Wing Chun techs in MMA competitions

[Knifefighter]

This is directed mainly to Kenwingjitsu and is a spin-off from the sparring thread, but anyone else with MMA competition experience please feel free to respond.

KWJ, what Wing Chun techniques, strategies, approaches, etc. have you been able to apply in your matches? What things did you have problems with or were unable to apply?

[KenWingJitsu]

Knifefighter, I had replied o the other thread before i saw this so here it is again

Bong sao....definitely bong-sau, as well as the odd pak-sao and INTERCEPTION. Intercepting the opponents forward motion with a simple attack (straight punch or straight kick), and of course, LOTS of chain punches. I won my first fight by decision I think based on the sheer voulume of chain punches I landed.

As far as limitations, two things; grappling, and footwork. Now there's a lot of footwork in WC/WT, but traditonally, it doesn't teach you to deal with a constantly probing opponent,..one who is "light on his feet, in a stance, circling, jabbing, moving in & out....at long range. So to deal with it, one needs to go "outside the box" for the 'range fighting'/distance adjustment...until he's at the best distance for WT techniques.
In general, there are a lot of tools and principles that are easily adaptable to any combat situation if you're willing to do the work involved. Every time I fought, I made sure to have some type of WT clothing on my person....that way they always knew ;)

As an aside, I see wing chun principles and even techniques used by non WC/WT guys all the time in MMA. For example Rickson. When he mounts an opponent.

[fa_jing]

Hey I responded to the sparring thread too if you're interested. I spoke on my sifu's behalf, not my own - I've fought full contact a couple times but under San Shou-type rules.

[Matrix]

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
I won my first fight by decision I think based on the sheer voulume of chain punches I landed.
LOL ......Winning by decision, now there's reality for you. :p

Matrix

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Matrix
LOL ......Winning by decision, now there's reality for you. :p

Matrix

Yup, you guessed it folks......MMA tournies are no more real than WWF.

Rules=Not Real!

:D

[KenWingJitsu]

I thought you were gonna "ignore" me 'matrix' lol!!!!!! I guess my allure is too strong after all. Here's a little reality for ya...Muay Thai, San Shou, boxing kickboxing, wrestling Judo, BJJ...winer can be decided by decisions. Red pill? Blue pill.
LMAO!!

Fajing, how did you fare in San Shou? That was something I wanted to compete in also. Is your primary background wing chun?

[Knifefighter]

AndyM & Matrix:
No sh!t... As if we didn't know that. MMA fighters will be the first tell you that fighting in these competitions is "not real." However, I'd be willing to bet a good deal of money it's a lot more "real" than what you guys do in the safety of your school.

As I said, this post was directed to KWJ and anyone else who had competed in these events.

KWJ:
Is your straight blast the more traditional method of "arms only" striking or do you rotate your shoulders and/or hips to develop more power for the finish?

Do you find that your WT complements or hinders your applications of inside techs from Muay Thai?

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
AndyM
No sh!t... As if we didn't know that. MMA fighters will be the first tell you that fighting in these competitions is "not real." However, I'd be willing to bet a good deal of money it's a lot more "real" than what you guys do in the safety of your school.


Knifefighter,

You don't know zip about me mate.

Never met an MMA fighter who had the most basic grasp of eloquence, let alone a grasp on reality.

Thanks for helping me make my 100th post. :D

( Marshmallows and number two toasting fork at the ready ;) )

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
You don't know zip about me mate.

That's true, I dont' "mate". Based on your uninformed post, I can make a pretty good guess, though. I'd be willing to bet you've never fought in one of these events.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


That's true, I dont' "mate". Based on your uninformed post, I can make a pretty good guess, though. I'd be willing to bet you've never fought in one of these events.

What was "uninformed" about my post?

Based on what you've said so far, were I equally judgemental, I'd be willing to bet that you've never had to defend yourself or your loved ones in real life???

I posted simply because of the irony I detected in 'Matrix's' comment.

I don't play with MMA because they are just a game, as are all sports.

I only interjected a little humour into the thread. Sorry you seem to find that so objectionable.

[Knifefighter]

KWJ:
A couple more questions for you:

Since EP and KK were open-handed rules, did you have trouble adapting your WT techs to these events?

Do you do your Muay Thai and BJJ training at Emin's school or do you go to other gyms for these?

What's your percentage of finishing standing vs. finishing on the ground?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
Based on what you've said so far, were I equally judgemental, I'd be willing to bet that you've never had to defend yourself or your loved ones in real life???

OK, Mr. Expert at defending himself and his loved ones in "real life", suppose you tell me a bit about what your approach to these "real life" situations has been?

Fill me in... I'm paying attention.

As far as what was uninformed about your post, the fact that you said MMA was no more real than WWF.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


OK, Mr. Expert at defending himself and his loved ones in "real life", suppose you tell me a bit about what your approach to these "real life" situations has been?

Fill me in... I'm paying attention.



Well surely that's a seperate issue entirely?
You want a blow by blow account of every situation I have been in during my lifetime and how I acquitted myself?

I'm still here. I'm 36, not 16. What do you want to know?


As far as what was uninformed about your post, the fact that you said MMA was no more real than WWF.

Well you're taking that out of context, and I meant no offence by it.
MMA events are fought to rules, as are WWF events. A larger proportion of the audience know WWF is a show, but boxing, KickBoxing, Thai Boxing and MMA are all sports, because they are fought to rules.

Am I wrong?

Are there no rules?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
I'm still here. I'm 36, not 16. What do you want to know?



Well you're taking that out of context, and I meant no offence by it.
MMA events are fought to rules, as are WWF events. A larger proportion of the audience know WWF is a show, but boxing, KickBoxing, Thai Boxing and MMA are all sports, because they are fought to rules.

Am I wrong?

Are there no rules?

WWF is fixed. The outcome is known before. It is entertainment drama, not competition. Muay Thai, Boxing, MMA, etc. are competetive events. There are rules, but each person is trying with 100% effort to put the other person out of commission and no one knows who will win.

Yes, there are rules, but that doesn't mean they are not broken. Yuki Nakai, a Japanese Pride fighter was blinded by an eye gouge, but still finished off his opponent. I've seen more than a few limbs snapped in MMA competitions.

The fact that you state you have been in a variety of "real situations" over your 36 years and are not in prison tells me you have probably followed a few rules of your own over the years in your encounters. Does that make them less real?

[anerlich]

Knifefighter is correct.

MMA might not be as real as a prison riot or a mugging, but it is a real contest, albeit with rules and limits. WWF is a show, with the most dramatic moments often occurring when "rules" are broken by the "bad guys".

IMO a successful MMA fighter would be a much better ally than a guy who only trains at his kwoon and never spars or fights in competition because his combat techniques are "too deadly".

KWJ, have all your fights been by decision? Or have you had some KO/stoppage/submissions as well?

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter



The fact that you state you have been in a variety of "real situations" over your 36 years and are not in prison tells me you have probably followed a few rules of your own over the years in your encounters. Does that make them less real?

Does that make 'what' less real? Reality???

Rules that I follow? Do what I can, when I can, if I can?

This thread is turning into yet another MMA monster doo doo plop-fest.


Yes, there are rules, but that doesn't mean they are not broken. Yuki Nakai, a Japanese Pride fighter was blinded by an eye gouge, but still finished off his opponent. I've seen more than a few limbs snapped in MMA competitions.

Do you feel this is an example of reality breaking into competition, or of unsportsmanlike conduct???

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
Do you feel this is an example of reality breaking into competition, or of unsportsmanlike conduct???

Could be and example of both or either.

BTW, as far as rules vs reality, I'd be willing to make another wager. I'd bet the rules in MMA competitions are less restrictive than the ones that you follow in your school where your are supposedly practicing for the "no rules" environment of the street.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


Could be and example of both or either.

BTW, as far as rules vs reality, I'd be willing to make another wager. I'd bet the rules in MMA competitions are less restrictive than the ones that you follow in your school where your are supposedly practicing for the "no rules" environment of the street.

Presuming your response is directed at me, seeing as you've quoted me;

I don't train in a school, I follow no-ones rules but my own.

The street has rules too, it's just that you have to learn what they are a whole lot faster.

Any other assumptions you want to discuss?

[Matrix]

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
I thought you were gonna "ignore" me 'matrix' lol!!!!!! Wow, thanks for noticing. I didn't think you cared. :p
Some people will fall for anything, so I guess fakes do work.

Quite frankly, I suspected that you would reply just as you did. Thanks for not disappointing me.


I thought you were gonna "ignore" me 'matrix' lol!!!!!! I guess my allure is too strong after all. Here's a little reality for ya...Muay Thai, San Shou, boxing kickboxing, wrestling Judo, BJJ...winer can be decided by decisions. ]Reality check!!! My point exactly. Just remember, street fights don't end by decision. When you get over your own self-absorption maybe you'll understand that. Look Ken, I think it takes a lot of guts to get in the ring. So for that I respect you. However, you have to learn that respect is a two-way street. You must give it as well. Sometimes, even when you don't totally agree with what the other person has to say. You can have a difference of opinion and still show some common courtesy. Some of us have already been where you are. Not exactly of course, but we've seen and done a few things. I can tell that you are quite young and brash, so maybe its to be expected to some degree, but can't you at least be civil??

There is an expression that I would like to paraphrase..." Don't try to make others too much like you. You know, and God knows, that one of you is more than enough." That applies to me as well, by the way.

As for the pills. It's just a movie........get over it.

Matrix

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
The street has rules too, it's just that you have to learn what they are a whole lot faster.


But you said, "Rules=Not Real."
Make up your mind.

Since you don't train in a school, maybe you'd like to elaborate on just how you train your deadly, combat street-fighting techniques.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


1/ But you said, "Rules=Not Real."

2/ Make up your mind.

3/ Since you don't train in a school, maybe you'd like to elaborate on just how you train your deadly, combat street-fighting techniques.

1/ In the original context that's true.

2/ I have.

3/ Now there's a leading question without a question mark.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM

3/ Now there's a leading question without a question mark.

I am curious, since you seem to be implying that what you do is somehow more "real" than what sport fighters do. Since you are so keen on putting down the rules based competition/combat approach, why not elaborate on the specifics of what makes your approach so much better.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


I am curious, since you seem to be implying that what you do is somehow more "real" than what sport fighters do. Since you are so keen on putting down the rules based competition/combat approach, why not elaborate on the specifics of what makes your approach so much better.

I've never mentioned what I do, and for the record I have played with 'sport' MA before.
I've never suggested that what I do is better (for what?) than any one elses code of practice either.
If I had all the answers, what makes you think I'd tell you?

I don't know that I'm the leading 'basher' of "the rules based competition/combat approach", or that I have any answers for you.

Maybe you are looking for answers to questions you yourself have?

If I've somehow hit a tender spot, it was unintentional, but perhaps it is the very thing you should be questioning for yoursef?

[KenWingJitsu]

LOL. blue pill!

Andy M. I dont get what you're saying. WWF is fake. the rest aren't.

Knifefighter,
Since EP and KK were open-handed rules, did you have trouble adapting your WT techs to these events? Not at all. I thought I would, but all I had to do was take a closer look at Chum Kiu, and adapt the straight palm strikes from there. Musta worked since I won by TKO in one of them ;)

Do you do your Muay Thai and BJJ training at Emin's school or do you go to other gyms for these?
I train BJJ elsewhere, and sparring/Muay Thai/stand up, I basically grab anyone I can who has stung up experience mT boxing etc I spar with them. I learn from them, but also learn how to use my tools against them.

anerlich, of the 3 matches, 1 was by decision, one by TKO, the other by submission.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
LOL. blue pill!

Andy M. I dont get what you're saying. WWF is fake. the rest aren't.



Hi KWJ, I wish I'd never mentioned WWF (bad example), but all sports are 'fake' to varying degrees. Tell me Pro boxing's 'one to one' as an example?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM


I don't play with MMA because they are just a game, as are all sports.

I only interjected a little humour into the thread. Sorry you seem to find that so objectionable.

If I've somehow hit a tender spot, it was unintentional, but perhaps it is the very thing you should be questioning for yoursef?

The only "tender spot" I have is when people put down MMA competitions as "not real", but somehow think that what they do in their schools is more real.

Sorry, I didn't get the fact that you were joking. My bad.

I do take issue with your statement that MMA is "just a game". There are many similarities with real-life encounters in MMA events. It doesn't take much modification in practice and application to make the things you learn in MMA type fighting more effective than what many "street lethal" systems practice in the safety of their schools.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


1/

The only "tender spot" I have is when people put down MMA competitions as "not real", but somehow think that what they do in their schools is more real.

2/

I do take issue with your statement that MMA is "just a game". There are many similarities with real-life encounters in MMA events. It doesn't take much modification in practice and application to make the things you learn in MMA type fighting more effective than what many "street lethal" systems practice in the safety of their schools.

1/

No matter how close, they are to reality or not, MMA competitions are not real. I understand what you mean though, as we all exist in varying states of self delusion.

2/

You could say this of any 'sport. There are things to be taken from boxing, or fencing, even tennis, which could be modified and made 'effective'. MMA I'd agree is about as close to reality as you can get in a sport/game format, yet there are no broken bottles, paving slabs, or matches where your opponent has mates trying to stab you in the head with screwdrivers. Training MMA is highly valuable, and most sane KF people are adopting ground skills if they find themselves lacking in this area. MMA is not however the be all and end all.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
MMA I'd agree is about as close to reality as you can get in a sport/game format, yet there are no broken bottles, paving slabs, or matches where your opponent has mates trying to stab you in the head with screwdrivers.



Neither are there these things in any other types of martial arts/combat systems... kind of hard to train for very long against multiple opponents with screwdrivers and broken bottles trying to waste you. You'd end up in the hospital or dead long before you learn how to fight.

[fa_jing]

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu


Fajing, how did you fare in San Shou? That was something I wanted to compete in also. Is your primary background wing chun?

It was San Shou rules, but took place on a large mat and was put on by a local organization of Kung Fu schools, not a officially sactioned San Shou organization or whatever. My primary background is Wing Chun, but I have a bit of other influences as my teacher is a JKD student of Ted Wong, has boxed, competed in MMA, etc. I know 7-8 takedowns that I can use comfortably and I know tactics for avoiding being taken down. I can handle myself on the ground. But everything flows from Wing Chun and from my natural fighting style.

First tourney there was only 3 competitors in heavy weight (!80 lbs) class, I beat the first handily, who was a 10-year student of Okinawan Karate, then lost to my junior classmate who had rested with a bye.

The second tourney there were 8 heavyweight competitors - I beat my first competitor, who was a Northern Shaolin student from out-of -state. Then I lost to a very experienced Martial artist, who studied some sort of integrated art and fought with a sort of kickboxing style, which he was quite good at. I was actually TKO'd with punches.

At the time I had studied Wing chun for 3 years, I studied 1.5 years of TKD but that was 12 years beforehand. I also have 6 months of Northern Mantis, which I got something out of, especially w/regards to some training ideas.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter




Neither are there these things in any other types of martial arts/combat systems... kind of hard to train for very long against multiple opponents with screwdrivers and broken bottles trying to waste you. You'd end up in the hospital or dead long before you learn how to fight.

You seem very sure of that?
Maybe there are people who train for these eventualities?
Do you now understand why I said MMA competition is not real?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM


You seem very sure of that?
Maybe there are people who train for these eventualities?
Do you now understand why I said MMA competition is not real?

If you or anyone else is training full-force against armed and multiple opponents who are trying to put you in the hospital, then your training is indeed more realistic than MMA training. I'll definitely give you that.

I see only one problem with this approach... it makes it hard to stay alive for long.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Knifefighter


If you or anyone else is training full-force against armed and multiple opponents who are trying to put you in the hospital, then your training is indeed more realistic than MMA training. I'll definitely give you that.

I see only one problem with this approach... it makes it hard to stay alive for long.

It's just a step further along the same sliding scale of reality. More realistic perhaps, but still not reality.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by AndyM
It's just a step further along the same sliding scale of reality. More realistic perhaps, but still not reality.

Do you or someone you know train full force against multiple opponents with weapons who are also going full force? If so, how do you keep from ending up in the hospital?

[AndyM]

What's so bad about hospital?

In the UK we have pretty nurses, free food and at least average medical competence.

Been in there 3 times in the last year.

[KnightSabre]

"Been in there 3 times in the last year"

Maybe if you trained at a good MMA school then it would have been them in hospital and not you :)

[AndyM]

Originally posted by KnightSabre
"Been in there 3 times in the last year"

Maybe if you trained at a good MMA school then it would have been them in hospital and not you :)

Maybe if I trained at a good MMA school then it would have been me in the morgue instead of them?

:D

[Ultimatewingchun]

This thread has really nose-dived into the soup of self-absorption, so getting back to Knifefighter's original question about what wing chun moves and strategies really work in MMA:

I personally have never participated any MMA event but I have trained regularly for about 5 years now with my most advanced students doing nothing but heavy contact sparring/grappling which has focused PRIMARILY ON A MIXTURE OF BOXING, KICKING, VARIOUS TYPES OF SHOOTS AND TAKEDOWNS FOLLOWED BY GROUND-AND-POUND AND OR GUARD, MOUNT, SIDEMOUNT MOVES INTO SUBMISSIONS, etc.

Previous to this our sparring used less grappling/BJJ moves to fight against. The point is for the last 5 years or so I have adapted many Traditional Wing Chun techniques and strategies so as to be able to deal with the MMA type of opponent coming at me with the above-mentioned types of moves.

Rather than talk about EXACTLY WHAT TWC MOVES WORK BEST against the MMA guy (and there are many I could list in a future post) I think the biggest news of all to mention first is the realization I came to early on that JUST TRYING TO USE STANDUP WING CHUN STRIKING AND KICKING TECHNIQUES ALONE WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH!

To make a long story a little bit shorter: I have called my self Ultimatewingchun (as in UFC) because I have put Traditional Wing Chun Kung Fu together with Catch-As-Catch-Can Wrestling in order for me to be able to deal successfully with MMA type of opponents....in other words...I have become one of them in order to beat them...using a mixture of what I believe to be the best standup fighting system I've ever seen (TWC) with the best grappling system I've ever seen (Catch Wrestling). I don't limit myself to only those 2 styles but aout 95% of what is done in my school now come from them--WITH TRADITIONAL WING CHUN PRINCIPLES still being the sun around which all other planets in this solar system revolve.

[AndyM]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
This thread has really nose-dived into the soup of self-absorption, so getting back to Knifefighter's original question about what wing chun moves and strategies really work in MMA:



Kind of inevitable if someone starts a p*ssing competition.

I do apologise if I contributed to hi-jacking the thread, as this wasn't my original intention.

Please carry on.

(Not being sarcastic for a change)

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun


... I have trained regularly for about 5 years now with my most advanced students doing nothing but heavy contact sparring/grappling which has focused PRIMARILY ON A MIXTURE OF BOXING, KICKING, VARIOUS TYPES OF SHOOTS AND TAKEDOWNS FOLLOWED BY GROUND-AND-POUND AND OR GUARD, MOUNT, SIDEMOUNT MOVES INTO SUBMISSIONS, etc.

... for the last 5 years or so I have adapted many Traditional Wing Chun techniques and strategies so as to be able to deal with the MMA type of opponent coming at me with the above-mentioned types of moves.

Two questions:
1- Where did your advanced students learn their boxing, kicks, takedowns, and guard work?

2- What specific WC techs and strategies have you found to be most effective?

[Ultimatewingchun]

I,m talking primarily about myself and six of my best students; and the range of time these six have been with me spans from 7 to 14 years. Prior to joining my school these six had spent a considerable amount of years in the following systems: TaeKwondo/ Karate/ Japanese jiu-jitsu/Boxing/Greco-Roman wrestling. My OFFICIAL background is 8 years of modified wing chun (directly under the late Moy Yat) and 20 years of Traditional Wing Chun directly under Grandmaster William Cheung (who is still my sifu).

UNOFICIALLY...I have studied some Karate/Thai-Boxing/boxing. and Catch-as-catch-can wrestling through the years...By this I mean not only trading techniques with some friends and some students but also studying various videos and books over and over again on my own and then bringing all of this to class to work on with my students. I have some 80 or so Ufc and Pride fights on video which I study over and over again as well- thereby having learned a significant amout about how to use various BJJ moves...ground-and-pound, etc. The interesting thing about the ground-and-pound is that growing up on the streets of Brooklyn, NY as I did I can remember back to many altercations wherein everybody I knew (including myself) used this kind of attack.

As regards what kind of Traditional Wing Chun techniques work best against the MMA type fighter - It would require a book to list them all, but I'll mention a few: against a low double leg shoot using a gong sao (like blocking a low round punch) while simultaneously TURNING YOUR CENTERLINE TO FACE HIS LEADING ARM - thereby blocking his attempted grab (as if it were a punch) -while also simultaneously using your other arm to strike him on the side of his face/neck area works really well as an OPENING MOVE to counter his shoot...to be followed by any number of moves depending upon his body's reaction to this first move.....Another thing to know about dealing with a LOW shoot is to NEVER respond with a kick - you'll find yourself on your back very fast if you do this....Another thing to know..if you have the full mount position the straight blast TWC roll punches along with pak/larp/ trapping techniques work very well..perhaps even as a prelude to finising him with an arm-bar..BUT NOT THE CONVENTIONAL ARM-BAR that places one of your legs over his face ((just asking him to bite you..there are no rules in the street). Place that foot on the side of his head/face area and PUSH while applying the arm-bar.

[DuLayLoMo]

UltimateWingChun:

How does your Sifu feel about you mixing his traditional wing chun kung fu with western wrestling "catch you as you can"? Have you consulted with your Sifu on your realization on his art's limitations? If yes, what did he have to say? And how long did you study with him again? I mean from what I read you are from NYC and Cheung Sifu's school is from the land Down Under? You actually been studying with Cheung Sifu for many years in the Down Under, huh? I am just curious and I hope you dont take offense to my questions.

James DuLay

[old jong]

Attacking would be a nice idea also!;)

[Matrix]

Old Jong,

You are such a radical! What crazy idea will you come up with next? ;)

Matrix

[old jong]

I know!...
I'm always on the impression that attacking or being active is better than being defensive or reactive.
But, that is so radical! ;)

My next crasy idea would be to break the other guy's timing....(This mean that we must first have,and control our own timing.
Really crasy! ;)

[Matrix]

Tabernaque!! You're a genius. :D

[old jong]

Shhhhh!...You don't have to say that so loud!... ;)

[yuanfen]

OK SHHHHHHHHH

[old jong]

shhhhhh! oups!... shhhh!... ;) :D

[Ultimatewingchun]

My credentials are as follows: I became William Cheung"s student In August, 1983 while attending one of his two-day seminars. Through the last almost 20 years I have attended some 40 seminars (about 30 of which were actually organized and coordinated by me in New York City). I've also had private lessons as well as numerous semi-private instructor seminars with the Grandmaster. I've also taken all of my tests in front of William Cheung, which are graded by him- receving my Level 10 Gold Sash instructor grade in October, 1990. (There are also several other levels and I passed the instructor level2 test in 1993.

As regards his attitude about my invovement with catch wrestling: that's between the Grandmaster and myself.I will say this: I am still an active instructor in his World Wing Chun Kung Fu Association, and in fact considered to be one of his best students and instructors.

[Ultimatewingchun]

AS regards training under Grandmaster William Cheung: the only people fortunate enough to train with him on a daily/weekly basis are those who live in Australia...All of the seminars he has conducted in the United States (ie.- here in N.Y.) would produce the following effect: I would go to the seminars with my students and then spend months working on the techniques with my students on a daily/weekly basis (for 12 of the years I've been teaching I've taught 4 days a week). He has been coming to New York 2x per year- so six months later we would go to the next seminar and the process would begin again with new techniques. So trying to "cut out the middle man" makes no sense because my students get the advantage of training with me on a regular basis in between seminars -thereby increasing their ability to be able to keep up with what's going on at a higher level of proficiency and making them better equipped to be ready for the next seminar. (There have frequently been semi-private instructor seminars taught by the Grandmaster on these semi-annual visits as well).

As regards Duncan Leung - yes I remember hearing about him frequently during the years that I studied modified wing chun under Moy Yat (1975-1983), -although I never met him at that time. I also became aquainted with Phil Redmond at that time as he spent a few months back in the 1970's in attendance at Moy Yat's school. Phil and I became very good friends in 1984 when Grandmaster Cheung appointed myself, Phil, and one other person as assistant instructors together in the first ever Traditional Wing Chun school here in New York- to carry on the teaching of his techniques during the six month periods in-between his visits...This was the origin of my school, as Sifu Phil Redmond and the other guy I referred to eventually went their own way. Phil and I are still good friends and we communicate regularly. He has an outstanding website!

As regards the question- what was wrong with Moy Yat's teaching- this raises the ENTIRE question of what is missing from any wing chun I have ever seen other than William Cheung's: and enormous amount of footwork/the centraline theory of facing/the entry technique/ and a whole array of techniques that are too numerous to mention here. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU GET YOUR HANDS ON WILLIAM CHEUNG'S BOOKS AND VIDEOS AND SEE FOR YOURSELF!

[KenWingJitsu]

Ultimatewingchun...are you aware that Matt Furey is not highly regarded in grappling circles?

As for Catch as Catch can, I have Tony Cechinne's tapes. "Catch Wrestlers" a few and far between, basically you find them to be wrestlers who either studied under Tony or added his submissions to their wrestling. They have never done very well in competiiton. Furey himself has grappled some Jiu Jitsu guys, and they were not the ones tapping. Karl Goth decided not to have anything to do with him anymore...

[Ultimatewingchun]

I don't know anything about Tony Cechinne, so I can't comment about him. As far as Matt Furey taping out to jiu-jitsu guys...AFTER he learned Catch...I DOUBT THAT VERY HIGHLY. If Karl Gotch is not dealing with Furey anymore, my guess is the issue between them is MONEY...not Furey's talents as a catch wrestler.

But once again let me recommend Furey's tapes to you, starting with Steet Grappling (volume 1 & 2); but the Farmer Burns 12 volume series, though expensive, is INCREDIBLE!

I'm probably giving away my age now but I first began to follow (and imitate) the professional catch wrestlers techniques back in the early 1960's, including such greats as Lou Thesz, Verne Gagne, Karl Gotch,and Bruno Sammartino (who I actually saw wrestle in person 6 times). Though the outcome of their matches was usually predetermined - the wrestlers I just mentioned were FANTASTIC, and could really hurt somebody if they wanted to.

Even with the emergence of jiu-jitsu (which I respect) in recent years I still maintain that Catch-as catch-can is the best grappling system I've ever seen!

[Phil Redmond]

Your Cantonese romanization is a little off but it's still clear that your screen name means "SCREW" your mother. Obvioulsy you know what it means, I just wanted the others on the forum to know also.

[yuanfen]

Thanks Phil....had to happen sooner or later where anonymity is allowed.
IMO Sandman should take a look at that.
joy chaudhuri

[reneritchie]

Obviously a practitioner of the super secret Dai Lun Tao, with its deadly Chut Si Gwun set... ;)

[yuanfen]

ulimatewingchun-sez

As regards the question- what was wrong with Moy Yat's teaching- this raises the ENTIRE question of what is missing from any wing chun I have ever seen other than William Cheung's: and enormous amount of footwork/the centraline theory of facing/the entry technique/ and a whole array of techniques that are too numerous to mention here. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU GET YOUR HANDS ON WILLIAM CHEUNG'S BOOKS AND VIDEOS AND SEE FOR YOURSELF!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi-
I have read most of TWC's books and seen his videos- at least those that I am aware of.
I do not hold to the TWC central line conception, do not use that entry technique- i dont regard that as anuthing important is missing- but we are talking opinions.
And as far as enormous amoubt of footwork- you ovbiously are limited by what you have seen. That is a sweeping generalization.
And- I am proud of doing "modified" wing chun... are TWC folks still using that inaccurate term?

[anerlich]

I think the low esteem in which Matt Furey is held has more to do with his aggressive marketing, the inflated prices he charges for information which is nothing special on SOME of his products (the Farmer Burns course he was going to sell was actually in the public domain and freely available if you knew where to look), and a perception that he talks big about his skills but has declined or pulled out of matches to test them, e.g. Abu Dhabi several times. He's also had a number of falling outs with former allies, like Karl Gotch.

A fair bit of that goes on from (some) WC proponents as well, as well as in lots of other marketing arenas, so it's hardly a heinous crime.

There was also an incident, heavily discussed in BJJ and MMA forums, where he allegedly was about to be submitted by a much smaller purple belt in a grappling match in a BJJ academy he visited, and decided to start punching the guy rather than get caught and have to submit. How true this is I don't know, but it's certainly been a hot topic of discussion.

I kind of like the guy and his attitude in some ways, but not enough to have paid for any of his products.

There is no reason to assume that Catch is anything other than a great system. Certainly guys like Kazushi Sakuraba have shown that BJJ is not the only game in town and that a pro wrestling background can produce a formidable fighter.

Hwever, it's pretty difficult to find Catch instruction, especially outside the US. BJJ is much more prevalent, and in that regard at least, Helio and Rorion have proved to be marketeers par excellence.

[Phil Redmond]

have been a student of Sifu Cheung since July 1983. The very first NYC seminar was held at my school in 1984. You asked Victor Parlati about his training while living in NYC. Sifu Cheung wanted to start the Association in NYC. He appointed 3 people th run the Association. Myself as president, another student as vice-president, and Victor Parlati as treasurer. The three of us all had previous WC experience. I studied for 13 years with various WC sifus and in fact was a sifu with a school of my own when I met Sifu Cheung having. To insure that we were capable of teaching properly Sifu would come to the States every quarter (4 times a year), and stay for while to teach us privately. As the years went by he would come to the US 3 times a year now he's here only twice a year. During these visits the 3 of us got extensive private lessons as did Eric Oram and Blaine Collins when Sifu would travel to Caifornia. We practiced diligently with each other and a small group when Sifu was away. It took me from 1983 until 1991 to make Sifu because I wanted to wait until I felt that I understood the system before I opened a school. There are many competent instructors in TWC in the US that have never been down under. After the 3 people that hold a "Masters" rank in the US, Sifu Delroi Flood and myself are the highest ranking instructors in the State. Also, Sifu Cheung's world travels took him away from the home school in Australia for months at a time. This situation left the teaching to his students like Dana Wong. Sifu Cheung personally tests all of the sifus worldwide. So the "how did he learn outside of Australia" question has been answered. I hope.

[mun hung]

You have the right to call the Wing Chun you practice/teach "Traditional" "Authentic" "Original" "Ultimate" or anything else you might like, but you certainly don't have the right to call everything else "modified".

And as far as what you think is missing from your knowledge of what you call "modified" Wing Chun - I think you should get out more often, cause your exposure seems limited. And if all other styles of Wing Chun are missing so much then why are you adding things to your "Traditional" Wing Chun?

[yuanfen]

Anerlich on Matt Furey:
There was also an incident, heavily discussed in BJJ and MMA forums, where he allegedly was about to be submitted by a much smaller purple belt in a grappling match in a BJJ academy he visited, and decided to start punching the guy rather than get caught and have to submit
-------------------------------------------------
I posted a legitimate query but it ended up in some other part of cyberspace.

Why would Fuery be criticized if he punched to avoid submission?
I didnt realise that he hada falling out with Gotch. Nevertheless
because of Gotch folks are more aware than before of the the
regimen of "Hindu" squats and dips which are not always done right.
I grew up with old time wrestlers who did hundreds and hundreds of them every day.

[reneritchie]

Anerlich is correct, Furey is seen as somewhat of a shill by the general community. Recently in a column he seemed to suggest he is visited and taught by the ghost of Farmer Burns, which has led to increased skepticism.

Joy - It is bad because he was claiming catch was a superior grappling system to bjj, and was "rolling" (a grappling platform devoid of strikes) at the time. It would be akin to a Savate fighter getting into a Muay Thai ring and going for a suplex when he found he couldn't trade stand up.

The problem with catch seems to be that while you can find some people who appear to be good, they don't consistently produce top flight students the way BJJ has. Most people cross train now anyway, with Sakuraba reportedly working with Pehna (sp?) and many BJJ people working wrestling (the local olympic coach here has many BJJ people sitting in on his sessions).

[KenWingJitsu]

Why would Fuery be criticized if he punched to avoid submission?
Because it was a "friendly" grappling match. Grappling only no strikes. He was caught in a triangle choke and freaked out & punched the guy....and yes this was after he started doing catch...and the purple belt was about 60 lbs or so lighter than him...

[Knifefighter]

Catch has some good and dangerous stuff, although some of the techs and strategies are not quite in line with my approach. Don't judge Catch just by what happened between Furey and the Maxwell purple belt. Furey hadn't been doing Catch very long, while Tony was a seasoned BJJ player who was ready for his brown belt.

Some of the best submission grapplers and fighters are those who have taken the BJJ game and mixed it with the techniques and concepts of Catch.

[Ultimatewingchun]

To Begin with..."what's wrong with Moy Yat...as far as enormous amounts of footwork, you (Victor Parlati) obviously are limited by what you've seen...why are TWC folks still using that inaccurate term (modified)..." in response to these objections to what I posted let me say the following: I studied MODIFIED 3 to 4 days a week under Moy Yat for eight years...I've sparred (and sometimes fought) modified practioners who came into my school...I've watched my top student Michael Mundy take apart 2 Karate guys, one after the other) in a full contact tournament after they each had eliminated 2 different modified guys who tried TO COME AT THEM WITH THE STRAIGHT BLAST CHAIN PUNCHES...I've seen countless books, magazine articles, and videos put out by numerous wing chun people, etc. and I'm telling you that there is a huge amount of IMPORTANT FOOTWORK THAT"S MISSING from these other systems as well as techniques that are done WRONG because they were PURPOSELY modified by Leung Bik because he didn't want to teach them to Chan Wah Shun..(ie. the bong sao is too low and the dipping downward of the hand itself towards the floor makes it a weaker hand..tan sao is held too low - thereby providing no real protection against head shots.. the pidgeon-toed neutral stance (instead of the feet being straight) was introduced in order to SLOW the practioner down...just some examples off the top of my head..and believe me there are dozens more that could be mentioned.....ALL OF THIS ADDS UP TO A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN EFFECTIVENESS AS A FIGHTING ART!

As regards Catch wrestling: The Farmer burns info was NEVER fully demonstrated and the setups for the submissions and defenses fully explored BEFORE the appearance of Matt Furey's 12 volume video series...

As regards Furey punching his way out of a triangle choke when his Catch knowledge was still young...YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING...A WING CHUN GUY COMPLAINING THAT SOMEONE USED STRIKES TO COUNTER A GRAPPLING MOVE???!!!

As regards Sakuraba...he studied some catch from someone who learned it from Antonio Inoki who learned it many years ago from Karl Gotch himself....DID YOU HAPPEN TO SEE WHAT SAKURABA DID TO ROYCE GRACIE?...USING A COMBINATION OF STRIKES, KICKS, AND CATCH WRESTLING TECHNIQUES?!...which is the whole point: Successful Martial Art FIGHTING ability requires striking, kicking, and grappling techniques in combination...

No one standup martial art has all the answers to striking and kicking..and no one martial art has all the answers to grappling...

BUT NOT ALL MARTIAL ARTS ARE CREATED EQUAL EITHER...

TRADITONAL WING CHUN HAS MORE ANSWERS TO STANDUP AND CATCH-AS-CATCH-CAN WRESTLING HAS MORE ANSWERS TO GRAPPLING THAN OTHER SYSTEMS......This is my opinion ..for what it's worth.

[anerlich]

Knifefighter,

I know you weren't implying this, but I never wanted to give the impression that Furey was some sort of head honcho for catch. Indeed, his self appointment as some sort of "catch guru" with comparitively little documented experience or achievement is one more reason much of the grappling fraternity regard him with suspiciion. There are other Catch guys with stuff out like Tony Checcine (sp?)

I've actually found some of the articles on Furey's website and in magazines useful. He's a reasonable writer and journalist. But he does hype a lot of stuff to the max, and a lot of what he charges big bucks for is derivative and not particularly profound.

IMHO.

KWJ is correct about the alleged incident.

[t_niehoff]

Ultimatewingchun wrote:

TRADITONAL WING CHUN HAS MORE ANSWERS TO STANDUP AND CATCH-AS-CATCH-CAN WRESTLING HAS MORE ANSWERS TO GRAPPLING THAN OTHER SYSTEMS......This is my opinion ..for what it's worth. UWC

Exactly -- for what it is worth. That's why TWC and Catch are both illegal in all NHBs, so that others can have a chance at winning. ;) TN

Terence

[yuanfen]

Ultimatewingchun states among other things:(Yuanfen responses in brackets))

)..." in response to these objections to what I posted let me say the following: I studied MODIFIED 3 to 4 days a week under Moy Yat for eight years...I've sparred (and sometimes fought) modified practioners who came into my school...I've watched my top student Michael Mundy take apart 2 Karate guys, one after the other) in a full contact tournament after they each had eliminated 2 different modified guys who tried TO COME AT THEM WITH THE STRAIGHT BLAST CHAIN PUNCHES...

((Again- seriously you should reconsider using a broad brush label of "modified" to characterise non TWC wing chun. I dont think that you would like others to call TWC "Cheung's made up wing chun". Civility points towards calling others by their own names. This does not prevent you from being loyal to your own lineage and pointing out specific differeneces that you see in what others do. Straight blast punches---? Lineages vary widely in their use. Your universe of observation is apparentlya small one. I think there are enough mature readers on this list who would listen to specicic TWC points and explanations without the usage of inappropriate labels for non TWC folks))

I've seen countless books, magazine articles, and videos put out by numerous wing chun people, etc. and I'm telling you that there is a huge amount of IMPORTANT FOOTWORK THAT"S MISSING from these other systems as well as techniques that are done WRONG because they were PURPOSELY modified by Leung Bik because he didn't want to teach them to Chan Wah Shun..(ie. the bong sao is too low and the dipping downward of the hand itself towards the floor makes it a weaker hand..tan sao is held too low - thereby providing no real protection against head shots.. the pidgeon-toed neutral stance (instead of the feet being straight) was introduced in order to SLOW the practioner down...just some examples off the top of my head..and believe me there are dozens more that could be mentioned.....ALL OF THIS ADDS UP TO A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN EFFECTIVENESS AS A FIGHTING ART!

(You sure distance yourself from other reasoned discussion of the role of Leung Bik))


As regards Furey punching his way out of a triangle choke when his Catch knowledge was still young...YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING...A WING CHUN GUY COMPLAINING THAT SOMEONE USED STRIKES TO COUNTER A GRAPPLING MOVE???!!!

As regards Sakuraba...he studied some catch from someone who learned it from Antonio Inoki who learned it many years ago from Karl Gotch himself....DID YOU HAPPEN TO SEE WHAT SAKURABA DID TO ROYCE GRACIE?...USING A COMBINATION OF STRIKES, KICKS, AND CATCH WRESTLING TECHNIQUES?!...which is the whole point: Successful Martial Art FIGHTING ability requires striking, kicking, and grappling techniques in combination...

No one standup martial art has all the answers to striking and kicking..and no one martial art has all the answers to grappling...

BUT NOT ALL MARTIAL ARTS ARE CREATED EQUAL EITHER...

TRADITONAL WING CHUN HAS MORE ANSWERS TO STANDUP AND CATCH-AS-CATCH-CAN WRESTLING HAS MORE ANSWERS TO GRAPPLING THAN OTHER SYSTEMS......This is my opinion ..for what it's worth.

((Frankly- not worth much in its current formulation above. Also- so TWC hasa major flaw that catch wrestling can cure!!
We have just come througha period of closed threads on this list- why muck it up more? Note my comments are not on TWC mechanics but the nature of your posting))

[planetwc]

Victor,

Leung Bik was a classmate of Chan Wah Shun, they both studied under Leung Jan, Leung Bik's father. If anyone would have done the withholding it would have been Leung Jan, not Leung Bik.

It would also then be that Leung Jan would have had to withhold from ALL his student so his 2 sons would have some sort of advantage for his entire career of teaching Wing Chun. Logically that just doesn't make sense, and the way of movement and action would "come out" in any sort of chi sao or gor sao on the son's part.

For that matter, if the Leung Bik story is to be believed, only Yip Man was his "student" in Hong Kong. Hardly a valid way then to preserve his "rice bowl" if in the end he was only going to opportunistically run into Yip Man and then train him in his father's secret ways. Just reads like a bad movie.

Another question, what do you make of Joe Grepo's supposed assertion that William actually learned his "other" style of Wing Chun while on the mainland from a teacher other than Yip Man?
As Grepo was William's adopted son for lineage purposes prior to their falling out, it would seem likely that it makes sense.

It would also explain the similarities to Hung Fa Yi in terms of the sets being similar in execution if indeed William's other Wing Chun system was based on his studies with a Hung Fa Yi instructor, rather than with Yip Man.

I'm also surprised to see you resurrect the term "modified" Wing Chun as I thought that had long ago been put to rest by the TWC organization. Especially given the fact that there are so many other variants of Wing Chun which DO NOT come from Leung Jan, but have the SAME properties of Hong Kong/Foshan Wing Chun as Yip Man taught. The same stances, sets and what not.

Surely those were not also modified to give the smaller weaker Leung Bik an advantage over Chan Wah Shun, who in any case purportedly defeated Leung Bik in gor sao? All the footwork in the world didn't give Leung Bik the advantage against his classmate.

This modified vs tradional only works in a 1970's world when no one knows about the numerous other branches of Wing Chun. Is it truly being held to today as accurate?


Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun
To Begin with..."what's wrong with Moy Yat...as far as enormous amounts of footwork, you (Victor Parlati) obviously are limited by what you've seen...why are TWC folks still using that inaccurate term (modified)..." in response to these objections to what I posted let me say the following: I studied MODIFIED 3 to 4 days a week under Moy Yat for eight years...I've sparred (and sometimes fought) modified practioners who came into my school...I've watched my top student Michael Mundy take apart 2 Karate guys, one after the other) in a full contact tournament after they each had eliminated 2 different modified guys who tried TO COME AT THEM WITH THE STRAIGHT BLAST CHAIN PUNCHES...I've seen countless books, magazine articles, and videos put out by numerous wing chun people, etc. and I'm telling you that there is a huge amount of IMPORTANT FOOTWORK THAT"S MISSING from these other systems as well as techniques that are done WRONG because they were PURPOSELY modified by Leung Bik because he didn't want to teach them to Chan Wah Shun..(ie. the bong sao is too low and the dipping downward of the hand itself towards the floor makes it a weaker hand..tan sao is held too low - thereby providing no real protection against head shots.. the pidgeon-toed neutral stance (instead of the feet being straight) was introduced in order to SLOW the practioner down...just some examples off the top of my head..and believe me there are dozens more that could be mentioned.....ALL OF THIS ADDS UP TO A MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN EFFECTIVENESS AS A FIGHTING ART!

As regards Catch wrestling: The Farmer burns info was NEVER fully demonstrated and the setups for the submissions and defenses fully explored BEFORE the appearance of Matt Furey's 12 volume video series...

As regards Furey punching his way out of a triangle choke when his Catch knowledge was still young...YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING...A WING CHUN GUY COMPLAINING THAT SOMEONE USED STRIKES TO COUNTER A GRAPPLING MOVE???!!!

As regards Sakuraba...he studied some catch from someone who learned it from Antonio Inoki who learned it many years ago from Karl Gotch himself....DID YOU HAPPEN TO SEE WHAT SAKURABA DID TO ROYCE GRACIE?...USING A COMBINATION OF STRIKES, KICKS, AND CATCH WRESTLING TECHNIQUES?!...which is the whole point: Successful Martial Art FIGHTING ability requires striking, kicking, and grappling techniques in combination...

No one standup martial art has all the answers to striking and kicking..and no one martial art has all the answers to grappling...

BUT NOT ALL MARTIAL ARTS ARE CREATED EQUAL EITHER...

TRADITONAL WING CHUN HAS MORE ANSWERS TO STANDUP AND CATCH-AS-CATCH-CAN WRESTLING HAS MORE ANSWERS TO GRAPPLING THAN OTHER SYSTEMS......This is my opinion ..for what it's worth.

[t_niehoff]

planetwc writes:

It would also explain the similarities to Hung Fa Yi in terms of the sets being similar in execution if indeed William's other Wing Chun system was based on his studies with a Hung Fa Yi instructor, rather than with Yip Man. DW

Until we have real evidence that HFY pre-dated TWC (like a verifible practitioner of HFY), any speculations like these are simply empty musings IMO. We should instead be guided by Occam's razor (as Joy likes to cite). TN

Terence

[AndrewS]

Terence,

I'm shocked, shocked! That you should suggest such a thing!

Can't you just accept the legitimacy of a millenia-old lineage resulting in virgin birth? Isn't it much easier to thing swallow that way?

Andrew. . . shambles off to play with Madeline Murray O'Haire's corpse. . .

[byond1]

i believe if we look at koolo wing chun we get a very clear picture , of what leung biks wing chun would look like.....because we get a very clear picture of what leung jans wc became.....and we can make many assumptions like....leung jan taught using a pigeon toed ygkym....as was used by wong wah bo, leung yi tai, gu lo chung.....the abduction with the feet and knees would sure be great on a boat.....huh??? ...im sure pin sin theory was also stressed over jung sin.....
i dont believe we can compare a "moy yat tan sao" with a "yip man tan sao"" if you know what i mean..... since both of these gentleman have ventured into the mist..
...i dont believe we can compare the standards set by the "moy yat lineage" or the "hfy lineage" or the whatever ...because the basic standards of position, as illustrated, in our individual lineage forms are not the actual "tan" or "bong"....the energy and motion is the bong or tan...and is used approprietly....not frozen in time and space .....so to say, anyone method of training, produces better usage of the motions cant be proven......imo, and is a waste of energy and time fretting about it.
b

[yenhoi]

YGYKM.

punch.
kick.

tan, bong, fook.

moving.

:D

Smartass, I know, but also very true.

and pak :)

pak sau is by far the 'technique' I 'use' the most, next to punching and kicking.

:eek:

[reneritchie]

Victor,

If you hear the phone ringing, that's the 1980s calling, they want their BS marketing back. ;)

[KenWingJitsu]

lol!!!!!!!!

[reneritchie]

David,


Another question, what do you make of Joe Grepo's supposed assertion that William actually learned his "other" style of Wing Chun while on the mainland from a teacher other than Yip Man?

It would also explain the similarities to Hung Fa Yi in terms of the sets being similar in execution if indeed William's other Wing Chun system was based on his studies with a Hung Fa Yi instructor, rather than with Yip Man.

Grepo sifu's full assertion, at least as I have read it, is that Cheung sifu went to China and learned more martial arts while avoiding trouble with the Tong's in HK (I don't remember if he claimed Cheung learned another branch of WCK or if he learned his family's version of Baguazhang, or both). Grepo sifu does not assert that Cheung sifu learned HFY, but rather that HFY as it is now known comes from Cheung sifu giving private lessons in San Francisco during his seminar visits to the US over the last few decades.

I have heard an alternate account, from Meng sifu, that Cheung sifu did learn from one of the other HFY teachers, however, so it is one possibility.

IMHO, there is no significant evidence yet presented to support either account, and thus arguments made either way can only be formed from personal opinion (unfortunately, those seem to be the ones that cause the most argument).

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Ultimatewingchun


As regards Furey punching his way out of a triangle choke when his Catch knowledge was still young...YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING...A WING CHUN GUY COMPLAINING THAT SOMEONE USED STRIKES TO COUNTER A GRAPPLING MOVE???!!!

If you are simply rolling as these guys were, it is complete BS to punch your way out of a submission. The same as it would have been if Tony, having secured the triangle on Furey, had slammed a couple of elbows into his face while he was stuck there.

[anerlich]

I've heard the same postulates about GM Cheung going to the mainland while on the run from the triads and learning HFY there, with the Trad/Mod story made up to explain the missing years involving criminal activity in the opium trade, etc. etc.

But GM Cheung's never copped to this, sensible even if it were true as only a moron would admit to drug smuggling.

GM Cheung's no slouch when it comes to marketing, and it seems surprising to me that if there were a legit HFY angle for him to use he would not be out there pushing it. And I would imagine Gee and Meng Sifu also considering the advantages such occurences might provide to further their own causes. No disrespect meant, I'm only saying that if there were a relationship there both sides would arguably gain considerable advantage from advertising it.

That's why, certain surface similarities between TWC and HFY notwithstanding, I doubt that any link exists.

Victor, neither party in the Furey incident was a WC person. They were grapplers, and weren't even having a proper match, just rolling AFAIK. Instead of doing what he should have done and tapped (everyone gets caught occasionally, just like everyoner gets hit in sparring), he decided to start laying the smackdown. Not exactly polite conduct if you're a visitor to a school and allegedly a high-profile representative for your art.

It's about as classy as kicking someone in the groin because he's beating you in a boxing match.

I'm sure if he'd turned up and wanted an MMA or Vale Tudo match someone at that school could have accomodated him - someone about his own size and not several stone lighter as the guy who got him in the traingle was. Indeed, Furey's reputation, justified or no, has him being unwilling to test his much self-promoted skills in real competition.

[hunt1]

Shouldnt do this but since Matt Furey is in my neck of the woods and our circles cross I will say this. He is in great shape and has a hard mind set, as the story suggests, which makes him dangerous but as for his wrestling, better places to spend your money.

AS for what Leung Jans wing chun looked like why doesnt anyone go to the school in New York that claims to come from his son Leung Chun. It may be legit. After all it does have a line that names some of the same teachers as the school in Aus that also claims to come from the same source yet the two schools have no ties.

[mun hung]

hunt-1, where is this school in N.Y.? I've never heard of it and I have visited just about every WC school in N.Y.C. I would very much like to see how and what they train.

[t_niehoff]

Hi Andrew,

anerlich wrote:

That's why, certain surface similarities between TWC and HFY notwithstanding, I doubt that any link exists. AN

"Certain surface similarities?" As an illustration, suppose I began teaching what I claimed was the oldest form of WCK, that has been kept secret for a thousand years, a "system" in which there are no other verifiable practitioners of, and that the forms of my system look almost exactly like Yuen Kay-San's (which are distinct, has its own "signature moves", etc.), my system has the same drills as YKSWCK (some which are unique to YKS, ones that YKS created), has the same dummy form as YKSWCK (I know that if you have a million chimps all at typewriters, one will reproduce Shakespeare . . . but the odds . . . ), my system has the same terminology as YKSWCK (some of which is unique to YKSWCK), etc. Then . . . when you tell me that my system looks just like repackaged YKSWCK (that my syytem has an extra layer of "theory" on top), I reply that all those things are only "surface similarities" . . . that the DNA is "slightly different", that "DNA only 3% different results in different organisms", how we do "pak sao" is different entirely than how you do "pak sao" (in fact, you can't even really comprehend our "pak sao"), etc. When you ask for evidence of my lineage, I tell you the evidence is my system itself -- if only you "fully grasped it" you'd see how it couldn't possibly be YKSWCK. TN

But you see, the problem is that I never really address the question: how is it my "system" looks so very similar to YKSWCK (pure chance is simply out of the realm of genuine possibility) if they are two different, distinct lineages? Instead, I avoid the question, deflect the question with a variety of tactics, or simply deny it. But the question remains unanswered. To say these things are just "certain surface similarities" is simply not the case (if the forms, drills, terminology, etc. could be copyrighted, I think TWC would have a great infringement case!). TN

Terence

[reneritchie]

There's a related group that perports Leung Chun descent in Australia as well. They used to have a website up and their pictures didn't look, in terms of gross body positions, that different from the extent lineages of WCK (Yip, Sum, Gulao, etc.)

[Ultimatewingchun]

On this post, for the sake of brevity, I'll just answer issue-after-issue that has been directed towards me since my last post...

Being loyal to my lineage doesn't mean that I'm not telling the truth: using "too broad a brush to paint a picture" of the modified straight blast attack is not true.Who is going to deny that ALL of the lineage from Yip Man other than William Cheung use the straight blast roll punches directly up the centerline, coupled with some minimal shifting/shuffle type footwork - with some larp/dar or pak/dar thrown in doesn't constitute about 80% of all that is done in terms of ACTUAL FIGHTING TECHNIQUE. The other 20% consists of an occasional front heel kick and the use of such moves as tan/dar, or bil sao, or gong /dar or bong sao or huen sao as the means of blocking, deflecting, or redirecting in coming strikes and kicks? (Yes, there are some other moves - the sidekick, for example) but they are very few and far between
... and who is going to deny the difficulty they have had using these technigues (against a good fighter) because they constantly find themselves at an awkward angle vis-a-vis their opponent ?...

It's about the FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...!!!
Yes, I made a mistake with the names, but it doesn't change the facts...It was LEUNG JAN who modified (changed) the system to make it less effective once he found that he was being forced to teach Chan Wah Shun. He ONLY taught 3 people, his two sons, Leung Bik and Leung Chun, and Chan Wah Shun. Whether it's the 1980's, the 90's, or now it's STILL ABOUT THE MISSING FOOTWORK AND THE CENTRALINE TECHNIQUES THAT ARE BACKED UP BY THE FOOTWORK, AND THE ENTRY TECHNIQUE (also a piece of footwork) that make up a majority of the difference between TWC and ..yes, here comes that hated word - modified.

Yip Man - originally a student of Chan Wah Shun - eventually came across Leung Bik and learned TWC.

But I've often speculated to myself that maybe Yip Man wasn't the only student of Leung Bik (or Leung Chun, for that matter)...and since I have seen similarities between Garrett Gee's Hung Fa YI and TWC...and since I know for a fact that Gee never learned from William Cheung or any of Cheung's students...perhaps Hung Fa Yi derives it's lineage from one of Leung Jan's 2 sons ???

By the way..Benny Meng started with Moy Yat..then had his mind blown by the FOOTWORK while partcipating in a William Cheung seminar...kissed up bigtime to William...then travelled hundreds of miles (an 8 hour car ride) to attend another William Cheung seminar a few weeks later...AND THEN TURNED AROUND AFTER MEETING GARRETT GEE AND SEEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECAME SOMEBODY WITHIN GARRETT GEE'S NEWLY EMERGING ORGANIZATION...BEGAN TALKING TRASH ABOUT WILLAM CHEUNG AND THE LEGITIMACY OF TRADITONAL WING CHUN!!!

I know Joe Grepo very well and his story is very similar to Benny Meng's...started out as a student of Sifu Keith Mazza in TWC..learned very little...began doing a lot of work for William Cheung..had a falling out with the Grandmaster over money...left the association and started talking trash...big time lies!..Joe is actually kind of likeable but a story teller par excellance..no, he is not William Cheung's adopted son and was never promoted to sifu..

The missing footwork and the centraline techniques were supposed to give Leung Bik and his brother an advantage over Chan Wah Shun, but it didn't work out that way...Chan Wah Shun's overwhelming size and agressivenes won out..Which brings up another point..there are a lot of excellent MODIFIED fighters..even with the less than superior technique in their arsenal--Wong Shun Leung. Victor Kan, Duncan Leung, etc.

Aggressiveness, physical strength and conditioning, and most of all ...WILLPOWER... can go a long way!

"TWC has a major flaw that catch wrestling can cure...Yes..the same flaw shared by all of the wing chun lineages...what will you do if your opponent manages to grab you and bring you to the floor???

Where is my school in New York City? For many years i(since 1984) it was located in lower Manhattan on Broadway just south of Canal Street. but after September 11th I moved it to the Park Slope section of Brooklyn..

Never heard about a Leung Chun descended group in Australia. If you (reneritichie) have any more info about that I'd be interested in hearing it.

[reneritchie]

Victor,

Leung Jan had many students in Foshan. He taught the other well-to-do shop owners. Among his more famous students (aside from Chan Wah-Shun) were Lo Kwai (who owned the local butcher shop) and Ngao Shu (who worked doing clean up at the apothecary shop). He also had several students in his hometown of Gulao, Heshan, including his nephews (Leung Bak-Cheung being one of them).

There are 3 groups who claim descent from Leung Chun, through a lineage of Chinese reverends if memory serves. I believe someone from the Australian group posts here occasionally. There's also a related group in NYC, and one other that doesn't have a related story.

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/archives/methods/systems/leungchun.html

As to the story about Leung Jan "modifying" WCK, it's illogical and self-contradictory beyond even the O.J. trial. In any event, if the system works better for you, you shouldn't need to grasp on to stories.

[yuanfen]

ultimatewingchun states:
On this post, for the sake of brevity,

((Brevity? Hate to see a long post!!)

Being loyal to my lineage doesn't mean that I'm not telling the truth:

((Loyalty is ok-- but you do mean opinion rather than truth))

using "too broad a brush to paint a picture" of the modified straight blast attack is not true.Who is going to deny that ALL of the lineage from Yip Man other than William Cheung use the straight blast roll punches directly up the centerline, coupled with some minimal shifting/shuffle type footwork - with some larp/dar or pak/dar thrown in doesn't constitute about 80% of all that is done in terms of ACTUAL FIGHTING TECHNIQUE.

((Not really))

The other 20% consists of an occasional front heel kick and the use of such moves as tan/dar, or bil sao, or gong /dar or bong sao or huen sao as the means of blocking, deflecting, or redirecting in coming strikes and kicks? (Yes, there are some other moves - the sidekick, for example) but they are very few and far between
... and who is going to deny the difficulty they have had using these technigues (against a good fighter) because they constantly find themselves at an awkward angle vis-a-vis their opponent ?...

(Not necessarily))

It's about the FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...!!!

(( Not necessarily TWC footwork))


Yes, I made a mistake with the names, but it doesn't change the facts...It was LEUNG JAN who modified (changed) the system to make it less effective once he found that he was being forced to teach Chan Wah Shun. He ONLY taught 3 people, his two sons, Leung Bik and Leung Chun, and Chan Wah Shun. Whether it's the 1980's, the 90's, or now it's STILL ABOUT THE MISSING FOOTWORK AND THE CENTRALINE TECHNIQUES THAT ARE BACKED UP BY THE FOOTWORK, AND THE ENTRY TECHNIQUE (also a piece of footwork) that make up a majority of the difference between TWC and ..yes, here comes that hated word - modified.

((What you calling modified may just be better than madeup..
possibly?))

Yip Man - originally a student of Chan Wah Shun - eventually came across Leung Bik and learned TWC.

((Haha... another "history"... unique to TWC)))

But I've often speculated to myself that maybe Yip Man wasn't the only student of Leung Bik (or Leung Chun, for that matter)...and since I have seen similarities between Garrett Gee's Hung Fa YI and TWC...and since I know for a fact that Gee never learned from William Cheung or any of Cheung's students...perhaps Hung Fa Yi derives it's lineage from one of Leung Jan's 2 sons ???
(x234zxxx?))

By the way..Benny Meng started with Moy Yat..then had his mind blown by the FOOTWORK while partcipating in a William Cheung seminar...

((Wow))

kissed up bigtime to William...then travelled hundreds of miles (an 8 hour car ride) to attend another William Cheung seminar a few weeks later...AND THEN TURNED AROUND AFTER MEETING GARRETT GEE AND SEEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECAME SOMEBODY WITHIN GARRETT GEE'S NEWLY EMERGING ORGANIZATION...BEGAN TALKING TRASH ABOUT WILLAM CHEUNG AND THE LEGITIMACY OF TRADITONAL WING CHUN!!!

((Wow...the truth shall make you free))

there are a lot of excellent MODIFIED fighters..even with the less than superior technique in their arsenal--Wong Shun Leung. Victor Kan, Duncan Leung, etc.

((Wow. Some badge of approval. Are they thankful?))

[yuanfen]

ultimatewingchun states:
On this post, for the sake of brevity,

((Brevity? Hate to see a long post!!)

Being loyal to my lineage doesn't mean that I'm not telling the truth:

((Loyalty is ok-- but you do mean opinion rather than truth))

using "too broad a brush to paint a picture" of the modified straight blast attack is not true.Who is going to deny that ALL of the lineage from Yip Man other than William Cheung use the straight blast roll punches directly up the centerline, coupled with some minimal shifting/shuffle type footwork - with some larp/dar or pak/dar thrown in doesn't constitute about 80% of all that is done in terms of ACTUAL FIGHTING TECHNIQUE.

((Not really))zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

The other 20% consists of an occasional front heel kick and the use of such moves as tan/dar, or bil sao, or gong /dar or bong sao or huen sao as the means of blocking, deflecting, or redirecting in coming strikes and kicks? (Yes, there are some other moves - the sidekick, for example) but they are very few and far between
... and who is going to deny the difficulty they have had using these technigues (against a good fighter) because they constantly find themselves at an awkward angle vis-a-vis their opponent ?...

(Not necessarily))

It's about the FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...THE FOOTWORK...!!!

(( Not necessarily TWC footwork))


Yes, I made a mistake with the names, but it doesn't change the facts...It was LEUNG JAN who modified (changed) the system to make it less effective once he found that he was being forced to teach Chan Wah Shun. He ONLY taught 3 people, his two sons, Leung Bik and Leung Chun, and Chan Wah Shun. Whether it's the 1980's, the 90's, or now it's STILL ABOUT THE MISSING FOOTWORK AND THE CENTRALINE TECHNIQUES THAT ARE BACKED UP BY THE FOOTWORK, AND THE ENTRY TECHNIQUE (also a piece of footwork) that make up a majority of the difference between TWC and ..yes, here comes that hated word - modified.

((What you calling modified may just be better than madeup..
possibly?))

Yip Man - originally a student of Chan Wah Shun - eventually came across Leung Bik and learned TWC.

((Haha... another "history"... unique to TWC)))

But I've often speculated to myself that maybe Yip Man wasn't the only student of Leung Bik (or Leung Chun, for that matter)...and since I have seen similarities between Garrett Gee's Hung Fa YI and TWC...and since I know for a fact that Gee never learned from William Cheung or any of Cheung's students...perhaps Hung Fa Yi derives it's lineage from one of Leung Jan's 2 sons ???
(x234zxxx?))

By the way..Benny Meng started with Moy Yat..then had his mind blown by the FOOTWORK while partcipating in a William Cheung seminar...

((Wow))

kissed up bigtime to William...then travelled hundreds of miles (an 8 hour car ride) to attend another William Cheung seminar a few weeks later...AND THEN TURNED AROUND AFTER MEETING GARRETT GEE AND SEEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECAME SOMEBODY WITHIN GARRETT GEE'S NEWLY EMERGING ORGANIZATION...BEGAN TALKING TRASH ABOUT WILLAM CHEUNG AND THE LEGITIMACY OF TRADITONAL WING CHUN!!!

((Wow...the truth shall make you free))

there are a lot of excellent MODIFIED fighters..even with the less than superior technique in their arsenal--Wong Shun Leung. Victor Kan, Duncan Leung, etc.

((Wow. Some badge of approval. Are they thankful?))

[hunt1]

Mun Hung try www.webspawner.com/users/mywingchun

This should give you the inforamtion you asked for.

[anerlich]

(if the forms, drills, terminology, etc. could be copyrighted, I think TWC would have a great infringement case!). TN

No doubt, and unfortunately, someone out there will attempt something like this in the near future. Or attempt to patent the forms, or something else like that.

as a TWC practitioner I find all this talk embarrassing. Leung Jan taught other people besides his sons (who got their a$$es whipped by Chan, despite his learning the allegedly weakened system and them getting the good stuff - that plan worked a treat, didn't it?) and WC has other lineages which have nothing to do with YM.

In Australia, most TWC people stopped talking that line a decade ago. Personally my conscience prevents me from passing on unsubstantiated and unprovable dogma. I'd rather believe there's an HFY connection with Sigung learning in secret on the mainland - it mightn't be true, but at least it isn't completely implausible.

The best Wing Chun isn't written on stone tablets and passed through generations. It lives and evolves with exposure to new information and influences.

[reneritchie]

Anerlich - Ngau Shu apparently also defeated one or both of the Leung sons. They may, however, simply not have been fighters...

[byond1]

my opinion...for what its worth ,.... anyone, and i mean anyone can make claims of being the best!! ...but when push comes to shove....it boils down to this.....can you do it???? is your system or personal skill so high that you can stop any attacker....no matter "how" they attack you? is your skill so great that you can make the challenge.."i will fight anybody, anytime, anywhere" and than back it up until the day of your death!! other than that...its all hot air!!! and what ever system or individual makes claims of being the best....either has a perfect fight history or not. under all circumstances.
if leung jan "modified " his teachings to leung bik....(as the story goes) he did a rotten job at it!! chan wah still beat leung bik.....so, imo the story makes no sence at all.
i believe yip man met leung bik.....where,when,why and what he learned will appear in an article im currently working on....but we can see that the pigeon toed stance was used by all wing chun lineages decending from the red boats....the only way a wing chun lineage could avoid this was to not have ever been on the red boats...and developed independently.....
leung jan learned from wong wah bo and leung yee tai....the systems that trace there lineage to wwb, that can back it up with documentation...all use the pigeon toed stance....leung jan has absolutly nothing to do with putting in or taking out differant stances.....of cource other people change what he taught them...to suit there own needs. and of cource koolo sup yee fatt is probably leung jans final evolution of his wc....and it has all the same stance work that he and fok bo chun learned from wong wah bo.....his focus was on side body not straight body, as chan wa shun, ng chun so and yip man focused on
imo, anyone using a straight legged stance either
1) there lineage developed independent of the red junks or
2) they put it into there wing chun,

a big problem in this world , is that people want to be lead!! it takes burdin off there shoulders....instead of direct experiance for there own!!! when you actually take "stories" and scrutinize them with real historical data.....more often than not...the stories do not add up......there, usually is a small grain of truth with tons of imbelishment

Victor--when i see meng sifu withen the next couple week ends i will be sure to ask him if he had his "mind blown" and "kissed up bigtime to william"

[anerlich]

They may, however, simply not have been fighters...

But they learned the ultimate WC system! They shouldn't NEED to be fighters!

And if Leung Bik wasn't a fighter, but still went through a much younger and reputedly bada$$ Yip Man like a hot knife through butter, and YM trained with the uberbada$$ Chan Wa who beat the Leung's with the system their dad crippled so they should have been able to beat it, what does that say about Yip Man's abilities?

Actually having read what I just wrote I'm not sure I could answer it :D

The stories lead to too many contradictions and leaps of faith to take seriously. we can all argue about it if you want, but I think it'll zoom into a Twilight Zone of illogic PDQ.

[Jim Roselando]

Hello all,


I am kind of late with this discussion but a couple of points.

If Wong Wah Bo had 2 students (Leung Jan & Fok Bo Chuen), and both students had pupils, then all we need to do is take a look at how they preserve the teaching to find (cross check) similarities in forms/structure/movement/etc.. The teaching of Leung Jan most resembles the teaching of Yuen Kay San. Both are extremely similar so this whole secret footwork/art of Leung Jan is kind of an old story that should be put to rest.

Let me give you an small example of what I mean! The movements Leung Jan taught in as his root to the Koo Lo (from his original Siu Lin Tao set) art preserved by the Dai Sihing of the village are so close to the movements in the Yuen Kay San form you would have to say they stem from the same source!

Another example? Ok! Lets say you are correct that Leung Jan had some secret version of WC and only taught it to his sons and basically watered down the art for the rest of the people he taught his "whole life" then that would mean the art that Wong Wah Bo taught him was the only real secret methods and the stuff he taught Fok Bo Chuen was the odd ball changed one? Why would he do that? Leung was not related to him? Yet! They are both too similar for that to be the case! Yet again! He taught his own nephew (family member) Leung Bak Chung in Koo Lo village the same compact (or as you call it "modified) WC that he taught eveyone else so we can discard the secret family story.

Our village information maintains that while Leung Bik did learn some WC he was not very skilled. We do not get any self promotion out of saying this (as the Koo Lo family does not have any public school or make any money from their families WC) so maybe the info is correct and maybe not. Also, the fact is a few of Leung sifu's Futshan students knocked Bik is well known. Plus! Yip Man's "own" written history makes no mention of Leung Bik in it.

Another yet! If Leung Bik was into this real secret art that was only passed down in the Leung family then what makes you think he would teach a boy who he did not know sqwat about? Yip was not his family! The Fung family of Koo Lo hardly ever teaches outsiders/non family. Hendrik also mentioned the Cho's hardly ever teach outside the family. It would not be common in traditional Chinese Kung Fu family way!


I think the Modified/Traditional story has seen its day. Most Red Boat Kung Fu looks pretty similar so even if all this info is incorrect we can go with what is more likely than less likely. We are better off talking about technical stuff as its easier to learn from!


Regards,

[yuanfen]

Jim- the 3-4 Koo Lo folks provide their perspective of what Leung Jan taught them in his last 3 years of his life. The Ip man folks have their perspective also on what Leung Jan taught. Regarding Ip man not mentioning Leung Bik in his brief written history, two points that I repeatedly make...

1. Ip Man told many folks including his own sons about Leung Bik.
Wang Kiu's opinions are his own .Everyone has opinions.

2. Ip man as per the existing tradition lists his first teacher
Chan Wah Son as his sifu. Listing the first teacher does not mean that IM as well as others didnt learn from others besides their first teacher.

On "Victor's" claims-- I thought that those preposterous claims including still hurling the "modified" label at others was a thing of the past. It was laughable then and even more laughable now...
of Ip Man giving "truth" exclusively and secretly to a teen ager who moves to Australia. I am commenting on the myths not on the TWC motions.

Stories of masters giving the entire truth to one or more teenagers in a brief few years of association flies against what we know of the whole world of TCMA transmission in taiji, tong long mantis, ba qua and other styles.

I choose not to do TWC--- has nothing to do with myths. I do what I do because I perceive it and experience it as effective.
History is too important to be left to ideologues. In terms of practice , the present is all that matters.

In any case what is often overlooked is the massive and iportant contribution that Ip man himself made to the art synthesizing and pruning what he learned and knew.He stood on the shoulders of giants...BUT he advanced the art from where he found it. A natural story of progress in a live art.

[desertwingchun2]

Ultimatewingchun wrote: "... and since I have seen similarities between Garrett Gee's Hung Fa YI and TWC...and since I know for a fact that Gee never learned from William Cheung or any of Cheung's students...perhaps Hung Fa Yi derives it's lineage from one of Leung Jan's 2 sons ???"

Here is a link to the HFY lineage:

http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/family_tree.php

"By the way..Benny Meng started with Moy Yat..then had his mind blown by the FOOTWORK while partcipating in a William Cheung seminar...kissed up bigtime to William...then travelled hundreds of miles (an 8 hour car ride) to attend another William Cheung seminar a few weeks later...AND THEN TURNED AROUND AFTER MEETING GARRETT GEE AND SEEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECAME SOMEBODY WITHIN GARRETT GEE'S NEWLY EMERGING ORGANIZATION...BEGAN TALKING TRASH ABOUT WILLAM CHEUNG AND THE LEGITIMACY OF TRADITONAL WING CHUN!!!"

What did you wish to acheive by bringing my Sigung into this conversation? The content within your quote above is innacurate and extremely insulting. I don't know what you are trying to achieve by posting comments like these. You are not furthering your cause by insulting any Wing Chun family and or its members.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Rene,


Grepo sifu's full assertion, at least as I have read it, is that Cheung sifu went to China and learned more martial arts while avoiding trouble with the Tong's in HK (I don't remember if he claimed Cheung learned another branch of WCK or if he learned his family's version of Baguazhang, or both). Grepo sifu does not assert that Cheung sifu learned HFY, but rather that HFY as it is now known comes from Cheung sifu giving private lessons in San Francisco during his seminar visits to the US over the last few decades.

I have heard an alternate account, from Meng sifu, that Cheung sifu did learn from one of the other HFY teachers, however, so it is one possibility.

IMHO, there is no significant evidence yet presented to support either account, and thus arguments made either way can only be formed from personal opinion (unfortunately, those seem to be the ones that cause the most argument).


Just saw this. As you know, I visited Gee sifu a while ago as a guest of one of his students. This was before There was much if any involvement with Benny Meng. Gee sifu was very gracious and spoke freely on many topics, some of which were touchy and probably should not have been discussed with the likes of me.

I have nothing to gain if HFY lives or dies. I have no connection to TWC. I like wing chun and I enjoy its history. But I don't take sides as it is lame and doesn't serve any purpose. And I have no reason to argue against either organization.

With that said, I spoke with Gee sifu for several hours. I can not say if what he told me is true or not. But he told me a couple interesting things. One of which is that he had absolutly no involvment with William Cheung. He did not train him and he was not trained by him. He said he only had one exposure to TWC and that was when someone visited his school once many years ago. Only a short visit nothing more. He said he has several TWC videos and that he sees major differences. I see major similarities but that is not what i am speaking to. If ANY one suggests that Gee sifu learned TWC through Video tapes, they are obviously mistaken. Gee has some real skills, that did not come from video. Some one some where trainied him.

ANother thing to note that someone else said, is what does Gee sifu gain in the HFY stuff? He is already skilled in a fairly famous and respected family style of Gung Fu. Why wing Chun if he never really studied it? And why something so odd as TWC? Were is the money incentives? He didn't make his money on teaching HFY? Heck, they don't have a large school, or atleast didn't, and he only does a few seminars. I think money is not their nor fame. He is not pushing his system, Benny is. I just don't see the motive here.

Personally, I think there is a connection between HFY and TWC. But I think Gee sifu is teaching honestly what he was taught. Though I don't think we have all the info on HFY. I think there is a connection between HFY, TWC, and possible illegal activities as mentioned by others which currently help to hide the truth. Maybe we will see more substantial info at a latter date.

Tom

[anerlich]

With that said, I spoke with Gee sifu for several hours. I can not say if what he told me is true or not. But he told me a couple interesting things. One of which is that he had absolutly no involvment with William Cheung. He did not train him and he was not trained by him. He said he only had one exposure to TWC and that was when someone visited his school once many years ago. Only a short visit nothing more. He said he has several TWC videos and that he sees major differences. I see major similarities but that is not what i am speaking to. If ANY one suggests that Gee sifu learned TWC through Video tapes, they are obviously mistaken. Gee has some real skills, that did not come from video. Some one some where trainied him.

Tom, this is interesting stuff. I'm glad to hear that GG has actually said something to someone about this issue. I think a TWC/HFY link has to be discounted. The notion that HFY is TWC with a false nose, moustache and glasses is ridiculous.

?
Maybe we will see more substantial info at a latter date.

It's possible. More likely that we will see more unsubstantiated assertions, biased and grandiose accounts and claims, and flame wars, from all parties involved :(

In what will probably be an unsuccessful attempt to stop this devolving into another lineage promoting/bashing thread like the one that Sandy closed recently, let me ask: what do other grappling cross-trainers see regarding the application of WC hands to grappling?

[anerlich]

but rather that HFY as it is now known comes from Cheung sifu giving private lessons in San Francisco during his seminar visits to the US over the last few decades.

Yeah, right, and the Illuminati are behind the war on Iraq.

If this were true, I can't see Sigung Cheung keeping quiet about his role in it. He's never been particularly reticent about his own abilities and accomplishments. Nor could I see him keeping Mum while GG & BM tout what he taught them as something independent. Better for Sigung Cheung that he get another two TWC instructors on board in the US.

And this would have done - why? Who gains from such a conspiracy? I'll start wearing a tinfoil beanie before I accept that "theory".

[tparkerkfo]

LOL, Great points Andrew. LOL. I just don't see the direct connection between the two myself either. It don't add up. Why would William train some one and either not claim him or not disown him? William is not known for his discretion! If there was a link, I think we would have heard about it one way or another. By the way, is William even aware of HFY or Garrett? Has any one actually asked him or heard him speak of the topic? Just a thought.

However, to be honest, I do see a lot in common between the styles. I have looked at several different styles of wing chun, YKS(from two sources), Pan Nam, various Yip Man, and Yik Kam. Most of these were indeed brief visits and others a little more indepth. I find that there are a lof of similarities. The SLT takes a similar structure in each one of these systems. The foundation is the same. With Pan Nam, I had to look a bit harder, but I saw it all there. But with HFY, it is almost exactly the same as William Cheungs SLT complete with the steping. Who else has stepping in SLT..... Who else has two SLT? The overall theme is fairly close...though Garrett Gee did go through the system and tell me exactly what the differences are. Most of it went right over my head as it seems to do for their own practioners in many cases.

Yes Garrett Gee discussed this at great length. I beleive what he says for the most part. I beleive that he learned from who he said he learned from. He was very open. I think there is much more that lies beneath the surface though and he is only telling part of the story. My beleif is William had some connection with a system that Gee's sifu taught. This is just my interpretations.

Also, just to put it out there, I have seen VERY LITTLE of TWC so it is hard for me to really judge the two. I have seen much more HFY than TWC.

Thanks for your perspectives.
Tom

[bglenn]

I see alot of people post that Hung fa yi and traditional wing chun of william cheung are very similar but without any details.Is it the forms,footwork,or the favoring the outside(blindside)line?

[yuanfen]

For the record, I beg out of that discussion Glenn. In the larger scheme of things IMO it doesnt matter.... and weill soon end up witha long irrelevant thread.
Anerlich was trying to get back to the original thread theme and see
how wc is relevant in mma.

[bglenn]

Yuan fen this is already a long irrellevant thread.Me asking the question is not going to take this thread any further off subject than it already is.The problem is that you cant even ask certain questions without starting arguments.

[planetwc]

Well at least one thing is forms.

Seeing Marty Goldberg demo one of the TWC SLT followed by Benny Meng doing HFY SLT on video looks very very similar.


Originally posted by bglenn
I see alot of people post that Hung fa yi and traditional wing chun of william cheung are very similar but without any details.Is it the forms,footwork,or the favoring the outside(blindside)line?

[tparkerkfo]

I agree this post is long and weildy.

My comments are that I am not very knowledgeable on TWC so any thing I say may be incorrect. But, what I saw was the choreography os SLT was very close. As I stated above, I have seen other lineages that were close in the overall structure, none were visualy close in choreography. The two main things were the steping in SLT. ONLY TWC and HFY has stepping. Only these two have 2 SLT.

There are other things that looks imilar to me. Both seem to favor the blind side...but more than that it is the flavor in which they do it is very close. If I went to the bliind side, it would be very different. I see a lot of similarities in the motions of the body and arms. I tend to call it large frame, but I am not sure if that is correct. I see some similarities in the foot work as well.

I was Marty and some one from the VTM do SLT in LA. It was very close. I was actually stunned because it was too close.

Just my thoughts.
Tom

[bougeac]

is the "superior" twc footwork the same footwork that william cheung used so successfully against emin boztepe in cologne in 1986, if so wow!!!, i definately need some of that....

[t_niehoff]

anerlich wrote:

But they learned the ultimate WC system! They shouldn't NEED to be fighters! AN

I hear from time to time folks using the distinction of technician vs. fighter ("he's a great technician, but just not a fighter"), and IMO that distinction just doesn't make sense. You can be a great fighter without knowing WCK, you can have bad WCK and be a good fighter (where you win for reasons other than WCK), but you can't have good WCK without being a good fighter (where would you ever hear such talk? He's a great technical bjj'er but always taps . . . he's a great technical boxer but always gets KO'ed . . .I'm a WCK master but just can't fight!). TN

When I hear folks say that they have the "ultimate" or "superior" system, I feel sorry for them -- not only have they swallowed the "marketing" (baah, baah -- it is the year of the sheep) but they don't even have a firm grasp on reality. Let's face it, if that were true they'd be ruling NHBs (at least then there would be some evidence to support a claim; as it stands there is none). The fact that they're not either suggests that their marketing is hype or that all of the "superior" system's practitioners must be either incompetant or untalented as they can't seem to make the "ultimate fighting art" work! TN

Terence

[Jim Roselando]

Hello Joy,


I understand your points and like I said at the end of the e-mail;

Even if all this stuff is incorrect we can still go with what is more likely rather than less likely.

I tend to think that most of the history stuff can be debated for ever but the true links would be in the technical/structural DNA (as Terence called it). That the real key to linking arts and TWC has very little technical/structural linkage to Leung Jan's core teaching. That doesnt mean its not an effective means of self defense but it just means its highly highly unlikely for it to be Leung Jan's teaching.


Take care!


Regards,

[yuanfen]

Hi Jim- good points.
joy

[t_niehoff]

Hi Jim,

Jim Roselando wrote: If Wong Wah Bo had 2 students (Leung Jan & Fok Bo Chuen), and both students had pupils, then all we need to do is take a look at how they preserve the teaching to find (cross check) similarities in forms/structure/movement/etc.. JR

IMO this depends on what you mean by "similarities in forms/structure/movement/etc.". I think we need to look at the totality of the picture while keeping in mind a few things -- like form and function -- to get a good idea. Certainly form "choreography" is a good way to tell relationships; for example, YM and lineages descending from him do huen sao to end each section of the empty-hand sets, whereas other non-YM (except Ng Chung So where Yip probably picked it up) lop to end each section. Terminology is another good way to track relationships. Training methodolgy another. Physical location another. Etc. The problem with using "structure", by which I assume you mean body-structure, is that this can be easily affected by individual morphology, the difference in 'form vs. application' (someone might teach a very tight pigeon-toed YJKYM but not fight like that; his student sees this and eschews the tight pigeon-toed YJKYM in favor of a more application-oriented horse), differences in power expression, and a whole host of things. The differences in body-structure among Yip Man's students is illustrative. I think a good practitioner of WCK, i.e., one that has personally actualized WCK, is not going to "look" like his sifu in his expression of WCK (just like a good boxer doesn't "look" like his boxing coach). TN

Terence

[Knifefighter]

LOL at all the people turning a question about which techniques have been used in MMA fights into a debate about lineages. No wonder so many WC guys can't fight.

[Ultimatewingchun]

desertwingchun2: " Insult your sigung, Benny Meng??? "

Not only did Benny Meng do everything I said he did...he also bounced a check $$$ to William Cheung for one of the seminars and never made good for it!

It's Benny Meng who has insulted my Sifu with phony maneuvers and lies...

If you want to continue this conversation let's do it off-line via the pm (private message) mode....where it belongs.

[reneritchie]

If you think about it, the argument about a smaller person needing more footwork only holds true for beginners. WCK, like most quality MA, manipulates balance and momentum. This is what is referred to as "using stillness to overcome movement", "resting an allowing the opponent to fatigue" and what lets it "achieve twice the results with half the effort", or, in essance, what let's the smaller, weaker, overcome the bigger, stronger foe.

When you realize how WCK manipulates balance and moment, the circles and spirals involved, it becomes clear that small, skilled WCK people can use smaller circles and spirals. Their danger is in the bridging, and more elaborate footwork only keeps them in this dangerous area. Their excellence is once closed, where the longer limbs, bigger circles, more muscular experession turns only on itself, and the economical expression of the small, skilled WCK movements takes advantage.

To see this, we only have to look at the older masters of WCK (or many other arts). Did they use complex movements and elaborate footwork patterns? Sounds like they didn't, that they needed very few, sometimes only one move (probably because they couldn't afford to risk taking longer).

Understanding this, when you hear stories about secret footwork or secret versions or what not (from any one, any branch) you can kind wink them away. The secret isn't the secret. It's the obvious, which makes it all the more elusive.

[Jim Roselando]

Hey there Terence,


Good thoughts!

I tend to think individual influence will have a great effect on the art we all practice but when you look back it is very easy to see the similarities of the art.

Terminology (like you said) is one great way to look at it. I know that in Leung Jan's Koo Lo teaching we do utilize some different terms for the skills practiced in other arts.

Body Structure! While individual morphology may have effected this to some degree (and in some arts it may not have been effected) we can look at the root teaching of different lineages and see the same starting point to develop from.

Choreography is so important as it can really link you to who what when etc.. The closing grasping hand is how Leung Jan taught it in Koo Lo so you can easily link the ones doing the huen to a different time/master/etc...

As for a good WC person not looking or expressing his WC like his sifu I tend to agree with half that statement as we are all individuals and will all fight in accordance to our body design. No two people are carbon copies but when you look back you will see that the old masters all had many similarities. Thats just my thoughts (could be right/could be wrong) but I also tend to think that your statement of the YMWC horse being a more "application oriented" horse is kind of unfair (especially since you would have to choose which YMWC horse as most are different) as its not the horse but the person using the horse. I have seen good and bad in all WC and if someone truly trained hard it would be the deciding factor.

Certainly the very compact nature of the training may not be exactly how you apply it in reality but the main importance (IMO) is how the power generates. The other thing that comes to mind is since WC is based on refinement, and (Small) minimal methods to get the job done rather than gross, we should assume its nature would be small in all aspects. A quote from Wang Xiang Zhai best sums it up IMO: Small movement is better than big movement! No movement is better than small movement! While not a WCK man his views indeed relate and if one has good "post" in their WCK (and know how to issue/recieve force) the size wont make such a great difference. Refinement is the goal.


Ok! Have to run but thanks for the chat.


Greetz,

[Jim Roselando]

Hey Rene!


Superb post!

It really hits the nail on the head (with the body that is) hehehe!


See ya,

[Phenix]

Originally posted by Jim Roselando
A quote from Wang Xiang Zhai best sums it up IMO: Small movement is better than big movement! No movement is better than small movement! While not a WCK man his views indeed relate and if one has good "post" in their WCK (and know how to issue/recieve force) the size wont make such a great difference. Refinement is the goal.


IMHO,
changing Foot work is often too slow at contact point. Thus, fighting with advance MA, the big circle of TaiJi... is never effective.

Refinement or variying body force vectors without move is the goal and not about having different moves...

In any case, Yee is weightless, independent of body size, and faster then speed of light...

The question remain on how to get there?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Picking up on Knifefighters post - we could debate forever about what happened 100 or 200 years ago - so let's look at what we know, what we have seen, and what works in the now-THIS LIFETIME- regarding techniques, strategies, footwork, etc.
For example, the only response I read to my post about the straight blast attacks is..." not really".... to this thing I said and ..."not really"... to that thing I said... We can't do better than this as a response? Let me add this as well: How often have you been hit with a boxers type hook punch while travelling straight up your centerline which is facing his body as you attempt the straight blast chain punches?...(those of you who actually do hard sparring against a hard and fast punch thrown at your head, that is)......BE HONEST!...HOW MANY TIMES?

[t_niehoff]

Rene, I agree with your post. On one point, however, I think there is a bit more . . .

reneritchie wrote: If you think about it, the argument about a smaller person needing more footwork only holds true for beginners. RR

I agree. And also, many of these statements reflect a certain type of thinking -- that there is one "best" way to *fight* every opponent. It ignores that what works against one (type) of opponent isn't necessarily even effective against another (type) opponent. For example, many people seem to think that smaller persons should seek the flank (get away from the larger person's "other hand"). As counter-intuitive as it is, actually it is the larger person that more effective flanks and the smaller person more effectively goes up the middle and gets close. This stragegy is universal in all striking arts. Taller boxers don't bob-and-weave, duck, and hook but flank and stay outside, jab and cross; it wouldn't be in their advantage to stay in the middle which would permit the smaller boxer to "get in" more easily. Smaller boxers realizing it is slower to flank (they need to move more) and that they can take away the larger man's leverage by getting in close, typically move in up the center. Look at Ali v. Fraazier. Staying outside, even flanking and hitting is a losing strategy for a smaller man. It isn't surprising then that someone like William Cheung, being very tall, would naturally develop the method of using the flank and his reach to beat (the more common for him) smaller fighters very well, and that someone like Hawkins Cheung would develop the method of using the center, getting in close, and in-fighting to beat larger fighters. TN

Terence

[AndrewS]

Hey Terence,

distinctions between technical expertise and fighting are made in other arts, and I do think the distinction is a legitimate one. If you want to go to Abu Dhabi, go train with the Machados- great *technical* grapplers. If you wanna do MMA, maybe Renzo Gracie is a better pick. A bad asthmatic or heavy smoker can have very good technical Wing Chun, but once you hear that wheeze, you know all you have to do is make them move a bit, start to gas them, and let the tachycardia and shortness of breath take away their motor skills (and a good fighter with this problem will try to prevent you from doing this).

I agree that a degree of fighting proficiency should accompany technical skill, but would argue that there's more grey area than your stance suggests.

Later,

Andrew

P.S. Rene is, of course, correct.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I've just been informed by my Kung Fu brother Phil Redmond that eventually Leung Jan did go back to his village and taught other students in addition to his sons...and Phil tells me that eventually Benny Meng made good on the bounced check...I stand corrected on these two points.....but I stand by everything else I've posted!

[t_niehoff]

Hey Andrew,

Those "technicians" you cite can still use it well and fight/roll with it effectively (I don't think then Machado's are push-overs by any stretch of the imagination), so I would still consider them fighters (persons that can really use it against real resistance.) My distinction had more to do with those in WCK who can't make it work effectively -- regardless of their claims -- in fighting or against real resistance but nevertheless are sometimes considered "technicians" ("they have knowledge") by their supporters. IMO, a "WCK technician" is simply someone who can tell you how to not make it work. TN

Terence

[yuanfen]

Ultimatewingchun sez:
For example, the only response I read to my post about the straight blast attacks is..." not really".... to this thing I said and ..."not really"... to that thing I said... We can't do better than this as a response? Let me add this as well: How often have you been hit with a boxers type hook punch while travelling straight up your centerline which is facing his body as you attempt the straight blast chain punches?...(

((Sigh. Victor you seem to be fixed in your perception that wing chun folks just do straight blast chain punches.You must be seeing some WT folks in your imaging. Again- not so. Lots of folks do linked punching for development purposes but do NOT march in with chain punches. Wing chun folks who know whata hook is shouldnt get hiy by one. I dont))joy

Tnsez:
Taller boxers don't bob-and-weave, duck, and hook but flank and stay outside, jab and cross; it wouldn't be in their advantage to stay in the middle which would permit the smaller boxer to "get in" more easily. Smaller boxers realizing it is slower to flank (they need to move more) and that they can take away the larger man's leverage by getting in close, typically move in up the center

((Ruiz didnt flank enough and got clobbered by Jones. Jones didnt always have to be inside- good footwork can take you from inside and outside and the reverse as in the case of Jones... shorter in height and reach and lower by 30 pounds in weight-the key is timing)) joy

Anrew S sez:
wanna do MMA, maybe Renzo Gracie is a better pick. A bad asthmatic or heavy smoker can have very good technical Wing Chun, but once you hear that wheeze, you know all you have to do is make them move a bit, start to gas them, and let the tachycardia and shortness of breath take away their motor skills (and a good fighter with this problem will try to prevent you from doing this).

I agree that a degree of fighting proficiency should accompany technical skill, but would argue that there's more grey area than your stance suggests.

((Agree for the most part but also depends on context and individual ability. Some smokers can conserve their motions and energy and not be dragged on and then lower the boom.
The guy who bombed Vernon Forrest out of his championship belt violates most training rules including re smoking.(Unfortunately) lots of sifus(not mine) have been excessive smokers but (fortunately) know when to move and when not to- when the chips are down in a non sporting event. Of course a smoker who tries to dance around is a different matter. But "grey"(above) is good.))joy

[kj]

Rene very well put.

Andrew S., you are correct.


Originally posted by Phenix
The question remain on how to get there?

SNT. With or without the wires.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[Jim Roselando]

Hello Victor!


I had my clock cleaned not once but twice by a good hook! Knocked the crap out of me. *&^%^*&%$&% :-) It had nothing to do with running up the middle with Chain punching combo's as Chain punching is not meant to be something that you just throw wihout reason. Like anything. Those who do that deserve to get hit. Normally we dont just travel up the middle like you described. Normally (even tho the art is called Pin Sun) we dont just go to the side. Its all about what is offered to us. Attacking the weak areas! When it came to the hook I found that the big problem I was having was timing & distance!!! It has nothing to do with being in the center or being on the side. If you can shut the hook down at its source rather than at its point of power extension that is the the best way I find the safety of dealing with a hook. Plus! Once the hook is neutralized you must bring on the pressure to break the balance and finish the job if it wasnt finished already. If the timing is different you can also use other methods but its all situational.


Regards,

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yuanfen: So you don't march in straight up the centerline with chain punches when you attack ...OK...so then exactly how do you come in to attack your opponent?

[AndrewS]

Hey Terence,

I catch your distinction. I make that distinction more in terms of, for instance, boxers, who may be considered technical boxers, or brawlers.

Rocky Marciano was *not* a technical fighter, but he was a fighter par excellance. Watching Gene Tunney or Joe Lewis is like watching a boxing manual come to life. I don't think there's ever been a more 'technically correct' fighter than Lewis. In the fantasy ring, who would have won- Lewis or the Rock?

Basically, this is linguistic. I think we'd both agree that if you can't apply you suck.

That being said- to me a fighter has certain qualities beyond the technical- a good jaw (implying the whole body), heart (in the face of adversity), and hate (the visciousness to finish the job once started).

BTW- I *completely* agree with your analysis of size differential in fighting. As a big guy, I wind up slightly surprised when I'm working with someone bigger and wind up inside, feeling like I've become one of my smaller seniors when they're throwing me around.

Joy,

personally, I think that if you're not getting hit by hooks regularly, you need to train against someone who throws them better.

Victor,

off-line footwork and a nice jab on the close tends to be more problematic than hooking, unless it's a hook off the jab. IME.

Later,

Andrew

[Ultimatewingchun]

JIM ROSELANDO: and if you can't shut down the hook at it's source ..let's say he begins the punch by stepping in from 2 to 3 feet away and it's almost there...what do you do then?

[Phenix]

Originally posted by kj
Rene very well put.

Andrew S., you are correct.



SNT. With or without the wires.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

You mean wireless with Bluetooth? :D

[yuanfen]

2-3 feet for a hooker? The dangerous hooks are closer.
But if you have the right wing chun coordinated hand formation
and (for me) "modified'(g) non TWC footwork you can intercept and hit at the same time. There are many auto- options in hand formations and combinations.

[Jim Roselando]

Hi Victor!


Good thought!

My thoughts are this. The big telegraphed haymaker hook from way out west is much easier to deal with than a solid in close boxing hook. There are ways to shut it down or deal with it. If the scenerio is; that I am late on timing or have been caught off guard (or maybe he is just faster than me) I can Ping or Hok Bong (and of course strike with the opposite hand) it and then go from there. Another point would be! It also depends on where my hands are located at that time! What if they were by my sides? What if one was holding my girlfriends hand and the other is free? What if they were in the ideal Mun/Wu posture? What if when I counter he covers with his rear hand? What if my counter is then followed up with anoter punch from him? (I gues my counter wouldnt have been to good then but its possible as nobody is perfect) I think once skillful any position can be ideal but it all about the training. As long as I dont Tan the hook I will be in better shape than if I did. Thanks for the chat.


Regards,

[reneritchie]

Victor,

Any straw-man will inevitably rot away. Charging the center with straight punches is something every WCK person should know how to do (because it can be a very easy way to dispatch a very unskilled opponent) but not something any WCK person should ever depend on (because it will get you killed by a skilled opponent).

To illustrate, it would be just as useless to ask you how often you've been tossed into a wall by someone sensitive when you tried to step around them.

One of my sidai's trained boxing with the Hiltons. He was also a power lifter, so I got used to hooks. There's a methodology involved in them, like in anything, and if its rigid and technique reliant (e.g. you have to step, you can't step, etc.) it *will* fail, it's just a question of when. Same as stepping against someone with good root and sensitivity (and, to mirror AndrewS, if you don't get tossed into a wall when you try to step around, you need to find more skilled practice partners to train against).

Momentum and root are very important concepts. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion, so IMHO, much of WCK deals with not giving any momentum away. We do this by always being minimalist. We don't step unless we *have* to. Don't even pick up our feet unless the opponent's attack is such that we *have* to. And if we do, we do the least possible to return to superior position (and, if skilled, you can flank as effectively by 2 degrees as you can by 90 degrees, even if taking the back is oh so sweet ;)

The important thing, IMHO, is not to limit ourselves by saying you can never step or have to step, or never do this or that. Nature exists through diversity. Its one of the most important principles. If you're method isn't diverse, the potential always exists for you to face conditions that will lead to your extinction. This is true if you just rush in and chain punch, or if you just flank and chase the arms.

If we think about it, those are just two manifestations anyway (well suited for beginners, a drop in the bucket as time goes on), and its not the manifestations that are important, its the concept - are we joining with the opponent, cutting off their offense, destroying their defense, delivering our counters, and sticking to receive feedback? If so, and we have the robustness of our art, instinctualized in our reflex, we'll probably have more success than the alternative.

(BTW- Since I'm not that good, I personally do prefer to flank, since its safer. If circumstances prevent (surprise, a skilled opponent, etc.) I can deal on the inside as well)

[reneritchie]

Jim - excellent points! You're making the kind of sense that does!

Terence & AndrewS - Fighting is part nature, part nurture. Some people are hell on wheels from their first kindergarten push-fest, and some can't really fight after decades in MA. This harkens back to Terence's piano analogy about his missus. WCK can't make someone good, it can only make them better. But that doesn't mean a bad to so-so fighter can't know WCK, its movements, its concepts, its ideas. They could know all of that intimately, and still have a glass jaw, or p!ss poor timing, or an adrenal system that puts them into flight every time, or an extreme moral aversion to inflicting pain on other human beings, or any number of other things. I've met a number of WCK people, some of whom have been great fighters, some of whom have been great intellects, a few who have been both or neither. I would learn from whomever could make me better, and fortunately have the ability now to discriminate. And I would probably spend time with both types, try to mesh the actions of some with the ideas of others.

[Ultimatewingchun]

ANDREW... I have spent countless hours over the course of many years working against the jab/hook combination thrown by one of my students who was taught boxing by a cousin who fought in the Golden gloves....dealing with this from the parallel position (ie. - if he has a left foot lead you have a right foot lead with your right foot always trying to stay just slightly to the outside of his lead leg) provides the best way to deal with the situation ...although it is definitely possible to fight the boxer from the cross leg position...but I'm getting ahead of myself...from the parallel position you are contantly looking at the lead elbow and either attack into the line he is jabbing on with a right hand strike of your own or perhaps jamming up his lead before he gets to throw the jab with a very aggressive bong sao/wu sao and of course immediately releasing the bong into a larp sao type move without really grabbing with your left hand as this will slow you down--this begins to turn the jamming move into a bit of a trapping pin--and needless to say at any time during this maneuver you might just start punching available targets as they open up...but always watching that elbow ( or "feeling" his lead arm leave your arm as he begins trying to hook around your bong) ...you then immediately find the elbow that's now throwing the hook off the jab and jam that elbow while simultaneously punching his face with your left fist as you move slightly toward your right ....AND HAVE YOUR CENTERLINE FACE THE POINT OF CONTACT ON HIS ELBOW YOU'RE NOW JAMMIMG WITH YOUR RIGHT HAND IN A KIND OF BIL/LARP POSTION.

[kj]

Rene's on a majorly good roll today.
- kj

[AndrewS]

Hey Victor,

TWC and WT agreeing- weird. While I'll disagree with your handwork (I strike first, jam when intercepting), I definitely have found that there are advantages to a mirror lead (R to L or L to R). A question- on that bil/biu position- are you winding up on the inside with that?

More realistically, I train with my back to my partner with them grabbing me to clock me sometimes. In that case, I've got to use whatever's there.

Later,

Andrew

[reneritchie]

Cheque's in the mail, KJ!

[Phil Redmond]

Cheung Sifu has heard about the HFY/TWC story. He personally told me he never met Garret Gee.
Phil

[Phil Redmond]

It is the same footwork that Keith Mazza used to smash Andrew Draheim in NYC and the same footwork I have used myself during mugging attempts in Detroit. Also it's the same footwork I used as a bouncer in nightclubs.

[Phil Redmond]

Has Hawkins Cheung ever been in a real fight?

[zultan]

was the "smash andrew draheim" comment really neccesary?

[AndrewS]

Phil,

I know Draheim. I've heard accounts of that event from a visitor affiliated with neither party. I've read the highly embarrasing spins both sides have posted. No-one got smashed; nothing definitive happened. Why don't we leave this at that, and avoid re-enacting another farce in the name of Wing Chun factionalism.

Andrew

[Phil Redmond]

Victor Parlati and his students witnessed what happend when Draheim refused to get up off the floor and fight. But I shouldn't have let someone's remark make me go there. I usually don't let things like like what was said affect me.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Phil,

Thanks for that. I figured William was probably ignorant of the whole HFY thing. But good to hear that he has heard about. PS...just to prevent any negative canotations...I don't mean anything bad about ignorant, just that I thought he wasn't aware of it. Some people can get touchy...LOL.

Thanks
Tom

[zultan]

its funny how both sides claim victory in this silly event. its old and boring and it has nothing to do with the students who just enjoy the art

[yuanfen]

Answer to ultimatewingchun:

Each fight is unique-no set posture- no set entry technique.

[t_niehoff]

Phil Redmond asked me:

Has Hawkins Cheung ever been in a real fight? PR

Phil, if you want to discuss my observations about fighting, particularly how the effectiveness of our strategy depends on the opponent, I'm more than welcome to but I don't want to get into discussions about which WCK sifu has the larger manhood. :( If you're interested in Hawkins' qualifications (i.e., skill and knowledge), I suggest you visit him yourself. But FWIW, I've never asked. I do know that he took up karate when he was younger (and earned a 5th degree bb) so that he could practice "sparring" against them and not fight in the street (and face the legal consequences). TN

Terence

[KenWingJitsu]

LOL at all the people turning a question about which techniques have been used in MMA fights into a debate about lineages. No wonder so many WC guys can't fight.
lol oh...so true.

personally, I think that if you're not getting hit by hooks regularly, you need to train against someone who throws them better.
Exactly! Who is this Andrew fellow and why is he making sense? lol.

[tparkerkfo]

And I suggest that if your getting hit by hooks regularly that you learn how to defend/offend against them.

Tom

[AndrewS]

Tom,

perfect is the enemy of good *and* better. Sometime maybe I can throw a few hooks at you and you can see how I help my partners learn.

Andrew

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Andrew,

Just saying if your getting hit a lot with somthing then whatever it is your doing is not working. Time to do somthing else. You should be learning and adapting to the situation. There is no "perfect" technique as we all know. I admit the Hook is a good one.

I am planing on being at the April get together, and maybe the March one as well. If you show up, you can clock me. LOL. Just don't make it personal.

Tom

[Gandolf269]

AndrewS: "In the fantasy ring, who would have won- Lewis or the Rock?"

It's not fantasy. Joe Lewis and Rocky Marciano fought in 1951 and Marciano KO'd Lewis in the 8th. But, Joe Lewis was way past his prime.

[AndrewS]

Tom,

what's a lot? Hooks deserve respect and attention; more than many people give them.


Gandolf-

d*mn, I have a couple of round of that on tape, and I forgot all about it. That was a miserable match. Lewis was near 20 years past his prime.

Later,

Andrew

[yuanfen]

Andrew S.sez:
Rocky Marciano was *not* a technical fighter, but he was a fighter par excellance. Watching Gene Tunney or Joe Lewis is like watching a boxing manual come to life. I don't think there's ever been a more 'technically correct' fighter than Lewis. In the fantasy ring, who would have won- Lewis or the Rock?
-------------------------------------------------------------
As "G" points out... Joe Louis's skills had already faded
when Marcio and Louis fought. Louis legs were gone and he was practically waiting at the ropes for a powerful right by Marciano.

I am not sure about the technical non technical distinction- one has to have elements of both. Marciano became pretty technical
under Charlie Goldstein's (Sp?) training regimen. Marciano really didnt have amateur experience- but a good trainer brings out the best in someone... and CG worked with Marciano's strengths.
He hada sense of body leverage with either hand making his punches huge despite his 185 pound small heavtweught level. he wouldnt have hada chance against Ali, Holmes and Lennox Lewis.
Holmesonce said that Marciano coulnt carry his jock straps even.Louis actually had some technical flaws -thats why he got knocked out by Schmelling in their first fight. After a jab his left hand dropped too much on the way back. Stay with what comes.....
Schmeling followed his withdrawing jab witha powerful right...
Louis adjusted in the second fight and knocked Scmelling out. Actually
Tunney wasa more complete tecjmical fighter than eithet Marciano or Lewis... he worked and worked on his jab and footwork for the Dempsey fights- saved him.. and he won---, more mobile and evasive than Dempsey.
Actually Lennox Lewis is a very good technical and thinling fighter-
but is given to some attention lapses as in the first Rahman fight.
Boxing involves less long run skill development so weight, power and speed are important variables. Marciano, Louis and Tunney wouldnt make it today- too small. Todays biggies are big and sufficiently skilled.BTW sadly- Louis wrestled a bit after hanging up his gloves- needed the money for Uncle Sam... didnt go far.
Tyson already is too small and immobile for the biggies these days--quite apart from other problems.

Merryprankster and I have a disagreement usually on boxing and some other things. By the time you really get good in boxing you begin to fade and in some grappling you head for knee surgery.
"Self Defence" is a complicated affair.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Andrew,


Originally posted by AndrewS
Tom,

what's a lot? Hooks deserve respect and attention; more than many people give them.

Andrew

Sorry if I misrepresented myself. I agree 100% Hooks are great weapons and can be a boxer/fighters worst enemy. If I remember right, the a south paw left hook is considered one of themore dangerous weapons. Many Wing Chun people have a hard time with them. As I wrote, you will probably clock me with one, but I don't work at them. I was just suggesting that if you do work at them and you ARE getting clobbered with them, then your doing something wrong.

My defense against them... I think your best chance against them is not to try to stop them as they are being delievered as many people seem to teach. I see people face towards them and biu sau or somthing. I don't like that approach since it requires breaking many wing chun principles....and since we are talking wing chun, we shouldn't break the principles. Different argument if your talking modified or mixed martial arts or something else. My prefered defense is premptive. Once the hook is fired, your screwed for the most part and are reacting, which is one step behind. I think it is better to stick to the oponent and attack the center and body structure. If you can do so affectivly and apply constant pressure, you should be able to stop the attack from starting as they will need to protect the center. Of course this is overly simplistic and easier said than done. I have seen it work and I beleive it to be as good as any other strategy I have seen. LOL

Tom

[anerlich]

AndrewS: "In the fantasy ring, who would have won- Lewis or the Rock?"

Jeez, and I thought he was talking about Lennox Lewis and the Scorpion King:D

Knifefighter is correct. It is laughable that this descended into a lineage thread, and that Cheung, Mazza, Boztepe and Draheim all got mentioned.

[t_niehoff]

anerlich wrote:

Knifefighter is correct. It is laughable that this descended into a lineage thread, and that Cheung, Mazza, Boztepe and Draheim all got mentioned. AN

I often wonder why *anyone* would bring up the Mazza-Draheim affair; what does it matter what happened? Two individuals having a scrap doesn't say anthing about which "lineage" is superior, only -- at best -- which person is a better fighter (bad WCK can be effective, only for reasons other than WCK). TN

On the other hand, The Chueng-Boztepe affair was IMO a positive watershed moment for WCK practitioners (at least for the few who are interested in being able to actually develop fighting skills) . . . sort of like when you get thrown around by someone in chi sao or taken apart while fighting, you can be either be thankful for the lesson and learn from it or ignore it (we can always find all kinds of excuses). TN

Terence

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I often wonder why *anyone* would bring up the Mazza-Draheim affair; what does it matter what happened? Two individuals having a scrap doesn't say anthing about which "lineage" is superior, only -- at best -- which person is a better fighter (bad WCK can be effective, only for reasons other than WCK). TN

On the other hand, The Chueng-Boztepe affair was IMO a positive watershed moment for WCK practitioners (at least for the few who are interested in being able to actually develop fighting skills) . . . sort of like when you get thrown around by someone in chi sao or taken apart while fighting, you can be either be thankful for the lesson and learn from it or ignore it (we can always find all kinds of excuses). TN

Terence

Why do you believe one merely a function of two persons, but the other a "watershed event"? In both cases it involved individuals and unique circumstances, regardless of who the individuals are. So far I'm failing to follow the distinction. To clarify, I'm interested only in the reasoning, and not at all interested in any politics or inferences about one person or group versus another. (That kind of thing sucks eggs, to put it nicely.)

Regards & TIA,
- Kathy Jo

[yuanfen]

TN sez:The Chueng-Boztepe affair was IMO a positive watershed moment for WCK practitioners (at least for the few who are interested in being able to actually develop fighting skills
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
??????A disgraceful affair IMO-FWIW with no redeeming quality.
Ditto for the NYC affair as well....years later.

[t_niehoff]

yuanfen writes:

A disgraceful affair IMO-FWIW with no redeeming quality. JC

Certainly, Joy, it was a disgraceful affair, especially to both Cheung and Boztepe, as there was no *quality* in terms of either person demonstrating any real WCK skills. Of course everyone else thinks that "their sifu" would have made such a better showing . . . . For me, the redeeming value of that farce, and what makes it a "watershed moment", is in the recognition of how the wool was, and still is, being pulled over our eyes by so many "masters" that can't really do what they teach. It was IMO a great wake-up call. Unfortunately, many have hit the snooze button. TN

and

kj writes:

Why do you believe one merely a function of two persons, but the other a "watershed event"? In both cases it involved individuals and unique circumstances, regardless of who the individuals are. So far I'm failing to follow the distinction. To clarify, I'm interested only in the reasonin . . . . kj

Perhaps if you read my reply to Joy, you'll see the distinction. It's one thing if you can't read, and quite another if your reading teacher can't. TN

Terence

[kj]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
kj writes:

Why do you believe one merely a function of two persons, but the other a "watershed event"? In both cases it involved individuals and unique circumstances, regardless of who the individuals are. So far I'm failing to follow the distinction. To clarify, I'm interested only in the reasonin . . . . kj

Perhaps if you read my reply to Joy, you'll see the distinction. It's one thing if you can't read, and quite another if your reading teacher can't. TN


Thanks for the clarification; I follow the reasoning now.

Regards,
- kj

[byond1]

imo, as i mentioned....any system....that suggests that they are the best.....would need to have a 100% victory rate....against all opponents/systems....all the time....for ever!!!
any fighter that suggests that they are the best...would need to have a 100% victory rate in combat...against all opponents....all the time....for ever...no matter waht....no excuse......
and if not......the rest is hot air

the closest any "lineage "came to perfection in combat would probably be the gracies, imo.

any one with eyes to see and ears to hear....

propaganda is so silly....

as i mentioned...and as rene and jim specified(which i avoided doing since im not a represenitive of either lineage)....its easy to see what exactly leung jans wc was......anything else is a day dream........and when we put cho family next to 2 differant wong wah bo lineages...we see the same core characteristics ....and than, if we look at yip mans early teachings....like gwok fu, lun gai and leung sheung.....we see many of same basic core structures and motions...albeit streem lined/modernized...and all using the same small framed ygkym......

i agree with T that we have several sources to draw comparisons from.., when comparing wing chun lineages.....and should draw from all, for our comparison....this will give us the most multi dimensional view....but must be carefull of the " human contamination factor".. which is easy to see as jim r. points out.

thanks for all the conversation.....ive enjoyed talking with basicaly everyone here at one point or another...
i feel that..."things will never change" ...people believe what they want even in the face of the "truth"(lol..historical proof)..... and someone mentioned to me last week...that the internet is an illusion....after thinking about it....i agree and i noticed, it does not do me good...physicaly, emotionaly or spiritualy.......and seeing that propaganda from the 80's is still alive and flurishing....i no longer wish to partisipate .....as well, someone took it upon themselves, to post my words that i posted on kfo, on another forum which i refuse to post on!....i dont appreciate that at all, if i had wanted to partisipate on that forum , i would have.....so.....i. have decided to not post anymore...perhaps i will again one day...but will continue private discusions....feel free to email me at
byondthis2@hotmail------my yahoo account no longer works!!!they are real over logged i believe
thanks rene for for your book yks wck and jim r....thank you for helping me find my path
brian scanlon

[t_niehoff]

byond1 wrote before he vanished:

as i mentioned...and as rene and jim specified(which i avoided doing since im not a represenitive of either lineage)....its easy to see what exactly leung jans wc was......anything else is a day dream........and when we put cho family next to 2 differant wong wah bo lineages...we see the same core characteristics ....and than, if we look at yip mans early teachings....like gwok fu, lun gai and leung sheung.....we see many of same basic core structures and motions...albeit streem lined/modernized...and all using the same small framed ygkym......B1

I think we need to be careful when we say "Leung Jan's WCK". None of us have seen Leung Jan fight (i.e., apply his skills, which is when WCK comes alive); all we have are how certain things were taught. Thus when you say "all using the same small framed yjkym", they may have all taught way (form), but that doesn't mean that is how it was applied. YJKYM, like tan sao or anything else, does not have one correct "look" but that the "look" depends on how one is using it in the moment or what one wants to emphasize when teaching. Personally, I appreciate differences in teaching emphasis -- it gives me a broader perspective. As long as we see WCK as WCK -- if we didn't have the same core, we wouldn't be practicing the same art -- and differences in lineage as differences in emphasis/teaching then we won't get caught in the "superior" trap. TN

. . . . but must be carefull of the " human contamination factor".. which is easy to see as jim r. points out. B1

IMO there is no such thing as a "human contamination error" -- that implies that there is a "right way" or "certain look" and any deviation is "error." WCK is a principle-based MA; if you accept that as true, you'll realize that there many ways to express and/or teach the principle. TN

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

To Andrew: Striking first with your lead hand into the line he might try to jab on (in the parallel position) IS the best way...You do finish up on the INSIDE with the final bil/larp move (the right hand in the example I gave) ..on the elbow of his left arm that was trying to hook punch you while punching back with your left hand...

tparkerkfo: You can't always be pre-emptive against a hook punch. What if someone throws it at you in some sneak attack on the street???

Yuanfen: Rocky Marciano not up to the likes of Larry Holmes or Lennox Lewis because he was only 5'11" and 188 lbs???!!!
I can recall an interview with Muhammed Ali and when asked about a fight with Marciano he really hemmed and hawed and sighed and hesitated before finally giving the standarde Ali line about how he could beat anybody including Marciano....But if they ever fought in an alley....my guess is Marciano would have gone home afterwards for a nice plate of pasta and red wine while Ali would have gone to the nearest emergency room of the nearest hospital....not to put down Ali..his speed, footwork, and combinations were awesome...but in terms of REAL FIGHTING...no rules...no gloves, etc...Marciano's style, unpredictabilty, in-fighting tactics and punching power was deadly!

To Zultan, AndrewS, and the rest of you concerning Draheim vs. Mazza and William Cheung vs. Boztepe:

Draheim actually had me arrested for assault on this matter and I went to court 5 times (he always refused to appear) before the charges were finally dropped by the D.A. - so needless to say I WAS THERE - Draheim was punched in the face and in the body , thrown to the floor and then refused to get up vs. Keith (but Draheim landed NOTHING on Keith)...so you tell me who won?

After surrounding William Cheung with about 7 of his friends (thereby forcing William to try to monitor 8 people with his eyes) Boztepe bullrushed Cheung, managed to take him to the floor and then tried frantically to pin Cheung's shoulders down with his knees while trying to throw punches ..none of which landed..before William Cheung pushed off and regained his feet...at which point Boztepe did not choose to continue but simply left...It's all on video....A Watershed event??? Give me a break!.....This "FIGHT" proved nothing!

[yuanfen]

ultimatewingchun sez-


Yuanfen: Rocky Marciano not up to the likes of Larry Holmes or Lennox Lewis because he was only 5'11" and 188 lbs???!!!

((Those (weight, height and other differences) are relevant
in boxing. Marciano was the best in his era but things change. You are entitled to your opinion. Of course we will never know))


To Zultan, AndrewS, and the rest of you concerning Draheim vs. Mazza and William Cheung vs. Boztepe:

((Best to forget both events.))

so you tell me who won?

(who cares??))

A Watershed event??? Give me a break!..

((As I have mentioned- not in my books))

...This "FIGHT" proved nothing!

(It proved some things- that wing chun folks can do some foolish things))

[AndrewS]

Victor,

yeah, I sometimes wind up in the same place when it comes to the hook off the jab, and see its advantages. I somehow think that our footwork might be a bit different, though.

When it comes to both the altercation with Draheim and sifu Emin's work on William Cheung, I think it's fairly obvious who I believe when it comes to the latter, and I think both of you are blowing smoke when it comes to the former.

I don't believe either your claims of outright victory or Draheim's 'I faced down nine armed men' pr.

Reading between the lines of both of your accounts, and hearing from a young lady who was there visiting the class (a friend of a friend, granted), y'all walked in. Draheim and Mazza clashed (isn't there a photo of this floating around, btw?), nothing definitive occured, Draheim lost his footing and separation happened, then no-one was willing to try to pass Draheim's guard (er, not really surprising, as that's something I really wouldn't want to do either). After that, you left.

You can spin this however you care to, posture all you like, it doesn't change the facts. After all, if Draheim slipping makes him a complete b*tch, and Mazza couldn't even pull side control or mount to capitalize on such a f*ckup, what does that say about things in Cologne?

Why don't we leave this whole thing be, maybe?

Andrew

[reneritchie]

You can spin this however you care to, posture all you like, it doesn't change the facts. After all, if Draheim slipping makes him a complete b*tch, and Mazza couldn't even pull side control or mount to capitalize on such a f*ckup, what does that say about things in Cologne?

Didn't even try the Mongolian Chop or cartwheel. D@am. Sakuraba would have cleaned up in either venue ;)

[anerlich]

Rene is correct. Sakuraba rocks! He'd tear all four of these "world's most dangerous fighters" to shreds.

LOL at Cheung/Boztepe and Mazza/Draheim getting brought up again. Look at yourselves and hang your heads in shame.

[anerlich]

Sandman,

please close this stupid thread.