5 element footwork

[byond1]

it was said yip man taught (originally)the old terms to lun kai(origianly fatsan clan)...lun kai told some of the h.k students that ym didnt teach them the 5 element footwork...but they compared and found they had the exact same basic footwork......does anyone know what element is what... in modern day wc footwork? no guessing either you know or you dont and i dont so.......
why does lun kai's jong form lack footwork? was that because he left it out(for leung ting)? and why is the jong so..differant from the H.K forms.....drastic differance imo..whih even though the H.K forms are all unique they are all more alike than any of them to lun kai's

[mtod1]

I was just speaking with one of my head instructors and he mentioned the five element footwork in passing. I think its something I'll learn much later in training (maybe)? Sorry I can't help, but at least i can kinda confirm that it exists.


seeya

[t_niehoff]

byond1 wrote:

lun kai told some of the h.k students that ym didnt teach them the 5 element footwork . . . why does lun kai's jong form lack footwork? was that because he left it out(for leung ting)? and why is the jong so..differant from the H.K forms.....

From my perspective, WCK is a conceptual kuen faat (fist or fighting method). I know you've heard it before, but IMHO if a person truly and fully appreciates that fact, concern with fixed forms (techniques) or whether someone does this or that becomes meaningless. It's not a matter IMO of having a certain number of techniques (footwork or whatever) or certain sets (kuen to); rather it's "getting" or "catching on to" certain specific fundamental (core) ideas, and the physical application of these fundamental ideas will naturally give rise a myriad of expressions (not just is what is in the sets). These fundamental core concepts are like the axioms in geometry -- once you have them and understand them, you can use them to derive all kinds of things. (Does it matter that so-and-so's geometry book doesn't have certain derivations while someone else's does? Not IMO, as long as they have the axioms -- then they can derive it themselves). Also, different persons often use different verbal terms to describe the same concepts/movements. TN

Terence

[byond1]

hi T---things are meaningless to those who dont attach meaning to the specific "thing"(whatever) we are talking about. Daredevil #4 (when they introduce the red costume) has lots of meaning to me but is meaningless to most people as they only see a comic book...or paper with ink on it....to me....it has meaning on several levels......such is the case with what you posted......
im not sure why you spent time on a post to me that didnt answer my question, but instead questioned why i even ask what i asked!!!
i agree with wck being a principle based art....anyone who says other...i feel sorry for..lol.....but "terms", words..grammer are important to someone who enjoys language, history..ect....grammer and language is something used by most of us on this planet.....i "ENJOY" wck history......as i said before, it is my hobby.....wck is not my hobby..... wck history is my hobby......wck is part of my life..and therefore not a hobby (tried to be as clear as possible..lol).....so if ym taught using differant grammer at one point in his teaching than at another....IT HAS MEANING TO ME......or i wouldnt have posted...looking for someone to help .......so let me reiterate.....
wck is part of my life, the principles permeate into every aspect of my thinking....wck history is my hobby......so even if historical discussions have no meaning to you...obviously they having meaning to me and many other people...... perhaps you mistake my inquisitive nature on historical information as a lack of "real time" ability.....i would suggest you are putting meaning and reflections to my questions that are not there......
you cant learn wck from talking on the internet....so i limit my discussions....but you can learn historical information.....which i am attemting to due since this is the only avenue currently for me in doing this

[[Censored]]

It's not a matter IMO of having a certain number of techniques (footwork or whatever) or certain sets (kuen to); rather it's "getting" or "catching on to" certain specific fundamental (core) ideas, and the physical application of these fundamental ideas will naturally give rise a myriad of expressions (not just is what is in the sets). These fundamental core concepts are like the axioms in geometry -- once you have them and understand them, you can use them to derive all kinds of things.

Understand first, then practice = shallow kung fu
Practice first, then understand = deep kung fu

So initially, we must be told what techniques to practice.

why does lun kai's jong form lack footwork

It has no footwork whatsoever? The feet don't move?