Is it just me?... [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

taltos

02-20-2004, 12:05 PM

I agree the wing chun punch is pretty unique to wing chun. But to break it down and over complicate something as simple as a punch is somewhat ridiculous to me.

On the street... yes. In a learning environment, I'd personally rather have all of the variables spelled out for me. I want detail in the school, so I can self-correct and make all the mistakes I can and get them out of the way so I don't screw up when it really matters.

A punch is simply from point A to point B in a straight line. Sure there is tons of science behind it, including structure but some of these articles just get way out of hand.

I'm a pretty skeptical guy, so I need all that science and structure spelled out for me so I can justify putting forth the effort to master it (or at least become proficient at it). Anything else and I'd feel like I was either flailing blindly for something lucky, or just carbon copying a good fighter. Or both.

I think it makes you jaded when you marvel at how awesome the power is and all the technology behind it is so effecient.

It doesn't make me jaded. It reminds me why I love WC so much: WC takes the guesswork out of things because everything has a reason, and the reasons are based on physics and geometry. When I can see the proof of why something works efficiently, I am more apt to dedicate time to it. Besides, how can we really know if it is efficient if there are no measurements?

Do we really need a 10 page disertation on the straight punch? Was wing chun intended to go this way? I thought it was known for its simplicity and combat orientedness.

I do. As I said, I'm lazy. And if it can't be proven, I'm walking away. Maybe that's not the best way to be, but that's how I am. And when I have information to ponder, I can "do" WC anywhere. And when I know what to work on, I can practice anywhere, because I can self-correct.

Chi Sao is the same way, too much technical mumbo jumbo out there to confuse us from what we really need to learn.

How do we know what we are supposed to learn without it being clearly defined? Anything else is just blind faith in the instructor, who will invariably (until technology advances considerably) be an organic, carbon-based human, full of frailty and imperfection just like everyone else.

I think some confusion might arise by assuming that because there is a lot of technical and structural information available, a practicioner will be concentrating on all of those things in the heat of battle. Quite the opposite is true, IMO. We train in accordance to specific technical criteria so that outr bodies will recognize correct and incorrect position and structure WITHOUT us needing to be consciously aware of it. That way, outside the kwoon and in the mix, we can concentrate on more important things. Like surviving.

I don't know just some thoughts, sorry for ranting.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, so no worries here.

-Levi

Gangsterfist

02-20-2004, 12:10 PM

Understanding how it works is okay, going into a small novel about it is a waste of time IMHO. I think some people do this to boost the reputation of their lineage or make their punch (or whatever technique they are describing) sound like its better.

I am a visual learner, and learn best through experience. I think that most martial arts are made that way. I am a big fan of using what works, no matter how technical or non technical it is.

To me wing chun is simple to learn. Then once you learn its simplicity you begin to realize how complicated and technical it really is. Its subtle however, not some huge scientific discovery.

Eh I am just ranting about stuff, so I hope no one takes any offense to this.

Gangsterfist

02-20-2004, 12:19 PM

I had a debate with one of my fellow kung fu brothers about ground fighting the other week. He started babbling all this technical stuff about wing chun immoveable elbow and how effective it is and how it can be applied on the ground. I told him perhaps, but its not real practical. Eventually we decided to test it out. So he is laying on his back with his arm extended all the way out and I have his arm inbetween my legs wrapping around his shoulders and head. I am perpendicular to his body. His elbow was right on my pelvis. The minute he tried to use the immovable elbow I clinched the arm bar and negated his every move from that arm. Everytime he tried to twist and turn that elbow I just clinced it, and he never had a chance of applying this highly scientific technique that has all this skeletal structure behind it.

So there is tons of science behind the move he was describing to me. Yes the techniques, philosophy, and science behind the immovable elbow are great. Its very anti-chin na applicable. However, it didn't work. So my point to this story is don't get jaded by 10 page disertations about how perfect a move is. You can be skeptical all you want, I am that way as well about certain things.

No matter what you learn it doesn't really mean anything until you really use it.

PaulH

02-20-2004, 12:26 PM

One of the reasons that Wong never wrote a WC book as David Peterson correctly pointed out on one of the posts is that he did not want to contradict himself later on. What you know today is not the same as what the future has in store for you. The important thing is to enjoy the learning experience and to grow in your understanding.

Regards,
PH

Zhuge Liang

02-20-2004, 12:46 PM

Hi All,

IMO.

Do you need form? Yes. Do you need live experience? Yes. Forms provide a framework to get you started, so you minimize the ramp up time where you're directionless and flailing about. It also gives you a reference should you wish to further refine your movements. Live experience provides the "aliveness" part of your training. It provides you a platform on which to test what works, what doesn't work, and what needs work. Without this dynamic environment, you will not be able to adapt to a real life, even more dynamic, even more chaotic environment.

Despite the over-emphasis of liveliness over form or form over liveliness, the truth of the matter (again IMO) is that you need both. The point of contention, really, is the distribution between the two. Should it be 30/70, 50/50, or 70/30? That depends on the person. Some people can draw a lot from the forms, "see" the intention behind the movements, and be able to apply what they gain out of the forms. These people may tend to weight form training more heavily. Does that mean they can't benefit from live experience? No. Then there are people whose minds/bodies are set up to learn from experience extremely fast. You throw them in a swimming pool for the first time in their lives and they manage not only to stay afloat but to swim ashore as well. These people may value live experience more than form. Does that mean they can't benefit from forms? No.

Look around at the people in your class. I'm willing to bet that you can pick out a few that you think might benefit if they focused on forms a little more. Similarly, you will be able to pick out people that would benefit from live experience if they focused on that a little more. It all depends on how each person learns. And it doesn't have to be static. For me at least, there were times where I felt I had to lay down forms and emphasize live training a little more. Then there were times I felt I had to settle down and emphasize forms a little more.

Not unexpectedly, I'm a little wary of the opinions of "live experience is the only thing that matters" or "forms are the only thing that matters". They both matter. Each to what degree depends on you. It will probably be different from me.

Just some thoughts,

Regards,
Alan

Gangsterfist

02-20-2004, 12:47 PM

Just to clarify the subject, I am by no means against all the science behind it. I think fully understanding it is not a bad thing.

I like to train realistically. In a street fight, I probably would never use a flying dragon kick. I can say this from experience most fights I have been in didn't last long. Usually the winner was pretty obviously winning within 20 to 30 seconds. It seems to me like a lot of the stuff being published or put out on the net is more of a sales perspective of wing chun. Oh use this its so scientific.

The FACT is fighting is not a concept nor an exact science. So trying to make it one is futile. You WILL NEVER have the same fight twice.

Okay I just had to get that out in the open, just needed to ramble. Either you agree with me or you disagree. So we can agree to disagree on this subject.

Gangsterfist

02-20-2004, 12:53 PM

Alan,

I agree forms are useful. They break down the movements and structure so it can be analyzed and put in your muscle memory. I agree with you on the training apect of both form and hands on (sparring, chi sao, etc). I use both. Forms are used to refence movements, and help train the body.

I think keeping it humble along with keeping yourself humble will benefit you the most. Do not rely on science (since sometimes its theroy and not proof) but on experience. Remind yourself you can always improve and always do the same thing many different ways.

The science is there and has been for since the dawn of time. We are utilizing our knowledge now to benefit us. But, when we rely on it are we denying ourselves something?

Just some more thoughts on my own ramblings...

taltos

02-20-2004, 01:51 PM

Zhuge Liang,

Excellent post. I couldn't agree more.

-Levi

KenWingJitsu

02-20-2004, 03:08 PM

"Before I started the martial arts, a kick was just a kick, a punch was just a punch....after I started martial arts, a kick was no longer just a kick, a punch was no longer just a punch.......after I understood the martial arts, a kick was just a kick, a punch was just a punch."

Bruce Lee

Ernie

02-20-2004, 03:27 PM

kick was just a kick, a punch was just a punch."

can i get an'' a ''to the mutha funkin ''men''

my the class of analyze to paralyze come to an end :)

Gangsterfist

02-20-2004, 03:40 PM

I agree with what Ken posted, that was the answer I was looking for.

Thanks Ken.

Ultimatewingchun

02-20-2004, 05:04 PM

Gangsterfist:

Like Ken and Ernie said...Just punch the guy. If he doesn't fall down - hit him again.

"Before I got onto this forum, a punch was just a punch. While I'm on this forum, a punch is rocket-science. After I log off, a punch is just a punch."

- Victor Parlati

Knifefighter

02-20-2004, 05:44 PM

---------------------------------------------------
"Before I started the martial arts, a kick was just a kick, a punch was just a punch....after I started martial arts, a kick was no longer just a kick, a punch was no longer just a punch.......after I understood the martial arts, a kick was just a kick, a punch was just a punch."
----------------------------------------------------
When I trained WC, a punch in WC was a lot different than a boxing or Muay Thai punch. Have things changed?

Phenix

02-20-2004, 06:29 PM

OK,
Some wacky thoughts.

There is a different between

1, making a first grade math very complicated to look great

or

2, Biting the bullet to study the (all I hate it) Partial differential equation in complex plane. Because we need to design those small cell phone circuit everyone is using today ( remember those cell phone which can take pictures and never exist in the Red Boat? those in the red boat using astra body communication and have a big saving of dont have to by batteries:D)

OK Sleep sleep sleep sleep zzzzzzzzz
So I can run away from you ,bros and sis. Dont hit me with your simple sun punch. ouch ouch ouch.... KJ , Victoooor,:D

Regards
Jiglypuff

Ultimatewingchun

02-21-2004, 08:58 AM

Hendrik (Jiglypuff):

Ah...yes... Astral Projection ! Those were the good old days. I remember them well.

(Thoughts from a previous life)...

And now I work for Nextel Communications - my how things have changed ! These days...when I hit someone with the sun punch - I tell them it's Direct-Connect.

Phenix

02-21-2004, 09:42 AM

Bro Victor,

Hey bro this is great for fajing! no need to practice simple to use but buying bateries. wonder what happen if we export a few to the 1800's :D

http://www.defensedevices.com/stunguns.html

Gangsterfist

02-21-2004, 02:45 PM

I think perhaps some things are not clear about my views on this subject.

1) wing chun is technical, scientific, effective, effecient. It is one of my favorite martial arts I study (right now I am currently training in 3 different MA). I think that WC has more merits than demerits to it overall as a system. I can also see where wing chun lacks, and yes in certain areas of combat it does lack.

2) In its design its a simple martial art, only 3 forms plus a few supplement forms (dummy and weapons). I don't know how many of you train outside wing chun, but choy lay fut for example has over 50 forms, depending on how traditional you are being taught it can get over 80 forms. That is a lot of form work to remember. Wing chun is complex but in simple ways.

3) Wing chun is very dynamic, but its dynamics are so very subtle you do not see them at first. They are short, quick, effecient movements that are also subtle. Angle stepping into an opponet is very dynamic, short, to the point, effective, effecient and so on.

All these things are what makes wing chun great. Breaking it down to explain it is a good tool for a beginer, and for someone who wishes to analyze wing chun and its movements. Now to over complicate something to someone who does not fully understand wing chun or its simplicity is futile IMO. You have to crawl before you can walk. I read these articles, read posters on the internet, go to websites about how some wing chun sifu has this huge philosophy about wing chun and how great it is. Then they write this huge article with all this science behind it and over complicate it. Next image I get his how some kid (or any person really) is busting card board boxes in their basement with a pheonix's eye fist thinking how deadly they are, when infact they would probably get their a$$ whooped on the streets. I think a lot of people don't train what is practical in real fights and in real combat. I have been in enough real fights to know what I can and can't do. Which honestly is not that many fights, you can tell what you can do pretty quick in a fight. You either do and win, and do and get knocked on the ground. That is what should be trained with wing chun. The rest of techniques they may seem unrealistic for you to use can be used with proper training. In the end you will find only a handful of your favorite practical techniques they will be your bread and butter for combat.

Until you properly assert or test yourself with your known skills you will never know. Reading this essay on the chain punch and how effective it is does not make you understand it, and it does not make you a good fighter. Writing a 15 page article on the straight punch does not make you an expert or master of wing chun.

Now, I am not discrediting any sifu out there or on this forum. I am sure the people who write these articles or teach this way are good martial artists. I do however think that they are relying on their art too much and not realizing no training, technique or style is absolute.

I guess you could say I have had a break through lately in my training. I have picked up a few other systems, internal and external ones. This has opened my eyes to the limitless possibilities that a real fight has. I also realized that my current views will probably change again down the road as my training advances even more. So what should be stressed that even though this technique or style of attack is effective is not the end all be all of attacks as some of these people believe, or advocate.

canglong

02-21-2004, 03:14 PM

Gangsterfist,
reflect on how many times you said I in your last post and maybe elaborate on what it is you find so fascinating about your own opinion.

Phenix

02-21-2004, 03:27 PM

I read this somewhere last night, wrote by a mad man name Leung blik. The son of Leong Bok-Lau, or Yim Wing Chun. who I met in Disney land selling cotton candy and tofuti :D

---------

Once upon a time, direct means see through physical and motion into energy flow. it is direct and simple, just keep everything in zhong. So, the wholelistics whole will be taking care of by the nature.

Then, it came the time energy was not seen but the motion. It is direct and simple, switch the key of the engine and motion handled nicely. So one takes others' position under his stance.

Then, when that picture of motion lost too, it becomes Mac-chun. It is simple, select from the manual on the wall, a meal for Tan Da, b meal for lap da, c meal for chain punch, d desert for angle.....
That simple.
But then, that is no longer the direct as in penetrate through the motion into energy flow. that is no longer the direct as switch the key of the engine. It is chasing meal with hand.

Then, later, to make the Mac-chun meal looks great and deep, one uses the ommmm and the "storingest" wave equation --- to explain why meal was designed to be simple and direct. That is a great phylosophy!

--------

That is the story from a mad man Leong blik. Not leong bik.

He sure is worst then Leong Bik who sold cloth. This guy sell cotton candy and tofuti. living with The spining cottton candy web and soft touching sensing slikly tofuti icecream.
Perharps he see through the web and soft touching into the energy flow of DisneyLand, simple and direct---- have fun.
or perhaps that is the complete story of his mom. more complete then Rene's complete wing chun in the Disneyland way. Better keep this before comcast buy disney and fired him. :D

Phenix

02-21-2004, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by canglong
Gangsterfist,
reflect on how many times you said I in your last post and maybe elaborate on what it is you find so fascinating about your own opinion.

It is a great post by a person express and share himself freely and honestly.

thus no need to reflect. it is about encourage everyone to think for oneself , people changes time to time, and getting better. Fix at one spot to reflex.... moral...ego... make it not nature.

If WCK needs good people for next generation then WCK must provide place for free thinker to express what they believe subjectively. Sure, one can always change one's mind later for not all what one thinks now one still agree next year. But write it down frankly is great. Just dont force other to take it.

No reason is needed for why one believe. So keep dream and get curious. that is the begining of creativity. keep write and keep modified, then somedays, those can become a great thing.

and I mean equal for everyone here.

Ultimatewingchun

02-21-2004, 07:19 PM

I have to second Hendrik (Phenix) on this...There's no need for Gangsterfist to reflect on the amount of "I's" he used - it was a brilliant post by someone who could have a very big wing chun future ahead of him - as well as other martial art styles if he continues to crosstrain...

The bit about the "I's" is Tony Jacob's attempt to take Gangsterfist of course...so don't take the bait.

And by the way, Gangsterfist:

When you wrote..."Writing a 15 page article on the straight punch and how effective it is...does not make you a good fighter...I think that they are relying on their art too much and not realizing that no training, technique, or style is absolute..."

you demonstrated an understanding of the psychological and political dynamics involved in wing chun that sometimes takes other people decades to realize.

Stay on course - you're doing fine.

canglong

02-21-2004, 09:40 PM

originally posted by hendrik
No reason is needed for why one believe.
originally posted by ultimatwingchun
I have to second Hendrik You don't have to be a proponent of reason or logic to practice a martial art but to be an opponent makes no sense.

Phenix

02-21-2004, 11:45 PM

How lucky are we to live in a democratic world with free speech ?

Grendel

02-22-2004, 12:18 AM

Originally posted by Phenix
How lucky are we to live in a democratic world with free speech ?
Hi Phenix,

I seldom feel compelled to correct you, but look around, not much of the world has free speech. That's why it's so important to protect it where it does exist.

To the master, all Wing Chun would fit on a page; to the novice, 100 books cannot convey it all.

Regards,

Phenix

02-22-2004, 12:22 AM

That's why it's so important to protect it where it does exist.-----

That is what I mean. and dont abuse it too.

Ultimatewingchun

02-22-2004, 12:26 AM

Hey Grendel:

"To the master all Wing Chun would fit on a page; to the novice 100 books cannot convey it all..."

THAT'S A GOOD ONE !

Phenix

02-22-2004, 12:10 PM

Praise, Ritual, Symbolic, Magic, Curiousity, Details, Transformation these are different phases might existed in the journey into MA. But how and what one encounter and how far one carry them depend on person to person and condition. These form a complex system of interpretation, writing, teaching..... because everyone can be or might not be in different phases of thier journey.

Magic
-------

We as human love magic. We love those simple but deep elegant magic which is similar to the clear tranquil rainbow. And because we love magic, the quest started.

Praise and Ritual
---------------------

Usually, one faces Ritual, Prase of a system/lineage/legends one study.
By joining practising prase and/or ritual, one "ground" oneself in a lineage, a family, a system, a sifu, a legend, a school, or a tribe..ect. This "grounding" empower one atlease in one stage. Thus, Ritual and Praise boost one's sense of power. In this stage, one will grasp one system or lineage or sifu tightly as the only truth of universe. Thus, chapters and chapters of prase will be written. Lots of ceremonies, ritual will be practiced. We as human will do things which We feel empower us. and that is human.
But, someday, when one grows, these seems to become dull and suffocating and limiting. Because we, internally, knows praise and ritual, no matter how much we practice them they seems to have thier limitation. A sifu is no God, a lineage cant be the most original, a system cant cover all.....and we face with questions ans questions. Some might decide to move along to next journey via curiuosity. Some might decide to stay and believe someday one will find the magic in the riture or praise.

Symbolic
-----------

Since we love magic, and thus we communicate in symbolic term or visual thinking. Not the vertical logic thinking where every step has to link logically to next step. That is because we might "see" something which we know it is there but not quite figure out what happen. Or we believe there is an answer out there but we dont know the details implementation. Or, we have seen what is it but decide to communicate the concept in an easy way...ect. We works alots with symbolic, from the Crane of NgMui to magical TanSau of TanSauNg. And we know some symbols might have a deep meaning but some is our dream, vision, or even fantasy we created.

Curiousity
------------

There are non agenda and agenda curiousity while we look for magic.

Non agenda Curiousity is the driving force to progress. Because of this non agenda curiousity, one will going deep into a subject, taking them a part, putting them back, back and forth for many many times, asking questions, strongly disagreement.... Details are looked at in up way, down way, inside out, outside in....even upside down. So, lots and lots of 100 pages writing will be wrote. some of them is carbage, some of them is gold. but, it is a form of progess. Everyone did it differently, I am sure some of us might had tear a part a simple Tan sau, examine how many ways a tan sau can response, how to breath with a tan sau........

Agenda curiousity is a negative non grow limitation, because in this way, one has an agenda behind, Either, to proof something one has hold as the only truth, or to feeding and support one's ego via the common "we have it too" . So, one goes around to find indication, data.... to proof oneself is right. and certainly, lots of chapters can also be written about what one find out.

Curiousity link with Details, disregard which type of curiousity.

Transformation
--------------------

Transformation is about realization. Once realized, one can no longer turn back. Transformation simplified one's view, but it doesnt simplified the steps or the details of a creation. Some embrace transformation, some will resist it with all price. Transformation call for strong self security.

Similar a phoenix embrace and know, the flame burning it is its based for a better version of phoenix. A phoenix cant plan to avoid get burn. so does a transformation has to take place when the grounding in praise and ritual is no longer become the limitation of one.

Transformation has to take place from a grounding in chaos not a grounding in stable pice of land. Similar to symbolically in buddhism that the clean and pure lotus is ground mud, and the lotus has to feel very comfortable with mud. Another symbolical expression is about the balance of the root chakra, when past become a friend not a haunting Ghost, and the uncertain future is a well support system for one's grow instead of unknow fear. then, transformation will solidly proceed.

In addition, Now a days, people talk about Zen Chan.
Zen and Chan cannot yield transformation is the 5 skandals ( material, emotiomal, ..impulse) not become a friend of oneself. Spiritual attainment cannot achive if the foundation of daily life such as food, travel, living, sex, emotion... money ..ect do not become a support. Thus, the buddha attain his transformation sitting in a lotus. That lotus is the 5 skandals. esoteric wholesome teaching is needed for transformation. transformation cannot be done just with wise spiritual talks qouting from others or ancestors or understanding of some kuin kuits, or new age-- Zap and you are transform. trasformation is a journey.

For Transformation in WCK, A high degree of mastering has to take place step by step moving in from 1,structure, 2,motion, and only then can move into 3, Energy flow.

Why do you think people from WCK goes learning BJJ? Because they want to understand motion which they dont understand yet. what's wrong with that? none. Or this is telling us, one needs to move up to the second attainment Motion? and that transformation needs help outside WCK. Simple.

Why chapters and chapters was written about a sun punch?
May be it is about: praise to ground oneself, a deep understanding of sun punch, a subsconcious message of one cant go on without step into the realm of motion...ect. self affirmation .....ect We dont know. until we non agenda curiously dig in and find out. and certainly we all can learn every time we curiously examine a thing.

Complex subject, but who's wrong? None. Everyone is learning beleve it or not. It is just our ego or pride that wont admit others is right and keep agueing...fighting....But internally we know what is the truth that beyond that emotion of protecting ones' ego, one's family's, lineage's, system's, reputation. Truth reveal beyond that emotion or heavy feeling in us when we think. Check for that heavy feeling. we all guilty.

IMO, using the Chakra system and Buddhist symbolic, the crow chakra -- the lotus of thousand pedals, the unbounded concious --- has to be open. but in the support of the root and other chakras, the lotus will bloom but from mud. So is mud our friend or our enemy? is the wisdom seperate from the mud? or the mud is the source of wisdom? There is no different between that one key kuen kuit or ten pages writing of a sun punch. the diferent is do we stuck with our own agenda? can we read with non agenfa curiousity? and that is what the journey about.

I am sure this long post can be describe in three words "as it is" for those yodayoda. but for non jedi then probably this long post isnt details enough.

Am I know it all? No, it is just the dont know it all , that screw up, that realization of I am wrong, suppoting my grow.

just some thoughts.

Gangsterfist

02-22-2004, 04:47 PM

To clarify one thing I am not saying every piece of kung fu literature is trash. There are good publications out there. My comment was about over complicating something as simple as a punch. When we chain punch we are extending our arms with the elbow, traveling short distances and hitting with the bottom three knuckles of the fist, connecting and aligning our fist at the wrist with our elbows inside. Generating power from the ground up with our structure. There is the science behind it.

Due to current recent events I have become a closed door student with my sifu. We are a small class. In four of five months I will no longer be able to train with him. Hopefully my sigung who is in town will take me as a new student. So these last 4 months have been intense on training. My sifu wants to close the gap between beginer and advanced students. He wants us to be ready to continue our training with either wing chun or another martial art. It is also kind of emotional as well.

Since we have begining to become more intense and train soley on combat these last few months I have had some realizations. These are all what I have gained from kung fu, so results may vary.

My observation does not only apply to wing chun either, all martial arts in general this applies to. Yes, these are my opinions and expressions so you may take what you will and leave the rest. Don't start posting about how wrong I am because I respect and give everyone else the right to their own even if I do not agree with it. Lets look at the pheonix eye fist. It relates to kung fu, and only certain systems use it. I am familiar with it due to some of the cross training I have come across. It serves its purpose, has science behind it, and is a technical aspect of striking someone. The thing is you don't need it. In fact, IMO its not even that good of a strike. You can do the same thing with a regular fist and do just as much damage, have less margin for error, and reduce the risk of injuring yourself. So my bottom opinion is yes it is effective given the situation calls for it, but its not practical. If you can pull it off then that is great, but not everyone can.

Now someone might read an article of the pheonix eye punch and think of how devestating it can be, and how cool it is and how someone would be scared of you after you hit them with it. Then you think how deadly it really is and you lose sight of practical combat movements. If your strike is not percise then you better come with another one right after it. If you don't that gives your opponet time to strike you back (or grapple, or whatever). People begin to lose sight of what is effective and what is not in reality.

The chain punch is simple, effective, to the point and destructive. It is also basic wing chun attack. Its also still a punch and there is nothing too special about it. Western boxers use it, and have used it for a long time, long before wing chun was ever publically taught. Reading a 15 page essay on the straight punch is kind of ridiculous, if you cannot apply it to real combat. Otherwise its 15 pages of theory, and theory does not mean anything in a real combat situation. Theory is good, we learn off it and expand off theory. Proof however, is way better than theory.

Training realistically is what is going to help you out the most with the ability to defend yourself. Wing chun is really about defending yourself when it comes down to it. Even a chain punch comes to the center first guarding your body before it attacks. You are creating a structure that is used for fighting with science behind it. Look at the SLT. Its the first form and the most simple. There is no foot work involved it just builds structure. It also means little idea if you translate it. This to me is so important and so overlooked in martial arts on having "the little idea." Do not dwell on the complicatedness, technology, or science behind what you are doing, just do it. Act, do not react. When we break things down to the smallest detail on something simple like a straight punch, are we not dwelling on it too much? It is a good idea to learn everything about the straight punch to better understand it. It is even better to just do the straight punch and not even think twice about it. You should train your wing chun on a realistic level, otherwise it will not be as effective as it could outside of sparring and in tournaments.

If you train this way then I would believe you have a great sifu as I have had. Its kind of like what Ernie has said in the past. You can take out all your sayings, philosophy and science and throw them out the window. In a real fight you must act and not think of all the complicated stuff that goes with it.

Perhaps kung fu is not progressing in this way and its just a trend I have noticed and will go away in due time. Learning all the minute details behind your art is good for learning more about your art. Training for real life situations you can throw all that out the window if you cannot back up your science.

Anyways, these are just some of my thoughts and opinions of what I have seen lately. I also realize that perhaps I may be growing in the wrong direction and will always try my best to not become some elitist behind a single art, but keep my mind open to all possibilities.

Gangsterfist

02-22-2004, 05:37 PM

BTW, phenix excellent post. I never said I was 100% right, its just some thoughts I have been pondering lately.

Miles Teg

02-22-2004, 06:01 PM

THeres so much written that I didnt bother reading all of it. So sorry if someone mentioned this.

I think that if it interests people it is OK to write in detail about the mechanics of a punch or whatever.

One could write or read pages and pages of literature on chi sau but when practicing there knowlege/understanding they only need to do one thing and thats Chi Sao. All Im saying is something similar to the expression [100 words to describe a picture]. What is discribed in these pages of literature could be demonstrated in 2 seconds.
Such literature can be interesting to a person who is detached from their lineage head guy or seniors and wants to know whether what they are practicing is consistent with other people in different branches around the world. Or even to compare philosophies between schools / lineages / training mehtods.

Its just one of those things that either interest you or dont. For me the whole [street/reality traing] concept posts and literature bore me. In my opinion if I was that paranoid about the street there are about a hundred things I could do before preparing myself for "multiple attacker with knives" type situations.

Phenix

02-22-2004, 06:06 PM

I never said I was 100% right, its just some thoughts I have been pondering lately.-----

Dont even have to have a second though on explanation.

Those who went through knew, those who have not gone through will not understand.

why explain? Just present truely.
And you might change tommorrow, or might stick with it.

A sun can post its view, a moon can post its view, a star can post its view. a .....

People post from different chakra consciousnes or different type of spiral dynamics. there is no standard view. that is the beauty.

---------------------------
1 BEIGE (A-N) based on biological urges/drives; physical senses dictate the state of being

2 PURPLE (B-O) threatening and full of mysterious powers and spirit beings which must be placated and appeased

3 RED (C-P) l like a jungle where the tough and strong prevail while the weak serve; nature is an adversary

4 BLUE (D-Q) controlled by a Higher Power that punishes evil and eventually rewards good works and Right living

5 ORANGE (E-R) full of resources to develop and opportunities to make things better and bring prosperity

6 GREEN (F-S) the habitat wherein humanity can find love and purposes through affiliation and sharing

7 YELLOW (A'-N' or G-T) a chaotic organism where change is the norm and uncertainty a usual state of being

8 TURQUOISE (B'-O' or H-U) a delicately balanced system of interlocking forces in jeopardy at humanity's hands.

Keng Geng

02-22-2004, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Lets look at the pheonix eye fist. ... The thing is you don't need it.... my bottom opinion is yes it is effective given the situation calls for it, but its not practical. If you can pull it off then that is great, but not everyone can.
1. If it's effective, then it's practical.
2. Kung fu is about options, not limitations.
3. You can if you train. More training, more options.

Gangsterfist, there is so much more to a punch then going from A to B. What happens if it needs to go to C. the structure the punch may need to change. If you don't understand the science behind it, you won't know how to change it. Sorry for the news,, BUT. BUT. BUT. Wing Chun DOES have more than one punch.

Phenix

02-22-2004, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Keng Geng

Wing Chun DOES have more than one punch.

In my search, SLT has more then a couple energy issueing technics. Notice, Not identify by shape here but energy pattern. IE Tan sau itself has a few ways of issuing...

Thus, A palm up or Tan Sau shape or water shape is not edequate to illustrate the energy pattern and motion type of wck.

This is where details and details come in. Similar to a map, the more detail it has, the clearer the direction. Certainly, this is not for those dont know how to drive but sit infront of computer simulator thinking they are driving.

Change is reality, and A Tan Sau is not just a Tan Sau when sensing and adaptive tracking involve.

There is a term in WCK--- chasing hand.
Chasing hand's concept applied as far as when to stop a Tan sau or kang Sau. A lots can be discuss there about the sensing process/sensitivity...mind/body, adapatation.... ect. That is the stuffs in the motion catagory.

Thus, it is not something can be described in one sentence.

True it is saying without 10000 spearing one doesnt know what is spearing about. But, after that 10000 spearing one will find out it is just a begining. Because there are lots and lots of people spear more then 10000 spears and in a different way. Now, what do one going to do? That 10000 spears is just a tikect to enter to disneyland. And, the roller coaster not even started yet.

Gangsterfist

02-22-2004, 09:40 PM

I was just using it as an example. If you feel confident enough you can strike my bicept with a pheonix eye punch in combat then great for you.

That is my whole point Keng Geng. There is no concept or exact science to fighting. Fighting is complete chaos.

If something is effective it does not make it practical. Scissoring someones arm into an armbar with your legs on the ground is real effective. In a real fight its not practical. Thinking that if something is effective then its automatically practical is the kind of thought I am trying to avoid.

The wing chun punch is one of the most basic wing chun attacks that I was using as an example.

Again people are not seeing what I stated.

It is a good idea to document wing chun and all its techniques and break it down to analyze it. We can learn from this. However, everything we learn from this type of study is theory. It becomes reality when you get into a real combat situation. If your training is all theory then I would say chances are not that high for you to win. If you training is a set of proofs of what you can and cannot do in a real fight then I would say your chances are higher.

If you do not train this way then how will you know what you practically can and cannot do in a fight? If there is a better method let me know. If you can practically pull off a more advanced move that requires a high skill of control then that is great; and you are a great martial artist. If you cannot, then use stuff that is more practical. Of course for everyone its going to be different.

Writing all these technical documents and breaking things down to the naked core of it is not a bad thing. Making it sound like a sales pitch saying its superior and make it sound fail proof is completely ludacris.

Like I said earlier if you train this way then keep doing it, you have a great sifu. I have trained with both good and bad teachers and to me that is what makes the difference. A sifu that can honestly come out and admit that all of these scientific moves mean nothing if you cannot apply them in real situations is someone who is practical. That you should train realistically for what is good for you. There are many factors, height, weight, speed, endurance, will, so on and so forth. Each person is different and will naturally be better and some things, which would make them more practical.

I still train as much as you can, and know all that you can know, but only use what you can keep under control.

Phenix

02-22-2004, 09:55 PM

I was just using it as an example. If you feel confident enough you can strike my bicept with a pheonix eye punch in combat then great for you. --------

Hey for fun to tease you , dont take it so serious.
Nah, Not bicept :D

Late Cho Hong-Choy taught me to use it for cutting , slicing, ...ect , wrist and elbow.. or knee ..... ect.

Yes, if they have long arm take out that arm.

Yes, take out that immmobile elbow, that tan sau, that man sau in bai jong.

when reversely use, for throat lock and breaking finger......

It is a whole system man :D

But sure it is not about

A man, A pen, a man and a pen, a pen and a man. a man has a pen. a pen belongs to a man, a man graps a pen. A pen graped by a man........ never ending sentences but only about a man and a pen. :D

It is a good idea to document wing chun and all its techniques and break it down to analyze it. We can learn from this. However, everything we learn from this type of study is theory.

It becomes reality when you get into a real combat situation. If your training is all theory then I would say chances are not that high for you to win.
If you training is a set of proofs of what you can and cannot do in a real fight then I would say your chances are higher. -------

There might be some truth in this. But,
Do we have to destroy cars and cars in order to learn driving? :D
Life is not that simple, that's why it is beautiful.

Gangsterfist

02-22-2004, 10:31 PM

No we do not need to destroy cars to learn to use them.

In fact we can know very little about the science behind a car and still drive a car.

The pheonix eye can be used to strike any soft tissue and scrape the breastplate like you mentioned. However, its a move that requires lots of training and control. A straight punch requires less, and is pretty much just as effective.

I mentioned bicept because that would be a harder target. However, the bicept is very tender on the inside and you can penetrate right to the bone. It hurts to get hit there.

Phenix

02-22-2004, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist

The pheonix eye can be used to strike any soft tissue and scrape the breastplate like you mentioned. However, its a move that requires lots of training and control. A straight punch requires less, and is pretty much just as effective.

Tell you a secrete Yim Wing-Chun told me in ,my dream :D

phenix eye is used in old time for top to down strike.
Sun punch is for a down to up strike. to take advantage of the dynamic motion/momentum.

so, up to down use pheonix, down to up use sun punch. different starting location different condition different methods. Different tools for different things. nothing is free nothing needs no training and nothing will work everywhere.

and by the way, that sun punch was a reduce power punch. the old time strike is more damaging. so, those old fellow decide to un-power it a little and make it a punch instead of a.... :D

belief or not :D

BTW,
I mentioned bicept because that would be a harder target. However, the bicept is very tender on the inside and you can penetrate right to the bone. It hurts to get hit there.------

It would be nice to shock the internal, penetrating thru the muscles, and one doesnt use punch in the area with lots of muscle :D
We need a 1800 stun gun. opps more wck writting needed for that stun gun :D

Understood what you try to communicate. :D just trying to communicate about different stuffs from outer space. like pokemons. :D
see they exist... and to be a pokemon trainer one needs to be familiar with all types of pokemons. just Pikachu is not enough :D

canglong

02-22-2004, 11:46 PM

originally posted by hendrik
This is where details and details come in. Similar to a map, the more detail it has, the clearer the direction. . Certainly, this is not for those dont know how to drive but sit infront of computer simulator thinking they are driving. Gangsterfist and remember this is from someone who originally agreed with your opening post.

Phenix

02-23-2004, 12:12 AM

Gangsterfist and remember this is from someone who originally agreed with your opening post.---------

Does one always totally agreed with one's best friends in a discusion?

not to mention a clear details map is not equavalent to the make complex writing such as:

A man, A pen, a man and a pen, a pen and a man. a man has a pen. a pen belongs to a man, a man graps a pen. A pen graped by a man........ never ending sentences but only about a man and a pen.

02-23-2004, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Understanding how it works is okay, going into a small novel about it is a waste of time IMHO.

<snip>
I am a visual learner, and learn best through experience.

If everyone shared the same learning style (http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm), and if everyone were at the same place in their learning and development all at the same time, a single preferred solution might suffice.

If we could do a "birds- of-a-feather" study, I think we would likely find that people tend to gravitate to styles and substyles which not only appeal to them technically, but also toward environments better suited to their style of learning. Similar observations might apply to how we respectively "talk" and "write" about our subjects of inquiry and examination.

There is a lot of human element in all of this - probably a whole lot more than most of us perfectionist-techno-geeks are inclined to admit.

Eh I am just ranting about stuff, so I hope no one takes any offense to this.

Not at all. As Hendrik and others have alluded, it isn't about being "right" or "wrong." It's about the process of learning. Technical aspects of a martial art are just the beginning. Good show.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Gangsterfist

02-23-2004, 07:40 AM

Thanks to everyone who listened to my ranting. Having the technology written out across many pages of an essay is good to have. IMHO, its better to have real world practical experience with that technology rather than just study the theroy of it.

Good luck to everyone in their training however.

canglong

02-23-2004, 01:33 PM

originally posted by kj
If everyone shared the same learning style, and if everyone were at the same place in their learning and development all at the same time, a single preferred solution might suffice.kj, the proper discussion is more about focus or bound teaching methodologies "greater learning " than style. Predictable results can and are produced through tried and true methods of teaching which eliminate style, preference and illusion. Chu Hsi's Bounded Learning (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0736045686/qid=1077568101/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8522843-7870244?v=glance&s=books) Chapter 3 pgs 50 - 57. Enjoy.

Gangsterfist

02-23-2004, 02:10 PM

That was a hypothetical situation, I believe she used the word "if".

I agree with KJ. There are definately different levels of genius out there. Michael Jordan is a physical (kinesthetic) genius, for his ability to play basketball. Dave Chapelle is a comic genius. Bruce Lee was naturally genius to martial arts. John Coltrane was a musical or rythmic genius. Van Gouh was a visual and artistic genius

Some people are natural, some are not.

This threads purpose was to make a noticeable difference between what is reality and what is theory. Too much theory and no reality does not make a good fighter IMO. You could also argue that too much reality and no theory does not make a good fighter. However, my money would go on the person who has all reality and no theory Vs. the person who is all theory and no reality.

I think its important to know the difference and not get jaded by the technology that is preached to you by your art.

John Weiland

02-23-2004, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by canglong
kj, the proper discussion is more about focus or bound teaching methodologies "greater learning " than style. Predictable results can and are produced through tried and true methods of teaching which eliminate style, preference and illusion. Chu Hsi's Bounded Learning (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0736045686/qid=1077568101/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8522843-7870244?v=glance&s=books) Chapter 3 pgs 50 - 57. Enjoy.
Unfortunately, except for the comments from HFY students, there remains much debate on the value of your reference.

Customer Reviews (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0736045686/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/102-5515615-0959368?v=glance&s=books&vi=customer-reviews[/url)

And in an attempt to explicate another item on the thread, "Styles of learning" as a concept is just the education system's apologists excuse for the system's failures (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040223/D80T5VUO0.html[/url).

Every normal human being can learn readin,' 'ri-tin, and 'rithmetic (the three Rs) through any of the three "styles", auditory, visual, or kinesthetic regardless of having a preference for one or another. The failure of the students to learn is blamed on their learning styles. Most teaching in the educational realm is "Teacher talks to class," which is auditory and visual. The class is forced to learn regardless of the "style" which is presented. Most of us who have been students within the educational system have adapted to this mode of presentation and learning. But I digress...

Unlike the lecture model of the classroom, Wing Chun has always been taught traditionally one-on-one, as practically speaking, only through a kinesthetic approach can the teacher and student be sure that the student has the concept.

Instinctively, most Wing Chun practitioners know that only practical hands-on training will prepare us for street combat, which bottom-line, is the underlying goal of our martial art---emphasis on the "martial." (No, I am not advocating street fighting.)

However, if anyone wants to learn Wing Chun from books, that's their business.

Regards,

John Weiland

02-23-2004, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
That was a hypothetical situation, I believe she used the word "if".

I agree with KJ. There are definately different levels of genius out there. Michael Jordan is a physical (kinesthetic) genius, for his ability to play basketball. Dave Chapelle is a comic genius. Bruce Lee was naturally genius to martial arts. John Coltrane was a musical or rythmic genius. Van Gouh was a visual and artistic genius

Some people are natural, some are not.

This threads purpose was to make a noticeable difference between what is reality and what is theory. Too much theory and no reality does not make a good fighter IMO. You could also argue that too much reality and no theory does not make a good fighter. However, my money would go on the person who has all reality and no theory Vs. the person who is all theory and no reality.

I think its important to know the difference and not get jaded by the technology that is preached to you by your art.
Hi Gangsterfist,

I didn't see your reply before I replied. I think you said it well.

Regards,

02-23-2004, 04:11 PM

I don't know the underlying assumptions of previous posters. But it appears that the intent of my message may have been lost, so I'll risk beating this horse one last time.

Firstly, I was offering no social or political commentary on the optimal cost/benefit solution for teaching in public schools.

Secondly, I am a firm believer that "All models are wrong; some models are useful"(George Box).

Thirdly, when it comes to principles of adult learning, I am just literate enough to be dangerous, LOL.

With that out of the way ...

Indeed, everyone uses all 3 modes of learning. Individual balances are different, however. If that were not true, answers to results of relevant tests and in depth studies would be the same for everyone, and that is not the case. Same logic applies for various "intelligences."

Note: I am in no way attempting to negate the fact that "most" individuals are capable of learning more or less effectively and regardless of teaching style, "if" the learners apply themselves, as John suggested.

Also, I never asserted that teachers (of whatever subject) are or should be bound to teach in any particular way.

I will, however, assert that as learners we ourselves are responsible to optimize our own learning.

Furthermore, and IMHO, teachers don't impart learning; they facilitate learning. The act and process of learning takes place within the learner.

Still, some teachers are more effective in general at facilitating learning than others. A few extraordinary teachers are adept at facilitating learning in ways that optimize learning for a wide range of individuals. Without appropriate skill as teachers and "learning facilitators," even one on one instruction cannot guarantee effective or efficient learning will take place.

Similarly, without a being a good learner, no method of instruction is a guarantee that effective or efficient learning will occur.

Fortunately, there are ways to improve skills in both a) facilitating learning, and b) in becoming better learners.

Kinesthetic learning is obviously essential for martial arts learning. Unless I missed something, no one in this thread asserted otherwise. However, individuals with aptitude in additional learning styles may benefit by appealing to supplemental (not substitutional) means of learning; in some cases, certain individuals may benefit strongly.

As is my custom, I apparently obfuscated the crux of my earlier post. So with this tedious context setting out of the way, I'll get on with my real point:

Regardless of one's belief about teaching systems or learning styles, if someone learns or understands something better through the process of writing a 100 page essay, I say more power to them. Furthermore, if reading a 100 page essay helps someone to better understand something, or sows seeds for further inquiry and improvement, I say more power to them also. If reading or writing helps someone in some way to better facilitate others’ future learning, fabulous! Moreover, kudos to each individual who finds appropriate ways of optimizing their own learning, according to their own needs and predilections. Finally, I find no cause to criticize such individuals (e.g., those who write, those who read, those who analyze, etc.). The fact that these activities and processes don't benefit everyone equally, doesn't negate possible value for some who engage in them. That was my point.

My teacher (whom it goes without saying, I highly respect) says all of these things about training in Wing Chun:

"Smart people tend not to work hard." And "Don't rely on smartness." Yet ...
"You need to be smart enough to understand it, and dumb enough to do it."

All of these things play together. Balance is everything.

I think it's okay to cut each other a little more slack now and then, cut each other down a little less, and focus more on how to achieve our own personal best.

Phew. Now I need a nap! ;) :D

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

PaulH

02-23-2004, 04:34 PM

There you have it, G-man. It's not you. It's Kathy! I see a lioness by the prints of its paw! Ha! Ha!

Regards,
PH

Phenix

02-23-2004, 04:41 PM

Those Ming's Chinese makes life tooooo complicated!

I like to learn from this guy better.

http://www.wes.4mg.com/

John Weiland

02-23-2004, 05:38 PM

I agree with PaulH, KJ, and Phenix, but I couldn't resist the opportunity to take a poke at institutionalized "education." :p

I was merely siding with U.S. Education Secretary Rod Paige that the teachers union, NEA, is a "terrorist organization." :p

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/02/23/national1454EST0655.DTL&type=printable

Regards,

canglong

02-23-2004, 06:09 PM

originally posted by john weiland
Unfortunately, except for the comments from HFY students, there remains much debate on the value of your reference. There is no debating the animosity and disfunction the Ben Der group brings to the table you only have to look at the Ken Cheung stuffs thread to see this. Weiland, your pointless attacks do you, your sifu and your kung fu family a big disservice.

Keng Geng

02-23-2004, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Again people are not seeing what I stated. I think we're ALL seeing what you're saying, but your perception is VERY limited.

and know all that you can know, but only use what you can keep under control. The point is to control EVERYTHING, and THAT is why one must one must analyze, so that the "fight" is NOT chaos.

PaulH

02-23-2004, 07:40 PM

Okay, this is just me. A long time ago Winston Churchill gave an alarming prophesy about the coming threat of Communism - something about "an Iron Curtain has descended across Europe". Glaring Krushnev of the U.S.S.R in his most dramatic flair that surpassed even Tony Blair himself took off his shoe pounding emphatically on the podium in front of the UN; He squealed loudly also something about "We will bury you." And so when Churchill died, he thought the end of the Western Civilization was just around the corner. What Churchill did not know that the young Ronald Reagan was listening to that "curtain" speech. It made a tremendous impact on him. Years later, he too made a speech howbeit of a different kind: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" and the wall came tumbling down ever since. I hope we all can use a little optimism here and there. Who knows perhaps one of these days someone who eavedrop frequently on this forum will be inspired from what transpires here. I hope it will be another Bruce because frankly WC needs just a little more publicity. Ha! Ha!

Regards,
PH

02-23-2004, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by John Weiland
I was merely siding with U.S. Education Secretary Rod Paige that the teachers union, NEA, is a "terrorist organization." :p

Ha ha - that is funny. :D
- kj

yuanfen

02-23-2004, 08:30 PM

John-if the NEA is a terrorist organization then we are safer than I thought. I will put my bot jam do away.

Paul H-- Californians have produced some strange politicians- right and left- one day they will get it right.

KJ- right on target-if I recall bits and pieces of the thread correctly
given our customary zig zags. People learn in quite varying ways-
one learning theory doesn't fit all. Number one son- worked out his equations on paper. Number two - worked them out with his eyes closed.

Given nature's cards- I am more visual than aural. Of course I learn (wing chun) by doing and touching- but "seeing" is also important for me in MA and CMA---seeing little details of weaknesses and strengths.
Helps "seeing" structural weaknesses in people standing in front of me.

A specially favorite example of "seeing" for me is the case of Max Schmeling. Before the first fight with Joe Louis-- Schmeling watched Louis again and again and again. Then came his famous statement-"I will vin- I zee zumething". Sure enough- he kncked the great Louis out in the rematch- he noticed that after Louis's famous powerful left jab
that Louis would drop his left a bit. Wham- came Schmeling's right cross after a Louis jab. Louis was devastated- with his trainer he
reinvented himself and the return of his jab...before the rematch
(and victory)with (an aging) Schmeling and the famous reversal and soaring American pride-given the politics of the time.

Joy Chaudhuri

anerlich

02-23-2004, 09:40 PM

What Churchill did not know that the young Ronald Reagan was listening to that "curtain" speech.

I tried to leave this one alone, at the risk of getting into another fun political argument with John Weiland, but WTH ...

Reagan didn't get Gorby to do ANYTHING. Gorby would have done it all a lot quicker if Reagan had had the faintest clue of WTF to do with a Russian leader who was not replying to his inflammatory anticommunist rhetoric in kind.

FCS, you are glorifying a man who claimed "Rambo" was his favorite movie.

Aaargh no, what have I done ? .....

anerlich

02-23-2004, 09:46 PM

Chu Hsi's Bounded Learning Chapter 3 pgs 50 - 57. Enjoy.

Now THAT was a blatant plug.

And, since you bring it up, what was on p 47 and thereabouts about "Popular Wing Chun" made the "pgs 50-57. Enjoy" part very difficult.

A blatant plug II (singing I will if you will so will I) - my (abridged) review is on that site. Enjoy.

PaulH

02-23-2004, 10:09 PM

Ha! Ha! I always knew Ronald Reagan has good taste! Rambo is also one of my favorite movies! And the Country agreed...Sylvester Stallone won an academy award either in this movie? or Rocky if you are looking for proof in the pudding. I guess you can say we love a good underdog hero.

Regards,
PH

anerlich

02-23-2004, 10:46 PM

I guess you can say we love a good underdog hero.

Don't we all ... though when, other than in real sports like rugby, soccer, and cricket, was the US and Ronald Wilson Reagan (anagram: Insane Anglo Warlord) last the underdog?

(please, no one take this TOO seriously)

Were the groundhogs in Groundhog Day underdog (or underground) heroes? How about the gophers in Caddyshack?

anerlich

02-23-2004, 10:48 PM

I don't think Rambo won any awards, though Rocky did as you say.

PaulH

02-23-2004, 10:54 PM

You're absolutely right, Anerlich! For my sanity's sake I'm not taking any of this seriously! The Kangaroo stops here! Good night!

canglong

02-23-2004, 10:56 PM

originally posted by anerlich
Now THAT was a blatant plug. Not really it was germane to the topic at hand of course you are entitled to your opinion but even that does not deminish the relevancy of the topic of bound learning discussed in chapter 3 as we have now both pointed out a couples of times now ;)

Phenix

02-23-2004, 11:29 PM

So what does Chu Hsi got to do or contribute to WCK?

I must be lost.

John Weiland

02-24-2004, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by anerlich

I tried to leave this one alone, at the risk of getting into another fun political argument with John Weiland, but WTH ...

Reagan didn't get Gorby to do ANYTHING. Gorby would have done it all a lot quicker if Reagan had had the faintest clue of WTF to do with a Russian leader who was not replying to his inflammatory anticommunist rhetoric in kind.

FCS, you are glorifying a man who claimed "Rambo" was his favorite movie.

Aaargh no, what have I done ? .....
Normally I'd get out of the way while you rewrite history, but I'm smarting from your comments about the "real" sports of rugby, soccer, and whatever the third one was. :o I'm sad you didn't mention my sport of water polo. :(

Back to your comments. Who won the Cold War then? Not the pandering useful idiots of the Left.

Perhaps you're buying the spin of Gorbachev's self-serving propaganda in the theater of Leftist absurdity, when, after the fall of the Soviet Union, he spoke in Fulton, Missouri, the site of Winston Churchill's legendary 1946 iron curtain speech in which Churchill declared, "A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so lately lighted by Allied victory. From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent."

Gee, Churchill made Communism sound bad. Why would he do that? Communism only killed 100,000,000 people in the 20th Century. Let's give it another chance.

Would the Iron Curtain fall? Who won the Cold War? Who predicted the end of the Soviet regime of terror: you guessed it, Ronald Reagan.

Be thankful for Ronald Reagan and the continuation of his policies in the administration of the first President George Bush for the fact that Europe and Asia have more freedom than at any previous time in history.

Regards,

yuanfen

02-24-2004, 07:02 AM

John W--- the fact that we have amicable dialogues given our ocean of differences on political labelling-illustrates a civility that could be used in many substantial wing chun discussions.

Before any mod. notes::
I agree with Anerlich on Gorbachev in large part. First- I make zero brief for communism though I wouldnt have cared to live under the Czar or under the Kuomintang(they lobbed shells into Shaolin and disturbed the harmony of wing chun and it has not been the same since).And both regimes butchered people. And Churchill's hands were not clean in the colonies. In the slaughterhouse of history there have been many butchers hurling shibboleths from the left and right.

Gorbachev's glasnost, perestroika and demokratica(sp?) helped untie the loosening bonds in the USSR
where ethnic and economic forces were already at work. He was trying for recreating a softer gentler federation- lack of money and military support took his loose footing away. I actually met the man and his daughter and visited with him at a confererence(on federalism)in Calgary soon after the collapse of the old USSR.
(Not simple topics- and beyond left-right labels. Even Khruschev's
condemnation of Stalinism was an early seed of change. Gorbachev who had been secretary of the communist party was trying to change the party as well)
On Churchill and Reagan...I hear the mod's footsteps.

Joy

02-24-2004, 07:34 AM

At face value, some people will assume you fellows are arguing politics. My theory is that you guys plot together in order to have my posts permanently deleted from the forum. ;)

Regards,
- kj

02-24-2004, 07:55 AM

yuanfen

02-24-2004, 08:13 AM

Hi KJ: John is really a shaolin spy in disguise- he doesnt want to share the great insights he gathered from bounded learning.
joy

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Keng Geng
I think we're ALL seeing what you're saying, but your perception is VERY limited.

The point is to control EVERYTHING, and THAT is why one must one must analyze, so that the "fight" is NOT chaos.

LOL okay you are right. I will try to control everything in a fight. When the guys buddies jump in or when someone pulls a knife on me (which both have happened before) I will completely control the situation with my wing chun.
I will control every movement because its not complete chaos. Fighting is not a concept, you will never have the same fight twice. I bet all your science will help you out there, along with all your theory.

Its that kind of elitist thought I am trying to avoid. It is also what I was trying to point out.

PaulH

02-24-2004, 08:54 AM

Okay, no more politics and back to WC learning discussion. My view which posted year ago in response to whippinghand1 has not changed so far (The background was the ongoing discussion on the logics of Ernie's controversial training methods back then):

"Actually Ernie's perspective is based on the assumption that there is no single system including his that can adequately cover all aspects of reality. For the sake of discussion, I'm going to borrow the ideas of Mitroff in his well-known "Multiple Realities Model" and applied to WC according to Ernie.

First of all, from a quick perusal of his numerous posts I don't see that Ernie's real purpose is to come up with a single way or system that solves all problems. It is rather to allow himself to act. It is not the truth of his system or his views he hold that dictate his modus operandi. But only through action, he comes to learn of the "working truth" of his multiple views model, where "truth" is defined by the ability to respond not only to one's immediate problem, but to anticipate future problems, and thus gain an invaluable edge on working on them before they have gotten out of control.

He observes from his own experience and reflection that when WC methods appropriate for well-structured or bounded problems are applied inappropriately to ill-structure or messy ones in the "real" world, the result is often disastrous. Thus he contends that the solution and hope lie in the ability of each WCner to view problems from multiple views and multiple disciplines. It is his reality and his bone of contention."

Regards,
PH

Ultimatewingchun

02-24-2004, 08:54 AM

I can't resist commenting on Reagan either...I hated him with a passion...a phoney...a liar...and with no REAL respect for the working middle class, the poor, minorities, etc.

BUT I WILL SAY THIS MUCH.....Along with the subtle political pressure that the Polish Pope brought to bear on the Kremlin (remember it all starting with Lech Walesa)...

Along with this...the reason why Soviet communism fell WHEN IT DID...because it would have fallen sooner or later...

was Reagan's arms buildup (WMD's) - this was the coup-de-grace.

The Soviet economy couldn't keep up with this - Gorbachev knew it - and the game was up.

BUT THIS ARMS BUILDUP WAS NOT REAGAN...he was the grade B Hollywood actor/salesman that delivered the message - DESIGNED BY OTHERS within the corporate and the military world.

desertwingchun2

02-24-2004, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Phenix
So what does Chu Hsi got to do or contribute to WCK?

What does Yik Kam White Crane Wing Chun have to do with Wing Chun from Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yi Tai?

"I must be lost"- phenis

Duh !!!

-David

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 10:37 AM

Hijacked again by politics.

This thread was really meant to discuss the progression of martials arts and specific progressions of wing chun.

I don't care about TWC or HFY or philosophy of the art, or if it was some big part of secret society, or it was developed by the 5 elders from shaolin. This thread is not about that.

I don't care about any of that. That is not advancing the art. Lets throw all that BS out the window and discuss what really works in combat.

My main point was too much theory and no reality or no hands on means nothing. Over complicating a simple technique like a punch realistically takes away its practicality. You can write and talk theory with me all day, and I do enjoy discussing it, but if you cannot strike me, contain me, or hurt me with your combat techniques then they mean nothing in combat; and therefore its nothing but theory.

Now, if you want to discuss applying theory in reality then do so. If you want to spout more politics please go start your own flame war thread.

Cheers,
GFist

PaulH

02-24-2004, 11:04 AM

I confess that Your GF (Gee fingers?) blinded my smoking eyes. Ha! Ha! Okay, bro. I'll be good. No more straying from this watery thread.

Regards,
PH

Phenix

02-24-2004, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Hijacked again by politics.

Now, if you want to discuss applying theory in reality then do so. If you want to spout more politics please go start your own flame war thread.

Cheers,
GFist

GFist,

You know, the path to the tip of phyramid is about embrace how other thinks but not distracted by it. Those are thier thoughts, they express it and one find out, undrestand, and without getting attach to it.

Is that WCK? Yes, that is about not get distract by anything outside the gates.

And, one response if needed with the min amount of efffort, such as not chasing hands. They is a saying "a light touch is enough"

Some will never understand, because they attach to a certain method of learning, insist on certain type of learning method to be the best, the ultimate, the proper..... ect. that is similar to insist on a particular finger is the right finger to pointing at the moon. And, guess what? All writting about finger and doesnt even know how moon looks like. I understand your post on become practical.....ect.

However, on the other side,
Life, Dao, and WCK are one. It is about how to face life with grace and that is the main key to grow. Not about to control or stuck in any terretory, to be king of the jungle some where. and, guess what, before one realizes it, the king faces great trouble because when all others had adapted to Mechine gun, one is still there throwing spear.

In the journey of growing, lots of details is needed, and lots of details has to be letting go. If the grounding and the area of a land is so deep,huge and vast, one can embrace anything from bombing to earth quake. The land is always center and balance. That is Chan's Heart Ground teaching,ba vast deep land which can grow anything. Heart is land. I didnt say that is easy but give a try... :D

How one lives, acts, thinks, will reflect how one's WCK, that is Dao. It is all about energy flow. and without the vast deep land/ground , there is no advance art. Cause a small ground's energy is limited.

Just some thought

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by Phenix

Some will never understand, because they attach to a certain method of learning, insist on certain type of learning method to be the best, the ultimate, the proper..... ect. that is similar to insist on a particular finger is the right finger to pointing at the moon. And, guess what? All writting about finger and doesnt even know how moon looks like. I understand your post on become practical.....ect.

Great post! This is exactly what I am talking about. A lot of people seem (this is my perception) that their science behind fighting is absolute. Who is to say that a wing chun punch, or a choy lay fut hook is wrong or right? They both work. One might work for you better. Thinking unilaterally about martial arts is not a good thing. Thinking that your ultimate complicated science behind a simple punch is so absolute it bends the time space continuum and there is no technique more precise is, well its ridiculous.

However, on the other side,
Life, Dao, and WCK are one. It is about how to face life with grace and that is the main key to grow. Not about to control or stuck in any terretory, to be king of the jungle some where. and, guess what, before one realizes it, the king faces great trouble because when all others had adapted to Mechine gun, one is still there throwing spear.

Yes again great stuff! You must adapt to modern times. If you do not realize past your art what in reality works then you cannot advance it to the next level. Wing chun will change sometime in the future and will adapt to us evolving. Training realistically can make one more adaptive to real combat situations.

Great points phenix.

canglong

02-24-2004, 01:05 PM

originally posted by gangsterfist
Sure there is tons of science behind it, including structure but some of these articles just get way out of hand. Point 1. You emmidiately contradict your own argument by admitting there is tons of science involved in the discussion.
originally posted by gangsterfist
My main point was too much theory and no reality or no hands on means nothing. Point 2. You never prove the author of the article doesn't have the reality or experience you believe to be the basic essentials for everyones training. If he does then who are you to question him if he doesn't you could possibly be right but as of yet you have yet to make the argument that you know more than he.

John Weiland

02-24-2004, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by Phenix

Tell you a secret Yim Wing-Chun told me in my dream :D

phenix eye is used in old time for top to down strike.
Sun punch is for a down to up strike. to take advantage of the dynamic motion/momentum.

so, up to down use pheonix, down to up use sun punch. different starting location different condition different methods. Different tools for different things. nothing is free nothing needs no training and nothing will work everywhere.

Hi Phenix,

Could you explain a little more about the rationale for the top to down, down to up differences?

and by the way, that sun punch was a reduce power punch. the old time strike is more damaging. so, those old fellow decide to un-power it a little and make it a punch instead of a.... :D

Make it a punch instead of a...? What? Are you referring to the difference between send and stretch here?

A punch that connects is more damaging than one that misses.

Regards,

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by canglong
Point 1. You emmidiately contradict your own argument by admitting there is tons of science involved in the discussion. Point 2. You never prove the author of the article doesn't have the reality or experience you believe to be the basic essentials for everyones training. If he does then who are you to question him if he doesn't you could possibly be right but as of yet you have yet to make the argument that you know more than he.

canglong at this point I think we should agree to disagree.

If you reread all my posts I never said that there is not any science behind wing chun. There is lots of science. My point was using that science as a crutch when confronted with other systems, styles, and real life situations is silly.

I also stated that people who write these articles are probably very good martial artists. Go back and read my posts again you will see that I stated that. If you have the knowledge to write an article in that much depth you must really know your art. I never once denied that.

My point was, and still is that relying on the science and theory behind it is not the reality of fighting. The fact that some people get so jaded by this technology they assume its the only, or the best way to do something. Overcomplicating something as simple as a punch to make it sound like its an absolute technique is thinking on a unilateral level with martial arts. Trying to make fighting a concept and an exact science does not make sense. Its illogical. I have never had the same fight ever occur twice in my life. I have never found myself in the exact same positions.

Don't sit there all day and theorize about the straight punch. Train the straight punch.

I never once said that documenting the technology in a essay is wrong, or has no use. You just assumed I said that, or were arguing against me as a devil's advocate. Which is good, with out debate how can one prove their point. With out difference of opinion, we lose our individuality. Thinking that your technology is the best, and over complicating it is, IMHO not the direction wing chun was intended to go. Like I also stated before, this is my current opinion and as my training advances and the art advances my thoughts will evolve with them. That is the progression of training.

If you would like to state your views of progression with how you view the technology and science behind the art, by all means share. If you just want to argue with me then you are missing what I am trying to discuss here. I may be ranting a bit, but I am trying to express my thoughts of the progession of kung fu (and wing chun) to this current day. Not how it traditionally was, that is the past, and I am looking at advancing wing chun and my training along with it. Advancing the art with articles explaining how the punch (or palm strike or whatever) is an exact science and nothing is more effecient or better than it is only viewing one plane of possiblites, one plane of martial applications. That, IMHO limits you as a martial artist. If you disagree, please share your views rather than argue.

Thanks,
GFist

anerlich

02-24-2004, 02:27 PM

Gangsterfist,

I think you are right, whether or not the author of the article has deep experience, or if it is a model of precise scietific analysis and knowledge, is probably less important as to whether or not it is useful to the reader and will assist him or her in increasing their level of skill in the chosen art.

Perhaps that article is completely useless to people at one level, whereas it may be very useful to those at another (NB - I am not saying that deep science can only be understood by advanced practitioners). Or it may be more beneficial to those of certain personality types. I personally tend to tune out on stuff that narrow and deep, but others may find it fascinating.

I too dispute the notion that there is a single best method of teaching or learning that suits everybody, or even the same person all the time.

And I was never a fan of Communism ;)

Phenix

02-24-2004, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by John Weiland

Hi Phenix,

1, Could you explain a little more about the rationale for the top to down, down to up differences?
[B]
2,Make it a punch instead of a...? What? Are you referring to the difference between send and stretch here?

A punch that connects is more damaging than one that misses.

Regards,

John,

Certainly.

1, the concept is that one has to be able to send at any location and make use of the potential energy. So, say you want to shoot some one on the hill, then Lauching rokect accord with the wind will be great. And, now, if you want to blow away some one under the hill, then drop the pounder bomb down using the hill's slope .

It all has to do about striking with the consideration of others momentum. remember those resultant force stuffs? what is the cleanest way to cut a cake.....

2, no, it is always sending, it is similar to the dentist drill, what tip to use for cracking, for drilling, for polishing.... using a carbite tip or a hard rubber tip get different results.

WCK is drill and tips expert :D

PaulH

02-24-2004, 03:31 PM

I think it is a undeniable proof that WC ancestors have a good sense of humour. You will never see a phoenix bird strikes from below. It's not showy and powerful befitting a beautiful bird for one thing. Ha! Ha!

Phenix

02-24-2004, 05:02 PM

Pual,

I was driving my cousin from asia who is a chef, knows all about Chinese food to check out different Chinese food concept sunday. We came to this new age chinese food place, it looked very Zen, and my cousin order a dish; he tasted a spoon and tell me, this is fast food mix not chinese food cooking, althought it's decoration looks more then chinese.

I think, Chinese Martial Art is an art, it has its "artistic and technology".

One can not hire a movie director, plot writter, a few actors, a few on line New Age people to create a CMA style. Undoubtfully, these people can make some movie similar to Shaw Brothers, but A CMA style has to have its depth.

A lots of sweat and blood but as in chinese, it said that ---- those who knows what is going on move thier hand, one will know he has "it" or not.
I think it is similar to food, just a tea spoon, the chef can tell what is it.

PaulH

02-24-2004, 05:15 PM

You can just tell if a guy is dangerous just from the look and feel. It is as though they are "abnormal" from the rest of humanity. Some people I know have this aura. When they touch you, you just feel naked and terrifying vulnerable. Skills and power can definitely be felt indeed.

Regards,
PH

yuanfen

02-24-2004, 05:18 PM

Phoenix sez:
WCK is drill and tips expert
---------------------------------------------------
True but re. the phenix eye.
If I understand you on phoenix eye usage- we have a disagreement. If the wing chun delivery mechanism is properly developed the bird and the eye can fly up. down- wherever you want it to go.
If one is uncoordinated, stiff and muscle bound the bird does not fly much.

joy

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by PaulH
You can just tell if a guy is dangerous just from the look and feel. It is as though they are "abnormal" from the rest of humanity. Some people I know have this aura. When they touch you, you just feel naked and terrifying vulnerable. Skills and power can definitely be felt indeed.

Regards,
PH

True, but same goes for the opposite. When I see people try to do real technical moves that require a good amount of control and they don't do it right, its pretty obvious.

Again making my point that practicing theory all day does not help you much, unless you are a natural good fighter.

Phenix

02-24-2004, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
the phenix eye.
If I understand you on phoenix eye usage- we have a disagreement. If the wing chun delivery mechanism is properly developed the bird and the eye can fly up. down- wherever you want it to go.
If one is uncoordinated, stiff and muscle bound the bird does not fly much.

joy

One does use the hammer upward to hammer a nail into the roof.

russellsherry

02-24-2004, 07:08 PM

hi guys , good topic, as a disabled person i had to change many things in my wing chun the things i made work for me was i trained sil lim tao, footwork low kicks and the wing chun punch i did not worry to much abut other things untill i got these right,
also i liked the wing chun jab as well i put my success in basics basics and footwork , andalso being beaten up by my senors many times they did not take any pity on me that way as wsl sais make wing chun work for your don"t be its slave. peace
russellsherry

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 07:49 PM

Russell-

Great post! You make an excellent point of the progression of learning. One must learn to crawl before one can learn to walk. You also advanced wing chun to your body and situations. Great job! Adapting your style to your own body and limitations is key in my own opinion.

Also getting beat on by your seniors keeps you in check. My sifu always says you learn more from losing than you learn from winning. We are only humans and trial and error is a good way to learn kung fu.

Russell, you are what defines good kung fu practitioner. Good luck in your studies.

russellsherry

02-24-2004, 08:08 PM

hi gangsterfist , thanks for the kind words russellsherry

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 09:25 PM

no worries Russell.

Knowing you have weakness gives you insight. Take that insight and turn it into your advantage. Know your limitations, and do not take actions you cannot control or complete in combat, for it may be your last.

Train your technique but be mindful that there is always a counter. Know that your training is not the ultimate, but it is good for you. Train what is practical and not what is thought to be the best. Find your own techniques that fit your physique and mindset.

If you have the mindset of killing then train killing. If you have the mindset of trapping and seizing, train that. If you have the mindset of defending yourself and your loved ones train for that mindset. Be true to yourself in your training. A sifu is a good tool to teach you half way of perfecting your kung fu. The other half comes from within one's self. I still learn from my sifu and will continue to until it is no longer possible. However, I have also started down my own path of training and look to my sifu for guidance, but ultimately find my own answers. Sometimes I find myself going down the wrong path and have to back track, but then again I am only human.

Conclusion:

Think of yourself as a seedling. Your sifu plants you and teaches you the base fundamentals of your system(s). From that basis you grow your trunk and your roots. Its a sturdy foundation that only grows bigger and digs deeper with more training and hard work. Eventually your sifu trains you enough that your trunk is so strong you can now grow branches. Each branch is a continuation of your training and a symbol of your inner self. Eventually you learn advanced techniques and modify them to fit your trunk. A branch can only be supported by the trunk of the tree. So your foundation must be strong enough to support your branches. Eventually you grow into a huge tree with deep roots. These roots are stuck into the ground therefore you may not move in any different direction. So advancing in another direction is hard. After growing large enough and strong enough to support many branches and leaves you begin to grow fruit. Bound by your roots, you are still able to expand by spreading your fruit. Since you have studied this system long and hard enough you are rooted to it, and must expand your training by spreading your fruit to grow new trees. Each new tree is a new birth in your training and a new realization. From each new tree you branch off and refine your base skills. However, each new tree comes from the seedling, which came from the fruit, thus the cycle can continue. Once, you reach a certain point your tree no longer grows, but spreads itself abroad by scattering its fruits and growing new foundations...

Just some cryptic metaphoric thoughts about kung fu. You must learn to expand what you know yourself and not rely on science or concepts. You must rely on yourself ultimately. Only you know yourself better than anyone, use that knowledge to advance your ownself. Do not rely on certain technologies and sciences of your art, because someday that technology may become obsolete.

Gangsterfist

02-24-2004, 09:47 PM

...oh and by the way, I was trying to talk like Phenix LOL

Phenix, I must admit it is fun writing metaphorically.

John Weiland

02-24-2004, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by Phenix
Pual,

I was driving my cousin from asia who is a chef, knows all about Chinese food to check out different Chinese food concept sunday. We came to this new age chinese food place, it looked very Zen, and my cousin order a dish; he tasted a spoon and tell me, this is fast food mix not chinese food cooking, althought it's decoration looks more then chinese.

I think, Chinese Martial Art is an art, it has its "artistic and technology".

One can not hire a movie director, plot writter, a few actors, a few on line New Age people to create a CMA style. Undoubtfully, these people can make some movie similar to Shaw Brothers, but A CMA style has to have its depth.

A lots of sweat and blood but as in chinese, it said that ---- those who knows what is going on move thier hand, one will know he has "it" or not.
I think it is similar to food, just a tea spoon, the chef can tell what is it.
Nice story. I agree. The true chef doesn't follow a "recipe." The true Wing Chun master doesn't either. Follows the broad theme of this thread.

Regards,

Keng Geng

02-24-2004, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
Think of yourself as a seedling. Your sifu plants you and teaches you the base fundamentals of your system(s). From that basis you grow your trunk and your roots. What if your sifu's seeds have been genetically modified, thus having fewer nutrients?

Do not rely on certain technologies and sciences of your art, because someday that technology may become obsolete. Technology can become obsolete, but at the bottom of all technology, well at least in any type of computer, are the 1's and 0's.

Phenix

02-25-2004, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
...oh and by the way, I was trying to talk like Phenix LOL

Phenix, I must admit it is fun writing metaphorically.

Until you need to get into SLT and test drive it to find out what is the reality. :D

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by Keng Geng
What if your sifu's seeds have been genetically modified, thus having fewer nutrients?

Technology can become obsolete, but at the bottom of all technology, well at least in any type of computer, are the 1's and 0's.

True, it is down to binary, or perhaps even at DNA level. That is also comparing man to machine. So maybe we can look at it all combat has punches and kicks (1s and 0s). The technology that moves them is different and can be upgraded.

Not all sifu's are created equal, so results may vary...

Phenix

02-25-2004, 12:48 AM

So we dont want theory, those stuffy thinking is too much.
Ok, then develop the intuition.

Go to SLT, practiced it,

listern to what "voice" come out from your mind? Your sifu's? your's? what does it telling you? to tight? to soft? the elbow is not align?......trying to be perfect?

Feel what the body "said', feel light? heavy? stagnated? natural?

Listern, feel.....

Then, may be you need to let all of those goes.
and. let the body and nature to have a say. They might be shutup for toooo long.

A mind full with sifu's voice and one's own voice is a loaded mind.
A body feel heavy and stuck here and there is a body programed with lots of memory.

How is this type of training can get one any where? But become a programmed wooden dummy perfectionist ? IT is going to do the samething again and again but it will get no where. Because human is not a dummy but if the mind want to treat it the wooden dummy way. The body and nature just shut up and let the mind runs them.

If practice SLT is similar to going to work late at monday morning, one is doom. Fill with those, I should, he should, the trafic is jam.. but one is on the cellphone until the police knock the window.... oh Shxxt I didnt get this quite right....

If practice SLT is similar to the cooking class, which the teacher tell one, first clean the chicken, then massage the chicken, then cut the chicken,.... and totally concentrate into the chicken. .... boring and sleepy with a dull brain. Oh that sleepy is ZEN for some one. OMMMM :D

If practice SLT is similar to friday night. Then, it is closer. Let go and go home for friday, think about it next week, relax and energetic....and have fun... the star is brighter and the street is fill with people but there are lots of space for everyone....

Which way do you rather face your best competator? the friday everning or monday morning or the Chicken way? :D

Your choice. :D

I hate thoes SLT, the type similar to going to work on monday morning.
But some might love those because they feel great to hear the ancestor telling them, this is tan this is wu this is this this is that.
Who is living? the Ancestor or you?

I must be feel ****ed at the divine tonite to write all these. Please forgive me. :D

Keng Geng

02-25-2004, 01:30 AM

Originally posted by Gangsterfist
So maybe we can look at it all combat has punches and kicks (1s and 0s). The punches and kicks are techniques. Our bones, muscles, and ligaments, etc. are the 1's and 0's of martial art. Understanding how they work gives you all the techniques in the world. Knowing physiologically how the pheonix fist works, is like having a Palm Pilot - there when you need it. Here's another analogy... the basic punch, kick, tan sau, lap da, etc. is like a pocket dictionary. The rest of it - the myriad ways of punching in WC - phoenix, hook, uppercut, backfist, etc., the myriad ways of kicking in WC- sidekick, knife kick, combination kicking, etc., the locks, the breaks, the takedowns, of WC, not to mention the load of learning from the weapons, and there is so much more. They would be represented by the Oxford Dictionary.

I'd rather be the Oxford Dictionary, not the pocket. It seems you would rather be the pocket dictionary. It has always been said that Wing Chun isn't for the common thinker.

desertwingchun2

02-25-2004, 07:59 AM

"Eventually you learn advanced techniques and modify them to fit your trunk. " - GF

If you only learn technique, how advanced can it be? Think about the Choy Li Fut master who learns Wing Chun techniques them "modifies them to fit [his] trunk", is he doing Wing Chun, Choy Li Fut or did he make his own style?

"A branch can only be supported by the trunk of the tree." - GF

Principles and concepts are the trunk of Wing Chun Kuen. As soon as one begins to modify these it is no longer Wing Chun Kuen.

In the beginning and in the end a punch is a punch. Straight line full circle enjoy the trip.

-David

canglong

02-25-2004, 08:55 AM

originally posted by gangsterfist
canglong at this point I think we should agree to disagree. Gangsterfist. like others I am just trying to point out that your basis for our disagreement seems flawed and maybe if you think about it a little more you might see why that might be.
originally posted by gangsterfist
My point was, and still is that relying on the science and theory behind it is not the reality of fighting. the only thing left is luck this is the equivelant of saying I don't need to know about all these gadgets just teach me how to fly or do you suggest to your sifu I don't need to be bothered with Siu Nim Tao just teach me some self defense techniques and I'll be fine. Science and theory behind and supporting all that you know is everything in everything. The chaos factor you speak of flying a plane to the beginner is chaos as well but to the trained professional it's as natural as breathing and far removed from chaos. I subscribe to the school of thought that says the more you know the further you can go maybe you don't so sure it's all a matter of opinion and we can certainly differ there I would just like to think we differ for better reasons than what has been written so far.

marcus_pasram

02-25-2004, 09:21 AM

Hi Russel,

Originally posted by russellsherry
hi guys , good topic, as a disabled person i had to change many things in my wing chun the things i made work for me was i trained sil lim tao, footwork low kicks and the wing chun punch i did not worry to much abut other things untill i got these right...

I'll understand if you don't want to discuss your disability but I'm interested to know how it changed your approach to learning WC as well as your SiFu's approach to teaching you. For example, one SiFu modified the fighting stance to a wider base for a student with a leg problem. He explained this was to give the student more stability; something that non-disabled ppl don't have to concentrate on. I'd really like to hear your experiences/views.

also i liked the wing chun jab as well i put my success in basics basics and footwork , and also being beaten up by my senors many times they did not take any pity on me that way as wsl sais make wing chun work for your don"t be its slave. peace russellsherry
IMO great advice,

Thanks ...marcus

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 09:24 AM

The thing is binary is a system. We can relate binary to what we (humans) are limited to. Our enviroments, physics, gravity, so on and so forth. The technology that drives us (the processor, ram, Hard drive, etc) is different in each system.

If you only learn technique, how advanced can it be? Think about the Choy Li Fut master who learns Wing Chun techniques them "modifies them to fit [his] trunk", is he doing Wing Chun, Choy Li Fut or did he make his own style?

That is a great example of cross training. Historically Choy Lay Fut was a combination of two families martial arts styles. They blended the best of both styles into one. The choy lay fut master that learns wing chun and takes what he can realistically do from the system and adds it to his trunk as another branch of knowledge is a true master.

Principles and concepts are the trunk of Wing Chun Kuen. As soon as one begins to modify these it is no longer Wing Chun Kuen.

In the beginning and in the end a punch is a punch. Straight line full circle enjoy the trip.

Look at russellsherry's post earlier on this thread. He modified traditional wing chun to his body, physique, and limitations. However, his basis of training (his trunk) is still a wing chun core. To me that is wing chun. He is being effecienct and realistic with his training.

Keng Geng-
Trying to pull out a dictionary in a real fight is not as realistic as pulling out a palm pilot for quick reference. A whole dictionary could also fit on a palm pilot. If its raw data you want, and lots of it perhaps compile a huge data base of moves. Not to mention with blue tooth, and other wireless technology that palm pilot serves as a better all around tool; it hooks you to the internet where you can troll kung fu message boards, and look up other information. So your dictionary is already pretty much out dated technology as far as effeciency goes. Relying soley on the dictionary and not seeing past it for how you can progress your training is unilateral thought towards martial arts.

Science and theory behind and supporting all that you know is everything in everything. The chaos factor you speak of flying a plane to the beginner is chaos as well but to the trained professional it's as natural as breathing and far removed from chaos. I subscribe to the school of thought that says the more you know the further you can go maybe you don't so sure it's all a matter of opinion and we can certainly differ there I would just like to think we differ for better reasons than what has been written so far.

I agree with you and disagree with you here. I agree, that to fully understand something is to argue for it and against it. To break it down to its naked movements where everything you do is obvious and can be measured in science and in technology. However, my point was and still is, relying on that technology like it is the ultimate is thinking on a unilateral plane. Though a 100 page essay may come out that says its the utlimate and proves it with scientific theory. However, is this technique realistic to you? Can you pull it off exactly how its described? Do you not question what else can be done, or how it can be modified to be more effecient for your body, your structure?

I question my training, my sifus, and my progression all the time. I try to keep it in check. I make sure I can see past the technology and not become jaded by it. I once sparred a very good white crane practioner, and during the fight my whole center line theory did not really work, because the crane wanted me to attack his center, and used it to his advantage. So what happens when another style adapts to your technology? IF you have not realized this before and accepted it, you will probably not know how to react. The crane fighter would always have his arms out making the illusion that his center was wide open, when in reality it was not. Unless you have sparred a good white crane practitioner you may not understand where I am coming from.

Thus, combat is chaos. You never know whats going to happen and there are so many countless factors. Thinking that your wing chun can account for all of them is limiting your growth as a martial artists. Branching out and learning as much as you can from other systems and taking what works for you and blending them into your wing chun makes you a great martial artist.

canglong

02-25-2004, 09:51 AM

originally posted by gangsterfist
relying on that technology Gangsterfist, here is the point of contention show where the article says if we know this we rely on it therefore we don't have to train anymore!

Then why don't you practice white crane and should you spar with someone else and find limitations there perhaps you may need to switch again .... hmmmm something just doesn't sound right here....
originally posted by gangsterfist
Branching out and learning as much as you can from other systems and taking what works for you and blending them into your wing chun makes you a great martial artist. the fork in the road here ask can you learn everything about every system or can you come to understand human physiology that which governs every system in the same manner everytime.

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 10:17 AM

The article never says that. It has become my opinion and perception that is what some people are looking at. Especially those new to martial arts. It sounds more like a sales pitch than anything.

This whole thread was started as my opinion, and my expressions towards progressing as a martial artist. You ever read any sci fi or watch any sic fi movie where man relies on technology too much and in the end it consumes them? That is the point I am getting at. I do not deny it is there, I just don't think its the end all be all of ideas behind our art.

As for the white crane sparring incident, I just was not ready for what the white crane fighter used against me. That is because I had never encountered it before that match. I had to adapt slighting and do a little long range sparring to be able to give myself better position when closing in on trapping range.

I don't see how you are misunderstanding me, but that is how it goes sometimes. I have explained myself enough and if you think that relying on all the technology behind the art is good, then that is your opinion. If you do not then you are in fact agreeing with me and arguing just to argue.

canglong

02-25-2004, 10:29 AM

originally posted by gangsterfist
I read this some what ridiculous article about the wing chun punch. point of contention show where the article says if we know this we rely on it therefore we don't have to train anymore!
originally posted by gangsterfist
The article never says that. Well then maybe the article is not as ridiculous as you would like us to believe.

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 11:15 AM

Hey canglong-

You are now trying to twist my words. You are not seeing any of my points and thinking unilaterally about this subject. You seem more concerned about finding small, pointless loop holes in what I have said rather than progress the conversation. You seem more concerned with arguing against whatever I say instead of expressing your own thoughts.

The author never came out and said it is the ultimate attack, but it was implied that all other techniques were flawed compared to the one being described. This kind of eltist thought about wing chun is something I completely disagree with. If you break down any martial art to its naked core you will find science, technology, and math. Wing chun is not the only one out there. THAT IS MY POINT!

Cross training is good, infact if you want to be a great martial artists I highly recomend cross training.

If you argue against everything I say, I can only assume they are relying on that technology, but when the time comes to apply it in the countless posibilities you encounter can you? Can you adapt, or are you still stuck by rules and theories in the text book?

So again, I think I am done making my point. If you wish to express your theories, thoughts, experiences, opinions, then please do so. I am trying to promote progressive conversation we can learn from; not petty arguments.

Thanks for all of those who shared their thoughts.

anerlich

02-25-2004, 02:37 PM

What if your sifu's seeds have been genetically modified, thus having fewer nutrients?

You seem to be implying that genetic modification (which happens in nature all the time anyway) necessarily leads to a less nutritious product. WRONG.

Producing new strains of food plants and animals via specific breeding programs, hybridization, etc., which is genetic modification at one level at least, for specific purposes, has been a mainstay of agriculture for eons. The modification of DNA in the lab to do this certainly has inherent dangers at this early stage, but further research is justified and arguably essential if we are to attempt to feed an expanding population.

By your argument, the introduction of the pole to WC at a later stage was the beginning of the end. And according to one theory, WC was produced by combining the best of the best of the Shaolin styles. So by your argument, it was fundamentally screwed from day one.

Gangsterfist,

Technologies may be superseded, but that does not make them necessarily useless. After some major cataclysm, or if you were marooned somewhere away from civilization, those old skills like working with timber and stone will be much more useful than knowing computer programming and DNA recombination. It's overreliance on *specific* technology and overspecialization that leads species to grief.

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 03:11 PM

Anerlich-

I agree, that is why I also stated use what is realistic to you. I do not live in the woods away from civilization so having those skills of survival not realistically needed for me. If I camped a lot and did lots of outdoors type stuff it would be more realistic. What are the possibilities I get stranded on an island, not very high, not very realistically. More than likey I would die on the sinking ship or crashing plane. Worrying about all those what if's can mislead you as well. Training what is realistic is what is best IMO.

russellsherry

02-25-2004, 04:41 PM

hi marcus and gangsterfist, i will put about how i overcome my cerbal palsy and the fact i could not walk until i was 11 years old and how wing chun helped me with this on another post russell sherry thanks for the support guys

desertwingchun2

02-25-2004, 06:07 PM

"The choy lay fut master that learns wing chun and takes what he can realistically do from the system and adds it to his trunk as another branch of knowledge is a true master." - GF

Um, ok, but slow down a bit. This statement doesn't address the question.

"Eventually you learn advanced techniques and modify them to fit your trunk. " - GF

If you only learn technique, how advanced can it be? Think about the Choy Li Fut master who learns Wing Chun techniques them "modifies them to fit [his] trunk", is he doing Wing Chun, Choy Li Fut or did he make his own style? - DW2

The conversation is not about the master.

-David

Gangsterfist

02-25-2004, 06:28 PM

I think that ultimately it would be all of the above. Wing chun is a very versitile fighting system that can be blended with lots of other fighting systems.

I was comparing people of systems who claim to be masters (I am not disbuting their claim, I have never personally trained under them) and act like their technique is flawless compared to other systems. They back it up by scientific essays. Which is all on paper and all in theory.

I will just break it down from real experiences here.

Ground fighting:

WCK does not really address it, the answer is don't let them take you to the ground. Well, we all know that is not always an option. So what do we do then?

Training for groundfighting has also broadened my view of fighting completely. Now, that I have had training I can use it. Now that I know what can and can't be done I can apply it accordingly. Mostly Judo, Jujutsu, and wrestling is what we trained. Now I don't freeze up when in the guard position, I try to get out of it or perhaps use it to my advantage. I don't tap when my kung fu brother gets me in a decent choke, and if I lose my breath for a second that is okay. Before my grappling training I probably would have tapped out.

If I were to rely on the science behind wing chun solely I would not be able to ground fight at all.

Perhaps, I jumped the gun with the master comment.

Traditionally and historically martial artists have cross trained. Its not like you have to stick to only wing chun. Wing chun is a great martial art, but it does not have answers for everything.

If you believe that a 15 page (I think it was right around 15 pages, printed off on 8x10 standard paper, standard 14pt text) essay on the science behind the straight punch makes sense, then explain why. The thing is there are so many countless situations the straight punch could be used in, and there are so many different ways to use it. There are so many different targets to hit. Why over complicate it, why not just train it? The pheonix eye is the same thing. Why use it when you can do almost the exact same damage with a punch? If you can use it, then great for you.

My answer to your question if the practitioner was using wing chun or CLF if they trained in both...

It doesn't matter what style its considered to be as long as it works.