What do you guys think of these explanations? [Archive]

melfid

09-01-2001, 03:50 AM

Hi OJ,

Thanks for your verdict ;-) I went through the archives and got lost in the argument of what is or isn't Wing Chun

Honestly, that is not important to me. In fact, I'm more interested in learning why things do or do not work. I mean no disrespect to the instructor nor the school that is in question. I am simply asking my question to a group of individuals who wouldn't care what is or isn't Wing Chun.

And, in regards to your critical points - Please share, for I AM interested.

I look forward to reading them.
Dan

old jong

09-01-2001, 04:24 AM

Hey Dan.
That thing about my "critial points" is just my "signature" for the time being!...You can have one by adding it to your profile. ;)
My signature is about a very long story on the forum. ;)
BTW,you are welcome in the forum! I hope to "hear" more by you! :)

You don't want to see my critial points!...

Sharky

09-01-2001, 04:42 AM

i will attack your critical points ver well.

================================================== ==========================

"What you wan' cry fo? You know that my hammer is heavy and it got kick like tae kwon do, now you gwarn die slow... I'ma show you how to stretch a m0ther****er if you wanna watch tae bo"

chi sau

09-01-2001, 11:47 AM

clip 1
the guys footwork is appalin and his rear foot is seen to be raised at the end which is a bbig no no in any wing chun guys book,stance being your strength .
clip 2 a lot of the time the guy was looking down at what i dont know but he wasnt looking at his attacker or where his attacks were going
clip3 again poor footwork and then guard ,his wu hand is placed by himself i might add flat against his own stomch this equals no fixed elbow position no guard no wing chun
clip4he was defending against an attack that wasnt going to hit him therefore why bother ???but then when he did he was leaning over at the waist which is very poor form
clip 5 again unbelievabley poor footwork and using tan to a high kick the way he did is slightly suspect
just my opinion

Sharky

09-01-2001, 03:07 PM

you also don't step back in wing chun.

================================================== ==========================

"What you wan' cry fo? You know that my hammer is heavy and it got kick like tae kwon do, now you gwarn die slow... I'ma show you how to stretch a m0ther****er if you wanna watch tae bo"

melfid

09-01-2001, 03:24 PM

Hi Chi Sau,

Thanks for your feedback. I noticed that on clip one and three there is an explanation from the Sifu as to what is being trained. Do you consider it is applicable? or worthwhile to train?

Clip-1
I was normally of the opinion that a WC guy doesn't raise his leg like that (clip one) but then after reading the Sifu's explanation - I doubt my reasoning. (AFTER I did the experiment he suggisted)

Clip-3
Again I agreed with you, but after considering the explanation, I'm again doubtinig my original reasonings.

These doubts are why I posted this in a non-wc forum. I am hoping that some people w/ no expections of what Wing Chun looks like can point out whether or not this stuff makes sense.

I'm questioning things like - WC never steps back. WC only kicks with the front leg. A pak sau is only 'this'. A kwan sau is supposed to be 'so', etc. I personaly feel these technical labeling points are clouding my judgement.

thanks again for contributing,
Dan (the confused)

chi sau

09-01-2001, 07:00 PM

i dont know what you do ,what style you practice but a *******ised form of anything is never a good thing to train i wouldnt practice clip 3 the way they did ever because of the reason stated in my earlier post bad footwork and bad guard the guy might as well have shut his eyes as well!!!
the hand movements in 1 are basically solid wing chun moves but in that context i would have used something else but i would say unless you are into traing poor quality fighting skills leave the whole thing alone buddy

joedoe

09-02-2001, 02:29 AM

I don't know that much about wing chun, but I heard that one of the basic principles was that it never utilised kicks above the waist.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

melfid

09-02-2001, 11:43 PM

Hello Chi Sau,

I am asking some very open questions about Wing Chun. Specifically about things I didn't understand after viewing the techniques on this website. Furthermore I was challenged by the instructor's explanation of the techniques' purpose.

I did not speak about my '*******ised form' and I did not mention 'poor quality fighting skills'. I am not here to criticize other people, but simply to have an open discussion about drills that I came across.

Did you read the instructor's explanation of why? I'm a WC practicioner who doesn't practice in this manner, however the way he explained the techniques, I cannot argue his points. I may dislike him or I may respect him, but I cannot say 'poor quality fighting skills' because those techniques (according to him) are not fighting - but drills with a purpose. Drills that do not exist in my school.

I am trying to do my research with an open mind.

ABandit:
Thanks for your input. Did you know that in one public fight Grandmaster Yip Man kicked someone in the chest and the person died.

In a fight, why limit yourself. A well positioned kick, at the right moment, after the right setup could kick ass (above the waist, that is).

I'd love to hear your opinion after you've seen the clips and read the explanations for 1 and 3. In fact, I look forward to it.

Thanks again,
Dan

[This message was edited by DanM on 09-03-01 at 02:51 PM.]

Urbanfist

09-02-2001, 11:56 PM

He may be using a tactic that I use often when he looks away. I stare off next to the guy I'm fighting at the floor to distance myself from combat and avoid flinching from a strike. It just helps me to keep from blinking. I can still see everything fine, just out of the corner of my eye. not many people fight like that, but it does work.

joedoe

09-03-2001, 02:53 AM

As I said, I don't really know much about Wing Chun (everything I know is what I have gleaned from books/mags or from stories told by friends who have tried the art, or from what I have seen in demos).

I personally agree that you should not limit yourself - if the opening is there then you should use the most appropriate technique.

cxxx[]:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity

melfid

09-03-2001, 05:03 PM

Hi ABandit,

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. I think your lack of experience in Wing Chun is an asset to this discussion. I feel that many WC practicioners (myself included) are too concerned with how Wing Chun looks rather than what works.

Unfortunately most of us (again myself very much included) are caught up convincing ourselves that we're learning something worthwhile when in our hearts we harbor doubts.

Instead of being caught up in 'What is Wing Chun' in the Wing Chun forum, I've come to this forum to ask other travellers their objective opinion and advice. After a martial art is a martial art. Martial Artist can recognize truth in any Fighting form. There are common criteria - does it make sense? can it work? Is the approach reasonable?

So, because you don't practice WC - you can look at these animations and say ,"**** that won't work because of x y z" or you may conjecture, "there is some substance to these techniques because of u v w"

I hope you understand my objective and don't feel I'm trying to criticize. I look forward to all objective dialog.

sincerely,
Dan

[This message was edited by DanM on 09-04-01 at 08:15 AM.]

chi sau

09-03-2001, 06:16 PM

ok dan u asked me were those techniques worth while training .Re-read my reasons and ask your self that question. should you practice something done badly ???
you also asked for critical replies .
that is what i gave you

rogue

09-04-2001, 03:30 AM

As a whole these guys don't know how to step back (aka tactical retreat) and look afraid of getting hit, and that's a red flag. What's with the turning away and turtleing BS they're doing? Very weak, very bad footwork, very bad habits and very dangerous. Yeah, I know WC doesn't retreat. Fine then at least get used to taking a few shots as you move in.

The guy doing the side kick and the flowery "Kung Fu" cr@p should spend more time sparring with TKD people to get his kicking down instead of looking pretty. I mean c'mon, landing with your groin exposed and your hands out like that?

The guy trying to do a roundhouse also should study some Muay Thai or TKD, here's a hint open the hips.

From the videos I'd say this school should spend more time sparring and less time doing making these demos and explaining them. Once again unimpressive, even for a demo.

Rogue, you're an @ss!! Watchman

Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it's hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L'Amour

BTW, did I mention that Rogue was an @ss? Watchman

[This message was edited by rogue on 09-04-01 at 06:47 PM.]

Kaitain(UK)

09-04-2001, 04:07 PM

I personally don't retreat - if someone initiates I attack before they've got anywhere

If I had to retreat it wouldn't be straight backwards - I would step to the side to try and narrow down their options. In all cases retreat is the poor cousin of evasion - step forwards and to the side and you gain the dominant position. Retreat changes nothing.

The kick defenses are poor - you'd be on the deck trying those techniques against someone who can kick.

Stances were bad - there was no rooting in evidence. Everyone in the background can't stand still when watching, so when they are sparring it is even worse. It wasn't Stillness in the heart of motion.

The movements I saw had too much thought - it looked like people who trained specific combinations for that situation. You must train combinations, but not in response to a situation - you train the fluidity of movement.

Too much concern with distancing - those techniques are only useful once you've closed the distance to the opponent. So why 'buy' space when your techniques require you to close the gap anyway.

More specifically:

Clip 1 - rear leg kick -
option a - I'd take his lead leg out with a kick, then I don't worry about his hands. Game over.
option b - since I've thrown a right straight punch, my left should have been arriving already

Clip 2 - I'd have stuck to the punch since it was in an over-extended stance. Or I'd have kicked the front leg out as he stepped in (standard way of dealing with a puncher)

Clip 3 - It's a straight arm hook (no power) or something - the punch wouldn't have landed anyway so I'd kick him square in the nuts for being crap. If it was going to hit me I'd attack the unguarded centre yada yada. Not worth discussing tbh

Clip 4 - It's a bad kick that wouldn't have landed, if it was going to hit you couldn't stop it with a straight block.

I do like the flow of the guy once he attacks. However, he doesn't use his feet on the way in - each step should contain a low line kick to the guys legs

Clip 5 - I'm not sure why they want to beat a donkey up but it's a good example of how not to kick. Guy steps in for an entry kick ffs! Say hello to a busted knee. Even if you wait for the kick, once the kick is taken why wasn't the knee taken out? Why plant the foot and move to hand techniques when it should be over already?

To me the movements afterwards are Wing Chun for the sake of Wing Chun.

Across the board there is no understanding of low-line kicking and how it should incorporate into every step you make.

Essay over - hope noone gets too offended.

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"

fmann

09-06-2001, 03:37 AM

I just wanted to comment on this statement made before:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I feel that many WC practicioners (myself included) are too concerned with how Wing Chun looks rather than what works.[/quote]

Form follows function. Function determines form. Something looks WC because it follows the principles and functions set by WC. If it doesn't look like WC, then it might be a new application or it might not be WC.

In the case of the videos, I think they are effective for the situations presented, but I agree with the others that they could be improved.

And I think the nitpicking is pretty much superficial. Sure his hand, stance, etc. might not be in the ideal WC position, but in a real fight, rarely will you be concerned with 100% correct WC form but rather the correct application.

melfid

09-08-2001, 04:17 PM

Hi Rogue,

Thanks for you reply. I agree with you, that roundhouse is a terrible example of a kick. I don't see anyone kicking like that in a real fight. Never Never Never.

The guy doing the sidekick tho - I don't agree with you. In my school, we do free sparring where the attacker is free to do any kicks and the defender has to react with wing chun. One guy rushes in all the time with that sidekick. He uses it very intimidatingly. When he charges in so quickly, we freeze (and get kicked) or keep going back (and back and back and back). Sometimes he fakes the side kick and drops the leg and executes a frontkick or a roundhouse. Which one it is? I never know cos I suck. It gets very confusing when you have to deal with it in that situation. The defender is not allowed to attack first. This is the TECHNIQUE that I saw that made me study these offerings from this school. Sifu Hawkens Cheung (not my lineage, but very respected by us) speaks highly of this school's instructor. So one of these days, I'll have to visit Sifu Cheung and ask him about these "Yip Man" techniques.

Now on to the Wing Chun points.

When I first saw these pictures, I said to myself, "These guys don't know how to step back." This led me to think - what is the proper way of stepping back? I don't know - my instructor has always told me that Wing CHun never steps back. After reading everything these guys wrote I found this:
...you could say that stepping back is sometimes the better way to close the distance. This strategy is described in Sun Tzu's classic, 'The art of War'. I'm surprised you are not familiar with it...

Well, guess what? I certainly never heard of it. But now it is something to consider.

What does someone mean by "not the right footwork?" There must be ways to qualify what is and isn't appropriate footwork. If someone is trying to "close the distance by retreating" they have to step back. Critics can point out, "Wing Chun never steps back." Then I ask, Who is correct?

One thing I don't understand in your post is "turtling?" Can you explain what you mean?

As for these guys being afraid to get hit, I don't know them. I once met a student of Grandmaster Yip Man and I asked him if he was afraid to fight. He looked at me like I was crazy, then he said something that I didn't understand at the time. "To be a great Martial artist you need to develop two things for yourself. Caution and Hard Work."

Rogue, thanks again for your response. I hope you don't think I'm being anal, but I just want to realize something without mis-understanding it.

Thanks again,
Dan

melfid

09-08-2001, 04:41 PM

Hi Kaitain,

I read your thoughts and I'm considering them. Please allow me some time to digest them.

One thing I was thinking about clip2 as I was reading other topics on these techniques is "Coverage". Have you heard of "covering" in Wing Chun? Is it a concept in other Styles? Its new to me and I'm trying to find out more about this concept. I'm thinking that may factor into the result. Tho - I don't know for sure.

Anyone heard of coverage in any martial art style?

Thanks again,
Dan

[This message was edited by DanM on 09-09-01 at 07:50 AM.]

[This message was edited by DanM on 09-09-01 at 07:51 AM.]

melfid

09-08-2001, 04:45 PM

Hi Fmann,

I appreciate your input to this discussion.

You mentioned that these techniques are appropriate for the situation but feel they can be improved.

Do you mind explaining what needs to be improved? I was thinking of the lack of follow thrus. Only two clips had follow-up combinations (If those weren't held, I feel sorry for the guy on the working end of em)

Looking forward to your responses,
Dan

fmann

09-08-2001, 09:25 PM

First of all, these clips are for demonstration purposes so I think we're taking them a bit too seriously. There are many ways to deal with a punch, side kick, etc. -- the clips are just certain applications of WC.

As for the "never stepping back"... personally speaking, I follow the adage, you shouldn't actively step back, otherwise, just run. I can understand being forced to take a step back (or shifting) if you're being overwhelmed by the opponent's force -- which in my mind is perfectly fine. In an old seminar with Emin Boztepe, one scenario we trained was being surprised and shoved back hard, then bouncing back like a spring to unleash offense.

Clip 1 - this is clearly a demo, so I'm not going to comment on it that much. You can clearly see that the defender is purposely holding himself back and I personally feel that in a real life fight, he would have front kicked in to chain punches, etc.. So I won't comment on this clip.

Clip 2 - I think if the punch is powerful, you'll have to yield slightly to the punch. It might require stepping back slightly (as in the clip), or it might require shifting/yielding. However, I agree with Kaitain that front kick in to punching/offense would be optimum.

Clip 3 - Stop kick would have been more effective. However, I could see the application of the pak sau's if you were really overwhelmed and needed to make an opening.

Clip 4 - I think this is pretty good. I wouldn't have done it this way, but it's effective.

Clip 5 - I don't like the fact that the defender doesn't move in to the roundhouse kick or shifts his body or anything. That tan sau is not going to be effective against a strong round house (ala Muay Thai). The wide long stepping near the end reminds me more of long fist footwork than WC.

rogue

09-08-2001, 10:26 PM

fmann, in clip five that wasn't a roundhouse. On the main forum we racked Gary over the coals for putting up misleading demos on his website. He corrected the videos and/or the text that explained them. So good for Gary.

If you're going to post a demo against a certain technique, the person better be sure the technique is the one you say it is, the technique should be of good quality and that it should connect if not countered.

These schools are putting up the same crap they do in shopping mall demos, but these won't do anymore. These people by posting bad videos on their sites make a lousy first impression.

Rogue, you're an @ss!! Watchman

Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it's hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L'Amour

BTW, did I mention that Rogue was an @ss? Watchman

nospam

09-08-2001, 11:41 PM

Regardless of their philosophy, if what and how they are doing their martial art works, either in tournament or otherwise, then it's all good.

Reagrding the vidclips, I note the attackers are limited to one strike while the counter-attacker unleashes a volley. That type of two-person training is first or second level at best. It would not show the true ability of either practitioner. The side-kick clip was closest in representing true dynamic interaction.

If you have other more specific remarks you'd like, feel free to ask.

nospam.

melfid

09-09-2001, 03:18 AM

Hello Nospam,

Thanks for contributing. I agree that nothing about a practicioners skill can be derived from those demos/drills.

When I posted this thread, I wanted the non wing chun practicioner's opinion/feedback on the explanations provided for two of the techniques published.

As with most threads in a public forum the topic wavers. Hopefully we'll meander to a worthwhile conclusion.

Based on your personal experiences, what do you think of the explanations/analysis? Also, what is the context for first and second level?

thanks in advance.

Dan

"He felt that his whole life was some kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it."

mun hung

09-09-2001, 09:28 PM

Dan - I think you're getting the picture. Forget about what people preach and concentrate on what works for you.

Rogue - no insult, brother cause I happen to enjoy alot of your off-beat topics and replies, but I don't think you have any real knowlege of Wing Chun. Sorry Buddy! And what makes stepping back a sign of fear? Sometimes it's called strategy. I step back when I spar, and I usually have something nice for them when they follow me into my range.

chi sau - because you don't know it, or have never seen it means nothing. It certainly does'nt mean it's not Wing Chun. Are you really confident you know everything there is to know about Wing Chun??? My SiFu was a student of Yip Man.

sharky - stepping back can actually help you to bring your opponent closer.

I want you fellas to go to our guestbook and read what Mark Thomson wrote on stepping back.

BTW my SiHing was looking to the next guy he was about to fight in our fighting circle.

Another thing - my other SiHing does a lousy roundhouse kick because of a hip injury. He knows it also and was quite upset actually that everyone around the world saw it. Oh well.

Get back to the rest of you later, when I have some more time.

I hope I have'nt offended anyone by my replies.

My SiFu Allan Lee welcomes anyone to come visit our school anytime.

mun hung

nospam

09-10-2001, 03:47 AM

mun hung..a good post.

DanM,
Based on your personal experiences, what do you think of the explanations/analysis? Also, what is the context for first and second level?

Regarding the explanation of the Kwan Sau technique, I note that if the attacker would have forced the issue or even stayed within a closer proximity to the defender, when the defender stepped forward and raised his leg that would have immediately placed him at a disadvantage. Why? One leg on the ground vs two.

By the vidclip, the defender already committed to the stepforward, by chance, the attacker stepped back, nullifying the offensive advantage he had a moment ago. As the rest of the vidclip plays out, the rest of the move by the defender is mute as there is no engagement and by that time it is obvious the attacker is retreating in haste.

Explanation of the Pak sau Pak sau technique- There are many variations that your opponent may attack you with punches, but how do you know? In some cases, if you are fast enough to react you can step straight in to pak sau and punch. Defense and offense simultaneously. That is the best case.

I believe that explains the best case scenario and I would agree; although by that, allow me to explain my remark about first and second level ability. The attackers in both vidclips either attacked with a one technique sequence or attacked quite slowly, this is a first level or introductory type training scenario. This allows for the practitioner (the defender) to concentrate on one movement in a very rudimentary interchange. Second level would involve more than one technique to defend or interact with. Usually as one progresses from here, the speed of the attacker is increased. Third level and higher could include a counter attack by the attacker, in otherwords, the interchange is bumped up a level until skill ability is matched. Once this occurs, the next level needs to challenge the practitioner's present skill ability otherwise a plateau will occur.

In defense of this particular kwoon's practise drills, many variables would have to be considered, such as the ability level of the defender; the principles of the system; skill level of the attacker(s); what technique, and the situation therein, that was being trained; and of course that it being a training session, not every reaction initiated from the defender will be optimal. This is a primary reason for such training methods in the first place.

nospam.

rogue

09-10-2001, 04:35 AM

Mun Hung, no offense taken, but I think you've got me wrong.

"but I don't think you have any real knowlege of Wing Chun"
97% correct! I took it for a few months, been exposed to it while training JKD and have sparred 3 different WC players, 2 on a still semi-regular basis. Heck, once I even used what little I know against a fellow karateka who outclassed me during sparring. So while I do not know WC by any stretch of the imagination, I've been exposed to it more than once.

"And what makes stepping back a sign of fear? Sometimes it's called strategy. I step back when I spar, and I usually have something nice for them when they follow me into my range."

Actually nothing, I agree with you. In the videos though several of the students turned their backs to the counter and turtled. They were retreating improperly. BTW I've picked up several excellent real workd methods of retreating, good skill to have since I'm studying TKD & karate. :D

BTW, is that your Kwoon? And what do you mean by "off-beat topics and replies"? :p

DanM,
"One guy rushes in all the time with that sidekick. He uses it very intimidatingly. When he charges in so quickly, we freeze (and get kicked) or keep going back (and back and back and back). Sometimes he fakes the side kick and drops the leg and executes a frontkick or a roundhouse."

See Dan, that's why you should study TKD or karate! You'll get used to handling better executed more powerful kicks in 4 weeks time. A tip, step back at a 45 degree angle when he starts to launch the kick and then head back in and sweep him. Other thing to do is half step in on him and throw his timing and distance off. But no matter what, use the old guarded secret of the TKD masters, GET OFF LINE! ;)
What I was getting on the guy about was the silly "Kung Fu" pose he hit after executing the side kick.

Rogue, you're an @ss!! Watchman

Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it's hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L'Amour

BTW, did I mention that Rogue was an @ss? Watchman