Living off the past?

[bglenn]

Do you believe as a group(Ving Tsun Practioners)are living off the exploits and acheviements of the past without blazing a new trail? If you look back 40 years ago in the late 50's and 60's,Ving Tsun was what brazilian juijitsu is today.They were inovators of the time.They used non stylized movements that were direct and to the point.They proved the effectiveness of their kung fu through Gong Sau matches. Do the practioners of today have the obligation to forge a new path for the future?Whatever that path may be whether it is NHB competions or new inovations in a healthy lifestyle unifying mind,body and spirit.

[kj]

Originally posted by bglenn
Do the practioners of today have the obligation to forge a new path for the future?

I'd rather say our obligation is to discover and actualize within ourselves the greatness and quality our forbears found in Wing Chun, and then to preserve that as fully as we can for and through successive generations. This would be a very significant accomplishment, IMHO.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[Phenix]

Originally posted by kj


I'd rather say our obligation is to discover and actualize within ourselves the greatness and quality our forbears found in Wing Chun, and then to preserve that as fully as we can for and through successive generations. This would be a very significant accomplishment, IMHO.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo


Well said!

Regards
Hendrik

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Phenix
Well said! Yeah, she has the nasty habit of doing that all the time. ;)

[Phenix]

Originally posted by bglenn
Do you believe as a group(Ving Tsun Practioners)are living off the exploits and acheviements of the past without blazing a new trail? If you look back 40 years ago in the late 50's and 60's,Ving Tsun was what brazilian juijitsu is today.They were inovators of the time.They used non stylized movements that were direct and to the point.They proved the effectiveness of their kung fu through Gong Sau matches. Do the practioners of today have the obligation to forge a new path for the future?Whatever that path may be whether it is NHB competions or new inovations in a healthy lifestyle unifying mind,body and spirit.




Pheonix has to burn into ash and raise again.
become Better and Better... everytime.
What keep the pheonix to live forever?
Legend said it is its heart....

If I have a time machine,
WCK needs to go back.
Back before the Culture Revolution.
Back before Taiping Revolution.
He who see it's heart will never die...

Then, with that platform, we will soar like an eagle.

[planetwc]

On one hand we have more information openly available to us about Wing Chun itself then ever before in it's history.

On the other hand we have less time to train in it than our ancestors did to achieve the level of skill of a "high hand" in the art. We are for all practical purposes unable to be live in students with senior masters of the art.

We have less ability to engage in rooftop "fights" without legal consequences, which leaves a venue of combat atheletes for which Wing Chun is not suited (MMA/NHB).

We have more open knowledge about other martial arts, what their strategy, tactics and techniques are, PLUS we have the experience of hundreds of NHB/Vale Tudo events to draw upon.

We have access to modern sports training/sports medicine.

We have more medical information and general overall information about the human body, kinesiology and the like which could be applied to our art.

We have more information about groundfighting, boxing, Muay Thai, wrestling and COULD train and develop abilities to deal with their specific attacks if we trained realistically for them.

So on one hand we have more information, more knowledge, more technology, but less time to hone skill under direct supervision of an instructor.

As I said a mixed blessing.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by bglenn
Do you believe as a group(Ving Tsun Practioners)are living off the exploits and acheviements of the past without blazing a new trail?

No. :p


If you look back 40 years ago in the late 50's and 60's,Ving Tsun was what brazilian juijitsu is today.They were inovators of the time.They used non stylized movements that were direct and to the point.They proved the effectiveness of their kung fu through Gong Sau matches.

It depends who they is? In the 50s and 60s, Yip Man's first generation were proving the art in Hong Kong, and a few, such as Bruce Lee, in America. When Yip Man, Wong Shun Leung, Bruce Lee were alive, there was no doubt about what Wing Chun could or couldn't do. All the MMA or rival MA foolishness would have been dispensed with at each encounter. The difference was in the essence of Wing Chun training, not the polluted, watered-down, made-up Ving Tsun prevalent today.


Do the practioners of today have the obligation to forge a new path for the future?Whatever that path may be whether it is NHB competions or new inovations in a healthy lifestyle unifying mind,body and spirit.

No again. The obligation of Wing Chun practitioners to the art of Wing Chun and posterity is to preserve it in its entirety and not to encourage its dilution, debasement, or make-over into what's happened in other arts with add-on confused New Age properties. The more an art spreads, the more errors are introduced.

The problem with the many of this era of Wing Chun is that too many want to change (and teach) what they don't understand and will never master.

Regards,

[mun hung]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by bglenn
Do you believe as a group(Ving Tsun Practioners)are living off the exploits and acheviements of the past without blazing a new trail? If you look back 40 years ago in the late 50's and 60's,Ving Tsun was what brazilian juijitsu is today.

Do you mean in about 40 years all the BJJ folk are gonna be sitting around just talking about fighting? :D

[t_niehoff]

planetwc writes:

On one hand we have more information openly available to us about Wing Chun itself then ever before in it's history. PW

That's actually part of the problem IMHO -- too much noise and very little substance. TN

On the other hand we have less time to train in it than our ancestors did to achieve the level of skill of a "high hand" in the art. We are for all practical purposes unable to be live in students with senior masters of the art. PW

We have less ability to engage in rooftop "fights" without legal consequences, which leaves a venue of combat atheletes for which Wing Chun is not suited (MMA/NHB). PW

I think we probably have more time to train (same as any other athletic activity). Presently we have more time for "recreation" than at any other time in history, we don't have the same demands on our time that folks did 100 years ago, etc. And we have the same ability to engage in nonlethal "fights" without legal consequences (they're called waivers, and they work); it's just that most WCK practitioners want to think of themselves as fighters, not actually be fighters. TN

The problem today IMO boils down to quality control (which goes to the issue of why one practices the art in the first place) -- anyone can teach WCK, claim to be a grandmaster, found a new lineage, etc. And then they send forth their troops to teach others. In the old days, one was expected to be able "put up" on demand, to prove one could fight, and -- believe it or not -- teachers were chosen for their ability not on their "style". That's because folks going to these teachers wanted, and expected, to learn to fight better. I don't think that's the true motivation of many learning WCK today. TN

Imagine if WCK instructors had an "open door" policy saying they would personally fight anyone that came to the kwoon (if you think that's unrealistic, it still goes on in some other MAs): we'd see pretty quickly who could deliver the goods (and the rest would fall by the wayside). All the noise would dry up. Today however folks sell themselves by their associations, not their ability to perform; and many buy it. Of course, those who do are typically persons motivated by image (they want to think of themselves as fighters) instead of performance (actually want to fight). So in a nutshell, IMO it is we that are responsible for the decline of WCK -- because of our motivation in practicing it (image, not performance), and consequently we seek out those that market image and not performance. A recipe for a downward spiral in performance. TN

Terence

[Mr. Bao]

Terence:

I totally agree you. I proud to know someone out there is someone who understands some of the problems within the art and the hype.

[planetwc]

I agree with you as well.
However, now what? :)

[reneritchie]

Has anyone seen the videos that do exist of the rooftop fights? Was it what anyone was expecting?

[planetwc]

hmmm. The picture in one's mind of a rooftop fight?

Then actually stopping and thinking that for the most part we were talking about teenagers? :rolleyes:

Darn it that is disrupting our Walter Mitty fantasies of Iron Monkey like fights. :D

Or Jet Li vs Mark Dacascos in "Cradle 2 Grave".

I've seen one of Wong Shun Leung's students fight, which may be the same footage on the John Little Game of Death DVD.

I've heard Hawkins Cheung has some footage, not sure if it is the same.

So, was it what I was expecting? Nope.
Was it what I SHOULD have expected? Sigh...guess so.

Kinda like that Taiji vs White Crane "fight".


Originally posted by reneritchie
Has anyone seen the videos that do exist of the rooftop fights? Was it what anyone was expecting?

[Phenix]

Originally posted by planetwc


Kinda like that Taiji vs White Crane "fight".



Don't they both train in CLF? :D




There is a New HongKong romance movie about the 70's.
The Title is "Yat Lok Cae". In there there is CLF, Hung gar, Bak Mei.... and ground figthing....


Well, get the video tape from the store it is up now. watch it. I guarentee you laught the heck out of it.

Hendrik

[kj]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Has anyone seen the videos that do exist of the rooftop fights?

Some; don't know how many there are.


Was it what anyone was expecting?

Yes, it was pretty much as I anticipated.

I have never presumed that all the touted exploits (or a sampling of them that happened to be captured on film) actually model my vision of good Wing Chun. People tout all kinds of things I don't necessarily accept at face value. My only disappointment here was in not being mistaken.

If anything, I allowed that much touting may be a result of people who felt the need to prove something by a) demonstration or b) vicariously by argument, which may or may not have any relevance to what is. But to put that in fair perspective, I question pretty much everything.

So there is another data point to your question. Why do you ask?

Regards,
- kj

[old jong]

We have a great system in our hands but very few could use it with succes in a real fight or competition.We should forget all about those past and often false legends and instead build a solid and effective technical and mental foundation for our art or it will die in the near future.
Wing Chun (IMHO) is often becomming more a personnal growth thing (Like most Tai-Chi) than a pure fighting style.People are talking and intellectualising about lineages tiny differencies instead of doing a thousand punches a day.We should look for the moves that work for us and practice them like maniacs until they can be done in our sleep.
We should also eliminate all that is not 100% pure,direct,agressive,gutsy,you know what I mean!...from our Wing Chun.Anything that needs ten years to master could be seen as suspect.
One thing I hate to say : Things have changed till the seventies. We have to be able to deal with opponents who favor different fighting strategies,strategies that were unheard off in Yip Mans days.

[Matrix]

Originally posted by old jong
We should forget all about those past and often false legends and instead build a solid and effective technical and mental foundation for our art or it will die in the near future. Old Jong,
I certainly agree with this. While it is interesting and important to understand the roots of the art. We cannot live in the past.

I don't believe that Wing Chun will die, although some branches may do so. Only time will tell.

Matrix

[yuanfen]

Yes and no on some points.

Change and development are part of life. But the baby and bath water analogies apply.

In most cases folks who argue for changes in wing chun, IMO dont understand wing chun enough in the first place. Its one thing to engineer new applications- its another not to understand the
beauties and principles of motion of a real martial art.

[azwingchun]

I have to agree with you on this, we need to pay close attention to the true meaning of Wing Chun and not worry some much about what we or others think it should be. Just stick to the basic principles of Wing Chun.

But as far as to what true Wing Chun is? Well, I feel this is where the problem is. Most of us here claim to be doing real Wing Chun, but we all sometimes have some very different view points. If we all agreed on everything, this forum may not exist. But many of the differences are actually very subtle when we look at them. The basic Wing Chun model still exist.

As far as living off the Masters of old, well the stories are great, but I don't rate myself based on them or even the masters of today. I only base myself on the Wing Chun system that I do and hold true to the art. I feel that it is people, as ourselves who live this way, are the only ones responsible for the art to continue in it's true form (whatever that may be...LOL). By the way, I have asked myself many times, what I thought Wing Chun will be like in 100 years. Will it resemble what we have today? I believe the art will grow, but at the same time there are only so many ways one can be attacked, therefore there are only so many ways to defend. With this in mind, I feel Wing Chun does answer all those questions and can be preserved and passed on just as it was and just as it is. Though again, this up to us to pass it on this way with full confidence in the art.

And hopefully, our students students students will feel the same way and realize the greatness of this art, and pass it on as such. Just my .02.;)

[old jong]

Hey guys!
My prime concern in my last post is about Wing Chun effectiveness.I'm not advocating flushing it or transforming it into MMA or something.I just think that the primary mean of Wing Chun must be effectiveness vs any kind of opponent.To do that ,we must look into it's basics and principles for answers but we should also open our minds for actual times questions too.
Just my two poor canadian cents. ;)

[Phenix]

Originally posted by yuanfen


In most cases folks who argue for changes in wing chun, IMO dont understand wing chun enough in the first place. Its one thing to engineer new applications- its another not to understand the
beauties and principles of motion of a real martial art.


In Chinese, Revolution is Ke Ming.
Ke means Change, Renew....
Ming means Life. S
So change the life or renew the life, That is Revolution.


So, as long as one knows the Ming one can Ke.
So, The issue is one has to know Ming or life in order to Ke or Change or Renew.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by old jong
Hey guys!
My prime concern in my last post is about Wing Chun effectiveness.I'm not advocating flushing it or transforming it into MMA or something.I just think that the primary mean of Wing Chun must be effectiveness vs any kind of opponent.To do that ,we must look into it's basics and principles for answers but we should also open our minds for actual times questions too.

I think Yuanfen answered this a few replies previously. However, good point about asking questions. It is obvious in much of our discussion, though, that many have not really explored Wing Chun for the answers and dismiss it's complexities without true understanding, either through youthful exuberance for other arts or impatience with the path to mastery.

Regards,

[t_niehoff]

planetwc writes:

I agree with you as well.
However, now what? PW

Well, I think the answer lies in our motivation -- if we are seeking enhanced performance and not an image then that will drive our training and who we seek training from (what we expect from our instructors -- as we discussed in the "modest proposal" thread). The problem is you can't do anything for someone that is not motivated to train for the right reason. TN
-----------

rr writes:

Has anyone seen the videos that do exist of the rooftop fights? Was it what anyone was expecting?

LOL! I expected more. But the main point is that they fought, and that we need to fight *as part of our training* -- IMO without doing that, we'll never reach any level of proficiency. TN

---------------
kj asks rr:

Why do you ask? kj

Well, I can't speak for Rene, but when I saw the tapes I had the same question pop into my mind -- and it shows IMO how reputations, legends, and all that stuff can so easily be blown out of proportion (even today I hear folks talk about how so-and-so was a great fighter in HK - 40 years ago - but if he looked like this, what does it say? Especially if he hasn't done anything in 40 years!). So now I want to see what these "masters" can do. TN

Terence

[reneritchie]

Why do you ask?

Thought it might be relevant, if we wonder how we stack up to the good 'ole days, that we have some realistic idea of what they were. (Whether that be closer to the climax of Crouching Tiger, or to what we remember our fights in highschool looking like)

[yuanfen]

Rene sez:(Whether that be closer to the climax of Crouching Tiger, or to what we remember our fights in highschool looking like)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Different strokes for different folks- high school days?
Both terrorist and non violent forms of nationalism and anti Brit nationalism, WW 2, extensive civil riots, partition of a nation
accompanied with great violence- not exactly a US, UK, Aus,.
Candian bourgeois experience. Even Crouching Tiger looks tame.
Bengal was a different world.
Still- real the principles, mechanics and experience of wc (not watching teenagers in rooftop videos) makes sense as televised sport does not.

[black and blue]

Rene wrote:
Thought it might be relevant, if we wonder how we stack up to the good 'ole days, that we have some realistic idea of what they were. (Whether that be closer to the climax of Crouching Tiger, or to what we remember our fights in highschool looking like)

It's an interesting point. Playing Devil's Advocate, perhaps one could argue that the standards today are higher than they were previously. (I can almost hear the silence as everyone stops their typing in its tracks :) )

The roof top fights people so often cite when discussing Wing Chun's effectiveness, have been critique by many people for looking sloppy.

I don't know if this is true (but I'll use it anyways ;)), but I heard that WSL once said most of his wins in challenge matches involved using what was essentially Western boxing and it wasn't so much the case that his skills were great, but often the case that his opponent's skills were poor.

Perhaps today we have to deal with fitter fighters, using a more scientific training regime. I'm not really too interesting in NHB or UFC championships, but there's no denying that many of the fighters are very fit and very tough, and train for many different types of encounter in the ring/cage etc.

A few months back I had a pretty shocking conversation with an instuctor from a Wing Chun lineage outside of my own. A nice guy who was very open and approachable (I'll save him hate mail by not naming him), who said many of Wing Chun's big names, both past AND present, where/are talking/teaching/training on unfounded reputations.

He said that many had great skills in Chi Sau, but that this was often governed by the confined structure of the exercise itself, and that they wouldn't last five minutes with some of today's 'real' fighters.

By real I think he was meaning pro fighters in the UFC etc. It was an interesting chat... though it's hard to know what to say when some names three of four major WC/WT players and then disses them.

Has he a point? I don't know. What do you guys think?

[UltimateFighter]

I agree wholeheartedly that wing chun is living off past glory.

30 years after the art was first spread overshores, it is still most famous as "the art Bruce Lee started with" rather than being known for its effectiveness in proven situations.

[kj]

Originally posted by UltimateFighter
I agree wholeheartedly that wing chun is living off past glory.

30 years after the art was first spread overshores, it is still most famous as "the art Bruce Lee started with" rather than being known for its effectiveness in proven situations.

I never saw a Bruce Lee flick till I was past 40 and already involved in Wing Chun. If I had, and had developed the perception that Wing Chun was strongly connected with his performance in some way, it would have influenced me neutrally at best, or likely discouraged me from approaching the art in a "can't relate" sort of way.

Most people who inquire with our group don't know any relevant history of Wing Chun - legends, personalities, movies or rooftop fights aren't why they come. And rare few care very much once they learn more.

Maybe what you say is true in general, but it isn't universal. Most of the people I have the privilege to work closely with (though not all) are intrinsically motivated rather then extrinsically so. Fortunately. Such differences in motivation and focus may in part explain what draws different people to different places, personalities and approaches to training.

As they say, different strokes for different folks.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[reneritchie]

I was probably vaguely aware of Bruce Lee but wasn't a big fan and didn't know about his connection to WCK, or WCK itself when I first met my teacher. I chose to study with him simply because he could show me why what I was doing before didn't work, and how to do something that did.

[yuanfen]

UF as usual lost in his own world and in his own pontifications.
My begiining, doing and sticking with wing chun has nothing to do with Bruce Lee.

If the wing chun I found was anything like UF portrays his to be- I wouldnt be in it either.

[planetwc]

Well if no one else will, I'll own up.

It was Bruce Lee that got me interested in martial arts in general and Wing Chun in particular. As a young lad I was particularly taken with Bruce Lee in the Kato role. In my high school years I rediscovered Bruce from his Hong Kong films.

My first exposure about Wing Chun existing was in reading Alex Ben Block's book on Bruce Lee after his death. I was in my teenage years an unabashed Bruce Lee fanboy. :)

Wall posters and everything.

I was intrigued by the brief description of Wing Chun and wanted to find out more about it. I built a collection in my teenage years of over 100 or so martial arts books across all the different systems from TKD, to Karate, to Kung Fu, to James DeMile's one inch punch book.

Nearly 20 years later I stumbled upon a Wing Chun school in 1992. After a year of trying to find it's address in San Jose. Turns out it wasn't at a commercial school, but in a backyard! Doh!

And that is how I met Bob Gahl and my sifu Ben Der (Der Wing Yan). And now here we are 11 years later. :D

I've made "virtual" friendships with folks like Rene, Marty Goldberg, Steve Leung, Joy Chaudhuri, Mike Adams, Mustafa Ucozler and many others. And of course all my si-hings and younger KF brothers (Steve Wong, Sandy Wong, John Weiland, Francis Der, John Ho, John Adams, Jerome, the Juergens, Dan Lam, KJ, and numerous others).

[byond1]

lol....yuanfen---war, famine, plague...afganastan.....irag..... all pale in comparison to life in detroit...lol

[UltimateFighter]

Originally posted by yuanfen
UF as usual lost in his own world and in his own pontifications.
My begiining, doing and sticking with wing chun has nothing to do with Bruce Lee.



*yawn*

Another case of misguided and silly quibbling from Yuenfan. How or why you got into wing chun is of no interest to me. But the fact remains that if he had not done the art, you wouldn't be doing it now. 95% of its spead can be linked directly or indirectly to him, and Yip mans fame derives largely from him. Those who think that they started without 'influence' of Bruce Lee (LOL)- stop and realise that not for him, the art would not have spread much further than Hong-Kong via Fatshan in the first place and you would never have heard of it let alone be doing it now. Show some respect.

[Matrix]

Originally posted by planetwc
I was in my teenage years an unabashed Bruce Lee fanboy. :)
Me too. It was 1974, Enter the Dragon. I was already training Shotokan Karate in college. Great times! I paid to see that film at least 20 times in the theatre, and knew all of the lines by heart - no video tape or DVD back in those days. :)

Unfortunately I never made the Wing Chun connection until much, much later. Oh, the agony of it all. :(

Matrix

[yuanfen]

UF:How or why you got into wing chun is of no interest to me. But the fact remains that if he had not done the art, you wouldn't be doing it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UF- feeling self important mistakenly assumes

1.that I am attempting to spark his interest

2. that he knows how I began my art- it had nothing to do with Bruce Lee- it had something to do with asian immigration patterns
and yuanfen.

Political forces at work as well- hidden causation- WW2, the Chinese communist revolution-Ip Man going to Macao and HK- then the beginning of the HK diaspora before the US recognition of the PRC under Nixon. Recognition of China-PRC and changes in immigration laws(doing away with quotas began to bring new waves of immigrants now including from the PRC .BL certainly helped popularize kung fu and wing chun...not necessarily a good thing from the standpoint of quality control. Good non wing chun kung fu was already here in the Chinese communities- before some started teaching non Chinese-
people like Wong Ark Yuey (choy li fut, shaolin etc). Gin Foon mark and Lum Sum before him were already here with southern mantis. People like Ben Der and Augustine Fong didnt come to the states sponsored by Lord Bruce. Without Bruce- there would have been people- new HK/Macao emigrants teaching wing chun- without the fan fare and without large organizations.
And, the results of the fan fare and the BL bandwagon are definitely mixed.

joy

[planetwc]

Woo Hoo! A Fellow traveler!
I saw ETD 50 times in the theatre and Return of the Dragon about 100! Talk about Old Skool!

I could recite the dialog verbatim as well. Hee Hee.

What a blast that was. Nowadays with VHS and DVD, everyone can do it for $20!

Those were the days. I remember being in school and hearing that Bruce Lee had died. I then forced my father to take me to see Enter the Dragon. Man I was blown away by that movie. My father of course hated it.


Originally posted by Matrix
Me too. It was 1974, Enter the Dragon. I was already training Shotokan Karate in college. Great times! I paid to see that film at least 20 times in the theatre, and knew all of the lines by heart - no video tape or DVD back in those days. :)

Unfortunately I never made the Wing Chun connection until much, much later. Oh, the agony of it all. :(

Matrix

[yuanfen]

David- a different reaction. I too was impressed with BL's fast moves compared to wooden karate... BUT- I clearly thought that his selection of "opponents" in the movie --specially a (Afro-American)person acting like a boxer (in a group which attacked Bruce)was phony..
good visual entertainment but phony straw men used as dummies.
Its only after doing wc for a while did I begin to realize how good wc really was- BL did not do it for me.

joy

[planetwc]

Joy,

I know what you mean. It was a very strange sight for me the first time I saw people doing Chi Sao at Ben Der's school.

After seeing static photographs of Wing Chun, Wing Chun Do and JKD it was not quite what I thought it would be. :)

Later on I would see where the differences were in the movie Bruce Lee, in his Jun Fan/JKD and where the connections were and were not with Wing Chun.

It was also interesting for me to have my sifu show me moves that Bruce used to do when they were teenagers in Hong Kong.

As to the movies, Bruce was always making a "point" with the opponents in his movies, to promote a vision of a capable Chinese man dealing with Americans, Japanese, etc. That and
promoting his adaptation of philosophy and his approach to combat via theatrics.

All that within the context of chop sockey flicks.


Originally posted by yuanfen
David- a different reaction. I too was impressed with BL's fast moves compared to wooden karate... BUT- I clearly thought that his selection of "opponents" in the movie --specially a (Afro-American)person acting like a boxer (in a group which attacked Bruce)was phony..
good visual entertainment but phony straw men used as dummies.
Its only after doing wc for a while did I begin to realize how good wc really was- BL did not do it for me.

joy

[reneritchie]

I was, fortunately or unfortunately, put in Judo at the age of 5 or 6, far before I was concious of what 'martial arts' were. Where I was born (RSA) there was no TV allowed by law yet (I think they finally got it in the 1980s, long after I left) and movies were strictly controlled. So I didn't really have any personal incentive to begin training. The first time I can actually remember seeing martial arts from films was on Canadian TV with Sean Connery in Dr. No, and my father telling me something about James Bond having several 'black belts' which I acquainted with my Judo Sensei, who had one. If I worked hard at Judo, I was told, I'd be allowed to do Karate when I hit my teens.

Karate Kid probably had the next biggest impact on me, since I was a kid at the time, and it was just coming out. Bruce Lee I stumbled on only after hearing he did WCK and wanting to see what it would look like in the movies. I think he, Segal, and Van Damme all entered my world at roughly the same time, though I enjoyed Jackie Chan and Co. far more.

[Matrix]

Originally posted by planetwc
Woo Hoo! A Fellow traveler! I seems that way. What a small world. Of course I have it on DVD these days, but for some reason, it's just not quite the same.

What do you know about Han? ;)

Matrix

[byond1]

i dont see that bruce lee brought wck anywhere.....he asked yip man for permision to teach wc when he moved to the U.S.A...ym denied his request...so...imo,bruce lee did not teach "traditional" wc he taught his own hodge podge of wc hands with northern shaolin kicking...totaly differant stance work and so its was no longer wc....ym, from my understanding wasnt going to let bruce teach because he felt wc was a treasure of china( traditional minded) as well as bruce lee hadnt completed the system...why else would you have to use other footwork? he didnt even learn the entire chum kiu or jong...and non of the biu tze form....
now he brought attention to wc.....but who really brought wc out of h.k?? well william cheung brought it to australia (if im not mistaken)...leung ting, victor kan, lee shing,wank kiu brought wc to europe.....what about the U.S.A?? well lee may shan was the first in new york in 1970....he was there about 3 years before moy yat(if memory serves)..plus ng wah sums(leung sheung) student chan kwok chung (did i get his name right??LOL) was there around 1971.....as well as allan lamb, alan lee, henry leung, and deuncan leung......
im not sure about who was in california around the same time ..perhaps someone on the west coast beat lee moy shan/moy yat in 1970-1973 to bringing wc to the U.S

[planetwc]

Chris Chan in San Franciso may have been the first Yip Man student on the west coast. He was at least the first I think in SF.

Bruce Lee was first in Seattle, then Oakland, then LA.
My Sifu and si-gung came later to SF.

Augustine Fong was in Arizona (he and my sifu would talk over the phone quite a long time ago).

I'm not sure when Hawkins Cheung settled in the LA area.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by planetwc
Chris Chan in San Franciso may have been the first Yip Man student on the west coast. He was at least the first I think in SF.

Bruce Lee was first in Seattle, then Oakland, then LA.
My Sifu and si-gung came later to SF.

Bruce Lee's friend, George Lee has a new book out, Regards from the Dragon. The book contains a copy of a hand-written letter by Bruce Lee referring to Chris Chan. The letter and the date it was written refute some current marketing hype.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0865682178/qid=1045129400/sr=1-19/ref=sr_1_19/002-7266872-6091268?v=glance&s=books

BTW, for you Bruce Lee fans, in the early 60s, he studied cha-cha in S.F. from George Long on Geary Street. Long also teaches White Crane.

Regards,

[yuanfen]

David, Brian , List:

Fong began wing chun in 1960 from Ho kam Ming and then
continued till 1969- he first moved to Nogales- south of Tucson- where he taught a few people... before he moved to Tucson.