What Needs to Change in Wing Chun to Address Modern Needs? [Archive]

tparkerkfo

04-28-2003, 03:36 PM

Hi John,

Good question. I think it depends on what your talking about. Do we need a chi sau machine to sit next to our dummy? Do we need to be concerned with EKG readings? Do we need a Matrix type connection (Matrix II is comming)? Those I can't answer. I think there is room for them to some degree.

But what I noticed this weekend is the modernization of our perspectives. So many groups try to be traditional and search for the Zen master, miyagi, to learn from. People ignore modern in favor or traditional. I think we need to receive and accept the benefits of modern times as well as the benefits of traditional training.

One point is that of analogies. I have been rereading some critical thinking books from College (I finailly finishied my BS degree), and one chapter is dedicated with metaphorse and analogies as it is a powerful tool in learning and transmition of knowledge. Using modern analogies can help to relate the essense of the training better than old traditional ones. I am sure the Confusion, tao, zen, and other subjects were not as cryptic to those that lived in the day. They can be a little more cryptic since we don't really understand the times. Think Sheakspere, one probably doesn't get the slang he uses. Building a Database of hands makes sense an is easy to understand. Trying to run a 32 bit application or a Pentium III chip on an old 286 computer can be related to by many.

Tom
________
Medical marijuana (http://medicalmarijuana.us/)

yuanfen

04-28-2003, 03:43 PM

Matrix II? I had enough trouble realting to MatrixI even though it has features from an Indian epic. (the Krishna- Arjuna dialog)-
too high tech for me- a son gave me a digital camera two years ago- I have yet to use it!

But the Yi runs faster than any tech.!

PaulH

04-28-2003, 04:57 PM

I don't know about modern needs, but I think a more pragmatic approach that emphasizes on different types of preparations against what can hurt you would be in order. Earlier in one of my posts, I mentioned that WSL thought that it would be better for teachers to teach students how to make less mistakes. Later one of my brother pointed out how WC training today seem to be so devoid of any practical or realistic fighting experience and suggested an alternative way to improve their fighting skills. The response from the forum was an embarassing silence. Perhaps all is just as well. People do what suit them best.

I was just talking to my coaches a few hours ago. They left France many years ago to come to California to learn BJJ with the Machado brothers. And now they are returning to France to recuperate from their injuries. Both of them competed in the Pam Am Jujutsu World Champsionship last Sunday in Santa Barbara, USA. Due to the ongoing injury with the knee, Jean Marc could not go on competing for the final round. Chan Keo, despite severe pains on her back, persevered through and won the vice world championship. It was an impressive achievement as she is 41 years old against a much younger three times world champion Brazilian. They fought resolutely to the end and the young victor won not by submission but by technical points. Every one there even NHB fighters came to cheer for Chan. All fighters love and respect good spirited fighters, for they know victory only comes from being better prepared mentally, physically and skillfully. I see this spirit of fighting WSL waning more and more as the WC era rightfully come to the end of its past golden years.

Regards,

wingchunalex

04-28-2003, 06:21 PM

The only evolution I see for wing chun is in adapting it to deal with kinds of fighters our wing chun ancectors never had to face. For example boxers with very light mobile footwork with good slipping. Or grappling specialists like BJJ people. Wing chun might need to use more evasive and light footwork to deal with a boxer. Or not limit wing chun to keeping the legs so narrow when a grapplers shoots, its okay to sprawle to defend it. And the evolution should come in training also. Wing chun needs to be trained just a little bit differently to handle a boxer as compared to a hung gar stylist. Also training in the areas of conditioning need to evolve with the times.

TjD

04-28-2003, 06:40 PM

its not the system, rather the students. wing chun needs students willing to put forth the required effort and go the distance to really learn the system. half-assed attempts will result in half-assed sifus for the next generation.

without outstanding wing chunners to point out the faulty money-grabbing sifus that will doubtly be there, wing chun will probably go the way of TKD (no offense to tae kwon do people).

Phenix

04-28-2003, 08:14 PM

Turn into water, or standing on top of Titanic feeling the wind which make me feel like flying.

Get another bottle of Champain Cheers with the bullet proof monks.:D

yylee

04-28-2003, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by Phenix
Get another bottle of Champain Cheers with the bullet proof monks.:D

your Matrix needs to be reloaded, something's wrong with the theta control pid loop.

John Weiland

04-28-2003, 08:46 PM

Originally posted by yylee

your Matrix needs to be reloaded, something's wrong with the theta control pid loop.
I'm a little leary myself of booking a trip on the Titantic, but if it'll improve my Wing Chun understanding, I'm there. :D

TjD

04-28-2003, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by John Weiland

I'm a little leary myself of booking a trip on the Titantic, but if it'll improve my Wing Chun understanding, I'm there. :D

mabye phenix was implying that WC is a sinking ship and we're all going down on it? :D

might as well play the violin and enjoy it!

Phenix

04-28-2003, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by TjD

mabye phenix was implying that WC is a sinking ship and we're all going down on it? :D

might as well play the violin and enjoy it!

http://www.titanicmovie.com/past/index.html

free titanik screen saver....
Ship sink love is forver....

John Weiland

04-29-2003, 02:42 AM

Originally posted by Phenix

http://www.titanicmovie.com/past/index.html

free titanik screen saver....
Ship sink love is forver....
TJD and Phenix, you guys crack me up. :D

Ship sink love is forver. But wait, a life-boat---she survives! There is yet hope for Yim Wing Chun if not for her loyal admirers. :D

black and blue

04-29-2003, 02:45 AM

At Kamon...

In the organisation I belong to my Sifu talks about "... elevating the art of Wing Chun to its next evolutionary level".

In part this is, I believe, about examining how we need to deal with attacks today (what type of attack, person, weapon etc will threaten us). Perhaps it's fair to say the person who attacks you late at night in London or LA etc, will not do so in the same way as someone in Hong Kong in the 1800s.

At Kamon I believe it is also about HOW the art is taught, as much as what is taught. Where we place emphasis (our Feeding Techniques for example). Dealing with random, heavy attacks from a neutral stance is as important to us as Chi Sau. I know someone who trained in Hong Kong last year, and he said they trained Chi Sau almost exclusively.

My Sifu also makes a point of sparring with boxers, Karate and TKD exponents, Thai Boxers etc. One of the reasons I'm so impressed with what he does/teaches, is his willingness to put-it-on-the-line in order to advance what he does/teaches.

In my opinion he and his Wing Chun evolves because of this. The great thing is that he hides nothing... this evolution and experience filters down to those he teaches.

TjD

04-29-2003, 03:27 AM

Originally posted by John Weiland

Ship sink love is forver. But wait, a life-boat---she survives! There is yet hope for Yim Wing Chun if not for her loyal admirers. :D

lets hope she doesn't drop the jewel of wing chun into the ocean - never to be found! :D :D

t_niehoff

04-29-2003, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by John Weiland:
What needs to change in Wing Chun to address "modern" needs?

PaulH responded:

I think a more pragmatic approach that emphasizes on different types of preparations against what can hurt you would be in order...WC training today seem to be so devoid of any practical or realistic fighting experience. . . .

TjD wrote:

its not the system, rather the students. wing chun needs students willing to put forth the required effort and go the distance to really learn the system. half-assed attempts will result in half-assed sifus for the next generation.

I agree with both of you. A trainer of NHB fighters once said, "It's all about motivation; if someone doesn't have the right motivation, they'll never get anywhere." And I think part of what he was getting at is that there is a price to pay if we want to become good fighters regardless of our MA: you must get out there and train hard, get conditioned, fight, etc. I'm not suggesting we abandon WCK's approach or training methods, only that we must train with the same *intensity* that any other fighter does if we expect to be able to really develop any fighting skills. We must recognize that belief in a "superior system" is misguided and distracting. We must appreciate that our teacher or system won't fight for us, and that it all boils down to what we personally can do (and there is only one way to tell). We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" and lineages and instead be concerned with actual, proven performance (can folks teaching really do what they claim to teach).

Terence

captain

04-29-2003, 05:31 AM

if this message board is a yardstick,then the anxiety many
wck people feel about being grounded/grappled needs
either,to be fully explained within the style,or addressed
by a grappler keen on wck.
pehaps one of us could get a grappler to come onto this
board at some point in the near future to answer questions.?
then we could all meet/log on here on an agreed time and
ask questions?does this sound good?shall we do that?

russ

Grabula

04-29-2003, 07:19 AM

I don't think much needs to be changed in wing chun. I think there are some small things here or there to address that maybe used to be addressed or weren't popular with fighting a few centuries ago? Ground fighting is the obvious one. I am sure wing chun addresses it to some extant or another, but maybe not as intensively as it needs to considering ground fightings popularity.
I don't think the way people fight has changed much, some of the tools have maybe, but I don't think it's all that different when it comes down to it.

Phenix

04-29-2003, 07:30 AM

Originally posted by TjD

lets hope she doesn't drop the jewel of wing chun into the ocean - never to be found! :D :D

The world I know fade away
But You stay! ----- A love before time.
That is the mission:D

sel

04-29-2003, 07:56 AM

the thing which needs to change is that people should find a master who teaches the art as it should be taught. if they do, all the necessary tools for "groundfighting" or "grappling" defence would be there to learn.

what you do when you are standing can be applied equally effectively from the ground. if you had a decent teacher you would know that.

reneritchie

04-29-2003, 08:42 AM

I believe the real advances of the latter quarter of the 20th, and now the beginning of the 21st century will not be in WCK itself, but rather in our understanding of it as follows:

Mechanically: As we come to greater understandings of the human animal and how it works, we'll be able to tighten the ranges of possibility within WCK measures to better approach optimal paths. And beyond WCK, hopefully this understanding will allow us all to live healthier, train more, recover faster, etc.

Combatively: As more ethical cultural MA join the world stage, and as MMA and other similar "modern" approach propagate, the bar will again be raised and it will allow WCK practitioners to delve deeper into their art for answers to the new variations of the same old questions. A century ago, we mostly had to worry only about other Southern fists, so some movements and strategies were emphasized over others. Then we met Karate, Boxing, Wrestling, etc. and the emphasis had to be adjusted. While this doesn't change the art itself, it continues our understanding and implementation of it.

Instructively: Teaching is a discipline all unto itself. Most people, including most teachers, can't teach. A good teacher can give you in 1 hr. what a bad one can't in 1 month. A good teacher can take an average, ungifted student and coach them into great achievements, while a bad one can only stay out of the way of the most naturally talented and let them achieve what they would on their own anyway. As the discipline of teaching grows, and more and more WCK teachers actually learn how to teach and actively work on nurturing their abilities to do so, it will benefit the next generation, and the art.

Evolutionarily: Minor things will continue to mutate. One lineage will have a lower Tan Sao, another a straight Bong Sao, another a non-retracting Wu Sao, another a wider Kim Yeung Ma, another a long pole form, another more examples in the Dummy, etc. etc. Since humans aren't perfect replicators, and each has different needs and idiosyncracies, these mutations will grow, the beneficial ones lasting the test of time, the negative ones disappearing or spinning off into quirky other arts all their own. The core will likely remain the same, as we can see by looking at Yip Man, Sum Nung, Koo Lo, Cho, etc. that it has over the last 150 or so years (300+ according to legend ;)

KPM

04-30-2003, 11:20 AM

IMHO, I think the weaponry trained in WCK needs to be updated for modern applications. I'm not saying to throw out the butterfly knives and pole, but rather to apply the principles from them to other weapons. For example, the easiest and most obvious step is to train pole technique with a shorter weapon....something on the order of 5 or 6 feet long. This is the length that you are likely to have at hand outdoors should you ever need a weapon to fight with. Sure, lots of people say that the training with the pole applies to all "pole-like" weapons, but how many actually TRAIN with the shorter length weapons? How about even shorter? Lets say about 4 ft in length...a walking stick. Pole technique still works, but by shortening the distance between the hands you can wield the shorter stick like it was a bokken or longsword and have a "two-sided" weapon. Now not only does pole technique still apply, but you can begin to bring in much of the footwork from the knives because you can now switch the weapon from side to side. Total different look from the pole, but still entirely using WCK principles. How about the most practical and useful weapons training for our modern times....the tactical knife? Holding a folder or other tactical knife in a reverse grip works great with WCK technique. Tan Saus and Bong Saus become slashes, hammerfists become stabs, and the Pak Da drill takes on a whole new level of seriousness when a knife is involved. Look at Leung Ting's organization. They have incorporated Escrima weapons training right alongside their WCK. IMHO this is not necessary. A perfectly valid and effective stick-fighting method can and should be derived from WCK concepts and techniques. I believe some of the TWC people have worked on this as well. I don't really see all this as a "change" in WCK, but rather a new application of WCK. Hand to hand fighting hasn't changed much through the centuries, but weapons fighting certainly has! There is a much different array of weapons available to us compared to when WCK was developed. I have been working on all of the aspects I have mentioned, and find that the WCK principles and methods apply just fine to different weapons. And its fun training! :-)

Keith

tparkerkfo

04-30-2003, 11:55 AM

Hi KPM,

I am with you. However I am not sure your on the correct path. If we are going to change it for modern life, why not add handguns to replace the dao and shotguns for the gwun? Perhaps we can add brass knucles, as they really are an extention of the hands.

But seriously, I hope people don't look at the weapons as real weapons. I am not sure if people really ever carried butterfly knives in the late 1800's, nor am I sure any one walked around with a 9 foot stick. Yes I could see a place for them, but I don't think they were real realistic weapons even back then. But they were part of a tradition and were around. I don't think the Chings really allowed the normal population to walk around with large knives.

I think one of the many uses for them are to build the practioner. The pole's main benefit is developing Jing from my understanding. The knives also do this.

Tom
________
Handjob teasing (http://www.****tube.com/categories/689/teasing/videos/1)

anerlich

04-30-2003, 02:42 PM

without outstanding wing chunners to point out the faulty money-grabbing sifus that will doubtly be there

Is there any evidence that self serving or incompetent Sifus were not as relatively prevalent in older times as they allegedly (has anyone done a survey?) are now?

wing chun will probably go the way of TKD (no offense to tae kwon do people).

Ha! That was diplomatic!

I absolutely DETESTED Titanic. I loved the Abyss, Aliens, and Terminator, but I doubt I'll ever watch another James ******* film after watching that schmaltz-drenched, nauseating testament to self-indulgence. Celine Dion's involvement was the final nail in the coffin. I HATE that song.

Personally I think WC needs to lose its outdated religious, TCM and cultural associations, and stop pretending it is a system of health cultivation, a spiritual practice, or the answer to every problem. "Get real", in other words.

anerlich

04-30-2003, 02:45 PM

Why was "C a m e r o n" bleeped?

yenhoi

04-30-2003, 02:56 PM

pehaps one of us could get a grappler to come onto this
board at some point in the near future to answer questions.?

Merry Prankster is all over this board, so are others. Mostly his advice is ignored and answered with "proper wing chun doesnt have to worry about the ground because of X" X usually being stance stance stance stance.

Start a thread, MP is very kind.

:eek:

KenWingJitsu

04-30-2003, 03:53 PM

Later one of my brother pointed out how WC training today seem to be so devoid of any practical or realistic fighting experience and suggested an alternative way to improve their fighting skills. The response from the forum was an embarassing silence. Perhaps all is just as well. People do what suit them best.
Excellent post PaulH!!!!

And kudos to your training partners. I too almost competed at the Pan Ams, but I hadn't been training ahrd enough for it so I skipped it, but I will be at the next BJJ tournament wherever that may be. I took second at the Copa so I hear ya.

As for WCK changes needed. Simple.
"Fight" training. that's all. I am actually wrking VERY hard on this right now as a personal project of mine. COnverting the 'deadness' of WC training into live training/fighting drills. Break the cycle of theory - if this, then that. Uh uh. It's going to be you will really try to hit me, and I will really try to use WC to defend myself. It will be infused with all WC techs that are out there, but the TRAINING METHOD will be the key adaptive factor. I've shown Andrew a little bit of what I'm talking about, and am in the process of documenting it so I can film it. I actaully already started. The challenge is staying true to Wing Chun, but this is very possible

John Weiland

04-30-2003, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by tparkerkfo

If we are going to change it for modern life, why not add handguns to replace the dao and shotguns for the gwun? Perhaps we can add brass knucles, as they really are an extention of the hands.
Oh the agony; where will it end? :rolleyes: :D

But seriously, I hope people don't look at the weapons as real weapons. I am not sure if people really ever carried butterfly knives in the late 1800's, nor am I sure any one walked around with a 9 foot stick. Yes I could see a place for them, but I don't think they were real realistic weapons even back then. But they were part of a tradition and were around. I don't think the Chings really allowed the normal population to walk around with large knives.

I think one of the many uses for them are to build the practioner. The pole's main benefit is developing Jing from my understanding. The knives also do this.

Tom
Good points, Tom. The "weapons" of Wing Chun, while still "weapons," develop the hands. Wing Chun is an empty hand art. Add a bunch of extras and we'll lose it. Then, given today's lack of necessity of knowing martial arts in the public's perception, it'll all be gone except in memory, along with the other "dead" arts and languages.

John Weiland

04-30-2003, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by KenWingJitsu
As for WCK changes needed. Simple.
"Fight" training. that's all. I am actually wrking VERY hard on this right now as a personal project of mine. COnverting the 'deadness' of WC training into live training/fighting drills. Break the cycle of theory - if this, then that. Uh uh.

Hi KenWingJitsu,

Sounds like your Wing Chun and mine are very different. But, I like the overriding idea of fight training while preserving and honing what works in the art.

It's going to be you will really try to hit me, and I will really try to use WC to defend myself.

Some of us do this now, but I guess you're meaning something more. I'd like to hear how you'd incorporate your training differences into Wing Chun. Would you do away with Chi Sao and the sets in favor of arranged fighting?

It will be infused with all WC techs that are out there, but the TRAINING METHOD will be the key adaptive factor.

Sounds interesting. :) I agree we as a Wing Chun community have a problem in how and what needs to be taught and the bringing students along to each stage of training.

I've shown Andrew a little bit of what I'm talking about, and am in the process of documenting it so I can film it. I actaully already started. The challenge is staying true to Wing Chun, but this is very possible
The best of luck to you. Please let us know how it goes. Will you be sharing your ideas with the rest of us?

Regards,

PaulH

04-30-2003, 09:00 PM

Originally posted by anerlich

Personally I think WC needs to lose its outdated religious, TCM and cultural associations, and stop pretending it is a system of health cultivation, a spiritual practice, or the answer to every problem. "Get real", in other words.

Surely, you jest! Did you not hear that "Human kind cannot bear very much reality"? - T.S. Eliot "Murder in the Cathedral"

Regards,

William E

04-30-2003, 10:01 PM

Terrence wrote> .We must recognize that belief in a "superior system" is misguided and distracting. We must appreciate that our teacher or system won't fight for us, and that it all boils down to what we personally can do (and there is only one way to tell). We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" and lineages and instead be concerned with actual, proven performance (can folks teaching really do what they claim to teach ).

Synonyms: honor, homage, reverence, veneration, deference
These nouns denote admiration, respect, or esteem accorded to another as a right or as due.

When you say We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" do you really mean that? We don't have to pay respect to sifu's or even grandmasters? Is that what your wing chun teaches you?

Just curious....

William E.

Train

04-30-2003, 10:32 PM

Terence wrote:
We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" and lineages and instead be concerned with actual, proven performance (can folks teaching really do what they claim to teach.

Holy Cow!! Do you know what you are saying ?? Who is your Sifu?? I want to email this to him... :)

black and blue

05-01-2003, 01:26 AM

There is way too much heroworship in WC/WT. Way too much talk of superiority of system. Way too much talk of 'pure' lineage, 'closest' to Yip Man, etc etc.

I have tremendous respect for my Sifu and his fighting ability, and value greatly his ability to transfer knowledge to students... but I'm sure he's the first person to admit he's just a man, and can be beaten in combat.... just like the rest of us.

Serious, hard training is the only answer, and even then it's no guarantee.

But hey, I'm feeling all gung ho having been given five stitches after I walked straight into my partners punch during Gor Sau Chi Sau last night.

:) :( :D

KPM

05-01-2003, 02:54 AM

Tom wrote:
I am with you. However I am not sure your on the correct path. If we are going to change it for modern life, why not add handguns to replace the dao and shotguns for the gwun? Perhaps we can add brass knucles, as they really are an extention of the hands.

---Note I didn't say we were "replacing" anything, just extending the application of WCK concepts. I have known people that used their WCK stance and structure when shooting in handgun competitions. But the rest of the applicaton of WCK to ballistic weapons would be somewhat limited. How do you Tan Sau with a 9mm or a rifle? :-)

But seriously, I hope people don't look at the weapons as real weapons. I am not sure if people really ever carried butterfly knives in the late 1800's,

---One of the theories for why WCK went with the butterfly knives as a primary weapon is that they were easier for revolutionaries to carry concealed. Makes some sense to me. I have an article by Bill Bagwell showing how to carry a 14 inch Bowie knife concealed at the waist.

nor am I sure any one walked around with a 9 foot stick.

---If you lived and worked on "Junks", then lots of 9 foot sticks would be around and available.

Yes I could see a place for them, but I don't think they were real realistic weapons even back then.

---Why not? WCK was and is a "fighting art". Why wouldn't the same thing apply to the weapons?

But they were part of a tradition and were around. I don't think the Chings really allowed the normal population to walk around with large knives.

---In comparison to other popular martial art weapons, the butterfly knives are small....and much easier to conceal.

I think one of the many uses for them are to build the practioner. The pole's main benefit is developing Jing from my understanding. The knives also do this.

----Which is exactly my point......most WCK people today do not see the WCK weapons are "real" or "practical" weapons at all. They are a training device, like lifting weights. I ask again....WCK is considered a "fighting" art. Why does this not apply to weapons as well?

Keith

KPM

05-01-2003, 03:03 AM

John wrote:
Good points, Tom. The "weapons" of Wing Chun, while still "weapons," develop the hands.

---Why should the WCK weapons not be considered "real" weapons? Why should they only be looked upon as training implements to develop the hands? WCK is a fighting art. Why should that descriptor not also be applied to weapons?

Wing Chun is an empty hand art. Add a bunch of extras and we'll lose it. Then, given today's lack of necessity of knowing martial arts in the public's perception, it'll all be gone except in memory, along with the other "dead" arts and languages.

---This certainly didn't happen when the knives and the pole were added to the system originally. Why would applying techniques with a 4 foot stick do so now? Why wouldn't learning to use a 4 foot stick or a tactical folder with WCK concepts and techniques give you new insight into and appreciation of the hand techniques? Do you think Wong Wah Bo or Leung Jan considered WCK to be strictly an "empty hand" art?

Keith

t_niehoff

05-01-2003, 05:06 AM

I wrote:
We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" and lineages and instead be concerned with actual, proven performance (can folks teaching really do what they claim to teach. TN

Train wrote:

Holy Cow!! Do you know what you are saying ?? Who is your Sifu?? I want to email this to him...

My sifu is Robert Chu -- feel free to email him. Titles (which are mostly self-appointed), certificates, and lineage are all for the most part BS. Skill is what I respect.

WilliamE wrote:

Synonyms: honor, homage, reverence, veneration, deference
These nouns denote admiration, respect, or esteem accorded to another as a right or as due. WE

I respect skill earned by hard work over time (gung fu). But real proven skill is very much a rarety in WCK. If someone has true fighting skills developed from WCK training, they should be able to demonstrate those -- and not with cooperative stuntmen but against real resistance offered by noncooperative, trained fighters. If someone calls themselves "sifu" or "grandmaster" but can't make it work against skilled resisting opponents, they are a joke IMO. TN

When you say We need to set aside deference to "sifus" and "grandmasters" and "certifications" do you really mean that? We don't have to pay respect to sifu's or even grandmasters? Is that what your wing chun teaches you? WE

We should respect all human beings but not put persons with self-appointed titles or certificates on a pedestal. Anyone can call themselves sifu or grandmaster -- that doesn't mean they have any genuine skills. In fact, I've actually found an inverse relationship between someone's skill and their need to titles or certificates -- as this "need" only demonstrates that their motivation is approval of others and not the acquiring of skill. TN

Terence

tparkerkfo

05-01-2003, 09:38 AM

Hi Kieth,

OK Lets look at the weapons. The pole was not invented for the red boats. It goes way back to it's shaolin roots apparently. The 5th brother removed his spear tip when he sought refuge in the temple. The pole comes from Gee Shim and is very common in southern arts and is nothing special to the red boats. Were there long poles on the junks? I don't know, but I do know they are not in Venice. LOL. The boats were rather large and the river is very deep. I am not sure how valuable a long pole would be, or if it would actually be the same as a wing chun pole. Also, Wing Chun spent little time on the boats. Leung Jan wouldn't have carried a long pole around, nor would Chan Wah Shun.

The knives. They are not that easily concealed. They are not that small. I admit I do not know the Qing rules for carrying weapons in the mid 1800's, but many areas seemed to ban martial arts and even the opera in fear of various rebellions. I can not see that the Qing would allow the knives to be carried.

Yes they can be concealed though as you pointed out. I saw a kid on Good Morning America (Morning news show in the US) where they profiled a Kid who was working with Law enforcment agencies to show how easily kids can conceal guns. THis kid had over a dozen guns on his body and no one knew it. One was even a short barrel shot gun! However, most people are not able to do this and it wouldn't be common.

The rebels were not stalking around like ninjas killing qing officials. They organized various activities against the government. I doubt they would have been armed much of the time. If some one accedently saw the weapon concealed, then they could report them and run the risk of getting in trouble. There were huge rebellions where the weapons were not concealed, but displayed.

I just don't buy that wing chun people carried Long Poles and Butterfly knives. I think they were common weapons that they DID have and they knew how to use. And the knives could be concealed. But not as an every day weapon, but perhaps on its way to a rebellion or perhaps stashed away on the junks. I wish there was more history on this.

Tom
________
POV HARDCORE (http://www.****tube.com/categories/890/hardcore/videos/1)

KPM

05-01-2003, 11:09 AM

Tom wrote:
OK Lets look at the weapons. The pole was not invented for the red boats. It goes way back to it's shaolin roots apparently.

--Sure, according to the legends. But one common legend was that Gee Shim taught the pole to Leung Yee Tai....who was the actual "poler" on one of the Junks. Gee Shim taught him how to use an everyday tool as a weapon.

The pole comes from Gee Shim and is very common in southern arts and is nothing special to the red boats.

---Never claimed any "special" status. Only that there may have been a good logical reason why the pole was one of only two weapons incorporated into WCK.

Were there long poles on the junks? I don't know, but I do know they are not in Venice. LOL. The boats were rather large and the river is very deep. I am not sure how valuable a long pole would be, or if it would actually be the same as a wing chun pole.

---I don't know either. Again, I'm going by the idea that Leung Yee Tai was said to be a "poler." Even if only a legend, these stories often had some basis in fact. If the legend states he was a "poler", it leads me to think that there were such people on the Junks. Even if the Junks were big, they must have had smaller boats to take people in to shore. It would be nice to know more about the history of the Red Boats in this regard.

Also, Wing Chun spent little time on the boats. Leung Jan wouldn't have carried a long pole around, nor would Chan Wah Shun.

---Little time on the boats? Based on what? WCK may have left the Red Boats after the Wong Wah Bo / Dai Fa Min Kam generation, but who do we know how long it was there prior to them? If Cheung Ng was a real person and was a WCK teacher, it has been pointed out already that there had to be several generations of practitioners between him and Wong Wah Bo's generation. Wasn't Chan Yiu Min known as the "king of the long pole"? It must have been used as an effective weapon above and beyond just a conditioning tool if he gained such a reputation.

The knives. They are not that easily concealed. They are not that small.

---Again, the point I was trying to make before is that this is a relative consideration. Compared to the other typical weapons of the day, they WERE small and they WERE more easily concealed.

I admit I do not know the Qing rules for carrying weapons in the mid 1800's, but many areas seemed to ban martial arts and even the opera in fear of various rebellions. I can not see that the Qing would allow the knives to be carried.

---Hence the need for a smaller weapon that can be carried concealed. Long flowing robes were common. One knife could easily be strapped to each lower leg and hidden beneath a robe.

The rebels were not stalking around like ninjas killing qing officials. They organized various activities against the government. I doubt they would have been armed much of the time. If some one accedently saw the weapon concealed, then they could report them and run the risk of getting in trouble. There were huge rebellions where the weapons were not concealed, but displayed.

---I never said they were swaggering around town like gunfighters. In the event that they needed to go out armed effectively, without people knowing they were armed, the butterfly knives would make a good carry weapon.

I just don't buy that wing chun people carried Long Poles and Butterfly knives. I think they were common weapons that they DID have and they knew how to use. And the knives could be concealed. But not as an every day weapon, but perhaps on its way to a rebellion or perhaps stashed away on the junks. I wish there was more history on this.

----We do know that of all the weapons available in the world of CMAs, WCK selected only the butterfly knives and the long pole for incorporation into the method. There had to be a good reason. And IMHO, it was more than the fact that they made good supplemental training devices for developing the hands. I think at one point in WCK history they were actually considered REAL and SERIOUS weapons. But we have gotten a bit side-tracked from the topic of this thread. I still believe that one possible way to "improve" WCK is to develop a practice of weaponry that is more appropriate for our modern times.

Keith

mun hung

05-01-2003, 12:20 PM

What needs to change in Wing Chun to address modern needs?

Sometimes modern needs and man's endless quest to try to perfect everything he sees ruins the natural progression of things.

As far as Wing Chun having holes in the system - no art is perfect or unbeatable, but has it's advantages and disadvantages. It's up to the skill of the individual to make use of it.

I think the big problem is (I'm gonna say it) - poor quality Wing Chun instruction. There are an unbelievable amount of instructors who don't have a good understanding of the art and/or a realistic approach in training/teaching and it reflects on their students. I blame this on all of the people out there who need/want money who have no business teaching an art they don't understand who create these holes and doubts in the minds of it's students.

I know these are bold statements - but this is my honest opinion.

Getting back to basics would be a good start.

yuanfen

05-01-2003, 12:55 PM

Good points mun hung. Instruction is the key.

Wing Chun at its best educates a wide assortment of usages of the human body.

What we then do with that can vary- in different positions and with different weapons or even technology- a bright wing chun person adapts his self development to the task at hand.

tparkerkfo

05-01-2003, 01:06 PM

Hi Keith,

You sound a little defensive. I hope your not taking my posts that way. Just discussing.

Yes the story is of Jee Shim teaching the pole. But that is said to be his specialty and I don't think it had anything to do with the Red Boats. The pole is also found in hung Gar, Lau Gar, and most other southern systems. The core is very close although the form may change. I don't know if the pole was common or not on the red boats. But looking at the boat that Leung Ting says is similar to a red boat, I doubt a pole would be of much use other than to push away smaller boats. But I don't know. Would be nice to find out.

According to most tradition, wing chun was not on the reb boats for too long, though they may have stayed there. Tan Sao Ng, according to HFY taught Hung Gung Biu and WOng Wah Bo. In Pan Nam's system he taught Dai Fa Min Kam. In Yip Man's line it was Yim Wing Chun that taught the boat people. But in any case, it left the next generation for YKS, Pan Nam, Leung Jan, HFY, and Cho Family if I am not mistaken. Maybe 10-30 years on board, but only one generation.

People sometimes point to the revolution and the knives as well as the boats and the pole. But I don't think this lends a lot of credit to it. I doubt Da Fa Min Kam killed a lot of Qing officals. Not saying he didn't, but I doubt he used the knives that much. Yes I think they were popular weapons of the time. The Butterfly knives and long pole are probably the two most popular weapon in wouthern china after the broadsword. Probably nothing special attached to those weapons.

But in any case, I don't think they are practical nor do I think many today really can use them as they were designed since few actually know how to kill with them. Those weapons do develop power in the hands. And I think that is their significant contribution to wing chun.

I am not sure what weapons would be suitible for wing chun. In the US, many states restrict the size and type of knife you can carry. Some places are even more strict. If I think about adapting a weapon, I would like to think it would be something I would be able to carry around at all times, or atleast the majority of times. If I adapt a pole cue, how often do I have one by my side? If I am else where and don't have a cue stick, then the pole cue is about as advantagous as the butterfly knives. A small folder might be of good use. Don't know. I think if you know wing chun, you can probably use a knife with little special training.

There are few things that I could use as a weapon in my enviornment. Maybe a keyboard or a mouse! I have a palm pilot and cell phone! LOL.

Thanks for the conversation
Tom
________
Ship sale (http://ship-sale.com/)

KPM

05-01-2003, 03:07 PM

Hi Tom!
You sound a little defensive. I hope your not taking my posts that way. Just discussing.

---My apologies. Don't mean to sound defensive. One of the dangers of internet communication. :-)

According to most tradition, wing chun was not on the reb boats for too long, though they may have stayed there. Tan Sao Ng, according to HFY taught Hung Gung Biu and WOng Wah Bo. In Pan Nam's system he taught Dai Fa Min Kam.

---From what I understand, the records of the Chinese Opera that mention Cheung Ng date him to the late 1700's. Wong Wah Bo is dated to the mid to late 1800's. There would be nearly 100 years separating Tan Sau Ng from Wong Wah Bo's generation. That is one of the problems with the HFY history. So as I said before, if Cheung Ng was involved in teaching WCK, several generations may have preceded Wong Wah Bo on the Red Boats.

I think if you know wing chun, you can probably use a knife with little special training.

---Anyone with a solid foundation in WCK could pick up a knife and use it.....but how well? Any weapon has its own unique characteristics of use. If one is serious about being able to use a knife effectively, one should train specifically with a knife. The same applies to any weapon. Being a conceptual art, WCK applies well to many different weapons in many different situations. But if you really want to maximize its effectiveness, you need to train it specifically. A common bit of wisdom in the "tactical knife" crowd is that in order to know how to effectively defend against a knife one should know how to USE a knife. Actually training with a knife really opens your eyes to the kind of damage it can do and gives you a much greater appreciation for the problems in defending against a knife-wielding attacker. Which is something that is very possible to encounter in today's modern times.

Keith

tparkerkfo

05-01-2003, 04:12 PM

Hi Keith,

Ah yes, the dangers of internet communication. LOL. I just didn't want to be preceived as pushing my views and such. I am just throwing things out that makes sense to me. Doesn't mean it is right. LOL. Take what ever I say with a grain of salt.

Actually, it is early 1700's. There is records of him in 1735 or so. So that does indeed put him at 100+ years. Most people do not feel Cheung Ng had a connection to wing chun. I beleive the only two are HFY and Pan Nam. If Cheung Ng did indeed play a role in wing chun, then there is a lot of stuff we don't know, and yes Wing Chun was on the boats for much longer. But I would need a lot more info before I beleive that. According to the older HFY info, Cheung Ng taught Hung Gun Biu AND Wong Wah Bo. So, I am not sure how their could be other generations between them. LOL. But we probably don't need to go there.

Tom
________
HOMEMADE VAPORIZER (http://homemadevaporizers.info/)

taltos

05-01-2003, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
Tan Sao Ng, according to HFY taught Hung Gung Biu and WOng Wah Bo.

Actually, according to the HFY family tree...

Tan Sau Ng (named Cheung Ng) --> Chan Jing Lin --> Chan Sai Yuan --> Chan Boh Jung --> Huhng Gun Biu.

Originally posted by KPM
There would be nearly 100 years separating Tan Sau Ng from Wong Wah Bo's generation.

Or approximately three generations. As accounted for above.

This info, as well as other information, is publicly available at:

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

-Levi

tparkerkfo

05-01-2003, 04:45 PM

Hi Levi,

Originally posted by taltos

Actually, according to the HFY family tree...

Tan Sau Ng (named Cheung Ng) --> Chan Jing Lin --> Chan Sai Yuan --> Chan Boh Jung --> Huhng Gun Biu.

Or approximately three generations. As accounted for above.

This info, as well as other information, is publicly available at:

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

-Levi

Thanks for the info. That makes much more sense! It is hard to stay on top of it since it has changed. Unfortunatly I can not recall what Garrett told me, but I thought he told me that Hung Gun Biu learned directly from Cheung Ng as did Wong Wah Bo. But it was a while ago and I am probably mistaken. However, other sources list it otherwise. Thanks, I'll make a note.
Tom
________
AMATEUR TUBES (http://www.****tube.com/categories/1/amateur/videos/1)

taltos

05-01-2003, 05:06 PM

Tom,

My pleasure. I've been trying to create a family tree of various WC lineages (akin to the one in the back of the "Complete Wing Chun" Book). It's been a LOT of work, and not nearly done, but it'll be worth it in the long run, I'm sure.

-Levi

tparkerkfo

05-01-2003, 05:10 PM

Hi Levi,

Ok, I looked at the document and indeed there are three people between Tan Sau Ng and Hung Gun Biu. One however is a contemporary and should not be counted since he is roughly the same age and is not a factor in a time line. But it does indeed make it possible.

But now for the wierd part. I rechecked the section in Complete Wing Chun to look at the history and it clearly says on page 85 that Wong Wah Bo learned from Tan Sau Ng along with Hung Gun Biu. The first paragraph.

I have heard that there was some "editing" to the document that was originally written, so I checked out the articals on the VTM website and noted that "From Shaolin To Wing Chun" by Benny Meng and Matthew Kwan also says Cheung Ng taught Hung Gun Biu.

Only select members of the Hung Fa Wui Goon troop were taught by Tan Sao Ng which were the first generation disciples of Wing Chun from the opera. Of those select students, few disciples were significant in the contribution to Wing Chun's history: Hung Gun Biu {Red Bandanna Biu}, Wong Wah Bo, Leung Yee Tei, and Dai Fa Min Kam {Painted Face Kam}.
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/hungfayi.php

Then later followed by

Hung Gun Biu, having been a distant relative of Tan Sao Ng, retreated with Tan Sao Ng into the underground.
http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/hungfayi.php

Am I not processing this correctly or missing something? I am seeing two differnt versions that don't make sense. Tan Sau Ng was documented in 1735 and Wong Wah Bo went back to work after the opera ban in roughly 1850-ish, not to mention he taught Leung Jan. SO he could not have learned directly from Cheung Ng if we are to beleive the dates.

Confused:confused:
Tom
________
UTG EVERBLAST ENFORCEMENT AIRSOFT SHOTGUN (http://airsoft-shop.info/p/utg-everblast-enforcement-airsoft-shotgun/)

KenWingJitsu

05-02-2003, 05:17 PM

John,

Some of us do this now, but I guess you're meaning something more. I'd like to hear how you'd incorporate your training differences into Wing Chun. Would you do away with Chi Sao and the sets in favor of arranged fighting?
Yes I was refering to something more. I know many in WC "say" that they train at full resistance, but the reality is far form that. What i mean is isolated spontanaity, mimicing the different stages of any kind of confrontation, whith a gradual progression of training the appropriate responses. But the end goal is to be able to spar fully, while keeping the WC structure and basics intact.
No, I wouldnt do away with Chi-sao at all. This will still be there, but only utilized as a building block. Most of the time, WC'ers train to have good chi-sao...and that's where it ends. Well, to me that's only the beginning. Next we have to take it to applicaton. Application...without contact...like would happen in a real fight. Then that application has to be "sparred", then that sparring has to be INTEGRATED (key word) with other applications and situations.
We kind of do it already in the form of Lot Sau, which makes my project easier, but more is needed. So I am taking it a step further to TOTAL spontaneity, still using a logical WC progression.

The best of luck to you. Please let us know how it goes. Will you be sharing your ideas with the rest of us?

I intend to for those who are interstred. I just finished writing out the entire outline for all the student levels in our system and have organized them the way I want. I have actually filmed the first 3 levels, but I might go back and re-do some things.