The non touch approach to teaching

[YongChun]

I just read again (it's been 10 years at least?) Moy Yat’s controversial article again regarding Yip Man’s teaching: http://www.moyyat.net/brice/moyyatnet.nsf It’s controversial because it wasn’t accepted by everyone and prompted for example a magazine rebuttal by Hawkins Cheung, who also was a Yip Man student.

So I was thinking that’s a great way to teach. It’s a lot easier on the body. For the next generation of students we will just go to restaurants occasionally and no one will be allowed to talk about martial arts. Chi sau will have to be done in non-contact mode only especially competitive chi sau. It would be hard to judge however.

This way of teaching seems more extreme than the Japanese approach of “shut up and do what you are told and don’t ask any questions.” Of course they have their reasons because students tend to ask 1000’s of unrelated what if questions and won’t put in the work to find out the answer as Moy Yat also stated.

To be fair, in 1977, I have met a good Moy Yat student who learned from him in Hong Kong. I was teaching him Tai Chi in exchange for some Wing Chun lessons. In the late 90’s one of Sunny Tang’s (Moy Yat student) by the name of ****y Chow came up also impressed those who played with him. So no matter what method one uses to train or teach, it seems good students can still be produced. Some teachers can be very inspirational even if they don't know much about a particular subject. (I am not implying lack of knowledge regarding Moy Yat). One of my math teachers in grade 11 really inspired me even though he encouraged only to learn the material in front of us so that we could pass the provincial (equivalent to State) exam. Another teacher before that also inspired me an in that case he didn't even know much math since he was an English teacher with no math teaching experience.

I remember in Tai Chi class that the senior students would not practice with the beginners. So the beginners all thought that the seniors were just stuck up. From the seniors point of view the juniors were a waste of time to practice with and would only result going backwards a few steps from what they were trying to achieve. For some good Tai Chi competitors look here: http://www.williamccchen.com/maxcchen.htm

Recently a Wing Chun student who is studying fencing said the same thing that senior students hate to practice with the juniors because they are so wild, relying on pure force, speed and unorthodox tactics without regard for any fencing conventions (e.g. right of way concept – and so simultaneously kill each other). He proceeded to show me his black and blue makes all over his arms from simple foil fencing with the wild bunch.

There are varying reports in how Yip Man taught. It seems his way of teaching Moy Yat was not the way he taught Leung Sheung, Lok Yiu, Hawkins Cheung, Duncan Leung and the Cheung brothers. Wang Kiu has reported that sometimes Yip Man would be black and blue from one of the Cheung brothers. Wang Kiu said the reason was that the teacher must allow some openings for the student to learn. Another teacher Kenneth Chung said that to teach beginners you sometimes have to compromise your good Wing Chun structure in order to afford them some opportunities to learn. But not all teacher’s or senior students like to do that so that’s probably where some of the hands off approaches come from until people have some reasonable level of skill.

Of course Yip Man couldn’t have taught all of his students the same way he did Moy Yat otherwise he couldn’t have transmitted the art except by Psychic methods. Then again I can see that some boxing coaches can teach by never stepping in a boxing ring with the guy they are teaching too. It might be unwise for them to do so especially with some of the wilder uncontrolled beginners.

Another perspective is that there is also a bit of an honor thing to actually touch a master. Some people use the approach of “the more you pay, then the closer to touching you can get.”

Up here the teacher always works out with all students. When I studied Karate in the 1960’s the 7th degree black belt instructor would spar with every student and furthermore led the class in punches, kicks, push-ups and whatever else we were doing. The guy was very fit and highly skilled. However years later, after I was long gone, something must have snapped since he started to have students call him “his holiness” and went around wearing Pope uniforms. He was able to generate millions of dollars that way.

[kungfu cowboy]

If you gotta go with something, a Pope uniform is a very good choice! I hope there was a hat involved!

[sihing]

Well I may get into trouble for saying this, but what the hell ah. In my opinion, if what Moy Yat said was true about Yip Man's teaching style then I think he sucked as a true teacher. One student comes up to me and says "Is it like this Sifu" and I say yes, then another student comes up and asks the same thing about the same technique but it is different and I say yes its okay too? What kind of teacher is that? It is true that to some degree the student has to be responsible for their own progression through the system. You can't baby them, and tell them every little detail and stand by their sides to watch them for every minute to make sure they are doing it correctly. This isn't practical, but if Yip Man did do like the above example then shame on him. This is probably where all the infighting between rival WC clans started from in the first place, no wonder, everyone thinks everything they are doing is correct because Yip Man told them it was all right. From what I understand of Yip's teachings, he really didn't like to teach and that once the first five were taught, they did most of the teaching after that. Once in a while Yip would correct one of his favorite students because he liked them, but it was rare for him to do this. Luckily today this is not the case with most WC Masters and teachers. My Sifu grades all the students in his Association and after each grading has a personal private lesson with each one of them to go over the areas needed for improvement. This way quality is maintained and everyone is generally on the same page when it comes down to do things correctly.

James

[Vajramusti]

James- sorry but your opinion of Ip man as a teacher IMO does not carry much weight.

People teach in different ways- and if it were not for Ip man, I doubt that you would be talking much about wing chun.

Ip Man didnt usea cookie cutter to produce students- why should he... and to judge his "uneven" teaching by current chain store standards is comparing apples and oranges.

He began the classes in HK because he had to make a living.
So in the regular classes aftera core of senior students developed
he began to give his best time to private instruction. In the private instruction he corrected some folks in great detail. Ho Kam Ming in his association with Ip man regularly did chi sao with Ip Man. There were others. But he did not touch hands with everyone specially in the general classes.

Those stories about Ip Man saying yes yes and being laissez faire
in what got by arise from chit chat talk from his general classes. The private instruction was private and sometimes private student A would not know what private student B was learning and doing. Happens with piano and violin master teachers too.
Many great CMA masters have been that way differentiating students and who was taught and what they were taught.

Master Ho is also old school- deciding what to teach to whom.

One can prefer a community college PE?101 kind of teaching with a handouts, spoon feeding, uniform multiple choice tests etc
But that is not the CMA world- apples and oranges.

Besides you have contradictory standards- earlier you went on and on about a special relationship between your sifu and sigung
and now you criticize IM for not being uniform in his teaching?

C'mon...where's the analysis?

[sihing]

Firstly Joy, my weight of opinion is equal to anyone else’s; we are all individuals and are equal in all rights. Secondly, Yip had every right to teach in anyway he choose, I just didn't agree with it and like I said above I(like each one of us on here) am entitled to that opinion, regardless if you like it or not. Thirdly, I've never contradicted myself, Sifu and GM Cheung did have a special relationship, but I don't ever think I said that Cheung taught my Sifu anything special. Sifu has a eye for MA and is able to interpret what he sees very fast and make it better, which he has done. To me the relationship wasn't the usual student/teacher type but more of a teacher/teacher relationship, since by the time my Sifu met GM Cheung he was a 24yr veteran of Chinese Martial Arts (didn't they say that it took 20yrs to master the old styles in the temple?). But I will say that Sifu did and still does consider GM Cheung to be one of his instructors, and has always shown him that courtesy, but like the old gunfight stories, that town wasn't big enough for the two of them. Forth, yes Yip Man was responsible for bringing Wing Chun out of the iron curtain and exposing it to the public, even if it was for survival which is what I had understood also about his initial reasons for teaching in the first place, but we have to all realize that if the icon called Bruce Lee was never in the picture, none of us would possibly be here, not to say I joined in the first place because of Bruce, but maybe before my time his influence could have effected my exposure to it. I believe Sifu would still have been teaching Kung-fu in Thunder Bay Ontario and I still would have joined his school, regardless of Yip's or Bruce's lives and influences, just maybe not the Wing Chun I am teaching/practicing today.

James

[Vajramusti]

Comment on James"s post in brackets:

Firstly Joy, my weight of opinion is equal to anyone else’s; we are all individuals and are equal in all rights.

((Right and weight are two quite diferent things-like free speech and good speech-like procedure and substance))

Thirdly, I've never contradicted myself, Sifu and GM Cheung did have a special relationship, but I don't ever think I said that Cheung taught my Sifu anything special. Sifu has a eye for MA and is able to interpret what he sees very fast and make it better, which he has done. To me the relationship wasn't the usual student/teacher type but more of a teacher/teacher relationship, since by the time my Sifu met GM Cheung he was a 24yr veteran of Chinese Martial Arts (didn't they say that it took 20yrs to master the old styles in the temple?).

((Commenting on your post and NOT on your teacher::

So your teacher hada special teacher/teacher relationship with
Cheung sifu but the other students didnt... but Ip Man in your opinion failed to be even handed in his teaching- holding two different values in quality control in teaching it seems))

But I will say that Sifu did and still does consider GM Cheung to be one of his instructors,

((Teacher-teacher but now an instructor!!))

and has always shown him that courtesy, but like the old gunfight stories, that town wasn't big enough for the two of them.

((So another story?))

Forth, yes Yip Man was responsible for bringing Wing Chun out of the iron curtain

((The term iron curtain was not applied to China- bamboo curtain sometimes))

and exposing it to the public, even if it was for survival which is what I had understood also about his initial reasons for teaching in the first place, but we have to all realize that if the icon called Bruce Lee was never in the picture, none of us would possibly be here,

((A bit of an overgeneralization. I respect Lee's achievements
in athleticism and movies- but my taking to wing chun had zilch to do with Bruce Lee. In the first movie i saw of him he was defending against fake boxing in the alley(?). Sensible folks distinguish between movies and reality))

[Tom Kagan]

So I was thinking that’s a great way to teach. It’s a lot easier on the body. For the next generation of students we will just go to restaurants occasionally and no one will be allowed to talk about martial arts. Chi sau will have to be done in non-contact mode only especially competitive chi sau. It would be hard to judge however.

I believe SiBak Hawkins Cheung never particularly liked Moy Yat. It probably stemmed from an incident in 1963. When they first met, Moy Yat got annoyed at something Hawkins did at Moy Yat's school, so Moy Yat lobbed a backhanded insult at his SiHing in front of Yip Man. So, when Inside Kung Fu wrote that story which included, among others, the error of Moy Yat becoming a student in 1967 instead of the correct date of 1957, it prompted SiBak's response.

Two grown men acting like children. Still, they did spend quite a bit of time together over the years. And most importantly, they came together to bury their SiFu. I can only hope my own sense of filial piety is as great.

SiFu and I talked about Kung Fu all the time. I'd imagine that anyone who was truly close to him would say the same. He would ChiSao with anyone who knew how to ask. ;) Still, he was much more hands on when he was younger and did not have many senior students.

ChiSao is hard to judge in general. But, we don't use ChiSao for that purpose, so it's not an issue. To judge our skill set, we would MaaiSeungJong.

We do hit in ChiSao. There is a joke about receiving the "Moy Flower" bruise pattern on your chest as an honor. :)

The basis of Moy Yat's teaching method could probably fill a volume or two. But, I take a whack and see if I can boil it down to three sentences: :D


Let the students play and make mistakes.
No matter how hard it may be, do not shield them from the consequences of doing and/or not doing so.
Trust in your ability to create an environment where the consequences are not catastrophic - or not large enough.



Just like raising children. :cool:

[t_niehoff]

sihing wrote:

Well I may get into trouble for saying this, but what the hell ah. In my opinion, if what Moy Yat said was true about Yip Man's teaching style then I think he sucked as a true teacher. One student comes up to me and says "Is it like this Sifu" and I say yes, then another student comes up and asks the same thing about the same technique but it is different and I say yes its okay too? What kind of teacher is that?

**A teacher that recognizes that WCK is an individual art, that depends on individual expression, and that two persons can, and will, have different ways of doing the same "technique" -- in other words, someone that isn't a dogmatist or a theoretician but sounds like an excellent instructor.

It is true that to some degree the student has to be responsible for their own progression through the system. You can't baby them, and tell them every little detail and stand by their sides to watch them for every minute to make sure they are doing it correctly. This isn't practical, but if Yip Man did do like the above example then shame on him. This is probably where all the infighting between rival WC clans started from in the first place, no wonder, everyone thinks everything they are doing is correct because Yip Man told them it was all right.

**The "infighting" has several causes IMO. But without getting into that, Yip Man also told his students to "go out and test it for yourself, I may be tricking you." Unfortunately, so very few took his advice. And those that didn't, never "got it."

From what I understand of Yip's teachings, he really didn't like to teach and that once the first five were taught, they did most of the teaching after that. Once in a while Yip would correct one of his favorite students because he liked them, but it was rare for him to do this.

**Yip realized IMO that those that were interested in developing real skill would take his advice of "testing it for themselves" and would make progress. Those that didn't do that, would never make progress regardless of how long they were in the art. All the "corrections" in the world wouldn't help the latter group.

Luckily today this is not the case with most WC Masters and teachers.

**Most "WC Masters and teachers" today have no skill and no understanding, so of course they have rigid standards of right and wrong. ;)

My Sifu grades all the students in his Association and after each grading has a personal private lesson with each one of them to go over the areas needed for improvement. This way quality is maintained and everyone is generally on the same page when it comes down to do things correctly.

**The only "quality" maintained is keeping everyone "on the same page" of dogma. "Correctness", as Yip Man pointed out by his answers to "what is the correct way", is an individual matter.

Regards,

Terence

[couch]

Originally posted by t_niehoff

**The only "quality" maintained is keeping everyone "on the same page" of dogma. "Correctness", as Yip Man pointed out by his answers to "what is the correct way", is an individual matter.

Regards,

Terence [/B]

I have to agree. Wing Chun is an expression of youself...it isn't Karate. Punches and kia's in the snow. Endless lines of people in white uniforms throwing chamber punches (Enter the Dragon comes to mind).

I feel that the rules/principles/kuen kuit should be made clear to a student and that forms are perfected, but as far as the expression of Chi Sao and then fighting simulation should be an individual expression.

This mentality that some schools put forth: "For straight punches, use this, for round, use this. Feel confident? Good. You should because you have predetermined motions." is wrong. Carbon copies of you Sifu or Sihings is not the aim of Wing Chun.

I think the best compliment a Sifu can get from his Sifu is: "Your students are very good, but they're nothing like you."

My 2 cents.

Peace.

[Vajramusti]

Terence sez:

**Most "WC Masters and teachers" today have no skill and no understanding, so of course they have rigid standards of right and wrong.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like-
Conclusions based on comparative field based survey research.

:rolleyes:

[t_niehoff]

Hi Joy,

Not really -- just an appreciation that one cannot have skill in something one has never done. I wouldn't say that someone teaching boxing that has never gotten into the ring had great "boxing skill" or really "understood boxing". Nor would I say that someone that teaches BJJ but never rolled on the mats had great "BJJ skill" or really "understood BJJ." There are some mandatory prerequisites to acquiring skill and understanding in any fighting method. So while there are lots of folks in WCK that "know" the forms and the drills (and have done them for years and years), those by themselves don't confer skill or understanding. One can't really learn WCK without fighting, just like they can't really learn to box or really learn BJJ without fighting.

Regards,

Terence

[sihing]

Terence,
So, going out an advocating fighting is a good thing to do as an instructor of a martial arts school? Once again your claims of "Only if your fighting, does one know how to fight" are quite clear. Sooner or later in your training you have to fight/spar or whatever you want to call it to test your abilities to function in a random high pressure situation. Does one have to go out to another school and challenge to do this, or go on the street and call someone out to do this? IMO you don't, all of this can be learned and practiced in the school, and the argument that your fellow students will not attack you with the same intensity is Bogus. And yes, we are all individuals and will learn things in a different way and express it all differently too, so this is why it is even more important to have uniformity in the learning and training process, not an instructor that is teaching all aspects of a art differently to every student in the kwoon.

Couch,
The idea of "Use this for straight punch or that for a front kick" is like a base foundation of a building. If you only learned the forms and basic or advanced ideas of the movements from the forms but where never shown applications then the process of figuring it all out would be longer. There are many, many ways to defend against various punches, kicks, grabs, chokes, shoots, etc. In our kwoon we do practice particular ways to defend against specific attacks yes, but once one has a complete understanding of the system, like a instructor level person, they are free to adlib and combine any type of footwork and hand technique they feel like when applying their WC. But the techniques/concepts that we do recommend to use are quite effective and simplify the process for the practicioner, especially beginners, someone throws a round punch at you, use tan sao-straight punch combined with side step in the direction of the strike. This one technique allows you to simultaneously attack & defend and get out of the way of the follow up combination punch coming from the other side. It also does many other things but the idea is simplicity and effectiveness. Obviously the opponent will not know you are going to do this so it works everytime and if it doesn't its the practicioners fault not the arts.


James

[t_niehoff]

sihing asks:

Terence, So, going out an advocating fighting is a good thing to do as an instructor of a martial arts school?

**Martial arts necessarily involve fighting are they are not martial arts. I'm not suggesting one needs to go into bars or backalleys and pick fights; we're not thugs, we're martial artists. We can find plenty of other martial artists with the same interests to help us develop our skills.

Once again your claims of "Only if your fighting, does one know how to fight" are quite clear. Sooner or later in your training you have to fight/spar or whatever you want to call it to test your abilities to function in a random high pressure situation.

**It's not just a question of 'testing' or 'pressure' -- that's like saying boxers must "eventually" ("sooner or later") get in the ring to test their boxing. No -- that's how they learn to box in the first place. And how they get better as boxers. Same with BJJ, muay thai, etc. Why do folks think they "learn" to fight (with WCK tools) without fighting? It's a myth. A myth that sells to certain people.

Does one have to go out to another school and challenge to do this, or go on the street and call someone out to do this? IMO you don't, all of this can be learned and practiced in the school,

**A lot of it can take place in the school, but the greater one's exposure to (i.e., fighting with) different methods and highly skilled fighters, the greater the rewards. You're not going to face the same things outside of your school.

and the argument that your fellow students will not attack you with the same intensity is Bogus.

**It is more than just intensity. Your fellow WCK students won't attack you with a single-leg shoot for example, and if they did, they wouldn't be nearly as skilled doing it unless they were well-trained wrestlers. So you'll never develop the ability to deal wtih a good one. Having one's fellow WCK students do "mock" non-WCK attacks is like having BJJ students pretending to attack with WCK techniques and seeing how well they could defend them. ;)

And yes, we are all individuals and will learn things in a different way and express it all differently too,

**So far, so good . . .

so this is why it is even more important to have uniformity in the learning and training process, not an instructor that is teaching all aspects of a art differently to every student in the kwoon.

**. . . and then you make a non sequitor ("it does not follow"). If the objective is individual results (improving the performance of the individual) and we agree how individuals learn and express what they learn varies with the individual, then it makes absolutely no sense to say "then we should train them all uniformly". Uniformity is important only when the dogma comes before the individual. And when that happens, the individual loses.

Regards,

Terence

[sihing]

As for "Carbon Copies", no one can duplicate exactly their Sifu. But duplication is an important aspect in this respect. If one has what you want, in this case WC skill and fighting ability, then you should duplicate them as perfectly as you can. The important part here is does the "Sifu" have what you want, WC skill. Some do and some don't, there are allot of Bogus Martial artist out there and you have to be careful. I remember a Steven Seagal article and he related a story one of his teachers told him, and that is it is better to search for 10yrs for the right teacher than to practice hard for 10yrs with the wrong teacher. I guess this means it’s better to have no habits rather than bad habits. Once you are sure of the "Sifu's" abilities, then duplicate them as best you can. After many years this may happen, and you have learned all you can from him/her, then you can start to apply your own flavor. I wouldn't recommend doing your own thing right off the bat, but to follow the system or "Dogma" as some like to put it, then eventually your own individuality will blossom. It's not about ego, and having a following of worshippers, but about passing along the system completely and then letting them express it. I could only wish I was a "Carbon Copy" of my Sifu.
James

[Vajramusti]

Terence sez:

Hi Joy,

Not really -- just an appreciation that one cannot have skill in something one has never done.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Terence:
I can agree with that.... with the caveat that folks may differ reasonably or unreasonably on what that something is.

Two problems I see- preaching to part of the choir that has experince in fighting. And second the use of the term "most masters"


On the latter- could be a definitional difference- IMO my own perception of wing chun masters would comprise a relatively small group. The rest are in it for name recognition, images or hopes of kaching.

The people in that group would not just be from my "lineage".
Many are likely to have very practical experience.They dont brag about their experienece. They dont roam on the internet. Yes and they dont enter UFC-Pride-k1.

But as I try to respond to B & B's occasional compulsive reiterations- unlike sports records- lots of real fighters do not go around waving stories of their exploits.

The best streetfighter I have known- I have seen half a dozen of his real fights- leaves no descriptions or camera records. But I was there and others saw the same things though not always at the same time. Two Gurkhas who I have known well- and very experienced with actual kukhri work- leave their smiles rather than vivid decsriptions of their handiwork- of which I have seen a bit.

It is probably important for a prospective student to probe a bit and geta sense of their teachers real skills- but kfo and ineternet "verification" is often xxxx chat.

[t_niehoff]

sihing,

You last post indicates a complete misunderstanding of the nature of fighting and what it takes to become a better fighter. If your boxing teacher was Mohammed Ali, you would never become a good boxer trying to box like Ali. In fact, Ali didn't become a great boxer trying to box like anyone -- except being the best he could be by finding what worked for him. Same with any great fighter. If you look at the Machado brothers, for instance, they all have completely different games, very different styles, and look nothing alike. Yet all are very good. When you try to "copy" anyone, you will never become very good. We all have our own "mix" (individual talents, attributes, attitudes, experiences, etc.) that is unique to us -- the "clay." Good instructors in any fighting method work from the clay, not from the dogma.

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

Actually people have been arguing these things since the early 70's maybe because of the losses to the Thais. So that resulted in various kinds of Wing Chun programs in Hong Kong and in Europe as well as in the whole Jeet Kune Do movement. Maybe some people are just discussing Jeet Kune Do and calling it Wing Chun. From the stories I hear, the German WT group seems to do OK against all the arts although there aren't any reports of successes against world class competition. Even Emin Boztepe is not looked upon highly in non Wing Chun circles maybe because of the fizzling out of a match with the Gracies or his video footage against William Cheung.

Normally it isn't practical to walk into another school to challenge them. You wouldn't live too long that way especially in the USA (worked in Germany). So that's why the have all styles tournaments and mixed martial arts competitions that are open to anyone. If my interpretation of Emin's statistics is correct then 1,000 out of 1,000,000 WT people are real fighters and a much smaller percentage compete. Of those no one has won a major MMA event. So then the stories of Wing Chun being useless will keep going however that honor is shared by most of the rest of the martial arts (Aikido, Tai Chi, Hung style, Preying Mantis etc.) as well.

[t_niehoff]

YongChun wrote:

Normally it isn't practical to walk into another school to challenge them. You wouldn't live too long that way especially in the USA (worked in Germany).

**It depends. IME you can go into any establishment (gym, school, etc.) where they fight as part of their training and they'll be more than happy to mix it up with you (they want the experience just like you do). The whole notion of it being a "challenge" came about from when someone walked into a group of nonfighters and suggested mixing it up. ;)

So that's why the have all styles tournaments and mixed martial arts competitions that are open to anyone.

**Not everyone wants to compete -- there is a much greater physical demands on training to compete in a NHB (even in a BJJ tournament) that there is in fighting as part of your training. All boxers, bjjists, muay thais, etc. fight, roll or spar (whatever you want to call it); they don't all compete.

If my interpretation of Emin's statistics is correct then 1,000 out of 1,000,000 WT people are real fighters and a much smaller percentage compete.

**What the he11 is a "real fighter"?

Of those no one has won a major MMA event.

**For some very good reasons . . . even though WCK is the most popular TCMA, the overwhelming majority of WCK schools don't train folks to fight (WCK as a nonmartial art), and to compete today in a MMA/NHB event requires solid groundfighting skills too, then you need to be fairly young, etc. It takes a lot of work.

So then the stories of Wing Chun being useless will keep going however that honor is shared by most of the rest of the martial arts (Aikido, Tai Chi, Hung style, Preying Mantis etc.) as well.

**It's not WCK that is useless. Traditional JJ hasn't won any NHBs either. It's not that TJJ is useless -- particularly since judo and BJJ is derived from it -- but that its training methods are not effective. WCK has produced fighters in the past. They developed those fighting skills by fighitng. Sum Nung, a premier WCK fighter, has said so. The trouble is folks would rather believe the myths.

Regards,

Terence

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
YongChun wrote:


If my interpretation of Emin's statistics is correct then 1,000 out of 1,000,000 WT people are real fighters and a much smaller percentage compete.

**What the he11 is a "real fighter"?

Sum Nung, a premier WCK fighter, has said so. The trouble is folks would rather believe the myths.

Regards,

Terence

A real fighter means exactly the kinds of people you are talking about all the time.

Sum Nung being a premier fighter is the same kind of story as everyone else has with their stories since he is not known to most people I would say. I don't know the first thing about him. It's the same as me telling you that Roland Wong and Jack Chin were premier fighters.

There is a guy in Vancouver by the name of Ralph Haenel who doesn't do Thai boxing or BJJ, just WT yet he has never been knocked down and just the other day handled a 5 year student of BJJ easily. The BJJ student couldn't get anything to work on him. So I guess is takes quite a few more years of BJJ. That story is from another teacher who teaches Tai Chi, Ba Qua and Tiger Claw Kung Fu and before that competed in 70 kickboxing matches. He himself was no kind of match for the WT teacher either. He said he saw a lot of very experienced fighters come to the studio and non so far was any kind of match for Ralph including those from other WC styles. A lot of good martial artists say the same things. Through their Lat sau and Chi sau program they seem to produce quality fighters who do well against the other arts. http://members.tripod.com/~RealisticSelfDefense/RalphHaenelBio.html

If those stories are true then my hat off to him. It says something about their training program. It is the feeling of some that he is in the Boztepe league but is just a much lower profile character. So this guy doesn't do BJJ or compete against boxers but finds his art can handle those. Once thing is that Ralph is super super relaxed and like all good fighters can hit like a truck.

I should be on their payroll. But if any Wing Chun/Wing Tsun/Ving Chun/Ving Tzun (whatever) guy anywhere is good then I don't mind to mention it to others.

[sihing]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
sihing,
You last post indicates a complete misunderstanding of the nature of fighting and what it takes to become a better fighter. If your boxing teacher was Mohammed Ali, you would never become a good boxer trying to box like Ali. In fact, Ali didn't become a great boxer trying to box like anyone -- except being the best he could be by finding what worked for him. Same with any great fighter. If you look at the Machado brothers, for instance, they all have completely different games, very different styles, and look nothing alike. Yet all are very good. When you try to "copy" anyone, you will never become very good. We all have our own "mix" (individual talents, attributes, attitudes, experiences, etc.) that is unique to us -- the "clay." Good instructors in any fighting method work from the clay, not from the dogma.
Regards,
Terence

First of all, if Ali became a coach then anyone's boxing game would definitely improve, no doubt about that, but not all will possess his natural gifts. The problem with your argument is that Ali was what I like to call a "spontaneous genius". His development to this level took years and years of training the basics of boxing and then, because of his individual genius, he took it all to another level. This is exactly the same as Bruce Lee, no one yet has been able to duplicate his fighting skills, at least publicly. Why is this? Because he was gifted with many things, most importantly he was obsessed with the nature of fighting and was a super trainer, besides his natural intelligence and great will inside of him. But it is true that Dan Inosanto would not be the fighter/teacher today if it was not for the influence Bruce had on him. One thing I disagree with what Bruce said is the be yourself thing. In the beginning of MA training you cannot be yourself, other wise if you already naturally had the skills to fight you wouldn't have to learn anything. In the beginning you have to follow a set pattern to learn the movement and understand the concepts you are trying to learn. Then you have to train it and train it some more until you have it within in you to perform the movement to a somewhat proficient level, all the while this is happening the intensity of the training is increasing and the difficulty too, meaning the random nature of things has to increase. Basically you are duplicating the people that have been there before you, and have actually done it. If you’re learning from someone that hasn't done it then it will take much longer to progress. It is only at this moment that you will have to start to make it up yourself to complete your training. Once this process has completed then you can start to express yourself individually. In the school I belong to, all of us instructors have the same knowledge but we do not all look alike, or have exactly the same ideas, nor do we explain things in the same manner, but essentially we are doing it the same way. It's the way we express it that is different.

To me, Bruce's idea's about JKD concepts are more of a advanced martial art philosophy, and not very good for the beginning Martial artist. Even they have a base system, Jun Fan, that they progress from.


James

P.S. Terence- It's not a complete misunderstanding, just a different understanding that doesn't agree with yours, opinions vary right.

[anerlich]

Normally it isn't practical to walk into another school to challenge them. You wouldn't live too long that way especially in the USA (worked in Germany).

Most of the early Gracie and Machado schools in California accepted challenges all the time. These were handled by purple belts. The head of the Machado org in Australia trained in schools there in the early-mid 90's and was sometimes taking several challenges a night as a purple (he is now third degree black). These were guys trying to hit him with knockout blows, not just rolling from the knees.

Matt Thornton's SBG group will generally also be happy to take challenges. There's at least one on their videos.

William Cheung took a number of challenges in Australia in the early days.

My own academy has had a few in the last few years. I even had a guy come for a private lesson and want to fight. Fortunately for me his cardio was crap and he was a sucker for snap downs (three times in less than two minutes).

I agree with what Terence said about "non-fighting" schools getting all upset.

IMO some competition involvement and results are healthy and avoid the worst of this sort of stupid shenanigans. Skills can be compared in public and in a regulated environment, and the escalation of words that lead to ambushes or criminal acts are avoided.


This is exactly the same as Bruce Lee, no one yet has been able to duplicate his fighting skills, at least publicly.

No one will ever be able to duplicate the fighting skills of a dead legend.

Seriously, Gene LeBell was able to handle Bruce fairly easily. Bruce was a great innovator and trailblazer, but IMO there are elite level fighters today who would have beaten Bruce in his prime. You may be right that no one trained harder, but then few died as young. If you run your car at 9000 RPM continuously, it's going to burn up the highway, but it's going to wear out real fast too. and you're the one who keeps telling us that hard training isn't necessary after a few years, so I'm not quite sure what your point is.

[Ernie]

challenges are alive and well ,
in the time I have trained at Gary’s there have been a few and I was involved in one

anti climatic though, dude was all talk and as soon as he found out it wasn't going to be chi sau , he was out the door and never seen again .

funny

typical wing Chun dude
:D

[t_niehoff]

Ray, IMO there are only fighters (folks that fight as part of their training) and nonfighters; "real" fighters suggests that there is some sort of "unreal" fighters.

sihing, yes, you do have a "different understanding" of fighting training, and it is quite simply wrong. You are, of course, entitled to a wrong opinion. ;) BTW, Ali's nemesis, Joe Frazier, one of the greatest boxers of all time, tried his hand at coaching -- his own son -- and screwed him up by trying to take a good, natural stick-and-move fighter and turn him into a Joe Frazier clone. He didn't work from the clay but from his way of doing things. Ali may not have fared any better; the best fighters don't always make good trainers. But if you bother to read anything written by the boxing coaches or talk to any good coaches, they'll all tell you that you start with the individual and work from there.

Andrew and Ernie make my point: if you fight as part of your training as you should (if you practice a martial art) being asked to fight isn't a big deal -- after all, you fight all the time anyway. So someone asking to mix it up with you is just another day at the gym. But when you are not a martial artist, and never fight, are afraid to fight, and have no fighting skill, the very thought of a fight becomes a challenge (to your ego, to your ricebowl).

Regards,

Terence

[sihing]

Originally posted by anerlich
No one will ever be able to duplicate the fighting skills of a dead legend.Seriously, Gene LeBell was able to handle Bruce fairly easily. Bruce was a great innovator and trailblazer, but IMO there are elite level fighters today who would have beaten Bruce in his prime. You may be right that no one trained harder, but then few died as young. If you run your car at 9000 RPM continuously, it's going to burn up the highway, but it's going to wear out real fast too. and you're the one who keeps telling us that hard training isn't necessary after a few years, so I'm not quite sure what your point is.

Terence's point was that if someone trained in boxing and was coached by Ali they wouldn't necessarily be any better of a boxer because of this. My point was that one would definitely benefit from Ali's advice and guidance, just like Dan Inosanto benefited from his experiences with Bruce Lee. It doesn't mean you or I would ever be able to duplicate their abilities, both of these men were geniuses/exceptions in their fields. I wasn't trying to make a point about training hard all the time, so I'm not sure where your coming from either. As for Gene LeBell handling Bruce "easily", I'm not sure that was necessarily the case. They were on the set and from what I understand LeBell was carrying Bruce up on his shoulders running around. If it was a real situation, things could have gone differently, so it's debateable if your initial statement is true, same can be said about today's elite fighters vs. Bruce. No one can say for sure if he would be defeated by them also, Sifu Inosanto would be a good person to ask that question. I agree that Bruce "burned" himself out to early in his life, and this was in part the cause of his early death.

Funny how you all are getting challenged. I've been at the Calgary school now for 6yrs and not once has anyone come it to challenge us. We are a very public school, this summer alone we did 20 demo's so its interesting how things like that work out. I was challenged once by a student from another school back in 93'. His teacher was pi$$ed off with us because in our advertising campaigns we used the words "Learn the most effective Martial Arts system in the world", he thought that was unfair of us to say. Well, he sent over one of his students, pretending to be a prospect. Once the class was over and the students left the training area, he challenged me to find out which art was more effective, mine or his. Well, I will say I was surprised and after a brief discussion, to which I thought I had him talked out of it, he once again challenged me. I said okay, but you throw the first punch, since I do not want to be charged with assault after it is over. We stared each other down for a few seconds and then he left, lol. The funniest thing about this so called "challenge" was that two years after the event he came to my school and apologized, telling me that his former teacher was brainwashing him. I accepted his apology and never saw him again. We too in the school have no problem accepting challenges although we have no need to look for them ourselves. Challenges are basically insecurities in people. When one learns the MA the correct way they overcome things like this, which is one of the benefits of learning a MA in the first place.

Terence,
LOL, LOL, LOL....

James

[couch]

Firstly, I can't wait until I've been in Wing Chun for about a year so that I can Chi Sao with people all over my city. I want to feel and see what other people are doing.

Second, I can't wait till it's been about 2 years so that I can mix it up with other fighters. I can't wait to challenge other people and put my Wing Chun to the test under stress. Especially with other specialized fighters...stuff I know nothing about, like BJJ. :)

I don't know why people don't mix it up more. My Sifu does it and he's handled himself well. Are people scared to have their dreams of being invincible shattered? ;)

Peace.

[Nick Forrer]

'Especially with other specialized fighters...stuff I know nothing about, like BJJ.'

Word of advice...........If you find yourself in his guard dont leave your arm hanging in the wind. A broken arm is a heavy price to pay for such a simple lesson.

[YongChun]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Ray, IMO there are only fighters (folks that fight as part of their training) and nonfighters; "real" fighters suggests that there is some sort of "unreal" fighters.


Terence

I'll go for that. Ray

[sihing]

Originally posted by couch
Firstly, I can't wait until I've been in Wing Chun for about a year so that I can Chi Sao with people all over my city. I want to feel and see what other people are doing.
Second, I can't wait till it's been about 2 years so that I can mix it up with other fighters. I can't wait to challenge other people and put my Wing Chun to the test under stress. Especially with other specialized fighters...stuff I know nothing about, like BJJ. :)
I don't know why people don't mix it up more. My Sifu does it and he's handled himself well. Are people scared to have their dreams of being invincible shattered? ;)
Peace.

Why don't people mix it up more? Firstly, how do you define "Mix it Up". If that means challenging to fulfill your ego then that is not the point of MA. If it means going out and making friends with other of different styles and systems then that is cool. If one walked into my kwoon and firstly introduced themselves, explained why they were there, and basically asked how WC works then that would be no problem either. They would be allowed an introductory lesson and if they wanted answers to specific attacks then they would be shown them, and not just shown them in a "You do this I do that" scenario, but a do what you want and I will defend it as a WC man type scenario. We just had a Muay Thai guy join the school, he said that MT is king of the ring and WC is king of the street, he's having a great time, is showing us great respect and loves the WC he is learning. No egos, no challenges, just friendly people learning something that interests them immensely.

People that have images of invincibility are just fooling themselves, because to be honest, most situations out there today are not fair ones, usually a weapon is involved and it's more than one attacker. Anyone and everyone is vulnerable, MA just try to bring some of the odds back in your favor, and IMO WC does this the best...


James