what's are the technical differences between WC styles?

[omarthefish]

Could somebody please fill me in on some of the techichal differences between the various factions within the WC community. I have trained with people from the Cheung lineage and with some of Chris Chan's students (just playing mostly) and I notice a few things in how they feel but am pretty ignorant of just exactly how they are different.

I'm all ears...

[Grabula]

I think the differences are small, but like waves those small differences can make a big impact.

The key sometimes is how is steering the ship, not what kind of ship it is.

[yuanfen]

Omar is fishing in trolling waters.:-

[Grendel]

Originally posted by omarthefish
Could somebody please fill me in
Are you related to Omar the Tentmaker?

[omarthefish]

Look, I'm not a newbie in Wing Chun looking to research it on the web. I've had plenty of first hand exposure and nearly a decade of southern Shaolin. I know the terminology except I'm not to clear on what's meant by the "central" line. Maybe if I could just tell you guys the differences I've noticed between schools.

School A:

Definate pigeon toed stance.
Very aggressive
Very pronounced inward tuck on the fuk sau.
Training focuses more on numerous repitions of Siu Lum Tao done at slow speed with continual tension in the forearms.
Many of the most powerull punchers I've ever met come from this school.
Tremendous emphasis on dynamic tension traaining and basic exercises for developing 'gong-fu' in the movements.

School B:
More natural stance.
Very conservative
more relaved fuk sau
Traing focuses on numerous repitions of simple applications taken out of the various forms.
Stronger emphasis on taking the blind side and pivoting back away from attacks.
More emphasis on footwork and roll punches.

Do any of these ring bells as being particularly distinctive of different 'styles' of Wing Chun? Any other notable differences specifically related to which 'style' of Wing Chun?

[yuanfen]

[
Omar- many folks including me do not fit into either one of
those two pigeonholes.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by yuanfen
[
Omar- many folks including me do not fit into either one of
those two pigeonholes.
It's all Wing Chun! ---NOT! :D

BTW, IMO there is no place for dynamic tension in my Wing Chun. That's a pretty dubious, yet funny approach. :p

[omarthefish]

What pigeon holes? I'm relating my experiences playing with students literally from two different schools. I have no idea who's trainng what 'style' of WC.

Are you guys telling me that really there's no differences at all? The tempest in a teapot I always see brewing on WC related threads is purely personal? Surely the 'original' or 'classical' schools have some kind of specifics that set them apart from the 'modified' or 'simplified' schools. No? Perhaps it's just spelling differences like 'Wing Chun/Ving Tsun/Yong Chun (actually technically the most accurate way to spell it in standard Chinese)

Forgive my sarchasm but it's just too weird to me that with all the constant arguing about styles, nobody can step forward and try to explain what side is saying what. I'm not even asking opinions on which is 'better', just what's the difference?

[KingMonkey]

Omar I recognize a number of elements from school A as being Leung Ting Wing Tsun and B as being a different flavour of WC or Cheungs 'Traditional' Wing Chun.

[yuanfen]

Reply to Omarthe fish:

What pigeon holes?

((See your own post. You used a two fold classification... classifications sometimes are called pigeonholes)) )

Forgive my sarchasm

(You are forgiven))

I'm not even asking opinions on which is 'better', just what's the difference?

((Omar- best to visit all the lineage sites listed in the Planet Wing Chun Website. Make some preliminary judgements for your self -
then ask (politely) someone from that lineage on the list or elsewhere for reasonably brief clarifications. ..if you are serious about your inquiry.The way you have asked the question it would take a lengthy answer perhaps even a book- then it may have to be thrown away because of its limitations))

[TjD]

Originally posted by omarthefish
Look, I'm not a newbie in Wing Chun looking to research it on the web. I've had plenty of first hand exposure and nearly a decade of southern Shaolin. I know the terminology except I'm not to clear on what's meant by the "central" line. Maybe if I could just tell you guys the differences I've noticed between schools.

School A:

Definate pigeon toed stance.
Very aggressive
Very pronounced inward tuck on the fuk sau.
Training focuses more on numerous repitions of Siu Lum Tao done at slow speed with continual tension in the forearms.
Many of the most powerull punchers I've ever met come from this school.
Tremendous emphasis on dynamic tension traaining and basic exercises for developing 'gong-fu' in the movements.

School B:
More natural stance.
Very conservative
more relaved fuk sau
Traing focuses on numerous repitions of simple applications taken out of the various forms.
Stronger emphasis on taking the blind side and pivoting back away from attacks.
More emphasis on footwork and roll punches.

Do any of these ring bells as being particularly distinctive of different 'styles' of Wing Chun? Any other notable differences specifically related to which 'style' of Wing Chun?


i'll help you out a little bit and describe how the school i attend works (or at least how i see it :D ) in the matter you did above.

but first, i dont understand what you mean by "very conservative" above - that can be taken many different ways. what did you mean by this?

on to my school-

School 'Mine':
pidgeon-toed SLT (pidgeon-toedness is not unnatural! once you get used to it its very natural - especially in application/chi sau/chi gerk)
100/0 weighting focused on at the beginning
no dynamic tension <- very bad!
relaxed fook sau, relaxated everything!
very large emphasis on finding correct structure through very slow repeated dan chi sau (on all levels)
high emphasis on letting you figure things out for yourself

for beginners (around SLT knowledge), 2-man drills are emphasized: bong sau/lap sau, pak da, dan chi sau

for moderates (chum kiu or so), emphasis is placed on chi sau and applying applications taken out of the forms

for older students (biu jee or so), emphasis is on chi sau, chi gerk and sparring type drills

the big emphasis on chi sau is part of the letting people figure wing chun out for themselves (with guidance of course :D ). how a 200 lb man and a 100 lb woman apply the WC footwork can be totally different and some motions work better for some people than others. your body, size, structure and your knowledge of the system is the real determining factor if you prefer the blind side and shifting out of the way more than a structural "charge" down the center.

[omarthefish]

Thanks for your answers. Especially the last couple.

Funny thing about the dynamic tension...the guys who were into that style of training were some of the hardest hitters of anyone I've ever met, serious fighters. Chi sau could still be very loose I'm thinking of how they like to do Siu Lum Tao.

By conservative, I mean in the mix of your tactics leaning always towards safety and defense as opposed to agrressive offence being the largest part of your defense. Things like pivoting back away from attacks, I view as conservative as opposed to stepping forward and to the side or coming on on the inside. The strong preference for the 'side door' as opposed to going in the 'front door', this strikes me as conservative. I've met WC fighters who just come right at you, right up the middle like squiggly locomotives.

So aside from all the family squabbles and different spellings how many recognized versions are there? 2? 3?

1.'Traditional'
2.'modified'
3.'simplified'

Leung Ting vs. William Cheung? Just different lineages or actually different styles?

Who is known more for the pigeon toed thing? We do that in Hung Gar too you know.

Is emphasis on fighting from the blind side more of a big deal in certain styles or just among different teachers?

Do some styles place more emphasis on power vs. sensitivity or vice-versa?

Maybe I just have to ask make these questions really specific to get better answers. Thanks for all the details, TjD.

[yuanfen]

Responses to Omar the Fish in brackets:

Funny thing about the dynamic tension...the guys who were into that style of training were some of the hardest hitters of anyone I've ever met, serious fighters.

((Depends on your sample))

Chi sau could still be very loose I'm thinking of how they like to do Siu Lum Tao.

((Loose sil lim tao?Dont know what you mean))

By conservative, I mean in the mix of your tactics leaning always towards safety and defense as opposed to agrressive offence being the largest part of your defense.

((When in action- dfense/offense disctinctions get blurred))

Things like pivoting back away from attacks, I view as conservative as opposed to stepping forward and to the side or coming on on the inside.

((Avoid going back. Might as well run if you constantly gp back))

The strong preference for the 'side door' as opposed to going in the 'front door', this strikes me as conservative. I've met WC fighters who just come right at you, right up the middle like squiggly locomotives.

((Never dogmatic))

So aside from all the family squabbles and different spellings how many recognized versions are there? 2? 3?

1.'Traditional'
2.'modified'
3.'simplified'

(Many lineages... even 3 fold classification wont capture the
possibilities. Squabbles? More "communication"<g>))

Leung Ting vs. William Cheung? Just different lineages or actually different styles?

((Both are far from many others))

Who is known more for the pigeon toed thing?

((Most except for TWC))

We do that in Hung Gar too you know.

((I know but the rest of the mechanics is quite different))

Is emphasis on fighting from the blind side more of a big deal in certain styles or just among different teachers?

((Thats a dogma- found in some not found in others))

Do some styles place more emphasis on power vs. sensitivity or vice-versa?

((cant separate the two IMO.Sensitivity is justa word. Sensitivity to what--- can mean different things))

Maybe I just have to ask make these questions really specific to get better answers.
((I think so))

[omarthefish]

Yuan Fen,

Not loose Siu Lum Tao. I mean they incorporate huge amounts of dynamic tension in Siu Lum Tao but their chi sau is still very loose.

My sample of hitters is pretty big. The 'fighters' in WC I'm referring to are Chris Chan's students in San Francisco. I've still never met Chris but many of his students are just plain ferocious. My initial impression of WC was from them.

I agree that distinctions between attack and defense can get blurred but nonetheless I still see more conservative and more aggressive players. I'm being totally subjective on this point, I know, but I can't think of a better way to describe what I'm seeing. Baji, for example is NOT conservative. It's much more all or nothing. The WC I've seen in L.A. seems emotionally very detatched and kind of intellectual. The eyes on thelead elbow thing seems to reinforce this feeling of detatchment. My Sifu in China (not WC) empasises eye to eye contact. Very different feel, more of an emotional/psychological battle that way. Are there WC schools with this slant too or are they all elbow watchers?

((Avoid going back. Might as well run if you constantly gp back))

I sort of agree here too but you can pivot back and away but stay in range to counterattack. It's just a bit more conservative apporoach. More defensive. Moving in is dangerous. Good payoff but dangerous.

Oh, and none of the WC guys were really dogmatic exactly about the 'side door' thing just that I noticed a stronger preference for that here in L.A. vs. the S.F. guys.

Last question, how do you find power and sensitivity intermixed? We may mean different things by the words? I mean like listening and speaking. Sure there's a relationship but the two skills are quite distinct. Sensitivity being listening (in Chinese literally 'listening jin' or 'ting jin') Power being talking, in Chinese, fa jin. (sending out power that is, my metaphor breaks down linguistically at this point :()

Oh, and by the way, not challenging you on this point but how exaclty are the mechanics of the Hung Gar pigeon toed stance different? Hard to explain on line, I know but . . . ?

[tiger_1]

my friends just to say werry good theme good topic and nice respons werry corect adn werry iteresting ( im hope many wingchungers can give responsess and we can see many difrents opinions about this theme - just friendly tiger_1:)

[AndrewS]

Omar,

I'm in WeHo/Hollywood. When's good for you to work out ?

Andrew

[omarthefish]

? ...uh... yeah, right. Where were you 3 months ago when I was trolling the forums for school suggestions in L.A.? I'll p.m. you with a phone number. I just got throught reviewing your old posts to see who you are because there's not much on your profile. Where are you at in your gong-fu career. I got a bit from your posts and like where your you seem to be comin from. I live in Santa Monica but my job has me in the valley a lot towards the end of my workday and maybe I could go directly to meet you some time. We could hook up on most any weeknight (after about 5:30 'ish) or anytime on a sunday. Saturdays I go see some Baji guys in Monterey park.

Omar