Wing Chun free sparring

[Black Jack II]

Some Wing Chun kats full range free sparring. I thought some may like this.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7343125483048978759&q=wing+chun&total=4613&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6

[wingchun187]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gW74UJxgso

[SAAMAG]

That's not wing chun...that's flailing w/ a few knees. If you're going to practice an art--you should also use it to fight with.

That's like all the karatekas that kickbox when they spar. What's the point of practicing karate if all they're going to do is box w/ a few kicks?

[Knifefighter]

That's not wing chun...that's flailing w/ a few knees. If you're going to practice an art--you should also use it to fight with.


That's what WC looks like when people use it to fight with. If you disagree, please post a link to a clip or two to show showing what it is supposed to look like in a full contact setting.



That's like all the karatekas that kickbox when they spar.

That's because kickboxing is what karate looks like when it is done full contact against fully resisting opponents.



What's the point of practicing karate if all they're going to do is box w/ a few kicks?

That's why most karatekas who fight full contact do more of a kickboxing style.

[YungChun]

There are certainly variations in skill level and variations in application that will express themselves differently in performance depending on the rule-set.. Not all karate will look like kickboxing, depending on what people think they are supposed to be doing, how they think they are supposed to be fighting, what tools they use and how.. We fought full contact in my karate school but it didn't really look like kick boxing... However, when one of our top guys fought and won in a kickboxing event, then what he did looked like kickboxing.. No one HAS to fight any particular way, again it depends on how they think they are supposed to be using the tools and what tools they use and how..

Take a look at the Lei Tai competition that Phil recently posted.. They COULD have fought just like the guys in this clip but they simply performed differently using similar tools but in a more efficient manner.. The level of skill in the clip on this thread is not the same as the level of skill in the Lei Tai clip, not all skill levels will produce the same performance and not all fighters in the same style will use the tools the same way, and how the opponent fights will also change how you fight; thus there is not one single way something looks when done at full contact/full resistance any more than every western boxer books the same when fighting different people. You can find similarities, fine motor skills diminish etc, but there is no one single way all people with different skill levels and personal styles perform.....

[SAAMAG]

That's what WC looks like when people use it to fight with. If you disagree, please post a link to a clip or two to show showing what it is supposed to look like in a full contact setting.

That's because kickboxing is what karate looks like when it is done full contact against fully resisting opponents.

That's why most karatekas who fight full contact do more of a kickboxing style.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. No offense man, I remember you from when I used to come on here a lot. That is what crap ass technique looks like.

Let me put it another way:

Boxers train the way they fight. When they train, their techniques look exactly the same in full contact application.

Muay thai fighters train the way they fight. When they train, their techniques look exactly the same in full contact application.

Brazilian Jujutsu stylists train the way they fight. When they train, their techniques look exactly the same in full contact application.


I have personally seen wing chun in application against resisting opponents, and used with correct form. A right cross is not wing chun, (and I saw a lot of those in the video). The application of the knee strikes from 5 feet away is not wing chun. Etc. Etc.

[YungChun]

Hi there Vankuen--Shprockets... ;)

I think there are a lot of different ways to express the system not the least of which reflects the level or ability of the WCK fighter.. If you fight a decent boxer vs, fight a decent Southern White Crane guy it will look totally different.. Fighting a westen boxer will tend to eliminate the need for certain moves and so IMO you have more disconnected striking than what some WCK people will think of when they think of WCK..etc... Again, it depends on who and how the fighters fight..

WCK should be training like it fights..even with the classical drill format--and I think that alone would solve a lot of problems, though not all with how most folks train.. Aside from luk sao <an attached starting point> in chi sao the moves IMO should be performed as they would be used in fighting, IE correct distance, timing and contact, for issuing power in the movements, etc..

[SAAMAG]

I wholeheartily agree with your comments there YungChun. To clarify, I'm not talking about the techniques that aren't used...but the ones that are.

Fights should be addressed based on the strengths and weakness' of both fighters...but the techniques should still be done as they were in training. Seeing a wing chun person fight with boxing is just the same as a boxer using wing chun punches.

When I fight using muay thai---I don't look like a gung fu fighter. When I fight using gung fu, I don't look like a boxer. When I fight using wing chun, I don't use boxing. If people train in a style and want to test the style's success rate [for themselves] than losing technique and reverting to "whatever" is counter-productive to impirical research.

When I fight with pure instinct (and no particular style in mind), I use whatever method suits the situation at that moment in time--and often the movements will vary based on distance or successes and failures from previous motions.

[Knifefighter]

I have personally seen wing chun in application against resisting opponents, and used with correct form. A right cross is not wing chun, (and I saw a lot of those in the video). The application of the knee strikes from 5 feet away is not wing chun. Etc. Etc.

That seemed to me to be a pretty good demonstration of what WC in actual live application would look like.

Maybe you could point me to something more along the lines of what you are talking about?

[YungChun]

That seemed to me to be a pretty good demonstration of what WC in actual live application would look like.

Maybe you could point me to something more along the lines of what you are talking about?
Aside from stray western boxing moves...

I think the difference is as simple as throwing a good punch or a not so good punch.. Same goes with any other technique or body mechanics.. You can have a sloppy boxer or a tight boxer with crisp moves—a fighter who only knows how to charge in with uncontrolled commitment or someone who measures distance and times his opponent... These are large differences that can manifest in any art/system, IMO.

What about the Lei Tai clip as a comparison?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Some Wing Chun kats full range free sparring. I thought some may like this.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7343125483048978759&q=wing+chun&total=4613&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6

Pretty much what WC looks like when the other guy hits back :D

[Black Jack II]

Pretty much what WC looks like when the other guy hits back

Ouch!!

Badabing!!!:D

[Black Jack II]

What the video shows them trying to accomplish is to make there system work under a stress based enviroment, so they can learn how to apply there skillsets in a uncontrolled situation. Of course its going to look a tad ugly, but that is how most mano-mano fights end up looking anyway.

I would wager these kids are learning far more about the importance of structure and combative flow than one would learn in chi sao or any reference point drill.

[Knifefighter]

What about the Lei Tai clip as a comparison?

Where's that?

[cobra]

Van,

Personally, I believe a right cross could fit in nicely and still fall in the principles and concepts. It is the principles and concepts that make Wing Chun, not the techniques!! Don't ever forget that no matter what your sifu says.

[SAAMAG]

Who do you know that teaches a right cross in their wing chun classes?

For fighting in general...I'm all for it. In fact that's probably my strongest punch--and it flows quite nicely with many types of punches from many types of styles (since there's only so many ways someone can move).

Point being that flailing arms and legs--is not something people should strive for in any system, and that's what I saw there. Granted--the clip shows fighting and I can admire the training intensity; but I can probably find a clip of plain ol' streetfighting that looks close to identical to what we saw there as being "wing chun".

[Knifefighter]

Point being that flailing arms and legs--is not something people should strive for in any system, and that's what I saw there. Granted--the clip shows fighting and I can admire the training intensity; but I can probably find a clip of plain ol' streetfighting that looks close to identical to what we saw there as being "wing chun".

So where is a clip of people fighting with good wing chun?

[YungChun]

So where is a clip of people fighting with good wing chun?
Again, I don't see what the confusion is all about.. Clearly there are different levels of skill in ANY ART.. as I talked about already on this thread.. There are going to be novice, intermediate and advanced where most folks are going to fit somewhere in the middle range.. There are certain basics that apply to any art, effective use of distance and movement, footwork, making angles, timing the opponent, making good power, not punching and having your wrist collapse regularly, etc....

I guess one of the reasons there is confusion is because not too many WCK folks compared to MMA, boxing, etc, do hard/full contact, but many do.. It would be nice to see more of it.. I think many folks are afraid of not looking "good enough" to put their stuff out there, in part because they think it doesn't look as good as the demos, and no it won't, but that's okay, it's not supposed to... Sadly a lot of people don't know this and so you have misunderstandings on the part of those in the art and those who want to sell the art and those outsiders who like to see good demos, who are 'shopping' for an art...

Any who... "Good" is a relative term... I think this is BETTER... And I will not criticize the performance or "use of the system" by these two practitioners, who I think have only been training for less than two years, because these boyz won their division...and good on them..

So Dale: Here is some better WCK... And thanks to Phil for posting/hosting the video..


http://www.wingchunkwoon.com/movie_viewer.asp?obj_width=320&obj_height=240&filename=images/movs/misc/lei_tai07_teaser.flv&filesize=55.6MB

[stricker]

those guys in the ring look like they're having awesome fun, but the best thing is they'll be able to look back on the video and see what mistakes they made, what they did good, what they need to change, do different etc. much better than just blindly carrying on learning stuff and not having any feedback or REAL learning experiences...

textbook wing chun or not after a while those guys will be a handful! they'll tear it up more than the form and drill masters thats for sure...

also to be honest the elbows to the spine etc where a bit scary, think they need better safety supervision :o

[SAAMAG]

So where is a clip of people fighting with good wing chun?

We didn't keep videos around when we trained during those years Knifefighter, so I've got nothing to show you; and I'm sure you'll capitalize on this by saying "than you're full of it if you can't find a video on google or utube". But in real life--not everyone walks around with a video camera every second of the day. (We were too busy actually training).

[SAAMAG]

Again, I don't see what the confusion is all about.. Clearly there are different levels of skill in ANY ART.. as I talked about already on this thread.. There are going to be novice, intermediate and advanced where most folks are going to fit somewhere in the middle range.. There are certain basics that apply to any art, effective use of distance and movement, footwork, making angles, timing the opponent, making good power, not punching and having your wrist collapse regularly, etc....

I guess one of the reasons there is confusion is because not too many WCK folks compared to MMA, boxing, etc, do hard/full contact, but many do.. It would be nice to see more of it.. I think many folks are afraid of not looking "good enough" to put their stuff out there, in part because they think it doesn't look as good as the demos, and no it won't, but that's okay, it's not supposed to... Sadly a lot of people don't know this and so you have misunderstandings on the part of those in the art and those who want to sell the art and those outsiders who like to see good demos, who are 'shopping' for an art...

Any who... "Good" is a relative term... I think this is BETTER... And I will not criticize the performance or "use of the system" by these two practitioners, who I think have only been training for less than two years, because these boyz won their division...and good on them..

So Dale: Here is some better WCK... And thanks to Phil for posting/hosting the video..


http://www.wingchunkwoon.com/movie_viewer.asp?obj_width=320&obj_height=240&filename=images/movs/misc/lei_tai07_teaser.flv&filesize=55.6MB


10x better. Kicks used at distance, punches used in midrange, and elbows used perfectly at extreme close range, sweeps done w/ great timing. Nothing flailing....

That's more what I'd say is good wing chun at full contact. But then Yungchun had a good point when he talked about skill levels. These guys were of higher skill for sure.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Who do you know that teaches a right cross in their wing chun classes?

For fighting in general...I'm all for it. In fact that's probably my strongest punch--and it flows quite nicely with many types of punches from many types of styles..."(Vankuen)


***I DON'T GET THIS :confused:

But first of all, welcome back to the forum, Van.

If you believe that a rear cross is great for fighting in general - and you understand, as so many people do, that it probably will be your strongest punch - then why wouldn't you teach it in your wing chun class?

Because it's not the prototypical wing chun vertical fist punch? So what? Isn't your wing chun class there for learning how to fight "in general"?

And furthermore, as someone else already said on this thread, the concepts and principles of wing chun have room for a rear cross within them, ie.- from a slightly longer distance than from the vertical fist punch with the centerline-facing-his-center-of-mass range.

Isn't bil sao horizontal instead of vertical? Can't a bil jee strike be horizontal? ...Now picture it with a closed fist coming from the rear hand.

Oh, but the body torgue at the hips and shoulders when throwing a rear cross breaks wing chun rules, you say?

Not if you're slightly further away - and there's an opening to land it. Then the CLOSE QUARTER wing chun "rules" don't apply.



Or they shouldn't apply.



If we're interested in fighting in general. :D :cool:

[YungChun]

After thinking about it for a while I had decided that from now on when I teach my little group that along with the standard WCK stuff we will also do standard boxing stuff and drills...

The reasons for this:

1.
Folks need to be familiar with the movements that are most commonly used here in the USA and how to use them...

2.
They need to be familar with attacking from no contact and develop longer range hand/eye coordination--and those drills help..

3.
They need to be able to attack with these tools in a reasonably competent way so when working WCK folks can experience more realistic attacks with greater variety...

Overall they expand on the attributes folks develop..

[monji112000]

jab, cross, hook, uppercut, elbow, knee are all in Wing Chun. they aren't the exactly the same as other styles that use them.

[YungChun]

Isn't bil sao horizontal instead of vertical? Can't a bil jee strike be horizontal?

Or a palm--deem...


Oh, but the body torgue at the hips and shoulders when throwing a rear cross breaks wing chun rules, you say?

Not if you're slightly further away - and there's an opening to land it. Then the CLOSE QUARTER wing chun "rules" don't apply.

Agreed so long as the mechanics are right.

When done right ala boxing, the rear punch snaps right back, along with the hips and should not over extend, unlike a reverse punch that is very extended and totally loads the front leg. So, over loading the lead leg aka violating the rules is a non issue at range IMO..

[SAAMAG]

"Who do you know that teaches a right cross in their wing chun classes?

For fighting in general...I'm all for it. In fact that's probably my strongest punch--and it flows quite nicely with many types of punches from many types of styles..."(Vankuen)


***I DON'T GET THIS :confused:

But first of all, welcome back to the forum, Van.

If you believe that a rear cross is great for fighting in general - and you understand, as so many people do, that it probably will be your strongest punch - then why wouldn't you teach it in your wing chun class?

Because it's not the prototypical wing chun vertical fist punch? So what? Isn't your wing chun class there for learning how to fight "in general"?

And furthermore, as someone else already said on this thread, the concepts and principles of wing chun have room for a rear cross within them, ie.- from a slightly longer distance than from the vertical fist punch with the centerline-facing-his-center-of-mass range.

Isn't bil sao horizontal instead of vertical? Can't a bil jee strike be horizontal? ...Now picture it with a closed fist coming from the rear hand.

Oh, but the body torgue at the hips and shoulders when throwing a rear cross breaks wing chun rules, you say?

Not if you're slightly further away - and there's an opening to land it. Then the CLOSE QUARTER wing chun "rules" don't apply.



Or they shouldn't apply.



If we're interested in fighting in general. :D :cool:

Thanks for the welcome back. I had to take some time off to wait for my wrist to get to a point where I could punch effectively again. I broke it and had 2 surgeries to get it fixed but now it seems apparent that it's not going to heal. So I've got some hardware holding things together. However now I can punch again without too much issue. Luckily it's just my left hand.

I'll try to clarify my thoughts Vic,

I see styles of martial arts as subsets--catagories if you will of prescribed methods and techniques for fighting. EVERY style has strengths and weaknesses, and those strengths and weaknessess can be seen when using the system (and that system alone) in a full contact atmosphere. Subsequently the impirical fighter would be able to determine where his or her strengths and weaknesses are in regard to that system by keeping in line with the system's techniques and boundries. Throwing in other things taints the hypothosis of the experiement if you will.

I don't consider wing chun's overhand movements to contain the same power as my MT or Boxing punches. The physical mechanics alone inhibit this. They can be similiar yes, but not the same thing (as far as the way I've learned things to be over the years).

I remember watching clips of some of your classes Vic--and my fighting method looks a lot like yours, using what comes naturally at given ranges. It can't be any simpler. But overall--when I'm testing styles, or just want to focus on one--I contain my movements to that one (to the best of my ability anyway, sometimes other stuff sneaks in instinctively).

[YungChun]

I don't consider wing chun's overhand movements to contain the same power as my MT or Boxing punches.

Disagree... Structure is one thing, power potential is another, IMO.

All the same "motors" are at work.. The quesiton is if folks use them all given what they *think* they are supposed to be doing by following "wing chun rules" which I submit were not intended to limit the use of the arm/elbow, the shoulder, the waist, the legs, and the alignment thereof, sinking, etc in making pleanty of power. And WCK elbows can be very powerful..

In that Lei Tai clip the #1 guy KOd his opponent with "hospital punches"--they seemed to have pleanty of power to me... :)

[SAAMAG]

See I thought he ko'd him with the elbows. When he fell first--it was because of a right elbow.

[YungChun]

See I thought he ko'd him with the elbows. When he fell first--it was because of a right elbow.
Ask Phil.. They're calling them "hospital punches"..

In any case there is lots of power that can be made with WCK mechanics.. Aside from my own experiences, I have seen others send people flying through the air with palms.. AMAZING power is possible...

It's like in boxing. The jab is not supposed to be that powerful, but fast.. The rear hand or inside hook is more powerful but slower or needs a delivery system.. The same idea is found in different ways to apply the moves in WCK.

[SAAMAG]

I remember what Phil was saying at the end...from the fighting clip the first time I saw the wavering was after the elbow--and then when he connected with like 3 elbows in succession I knew it was pretty much over for the other guy.

You're right Yung--could be MY limitation or natural ability in either one. When I hit a heavy bag using wing chun I dont get anywhere near the same result as when I hit it with boxing. But again--probably my limitation. Just like the styles, we individuals have strengths and weaknessess as well.

[YungChun]

Figure out where the extra power is coming from and then put it back into the WCK moves..

I liken the standard punch, at range to the jab...

The whipping punch to the hook... both come from the hips/waist the whip whips more AND thrusts..

The deem to the straight right or rear right vertical to rear right horiz.. Both can use major leg/hip/shoulder elements..

The options of moving/driving through the target or center with the horse with full body mass is there in both...

The 'sitting' in WCK is similar in how boxers set and hook we whip...

The uppercut to the splitting punch or wong jung, very similar ..both are very powerful...

CK elbow very powerful..

Biu Jee elbow? Massive power..

Deem Gerk? Massive power..

[wiz cool c]

That's not wing chun...that's flailing w/ a few knees. If you're going to practice an art--you should also use it to fight with.

That's like all the karatekas that kickbox when they spar. What's the point of practicing karate if all they're going to do is box w/ a few kicks?


I've got to disagree with you. What do you think Wing Chun would look like a Shaw Brothers Kung Fu movie. That definitely looked like Wing Chun.

[southernkf]

I've got to disagree with you. What do you think Wing Chun would look like a Shaw Brothers Kung Fu movie. That definitely looked like Wing Chun.

I don't mean to offend, but I too have to question what in that video was wing chun. Granted wing chun in application won't look perfect or like some shaw bros movie, not sure any one suggested it would. But is this really how wing chun looks in application? I disagree. For a comparison, I have seen amature boxers/kick boxers that don't look much different, then I have seen professionals that look quite different. The difference is the skill level.

If you think it is wing chun, ask what principles were followed in these matches. To me it looked like the more aggressive and better fit fighter was winning by overwhelming the opponent, not by any real skill. I would question that this is the wing chun Yip Man held dear and espoused.

Where are the stances? Since when do the shoulder drive the punches? Where in wing chun are these ground techniques and muy thai knees that are being applied? I honestly haven't seen much that is wing chun. Using Chain punches and a front kick doesn't makes something wing chun.

I do give then kudos for going in the ring though. I think they are testing stuff and they have a sense of how they can fight. I just don't see much (or any) wing chun.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The human body can only move in so many ways that are "unique" and rule sets can easily determine how a fight will look.

Full Contact WC with a person hitting back is NOT a "pretty" sight unless their is a huge skill descrepency.

[Knifefighter]

**** Sits back and lets SR handle this one.

[Phil Redmond]

So what does a WC person do if he ends up on the ground? One of the uses for the Wing Chun Gwai Mah is to deal with an opponent who is on the ground.
From what I've heard WC Master Sum Nung (sp)? could fight on the ground.
Also, who ever said there were no knee strikes, head butts, or whatever you need to use to survive in WC?
I've learned knee strikes from at least 2 Sifus who studied under Yip Man.
WC is principle based. You use whatever works for a given situation.
Remember WC was designed for rebels to fight/ambush/kill or Manchu. Wing Chun is a "Kuen" not a "Pai" nor a "Do". To win by any means neccessary is the goal. You'll rarely see PERFECT technique against a resisting opponent. Fighters know that.
PR

[sanjuro_ronin]

One of my WC buddies once told me any knee up the centerline is a WC Knee :D

I have seen WC look like WC in a REAL fight, a few times actually, the skill level was obvious to all, he toyed with the other guy.
But when my WC buddies go at it full contact, while there may be the occasional look of WC since they are both WC it is more like a typical K-1 match.

[southernkf]

So what does a WC person do if he ends up on the ground? One of the uses for the Wing Chun Gwai Mah is to deal with an opponent who is on the ground.
From what I've heard WC Master Sum Nung (sp)? could fight on the ground.
Also, who ever said there were no knee strike, head butts, or whatever you need to use to survive in WC? I've learned knee strikes from at least 2 Sifus who studied under Yip Man.
WC is principle based. You use whatever works for a given situation.
Remember WC was designed for rebels to fight/ambush/kill or Manchu. Wing Chun is a "Kuen" not a "Pai" nor a "Do". To win by any means neccessary is the goal. You'll rarely see PERFECT technique against a resisting opponent. Fighters know that.
PR

Hi,

Not sure if this is addressing me. I concur mostly with the above. Knee strikes can be extrapolated as I suppose head butts can. But not every head but and knee strike conforms to wing chun practices... or does it? To me it looked like borrowed techniques from MMA, Muy Thai, and even a judo type throw. I especially agree that WC is principle based. Which principles were followed in these clips and which were violated?

A bit off topic but was the are designed by rebels? If it was I don't think it was very successful. Wing Chun seemed to go into the hands of the upper class, atleast for a while. The opera troupe was shutdown after a riot. I have heard people talk about the rebel nature of wing chun, but there seems to be little documentation to support that, so it just becomes oral tradition that should be taken with a grain of salt as we can't confirm it. But if we do by that theory, then I would submit that wing chun was created by a female for a female. Those techniques shown wern't the most advantageous for a female practicioner, where they? I wonder if that is how Yip Man, or even Sum Nung fought...

[SAAMAG]

No one is saying the fight should look "pretty" by any means. What some are saying including myself, is that the people in that video weren't following wing chun concepts / theories / or techniques for that matter. Actually--they didn't seem to follow any fighting properties. They were spraying and praying. No distance, sidestepping, no timing, no nothing. Maybe that's what it all came down to--no skill.

Now on a contrasting note--the higher level fighters from Phils' place did all of the above, and put on a better example of what I would consider proper wing chun.

P.S. I also learned knees, elbows, etc. in WC...just never learned the MT clinch w/ knee in WC.

[wiz cool c]

What I saw in the video that looked like wing Chun was the classical chain punch, straight kick and elbows done the way I've seen them instructional videos. What more do you need. Anything else and where getting into the fantasy kung fu movie stuff. In the 70's Shaw Brother films the Kung Fu expert never looks bad. He easily defeats his opponent with his back straight with one arm. People still think this **** is real.

[Phil Redmond]

I started this group: http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/wckcg/
because of people who criticize other's clips but show none of themselves.
The group is small as I predicted but every member shares clips of themselves "doing" WC with respect and no egos or lineage crap.
Everyone benefits that way. Everyone has a right to their opinion of course. My opinion is that those that can't or never have shouldn't criticize.

[Edmund]

What I saw in the video that looked like wing Chun was the classical chain punch, straight kick and elbows done the way I've seen them instructional videos. What more do you need. Anything else and where getting into the fantasy kung fu movie stuff. In the 70's Shaw Brother films the Kung Fu expert never looks bad. He easily defeats his opponent with his back straight with one arm. People still think this **** is real.

LOL.
Well if you're going off an instructional video, you must know what you're talking about!

The original video link posted is OLD OLD OLD. I get a kick out of it every time someone puts it up like it's never been seen before.

From a layperson's POV, it did contain WC techniques. However you missed the point a few people made that compared to Phil's clip, the people in the 1st clip weren't quite as coordinated.

If you saw someone demonstrating *your* art not particularly well, you would disapprove of their clip.

Same goes for this situation.

Also some of the sparring practices were unsafe which doesn't promote the art well either. Elbows to the back of the head is not a good idea. A bit of foam on your head will not protect much.

[southernkf]

I started this group: http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/wckcg/
because of people who criticize other's clips but show none of themselves.
The group is small as I predicted but every member shares clips of themselves "doing" WC with respect and no egos or lineage crap.
Everyone benefits that way. Everyone has a right to their opinion of course. My opinion is that those that can't or never have shouldn't criticize.

Hi Phil,
Way to go, I hope that list does well and serves its purpose. I am sorry if I crossed some line. However, I am not sure I agree with your criticize comment though.

I agree there seems to be a lot of people unfairly criticizing. Though I am not sure this applies in this video as people have commented on what I think are valid points. If someone is claiming something is wing chun but it doesn't have any wing chun principles, then why shouldn't we comment? I hope perhaps, if it is good constructive criticizing, that the people can grow from it. I don't think the entry price for comments should be a posted video without concern for quality. I myself don't have to post a vid of my wing chun to know I still need improvements, and I don't think anyone out there would benifit from what I could put out. But I do feel I occasionally stumble upon a good thought and perhaps even provide some beneficial constructive criticism.