sao-

1st section- how to break poon sao (in-pak), simple bridging (cha kuen), how to handle heavy pressure (the pulling attack), making yourself free with the same arm by fixing a point (the low attack, inside lop, pak/tan entry to the high palm). Footwork.

2nd section- a second layer of responses to the in pak (the entry), the locks- how to lock either on the beginning of someone's force or the end, direct examples of controlling structure through the limbs (using the limb as the long pole), the responses- complete relaxation, fixing a point while locked, power expression through hip, shoulder, and elbow- notable how to go front to back while landing the rear shoulder and still express shock power by closing the stance. Footwork.

3rd section- entry how to abuse the tentative, and handle and innappropriate pressure from the response to the pulling attack, how to free yourself to express force (bong/man), uprooting and footwork- starting to make small angles clear, dealing with uprooting force- cutting and hooking as ideas- kao/ gaun response- starting to explore the kao sao more deeply. Introduction to fak sao- attacking up the centerline using diagonals, also due to- footwork. Exploration of kwan sao- one of the more important ideas. Footwork to give your hands force.

4th section- destroying balance on the way in, using stick to destroy postions, attacking with the double punch, more footwork emphasis on punching, more kwan response, keeping force in both arms, and *the jut dar sequence* from which most people flee, in which you take a serious look at your tan sao and kwan, and probably discover that all was not as it seemed (dammn SNT popping up again).

5, 6, and 7 I recognize by impact and have a few responses, but I really am not much worried about them. I have loads to play with in 2-4. Two is actually probably my favorite, as it teaches some interesting things about relaxing.

Lastly- two major things FOOTWORK and every idea goes back to poon sao. There are no techniques.

Hope this helps,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-18-2002, 11:16 AM

The concepts on 'locking' and controlling are thus far areas I have not covered thoroughly, but are interesting none the less. When you say 'cutting and hooking' from section 3 are you referring o the hook punch? I know this punch is only contained in biu Jee (which I have seen a number of times but not been officially 'taught'), but thus far the wing chun hook has not been emphasised much in application. I feel that it is one of the foundation level punches that should be introduced earlier.

One thing I do like about the WT approach is that everything is taught structurally. As you say, you have a lot 'to play with' with the 4 sections. The forms only teach you the movements, it is through chi-sau that application can be discovered. And the different sections of chi sau taught systematically cover just about anything that can be done from an in-fighting range. I wonder how much of the upper level ideas and techniques are witheld however. It is not really the forms that are 'secret' in WT, it is the chi sau sections and their application. People rag on about Lat sau, but although the 'drill' was designed by Kernspecht, Lat sau actually means 'Free hand' or 'Free-fight'. In Hong Kong they don't do the Lat sau drill but they do practice 'lat sau' in application.

Tristan

09-18-2002, 11:17 AM

@ UF (if you allow me)

5th section:
opening: doubble inside position, bouncing punch, laansao attack, some attacks from gwansao position, elbows.

6th section:
opening: doubble outside position. Lab- faksao attacks in all variations (incl. dong-faksao).

7th section
opening: double djatsao from outside position. Attacks and counterattacks (djat and biutze sao´s) when the arms are stretched out.

T.

Tristan

09-18-2002, 11:27 AM

UF

I wonder how much of the upper level ideas and techniques are witheld however. It is not really the forms that are 'secret' in WT, it is the chi sau sections and their application. People rag on about Lat sau, but although the 'drill' was designed by Kernspecht, Lat sau actually means 'Free hand' or 'Free-fight'. In Hong Kong they don't do the Lat sau drill but they do practice 'lat sau' in application.

It´s all about how you practice your sections. When you master all the techniques, you have to mix them and just let it flow (forget the single techniques).
However, they do know latsao in HK, but not as you are familiar with: The KRK thing. (as you stated before)

Latsao means free application (of the chisao you´ve learned before). This means you have to learn to react properly at all circumstances when being attacked.
Exercise: you attack your partner (lab, pak, etc.) and he reacts and counterattacks you in the very moment: reflect his energy and finish him off.
As you may see you can think off endless variations. Just following the sections won´t help you much.

T.

UltimateFighter

09-18-2002, 12:39 PM

Actually, I was at a seminar recently with this man:

http://www.wingchun.com/video/wt/GermanWTstuff.mpeg

Jurgen Kestner.

He is the head of the German Special ops, which train WT for close combat. It was an intense training sesion is all I can say! We covered some interesting aspects such as:

Fighting with one arm broken, fighting when backed up against a wall and restraint procedures.

The guy is extremely fast in real life. I did a bit of lat sau 'sparring' with him. Suffice to say, I was getting caught with shots a hell of a lot. He is deadly quick. Word has it he is currently being trained up to be 'the next Emin Boztepe'. Don't be surprised if you see him a lot more in future.

red5angel

09-18-2002, 12:43 PM

Will he always wear the mask? :)

Do you guys all train to chain punch a falling opponent?

Tristan

09-18-2002, 01:14 PM

Will he always wear the mask?

Not very clever of him; as he is the only one training with a mask, he always´ll be recognised.
Maybe he changes colour from time to time? ;)

T.

Tristan

09-18-2002, 01:21 PM

Do you guys all train to chain punch a falling opponent?

We don´t ! Like the traditional way more: Standing on both legs and kick while controlling one of his arms.

T.

red5angel

09-18-2002, 01:28 PM

"We don´t ! Like the traditional way more: Standing on both legs and kick while controlling one of his arms."

Why is it that when I see a demo on the web, and granted web demos arent alays the best side of everything, the guy ends up chain punching a horrendous amount at the end?

UltimateFighter

09-18-2002, 02:21 PM

Chainpunching is the most effective finisher in the Wing Chun system. That is why you see it a lot.

The mask is for security reasons. Since he is still working for the GSG9 special ops, he doesn't want to get recognised.

Still, maybe he will be a masked fighter. That will be a good gimick for promoting wing chun (ever watched pro-wrestling).

I remember his words of encouragement at the seminar:

"Ze walls are dirty with blood, no? Then verk harder!"

He is the real deal.

UltimateFighter

09-18-2002, 02:26 PM

LOL

Its good to get some hardcore training once in a while. Seriosuly though, these special forces guys are Psycho's. You have to be an absolute nut to qualify for the Marines or SAS. Most of us just train for a past time/hobby. These guys train for real life or death situations.

hunt1

09-18-2002, 04:09 PM

Chain punching is in no way shape or means the most effective finisher in Wing Chun! You have alot to learn!

Tristan

09-19-2002, 12:31 AM

The chainpunching deal is mostly common in the EWTO (org. under Keith Kernspecht) and the EBMAS . These are just 2 of quite a few organisations wich promote LT WC (WT).
Personally I think chainpunching a guy who´s falling to the ground ain´t the most effective way of finishing.

T.

wtinfo

09-19-2002, 12:48 AM

The reason why you see chain punching so much when they fall / are on the ground is because it's an extremely sufficent way of making sure that they stay down once they fall and if they do get up they don't want to fight anymore. Remember that WT is 100% for self defence so chain punching is a good way to over power (in the sence that he can't do anything but try to defend - and thus he can't hurt you)

I'm just a novice but it should be obvious even from just seeing the videos. Also videos are very poor in showing WT, go see for yourself in a club even if you think it sucks take it for a few weeks im 100% that atleast 90% who bash on WT will change their mind or atleast view it with some more respect.

Also WT promotes cross traning and looking into other styles so you can make up your own oppinion on what works and what doesn't.

As for really working I know that atleast the Danish WT have a fight club. You wear only a mask, sparring gloves and groin protection... Sifu is the judge and there is no weight classes, everything goes and there is no set time on the fights (again WT is 100% for self defence not a sport) two WT guys who came from Jytland to Copenhagen to bein Fight Club ended up with a broken arm and broken ribs so this is very much like real fighting. Ofcourse this is an extreme case and it is usually just bruises you get (the Fight Club is 100% by your own will and behind closed doors, you only fight to face your fears and know that you are able to fight back instead of just panicking if you do end up in a fight)

Again im just a starting out and learning alot, I find it great and urge you all who doubt WT to just try it out.

And id like to add almost every single martial art has something you learn from and improve yourself, what I found so appealing with WT is the fact that it's 100% for streetdefence, not a sport, no rules just you protecting yourself and your loved ones from assault and harm.

UltimateFighter

09-19-2002, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by hunt1
Chain punching is in no way shape or means the most effective finisher in Wing Chun! You have alot to learn!

No my friend, it is you who has a lot to learn. Chain punching is the most effective strategy to finish an opponent when he is on the defensive. Finishing a falling opponent (if indeed that is necessary) is another issue, and there are many options for that, but chainpunching, or 'consecutive strikes' as Hawkins Cheung liked to put it on his streetfighting days in Hong Kong, is by far the most effective destructive tool in the wing chun arsenal. The reason? It is the most powerful weopon to use down the centre-line, and in Wing Chun, that is what we strive to do.

yuanfen

09-19-2002, 07:08 AM

Hunt 1 is on target. A skilled figheter can handle chain punching specially when it is predictable.

yuanfen

09-19-2002, 07:09 AM

Hunt 1 is on target. A skilled fighter can handle chain punching specially when it is predictable.

red5angel

09-19-2002, 07:14 AM

It just seems to me that chain punching is too committal and seems a little desperate to me. I am not saying there isnt a time and a place but that much focus on it seems dangerous.

Frank Exchange

09-19-2002, 09:00 AM

Yep, the time and place is when you have a line to hit the opponent, and are in range to do so.

The concept of the chain punch is that of a short succession of punches to the same target area to do more damage. Much more likely to get a KO, for example, if the synovial fluid has been dispersed from around the brain by a previous strike.

But, this means two, maybe three, not twenty. If a practioner needs more than this, I would suggest that their punching method needs work. Two or three punches with the whole bodyweight behind them will do more than enough damage.

IMO punching from out of range is a waste of time, and the repetitive, machine gun like punching I have seen in some schools is both predictable and easy to counter.

Steven Lamb

09-19-2002, 09:38 AM

what if the opponent is used to strong hooks and upper cuts, like say boxers/thai boxers. Two, maybe three thrusting punches might not cut it.

i agree that overuse of chain punching is silly. the demos are made to show the aggressive nature of WT, not the SOP of the system. I will continue my attacks (ie chain punching, elbows, knees) while there still is a threat and the way is still free.

Steve.

UltimateFighter

09-19-2002, 10:34 AM

I totally disagree that chainpunching is a 'low level tool'. It is the natural extension of the straight line (character 3 sun) thrusting punch.

Unless you are thowing a sideling punch with hip rotation (similar to the one drilled extensively in the Yaun Kay san lineage), then you are going to be square on facing the opponent - it only makes sense to throw consecutive strikes. I agree that chainpunching is often over emphasised, but it is a powerful tool none the less. My feel is that the standard wing chun punch (i.e staying square without putting hip rotation in) is not powerful enough to finish a fight with one punch. It is not as powerful as the typical boxer straight cross for example because we tend to remain square and do not maximise turning force.

About the thread title......I started this thread as a question. I by no means feel that WT is far superior to other WC branches, and I have actaully picked some very good points through discussion here. All branches have something to offer and we are all in the end part of the same 'wing chun kuen' family.

Peace.

red5angel

09-19-2002, 10:37 AM

Why the emphasis on the punch then? Chain punching is one of many many tools you can use. Most of them much less comitted and more effective.

Steven Lamb

09-19-2002, 01:53 PM

R5A,
Please excuse my irgorance but what are these tools you speak of?

I find chain punching great when the opponent is still able to change range. If I can get to elbow/knee range and stay there(hard thing for me to do sometimes), then i agree that chain punches are not the best tool to use.

Chain punches are not a committing tool.

Crimsonking,

I agree that if it ain't working, then use something else. ..FAST!
But some people think that they can knock out someone with one thrusting punch after training for only 2 to 3 years. That type of power comes slowly. until I have that type power, i ll rely on mulitple attacks until i know the person is no longer a threat.

Steve.

red5angel

09-19-2002, 02:10 PM

Steven Lamb, if I get into a fight my goal is to end it as soon as possible. there are plenty of other techniques that are much quicker and much more effective and taking an attackers mind off of fighting and redirecting it to finding a phone to call an ambulance. There are all sorts of dangling floppy bits on a combatant that can be broken, twisted, bent, etc,.. that dont recquire I open myself up like that.
It may sound more brutal, but I am one of those people who will do everything to keep it away from physical conflict, and I am a big guy, so if you are coming after me physically you want to do some damage in my opinion, and I cant take that chance.

Tristan

09-19-2002, 02:21 PM

UF:

I totally disagree that chainpunching is a 'low level tool'. It is the natural extension of the straight line (character 3 sun) thrusting punch.

Wait until you´re in the Biu Tze thing: biutzesau´s, chumsao´s, faksao´s, biubongsao´s, dongfak´s and three elboys at your disposal.

T.

Steven Lamb

09-19-2002, 03:48 PM

R5A,

quote:
"if I get into a fight my goal is to end it as soon as possible"

For Sure!
but I also want to do it as SIMPLY and effectively as possible too.
Maybe i'm just not there yet( the breaking, twisting, shattering my opponents limbs). I'm also still having trouble with my body's reaction to danger(tunnel vision, adrenaline, trembling knees, etc). Don't want to complicate things more then they already are.....

WORD.

UltimateFighter

09-20-2002, 03:18 AM

We already train elbows and I have seen Biu Jee many times. Chainpunching is still the No. 1 tool to use as a finisher. Yes you can use the horizontal chops and finger attacks (although finger strikes to the ease are not practical in real life - human reflexes are too fast, read Hawkins Cheungs many accounts), but thry aint as reliable or powerful as chainpunching.

As usual, redangel has no idea what he is talking about. He keeps mumbling about 'lots of more effective and efficient ways to finish a fight in wing chun' yet hasn't named a single one. ven if there were, he wouldn't know them.

Okay red, I ask you to name ONE more effective technique in wing chun that can be used in a variety of situations that is more devastating than chain punching. The balls in your court.

black and blue

09-20-2002, 05:32 AM

You know, we could all agree to disagree :)

Lots of people have a take on what WT is. Has anyone here ever done Chi Sau with Sifu Leung Ting?

What was it like? Any surprises?

I had the chance to attend one of his seminars a few years back, but work messed up my plans :( . I might not use chain punching as much as the WT guys, but I'm not sure if I'd argue the point with Leung Ting :D

Anyone with a hands-on Leung Ting story to tell?

09-20-2002, 05:41 AM

I am curious about something I've seen quite a lot in WT demo clips. When "finishing" an opponent [for example] this often seems to be via chain punches or elbows as described. The thing I'm most curious about, is that it seems the "victors" in such clips often bend, lean or kneel as the supposed opponent is falling down or on the ground, presumably in an effort to keep them within hand/arm/elbow range.

I realize that demo clips for purposes of publicity can be a different animal from recommended and actual practice in some cases. So wondering ... is bending over, leaning down, or kneeling generally advocated in your "real" practice? If so, is there any concern about compromising your own body structure and alignment, and why or why not?

My question is sincere, as I would like to better understand your practice and approach in this regard. Thanks in advance for your insights and perspectives.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Gandolf269

09-20-2002, 06:06 AM

Dang this is long thread, but I've read the whole thing and will put in my 2 cents worth (btw I practice WT). To answer the original question - No WT isn't the best (or most effective) branch of Wing Chun. I think it is the best in my area that I have seen so far, but I haven't visited all of the schools in my area either.

Both UF and R5A - You guys have alot to learn about WT/WC. I don't doubt that you both have learned alot in the 2 years that you have studied but to make emfactical statements with your limited knowledge is rediculous. I would say the first thing you need to learn is respect for your elder Kung Fu brothers, regardless of what school their from.

We don't cross train (ie wrestling, or bjj), but we do train in ANTI-grappling every once in a while. Using WT principles. It's all there in the forms, you just have to know how to apply them. Coming from Texas where every kid learns how to tackle at an early age because of the importance placed on Football (not Soccer), most of the fights there tend to end up on the ground. So it may be more important depending on the part of the world you live in. But it is anti-grappling that is taught in WT - "Don't wrestle a wrestler."

To say that muscles are an important part of a punch is just stupid. Almost as stupid as saying it is the most important thing. UF - If it is the most important thing then why not spend your time lifting weights instead of training WT.

Yes, KK is in it for the money. That's his business. But I bet the owner of everyones school is in it for the money. Otherwise they would be in business for very long. Simple economics.

Because LS was LT's first and longest Sifu it only makes since that our schools have alot in common. It is only the pride of both Sifu's that keeps/kept them from acknowleging each other. (which in my mind is rediculous)

good wing chun/wingtsun in dependent on the individual and his/her application of the forms.

Peace!

red5angel

09-20-2002, 06:34 AM

UF - Its not a matter of any one technique, unless of course your skill is lacking or you just feel like being predictable. There are any number of other options to 'finish' an opponent quickly. Of course, why 'play' with your opponent in the first place, why not 'finish' him right away? :rolleyes:
KJ touched upon a point I brought up a while back and never recieved a satisfactory answer on. Why break structure by chasing your opponent to the ground to chain punch him when you can use your feet and be less vulnerable?
My other big question is why the heck would you have to do all of those chain punches to finish someone off? Where is the power? Why do you have to hit someone so many times in succession just to 'finish' the guy? Sounds like instead of speed you guys should be working on structure maybe?

Steve Lamb, I understand what you are saying. Those tools are in the forms and in the practice. Some you have to discover as you go along but thats half the fun of training!

UltimateFighter

09-20-2002, 07:14 AM

I never stated that a punch's power is mostly dependent on strength. I just stated the (fairly obvious) fact that part of its power is derived from having well developed triceps.

About 'breaking structure'. That is a valid question and one that deserves a good response. I am limited in my knowledge on WT so I cannot say what is in the wooden dummy, knife or pole forms. But 'leaning' to finish someone with punches is a valid option. In fact in biu Jee there is a 'bending movement' accompanied with circling of the arms. So staying rigidly in stance is not a necessity.

I will say this: If you go to the ground, there is nothing in the forms which describes how to 'fight from the ground'. So does that mean you must give up? No, it just means that you must apply what you know to this practical situation. There is no movement in the forms about 'getting back to your feet'. But it would be ridiculous to stick so rigidly to the forms in their interpretation.

I maintain that the principle of Wing Chun is to 'stick to your opponent and finish'. If he falls to the ground but is not out, then finish him on the way down. Chainpunching is only one option of many, and I'm sure that Jurgen Kestner (the special op guy) knows and has used countless methods of finishing. That is just a demo, although a very impressive one.

Wing Chun's emphasis is also on speed over power. If you want power, I'd recommend boxing as a better method of generating single 'knockout' blows.

red5angel

09-20-2002, 07:18 AM

"there is nothing in the forms which describes how to 'fight from the ground'."

Really? Is that what you believe or is that what you are taught?

"Wing Chun's emphasis is also on speed over power."

hmmmmmm.........

Miles Teg

09-20-2002, 07:25 AM

Sorry UT but I have a few issues with what you said on page 14.

UT said
1. [QUOTE]The forms only teach you the movements[QUOTE]

Is that what you have been taught? If so you need to look at some other branches or styles

2. [QUOTE]The mask is for security reasons. Since he is still working for the GSG9 special ops, he doesn't want to get recognised[QUOTE]

I wonder if a better disguise might be him pretending to be a normal guy who isnft in the special forces but is good at w.cc..
Put bluntly, you might want to think about why he feels he needs to tell people he is in the special forces in the first place.

3. [QUOTE]The seminar covered: `Fighting with one arm broken, fighting when backed up against a wall and restraint procedures[QUOTE]

OK the fighting with the broken arm I have issues with. Firstly have you considered how you got the broken arm, could you entertain the idea that it might be because your opponent is better than you. Could you also entertain the idea that he has just kicked your a$$ when you had 2 hands and he may not have much trouble with you when you only have one. But seriously once youfve got a broken arm your f*cked, he might even let you go knowing he won, why would you want to keep fighting and risk further injury. Even he doesnft let you go you should probably try and keep other body parts from being broken so you can at least run.

4. [QUOTE]I remember his words of encouragement at the seminar:
"Ze walls are dirty with blood, no? Then verk harder!"
He is the real deal[QUOTE]

To that I finish my b!tching session with: Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai!
Put him a body bag, yeah..hahahahaha!
Does that ring a bell?

UltimateFighter

09-20-2002, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Sorry UT but I have a few issues with what you said on page 14.

UT said

2. [QUOTE]The mask is for security reasons. Since he is still working for the GSG9 special ops, he doesn't want to get recognised[QUOTE]

I wonder if a better disguise might be him pretending to be a normal guy who isnft in the special forces but is good at w.cc..
Put bluntly, you might want to think about why he feels he needs to tell people he is in the special forces in the first place.

3. [QUOTE]The seminar covered: `Fighting with one arm broken, fighting when backed up against a wall and restraint procedures[QUOTE]

OK the fighting with the broken arm I have issues with. Firstly have you considered how you got the broken arm, could you entertain the idea that it might be because your opponent is better than you. Could you also entertain the idea that he has just kicked your a$$ when you had 2 hands and he may not have much trouble with you when you only have one. But seriously once youfve got a broken arm your f*cked, he might even let you go knowing he won, why would you want to keep fighting and risk further injury. Even he doesnft let you go you should probably try and keep other body parts from being broken so you can at least run.

4. [QUOTE]I remember his words of encouragement at the seminar:
"Ze walls are dirty with blood, no? Then verk harder!"
He is the real deal[QUOTE]

To that I finish my b!tching session with: Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai! Cobra Kai!
Put him a body bag, yeah....

Lol. let me explain some things to you.

Firstly, you obviously have difficulty comprehending a joke, but one of the best things about WT as opposed to other more secluded branches is the sheer diversity of people that do it. We have right down from the average Jo who just wants to learn some basic self defence/fitness right up to top level Special forces operatives. The guy hold seminars becasue he is using wingtsun in real life application often with his health and personal safety at risk. This is something that you or most people will never do so we can all benefit from his experience of what works and doesn't. There are the hardore military personel like him with a 'never say die', 'go in and kill' attitude, right the way round to soft principle guys like KK or some of the top guys from Britain who have a much more relaxed and technical approach that stresses avoidance and calm. So we have BOTH approaches which can only improve our perspective and make us better fighters.

About specifics of the seminar - you can get your arm broken in a fight in a variety of circumstances. Broken or immobilised for whatever reason due to a fall or if he broke it. So according to your philosophy you would just say 'look, I've broken my arm and am clearly loosing so I will just give up'. The intellignet thing to do would be to at least trainsothat if in that situation, you could attack well enough with one arm to stun your opponent long enough to escape, which is the idea. Again it is about practicality.

On groundfighting - the forms do not contain specific areas focusing on this range, it is down to application which is what we train. But for the ground, it is always better to know a style that teaches this specific area in more detail. Just roll with a good Judoka or BJJer and you'll learn the hard way I guess.

Gandolf269

09-20-2002, 12:39 PM

Ultimate Fighter,

I just got the monthly newsletter from my Sifu and this months quote seems to fit the current topic:

"AS a professional I know that the ground is a very dangerous place to be. I don't want to go to the ground, therefore I prefer to teach anti-groundfighting, the art of not ending up where the greatest danger threatens, where you ruin your clothes and where you are helplessly exposed to kicks and other attacks of third parties, even if you are getting the better of your opponent." Blitzdefence by Keith Kernspecht, 10 Level Grandmaster, EWTO.

Since you won't listen to anyone else maybe you will listen to your Gigung. If you are being taught groundfighting it isn't WT. I am not saying that you are not being taught WT, but the groundfighting portion is something else. It maybe good to learn, but it's not WT. Like I said before the percentage of fights that end up on the ground seems to be a regional thing, so this may be required for your area. I know if I still lived in Texas (where everyone is a Dallas Cowboy wannabe :D ) , I would want to practice the anti-grappling moves more than I currently am.

R5A
As I stated previously, at my WT class we are not taught ground fighting. If we are shown groundfighting moves, or locks, it is only so our partner can learn to escape from them when we (try to) apply them. But,we don't kid ourselves, everyone in my class realizes the a BJJ player, wrestler, etc. would be alot more difficult to get away from than anyone in our class. This is not part of our normal curriculum, but is usually covered once or twice a year in an additional class given by our Sifu (usually either free or for a nominal fee of $10-$20).

Peace,
David

red5angel

09-20-2002, 12:54 PM

Gandolf269, sounds liek a reasonable and more realistic approach for wingchun people to me.

UltimateFighter

09-21-2002, 04:47 AM

The emphasis is on getting back to your feet if it does go to the ground, and that is something that anyone who has little ground experience should do. That is why I train another style for the ground. But for self defence purposes, I agree that the ground canbe dangerous. But if you are going to learn how to escape locks, you may as well learn how to apply them as well. This is not wing chun but it is common sense and can only improve you as a fighter.

I see WT 'anti-grappling' as a means of escaping the grapplie f you so choose. But it is a negative term. Afterall, if you DO have grappling skills, then why not use them? If you can grapple to an accompkished level, there is no need for anti-grappling (unless you are outnumbered), as grappling can be to your advantage as much as striking. That is the meaning of cross-training.

Miles Teg

09-22-2002, 02:29 AM

Hi UT
Well Ive done WT and I think theres alot of things that it is missing. This became aparent to me after training another WC. Dont get me wrong I loved it, the teacchers were respectful and they and my sihings seemed to be excellent fighters.

Anyway you mentioned that a lot of WT guys you know used to be WC teachers, so Im just giving myself as an example of the opposite (except Im not or havent been a teacher).
Anyway this is probably a subject that we will never agree on.
You probably know that the name WC cant be generalised into one category, as most are very different from each other.

I moved to Japan last month and I did my first Judo class the other deay and it was pretty cool. Lots of practice on the ground and the holds were effective. Im sure wc principles could be applied to it to make it more effective but Ill try that after doing it for alittle longer.

Are you a fan of Pride? Cause I love it, here in Japan they have all the fights at the video store Ive been getting them all out. The next pride event is in Nagoya 25 minutes away and Im thinking of going.

UltimateFighter

09-22-2002, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by Miles Teg
Hi UT
Well Ive done WT and I think theres alot of things that it is missing. This became aparent to me after training another WC. Dont get me wrong I loved it, the teacchers were respectful and they and my sihings seemed to be excellent fighters.

Anyway you mentioned that a lot of WT guys you know used to be WC teachers, so Im just giving myself as an example of the opposite (except Im not or havent been a teacher).
Anyway this is probably a subject that we will never agree on.
You probably know that the name WC cant be generalised into one category, as most are very different from each other.

I moved to Japan last month and I did my first Judo class the other deay and it was pretty cool. Lots of practice on the ground and the holds were effective. Im sure wc principles could be applied to it to make it more effective but Ill try that after doing it for alittle longer.

Are you a fan of Pride? Cause I love it, here in Japan they have all the fights at the video store Ive been getting them all out. The next pride event is in Nagoya 25 minutes away and Im thinking of going.

Yeah, PRIDE is awesome. Really, a large percentage of people on this forum could be seriously educated about fighting by simply watching a few PRIDE or UFC vids. If I had the chance I would definately go.

As for your training in WC, could you elaborate on the things that were missing from your WT training that you found in your new lineage. The chief instrcuctors for the U.K. Andrew ******* and Paul Hawkes are former chief instructors of the U.K. WCK organisation who switched to WT.

I would wait a lot longer than your first class doing Judo before you try to decide whther WC principles can be applied. Try to focus on the techniques taight in Judo before trying toa pply other stuff. I have been a Judoka for over 5 years and I can say they are very different styles, and WC principles will not help unless you have put in the hours on the mat. There are some superb things you can get from your Judo training if you stick with it long enough. Knowledge of groundfighting, standing grappling and throwing, and at the advanced level armlocks, strangles and chokes all of which are extremely useful in a real fight and are not taught in wing chun (except for a bit of modified standing locks).

Miles Teg

09-23-2002, 12:17 AM

Oh you were a judoka?
I was surprised how cool it was. Before last week I thought it would be like what you see in the Olympics where you try to get someone to the ground and thats all, but in the class we were on the ground most of the time. Also I thought the holds and stuff in Judo would only be useful if your opponent is wearing a GI but a lot of the moves, I thought, could, work without a GI. So anyway this new experience opened my mind up about Judo, and Im looking forward to the next class. I thought I would be one of the biggest in the class as everyone is Japanese but there are some big boys there and even the small ones had no problem dealing with me, so it will be a challenge.

In Tokyo there are a few MMA schools that are run/used by some Japanese Pride competitors. One is where Sakuraba trains, and apparently you can spar with him, but unfortunately Im not in Tokyo, and Im not in such good shape anyway, but when I go up there Id like to check it out.

As for what I thought was missing, one of the main things is structure. I donft know if everyone uses the same definition for the word. But im talking about the ability to resist force without redirecting and without using local muscle. As an example if you hold your bong up and I push against your bong how much force can you take before you have to change position eg. Into a tan or something. What I found in my class was that they couldnft take any pressure at all they moved into another position or tried to redirect into something else. What they donft seem to realize is that while im exerting pressure I am relaxed. They think that if someone is exerting force they are tensing their muscles when in fact they are using the whole body. The elbow can resist a lot of pressure without being tense. When I exert all the power I can into breaking my teachers structure it doesnft work, his elbow bends a little but will the spring back to the normal position. If I hold his arm with my spare arm to see if he is tensing up, I find that he is completely relaxed, he is also much smaller than me. I found in my old WT class that no one had the ability to do this.

Having this strong connection between your upper arm and your forearm (through your elbow) is quite Important not only for receiving power but for giving it. As far as I learnt in my WT class they didnft have any concept of this. Just to finish up Ill give you one example I can think of in the WT form that shows a lack of this understanding for this concept. The fak sau move in the wt form, has you move your elbows out 90 degrees to the side and THEN once the elbows are completely out you move your forearms out (now your arms are in a straight line out to the side of your body). There are so many things wrong with that movement, one of the biggest ones being the separation of the movement in the first place(elbow out and then hands). Just moving you forearm 90 degrees out with your elbow is a very week move, I mean if you were to do it now you can just feel how week it is. Its like me hitting you with a baseball bat but only using my wrist muscles to move the bat, but keeping my forearm and upper arm still. You want to hit using the whole arm. If you separate the movements like that you are localizing the movement to your triceps.

Its so hard to explain with words but very easy to show.

As for those guys from England who joined WT, I donft know what the WCK organization is cause I donft know much about WC in England. But as far as I know the WSL and Victor Kahn schools are the biggest in WC schools in England, and they are both of a very high standard. Is it one of those schools?

Frank Exchange

09-23-2002, 04:53 AM

UltimateFighter sez:

>> Wing Chun's emphasis is also on speed over power. If you want power, I'd recommend boxing as a better method of generating single 'knockout' blows. <<

Maybe in WT. Not in the vast majority of the WC I have seen.

Power in WC, like all striking arts, be they boxing, karate, taichi or kungfu, comes from utilizing the full body weight when hitting.

Frank Exchange

09-23-2002, 05:00 AM

>> As for those guys from England who joined WT, I donft know what the WCK organization is cause I donft know much about WC in England. But as far as I know the WSL and Victor Kahn schools are the biggest in WC schools in England, and they are both of a very high standard. <<

I believe that the UK WCK is of Yip Chun lineage, but I could be wrong, the instructors mentioned are definitely not from WSL or Victor Kan, which incidentally are by no means the biggest in the country. The Yip Man sons, Austin Goh, Kamon and others have far more members. I should know, I train WSL.

But nice to hear we have a good reputation abroad. :)

red5angel

09-23-2002, 07:39 AM

"Yeah, PRIDE is awesome. Really, a large percentage of people on this forum could be seriously educated about fighting by simply watching a few PRIDE or UFC vids. If I had the chance I would definately go."

riiiiiiiiiiiight, and if you really believe this you are going to be seriously educated if you get into a fight in the real world with someone with even a little bit of knowledge.......

yuanfen

09-23-2002, 08:22 AM

I have visited witha friend who is a student of Michael Louisson
who has also visited SF/USA. Michael studied some with WSL and
more with a good student of WSL.

BTW- you used the term "goolies' in another post- has that crept into the language in the UK? The term is South Asian in origin.

AndrewS

09-23-2002, 08:28 AM

Hey Miles,

sounds like the WT group you were working with had lousy understanding of basics. That happens, as in the rest of Wing Chun, teachers and groups have their strong and weak points. In this case it sounds like it was foundation.

That fak thing- what you were shown is a developmental exercise for beginners (whether or not it was taught as such). Leading with the elbow on the fak is an attempt to teach the same thing with the fak as driving with the elbow on the punch (not being hand oriented). The motion can be done with a couple of types of coordination, depending on the power you want to express. The hit would be a sequental expression of power from legs and body, from spine extension, to a slight pulling back of the shoulder blade, to the sidewards throwing of the elbow, to extension of the forearm at the elbow.

Later,

Andrew

Frank Exchange

09-23-2002, 09:01 AM

>> BTW- you used the term "goolies' in another post- has that crept into the language in the UK? The term is South Asian in origin. <<

If it refers to the same thing, the testicles, yep, its been in common usage since at least the 70s (when I first heard it on tv), and probably a lot longer. It wouldnt surprise me at all if it was incorporated into the language back in the days of the old British Empire.

Like all the best words, it has a nice, descriptive ring to it. You would know what it was describing, even if you had never heard it before. :)

UltimateFighter

09-23-2002, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by red5angel
[B
riiiiiiiiiiiight, and if you really believe this you are going to be seriously educated if you get into a fight in the real world with someone with even a little bit of knowledge....... [/B]

This coming from someone who thinks that playfighting at a birthday party is good 'grappling' training. Redangel, the stupidity of your posts sometimes defy's belief. I would laugh, but I pity you.

The general approach in wing chun is speed over power. Power is obviously extremely important, but the mechanics of the straightline wing chun punch mean that is sacrifices turning force of the hips in order to allow repeated follow ups with alternating punches (i.e chainpunches). That is why we stay square when we punch. Compared with boxing it does put a certain amount of speed over power.

AndrewS

09-23-2002, 10:32 AM

UF,

'stay square' is *not* equivalent to not using hip turn. Unless someone comes at you dead on, you don't make contact with their limbs on the way in, and you hit perfectly on their central axis, you will not be hitting 'square' - without hip twist. In essence you will nearly always be making a small hip turn to track the other person's torso. This is one place from where you may get power. This twisting power is similar to a boxer's hip turn, stabilized, and aided by adduction, and some very interesting pelvic mechanics. While the quality of power is different, I find not lack of quantity in these mechanics. Looking at the biomechanics, and comparing the force felt on the pad- logic and feeling- most people have little trouble understanding this. This force may not always come into play, but it can be used more often than most suspect and is used by the very good practictioners far more often than most notice. Watch the hips and back closely.

Perhaps, you should add a few qualifiers to your discussion of WT, as your experience and understanding are not the sole interpretation of the art, and you are occasionally doing yourself and the art little favor by presenting your present understanding as gospel.

Later,

Andrew

UltimateFighter

09-23-2002, 10:51 AM

What you are referring to is the sideling punch. Hip rotation is sometimes necessary to reach the target but the intentionis to stay a square as demonatrated in the forms.

I do not claim great knoweldge of WT as I have only been practicing it for 2 years, and really I only argue vigourously when the post is about grappling, an area which I have considerably more experience. Staying square and chainpunching however has no hip rotation whatsoever so I fail to see how you think that each individual punch is as powerful as the boxers cross with hip rotation. It cannot be so. The sideling punch is a different punch altogether.

red5angel

09-23-2002, 12:05 PM

UF - "The general approach in wing chun is speed over power"

Incorrect. The general approach to wingchun is sensitivity and precision over speed and power.

AndrewS

09-23-2002, 12:08 PM

UF,

you can't say no one tried to tell you.

Red,

stop trying to tell every other practitioner of Wing Chun on the planet how to practice.

Later,

Andrew

red5angel

09-23-2002, 12:46 PM

AndrewS its not my job to tell you how to practice, you should have figured this stuff out by now.......

UltimateFighter

09-24-2002, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by AndrewS
UF,

'stay square' is *not* equivalent to not using hip turn. Unless someone comes at you dead on, you don't make contact with their limbs on the way in, and you hit perfectly on their central axis, you will not be hitting 'square' - without hip twist.

Andrew

andrews,

You have agreed with me in your post even if you didn't realise it. Staying square does not use hip turn. As you wrote, 'unless someone comes at you head on, you will not be hitting square'. Staying square however does not use any hip rotation. The straight line punch of wing chun is done with the intention of having no hip turn and staying square.

AndrewS

09-24-2002, 01:13 AM

UF,

when striking perfectly flat targets perpendicular to the centerline estabilished between you and the target, you will step direct and punch without obvious hip turn. Even there, you will find a small and very powerful hip mechanic. As you step from C2 forward, you shift weight onto your now back leg, driving the front leg forward. The back hip will 'open' slightly- extend on the pelvis, and externally rotate- then close back down, essentially internally rotating and flexing, as the front foot hits the ground with adduction and hip extension. This is my present understanding of this mechanic. The step, in total, will keep you balanced and use as much of the muscle chains of the leg as a boxer's cross. It delivers similar or greater power depending on your understanding of it. In addition, the right straight or overhand right in boxing will generally go from hips at just past 45 degrees to hips just past square as you step in, and good boxers can hit harder with less and less turn. Go check out Mr. Latosa or Steve Tappin if you want to understand this better.

As you should always accomodate to control the centerline (which gets a bit more complicated than the standard centerpoint to centerpoint explanation), you're pretty much always going to be making small hip turns with each step, adding more and more 'twist' to your strike- the reducto ad absurdum being the hook defense from 4th SG or the 1st blitzdefense- the lop dar from crossed position.

If you don't think WT has power, you're selling the art very short.

Later,

Andrew