Why Wing Chun?

[peace&love]

My old sifu was quite good at Wing Chun, but that was not the main focus of his teachings. I did enjoy "playing hands" and working on the first form which I believe translates into "Little Idea." Please forgive me if I am wrong on that. I'm trying to think of info from over a year ago. Anyway, I have recently visited two Wing Chun teachers and have enjoyed the applications from this style. I wish the training contained more physical conditioning though. Is it normal to not have cardio training? My main point of this thread though is to hear feedback on why my fellow CMA practitioners chose Wing Chun as their main system of study. Also, I was wondering if you cross train in any other styles or conditioning methods. Thank you for the upcoming feedback.

[stonecrusher69]

Some schools have cardio and do not. For me What I'm looking for is a good W.C. not a cardio program. I do that on my own time why waste time doing that in class.

[stonecrusher69]

Myself I believe you have to mix it up with all styles and levels of M.A. to test out your stuff and see what works and what does not. W.C has has the answers if you look hard enough you'lll find it. Why I chose W.C. was simple reason. I found it to be a very practical M.A.

[paulus]

We rarely do any cardio training, but that doesn't bother me as I can do that away from class. We get some physical training in class from doing the forms but it's not your typical TKD workout, that's for sure.

It used to bother me, but I'm more interested in using the class to improve my technique. All the other stuff like cardio, strength, speed etc you can develop on your own.

[couch]

Time is precious. In class, you've got lots of people to train with, perform drills with, Chi Sau with, spar with, etc. That's where the time should be spent, IMO. Do your roadwork at home.

[golgo]

I pretty much agree with everyone else here. I do my weight training and "cardio" (not aerobic - anaerobic) at home. I am also not training for the Lei Tai or the ring (or at least not yet). I also have no misconceptions that my non-MA training outside the kwoon would necessarily prepare me for the rigors of competition fighting.

However, our school does promote a "MMA Conditioning" course that I have never attended. I like the fact that it is available once I become more skilled/confident though.

[Wu Wei Wu]

Is it normal to not have cardio training? My main point of this thread though is to hear feedback on why my fellow CMA practitioners chose Wing Chun as their main system of study. Also, I was wondering if you cross train in any other styles or conditioning methods. Thank you for the upcoming feedback.

The intensity at which you train your Wing Chun SHOULD BE YOUR CONDITIONING! i.e. if you are not pushing yourself hard, then it ain't worth doing.

Suki

[eomonroe00]

i dont think i chose wing chun as much as i chose the teacher, but i enjoyed the style enough to continue, and when i left the school i thought i should stay on the same path for awhile,

with me its more the sifu than the style

at this point in my journey, i know most styles have something, but i would rather work with an amazing sifu in a style i never heard of than work with a mediocre sifu in a style i love

[tsuei08]

i would rather work with an amazing sifu in a style i never heard of than work with a mediocre sifu in a style i love

Amen brother

[Wu Wei Wu]

Couldn't care less how good the teacher is. The issue is how good can he make me. Looking good and teaching good are different things.

Suki

[taojkd]

Couldn't care less how good the teacher is. The issue is how good can he make me. Looking good and teaching good are different things.


You have a very humble and rare attitude about martial arts. Good for you. I had an instructor once who wasn't a great fighter, but he was a great teacher and a decent fighter.

People would come in the school from other styles/lineages and 'tag' him in chi sao or some other drill. It was a petty way for them to feel big cause they 'hit' the instructor, even though it was a static drill or not a fighting exercise.

[Wu Wei Wu]

If in martial arts we only learned from physically able teachers, what would happen when the skill of such people begin to deteriorate should they succumb to age and the effects of osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, etc.

My point is that great fighters don't remain great. The greatness of their fighting ability withers with age. However, the power of their mind, their faculties to discern between effective an ineffective and their ability to draw out the most potential from their non-fighter students is what matters.

It's not a humble attitude. It is pragmatic and based on the people who have taken their wisdom and experience to help me in Wing Chun and Non-Classical Gung Fu.

Suki Gosal

[eomonroe00]

Couldn't care less how good the teacher is. The issue is how good can he make me. Looking good and teaching good are different things.

Suki

There are many components to a great teacher, yes? teacher and molding students is probably the most important aspect.

In other areas of life I have found that the best teachers have walked the walk,

one individual i greatly respects tells me when he can longer train what he teaches, he will no longer teach it.

what are your thoughts?

[TenTigers]

[I]

one individual i greatly respects tells me when he can longer train what he teaches, he will no longer teach it.

what are your thoughts?

I am going on 52.
I know I am not training for the cage, or the ring
I may need self-defense, but it will be a very rare occaision if at all
there will no longer be testosterone-induced fronting leading to fights
although I am in great shape, I probably shouldn't spar or grapple heavily
But, I still learn, train, roll, and spar
and teach.
One of my Sifu/friends is 75 yrs old.
He still has a great deal to share with me.

[stonecrusher69]

I am going on 52.
I know I am not training for the cage, or the ring
I may need self-defense, but it will be a very rare occaision if at all
there will no longer be testosterone-induced fronting leading to fights
although I am in great shape, I probably shouldn't spar or grapple heavily
But, I still learn, train, roll, and spar
and teach.
One of my Sifu/friends is 75 yrs old.
He still has a great deal to share with me.

I agree..even if say the sifu can't do what he used to do back in the day he still has that experience that can't be replaced. Like a great coach who's seen and done it all.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

I had a teacher who used to say "old masters fear nothing but the elbows of youth." Interesting saying. Had I ever managed to connect with something like that, I'm sure he would've crumbled... I never did, though.

He also used to say "Age and treachery will beat youth and skill every time." Made me laugh, but I can't count how many times he gained the advantage by tricking me or uprooting my structure or mind in ways I didn't even know of. And just as I'd get wise to one, he'd pull out another. The f*cker. Made me learn, though. :)

[Askari Hodari]

My WC training has never included cardio. It was assumed that I'd pursue this on my own.

I chose to train in WC because of its simplicity and effectiveness. I found the theories of the art intriguing. And I've been able to apply them in real-time via sparring.

I do cross train however. In fact I claim three styles as my main arts. They are WC, Choy Lay Fut, and Capoeira. Each of these styles provides something that makes my martial art practice more complete. WC provides an effective theory for combat and helps me to maximize my use of close quarter techniques. CLF has excellent power generation and multi-directional attacks. Capoeira has superb footwork, take downs, ground movement, and close quarter applications.

I'd suggest training in WC if it a) compliments your existing martial arts practice, b) has theories that you can understand and apply, and c) can be taught by a competent instructor.

AH

[Ultimatewingchun]

My old sifu was quite good at Wing Chun, but that was not the main focus of his teachings. I did enjoy "playing hands" and working on the first form which I believe translates into "Little Idea." Please forgive me if I am wrong on that. I'm trying to think of info from over a year ago. Anyway, I have recently visited two Wing Chun teachers and have enjoyed the applications from this style. I wish the training contained more physical conditioning though. Is it normal to not have cardio training? My main point of this thread though is to hear feedback on why my fellow CMA practitioners chose Wing Chun as their main system of study. Also, I was wondering if you cross train in any other styles or conditioning methods. Thank you for the upcoming feedback.


***ALTHOUGH this topic has been brought up a number of times before on this forum, nonetheless thank you for bringing it up again, p & l .....I started out in wing chun 33 years ago as a student of Moy Yat - and the lack of physical conditioning within his school used to drive me nuts - as did his answers about such things (which were very similar to a bunch of the answers you've been getting on this thread):

He thought it was a waste of time to do stretching, pushups, situps, cardio, etc. in the school. Fortunately when I became a student of William Cheung 25 years ago, his program, especially as it was introduced to us by the visits of his top American student at the time, Blaine Collins - included lots of conditioning...

which I've kept going to this day (have been teaching 3-4 days per week since 1984)...and I ALWAYS SPEND the first 25 minutes or so of every class on conditioning (the classes go from 2 to 3 hours).

IT'S AN ABSOLUTE MUST.

As far as crosstraining is concerned, I believe that's an absolute must also. I do catch as catch can wrestling and a little bit of boxing also - and mix the three into an mma approach - something I've been doing over the last 6 years or so.

The lack of concern for conditioning, and a corallary of this: the lack of concern for consistent hard (full) contact sparring, are two of the biggest weaknesses within the wing chun world (the entire CMA world?), imo....

although fortunately there are some notable exceptions to this general rule.

[jet64]

Why Wing Chun?

Simply because WC is very effective when practiced correctly.

WC is a soft style. A soft style is higher level compare to hard style. IMO :)

[Grilo]

Why wing chun? Why not? I train wing chun because of its efficiency, easy of use, and easy of thought. What I mean is it is easy to think about all the time. I also love how the theories of Wing Chun can be applied to other martial arts. I do cross train and have trained capoeira for some time and I love taking the theories of WC and applying them to capoeira. There are holes in all art and cross training your mind in each can help fill the holes.

I lucked out big time finding a Sifu that has not only a knowledge of Wing Chun but also a Passion for it that can only be fuelled to love it more by my need to learn. I am not sure my sifu knows how good he is or how much i appreciate him teaching me

P.

[SavvySavage]

The issue I see with following a system because of a charismatic teacher is this: You will ultimately be let down because your reason of inspiration is human which means he has flaws. You may not notice them initially but they will come about eventually and you will feel let down. You may want to develop the skills of the teacher but without his personal experiences it isn't possible. Take your own experiences and couple them with what you are being taught to develop your own skill sets.

Better to study a style/system because you love it because then you will find your own inspiration for continuing instead of relying on an outside source to please or to keep you going. It's fine if a certain teacher made you interested in the art but don't let that cloud your training in the next years. Your focus must change from going gaga over a teacher to gaining skill sets with in that particular art.

[First Blood]

SavvySavage

Great post my thoughts exactly :)

[bakxierboxer]

The issue I see with following a system because of a charismatic teacher is this: You will ultimately be let down because your reason of inspiration is human which means he has flaws.

"Charisma"?
Pfooey!
Skill and the ability & willingness to teach the art properly are the paramount considerations in your choice of a SiFu. Without that person with those qualities, a style can never be properly passed on.

As for flaws, we are all human and have "foibles". (ok, some are not so minor)
So long as those flaws are not part of his knowledge of the style it doesn't really matter.
(provided you are fairly adroit in your "relationship-fu")



You may not notice them initially but they will come about eventually and you will feel let down. You may want to develop the skills of the teacher but without his personal experiences it isn't possible. Take your own experiences and couple them with what you are being taught to develop your own skill sets.

Experiences are only one part of what any practitioner brings to their art.
Physical/mental/character strengths and weaknesses also have a great deal to do with what and how you will learn.... as well as whether or not you are a "good fit" with your teacher's "personality".



Better to study a style/system because you love it because then you will find your own inspiration...

"No one can do it for you!"

[SavvySavage]

"Charisma"?
Pfooey!
Skill and the ability & willingness to teach the art properly are the paramount considerations in your choice of a SiFu. Without that person with those qualities, a style can never be properly passed on.

Could you please elaborate on some of your points? Different people will have different explanations of ability and willingness to teach an art properly and I'm interested in what you meant and what relevant experiences you can present. Thanks.





Experiences are only one part of what any practitioner brings to their art.
Physical/mental/character strengths and weaknesses also have a great deal to do with what and how you will learn.... as well as whether or not you are a "good fit" with your teacher's "personality".

There are two schools of thought I think. One school says that you need someone to show you the basics and then it's up to you to master them which will bring you to the next level. The other school says that you practice the basics forever but then you need someone to show you the finer points to get to the advanced levels.

Which school of thought do you think is best?




"No one can do it for you!"[/QUOTE]

[TenTigers]

the advanced techniques ARE the basics. The only difference is sensitivity, distance, angles, acuracy and timing. This comes with time and practice.

[bakxierboxer]

the advanced techniques ARE the basics. The only difference is sensitivity, distance, angles, acuracy and timing. This comes with time and practice.

???????.......
how can I put this diplomatically?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
??????? oh, uh, yeah!

WRONG! :rolleyes: :D

It is true that an advanced practitioner can "do wonders" with "basic techniques".
What allows them to do this is their acquisition of "advanced skills" which are what you listed:
"sensitivity, distance, angles, acuracy and timing".
These are all acquired and polished by practice, use and experience... over time, as you said.
Further, these are all combined with techniques as one acquires the "gungs".
(all along never relieving you of the need to expend copious quantities of "blood, sweat and tears")

Generally speaking, "basic techniques" are single discrete techniques.
Again speaking generally, "advanced techniques" are compound techniques.
(which is not at all the same as multiple techniques)

[Vajramusti]

Generally speaking, "basic techniques" are single discrete techniques.
Again speaking generally, "advanced techniques" are compound techniques.
(which is not at all the same as multiple techniques)[/QUOTE]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A good distinction.

Bengal Tiger

[Ali. R]

"Charisma"?
Pfooey!

Skill and the ability & willingness to teach the art properly are the paramount considerations in your choice of a SiFu. Without that person with those qualities, a style can never be properly passed on.

As for flaws, we are all human and have "foibles". (ok, some are not so minor)
So long as those flaws are not part of his knowledge of the style it doesn't really matter.
(provided you are fairly adroit in your "relationship-fu")


Very good post!

That’s how those who cant do; just create problems for someone who can… Hoping that those problems will or could take away from ones skills or knowledge…

Everyone has eyes and can think too, but most here would rather believe and add fire to the problem, (we don’t have answers to everything) but most are not listening with their ears and because of their lack of knowledge they’re not being open, but only staying on the side of the so-called problem…

They rather cling to the ideal of the pass, because the more they speak the more they show that they no nothing…


Ali Rahim.

[SavvySavage]

I can't tell who makes the least sense: bakxierboxer or Ali. R.

Could you two get out of your heads and say what you mean? Maybe I'm so unenlightened that I'm not ready to accept the abundant knowledge of your posts.

I'm just being playful so please don't be offended. Seriously though, spit it out

[TenTigers]

???????.......
Further, these are all combined with techniques as one acquires the "gungs".
Generally speaking, "basic techniques" are single discrete techniques.
Again speaking generally, "advanced techniques" are compound techniques.
(which is not at all the same as multiple techniques)


The gungs are in many cases taught in the beginning as basics, Although there are certain elements that are not taught or shown to beginners or outsiders, the seeds are there, it is up to the Sifu and the student to nourish them and take their Gung-Fu to the higher levels.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The gungs are in many cases taught in the beginning as basics, Although there are certain elements that are not taught or shown to beginners or outsiders, the seeds are there, it is up to the Sifu and the student to nourish them and take their Gung-Fu to the higher levels.

I think you two may be confusing two different things.
Techniques and skills.
There are no "advanced" techniques, this is true, but there are advanced skills.

[bakxierboxer]

Generally speaking, "basic techniques" are single discrete techniques.
Again speaking generally, "advanced techniques" are compound techniques.
(which is not at all the same as multiple techniques)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A good distinction.

Bengal Tiger


Thank you kind sir! :)

I do have my occasional moments of (relative) "clarity". :rolleyes:

[bakxierboxer]

The gungs are in many cases taught in the beginning as basics....

Not the ones I'm talking about.

[bakxierboxer]

I think you two may be confusing two different things.
Techniques and skills.

:confused:
I was trying to make a distinction between the two, and actually thought I'd succeeded at doing that. :rolleyes:



There are no "advanced" techniques....

Not true, otherwise some folks wouldn't have had "trouble" comprehending something that I've recently posted about as a "compound technique".
You know, kind of like doing three things in less than three "counts". :cool:



this is true, but there are advanced skills.

Yes, there are some skills that are pretty much confined to the "advanced levels" of practitioners.
The majority of them, however, are usually simply the result of longer and more in-depth training.

[Mr Punch]

...and I ALWAYS SPEND the first 25 minutes or so of every class on conditioning (the classes go from 2 to 3 hours).That sounds reasonable... it's all a matter of proportion. One reason I had for leaving a (what I thought was) substandard class was because in a two-hour class we did one hour of conditioning and including other solo work (forms and san sik etc it was over an hour and a half - and the teacher often didn't even show for the first twenty mins or so). It wasn't even good conditioning! :D


IT'S AN ABSOLUTE MUST.Nah. It's a sometimes useful addition. In a one hour class I'd expect no or very little conditioning (maybe push-ups to failure or something!) and for that matter no more than say 15 minutes on forms or other solo stuff - so your teacher can correct what you've been doing at home. Of course, if your form sucks and you haven't been training you can go and stand in the corner and do it for an hour! :D If it's OK or even it sucks but you've obviously been working on it then it's time to do applications and live setting ASAP.


I can't tell who makes the least sense: bakxierboxer or Ali. R.Ali's a sifu, man! That makes him an expert! :D


I agree with this cold-heartedlyThat's whole-heartedly I'm guessing. How the hell do you teach anything without a first language? I mean of course, MA teachers should be able to teach with just actions, but how do you get across all that Steiner theory stuff? LOL :D


They rather cling to the ideal of the pass, because the more they speak the more they show that they no nothing… Yup, time for you to follow your own advice: you've been speaking a lot recently. I recommend complete absence from the board. :D


The issue I see with following a system because of a charismatic teacher is this: You will ultimately be let down because your reason of inspiration is human which means he has flaws. You may not notice them initially but they will come about eventually and you will feel let down. You may want to develop the skills of the teacher but without his personal experiences it isn't possible. Take your own experiences and couple them with what you are being taught to develop your own skill sets.

Better to study a style/system because you love it because then you will find your own inspiration for continuing instead of relying on an outside source to please or to keep you going. It's fine if a certain teacher made you interested in the art but don't let that cloud your training in the next years. Your focus must change from going gaga over a teacher to gaining skill sets with in that particular art.You sound like you're talking about impressionable 16 year-olds. Just because your teacher is charismatic you don't have to lose it. That's just one reason why charisma isn't important anyway. If he can help you to improve your fighting skills he's a good teacher (including of course recognising if it's right for you and your development to go and fight in comps, to go to other lines of the same style, to go to other styles, to do more conditioning, to stand in the corner of a room chain-punching for an hour... whatever... might work for some slackers! :D )

As for the advanced tech debate, one of the things I like about chun is that the some move you learn in biu jee for example is an 'advanced tech' but it's really just a continuation of something you learnt in SLT or CK with a different situational application. They're essentially the same, though the angle may vary a little - the structure is just there.

[sanjuro_ronin]

:confused:
I was trying to make a distinction between the two, and actually thought I'd succeeded at doing that. :rolleyes:




Not true, otherwise some folks wouldn't have had "trouble" comprehending something that I've recently posted about as a "compound technique".
You know, kind of like doing three things in less than three "counts". :cool:




Yes, there are some skills that are pretty much confined to the "advanced levels" of practitioners.
The majority of them, however, are usually simply the result of longer and more in-depth training.

I was actually directing that to Rik ( Ten Tigers).
And yes you did make the distinction clear, even for those of us with lack of chi ;)

[bakxierboxer]

I was actually directing that to Rik ( Ten Tigers).
And yes you did make the distinction clear, even for those of us with lack of chi ;)

PHEW!!! :D

Oh.... so that "you two" musta binna typo? :rolleyes:

[wetwonder]

I just started Hung Gar in December. The only thing I know of Wing Chun is from the movie Ip Man. With the Hung Gar, just doing the form work is so strenuous that there is no need for extra conditioning. If learning Wing Chung is just about technique, w/o low stances, then that sounds pretty interesting but quite different.

[punchdrunk]

Wing Chun does include low horse stance in it's pole form... but its definately not as emphasized as in Hung Gar. The differences and the similarities in the Southern styles can be intriguing.

[Hardwork108]

I just started Hung Gar in December. The only thing I know of Wing Chun is from the movie Ip Man. With the Hung Gar, just doing the form work is so strenuous that there is no need for extra conditioning. If learning Wing Chung is just about technique, w/o low stances, then that sounds pretty interesting but quite different.

In our Wing Chun school the training is not just about technique but also conditioning. A lot of situps, pull ups on the horizontal bar, low (shaolin type) stance training; animal walking; other resistance training and of course Iron Palm topped up with plenty of qi gong exercises.

Then come the technical work with many repetitions, forms, chi sao and (depending on the level of the student) sparring.

How Wing Chun (or any style of kung fu) is trained will always depend on the Lineage and of course the individual schools/sifus.

[Lee Chiang Po]

I did not pick WC as much as it picked me. WC is a system that can be learned and practiced by anyone. You do not have to be big and strong. The kicks can be done by anyone with legs and the hand techniques are not so numerous that you can not train them all. It is powerful and effective and it does not take a lifetime to develop skill. You can also keep these skills in old age where most other, more physical systems, get more difficult with age. It is the closest thing to a scientific or physics related system that is out there except for possibly jujitsu.

[stonecrusher69]

I just started Hung Gar in December. The only thing I know of Wing Chun is from the movie Ip Man. With the Hung Gar, just doing the form work is so strenuous that there is no need for extra conditioning. If learning Wing Chung is just about technique, w/o low stances, then that sounds pretty interesting but quite different.

Some lineages have low stances. We use low stances in our style all the time not just in the pole form. How can you fight someone if they have a low center of gravity and you have a high horse? you also have to use a low horse at certain times.

[clam61]

any good kung fu program should have intensive physical conditioning.

the point of kung fu is to fight, and you cannot fight well if you do not have proper physical conditioning. this is not limited to cardio--you also need to have good physical conditioning to properly execute techniques.

if you practice techniques all day without lots of sparring and physical conditioning then what you learned will be worthless

[golgo]

any good kung fu program should have intensive physical conditioning.

the point of kung fu is to fight, and you cannot fight well if you do not have proper physical conditioning. this is not limited to cardio--you also need to have good physical conditioning to properly execute techniques.

if you practice techniques all day without lots of sparring and physical conditioning then what you learned will be worthless

I agree that physical conditioning is important. At the same time, I am paying to learn kung fu, not hire a personal trainer. Does this mean I don't want my kung fu classes to be strenuous? Nope. But in general, I want them to be focused on technique and application. I enjoy the conditioning we do in class, but in terms of my overall physical health/condition I see it as a supplement to what I do at home (in my basement gym).

[stonecrusher69]

What you need is balance in your training and if your not getting it in your school you need to do it on your own. No sifu will hold your hand. You do it your self. Your responsible for your own progress.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am kind of mixed in my feelings in regards to getting your conditioning from classes.
There is pros and cons for both.
For the beginner, Classes more oriented towards learning are far more valuable, IF there is conditioning done on the side.
Certainly certain types of conditioning should not be part of class, like IP, IV, strength conditioning and so forth, BUT "sport specific" conditioning should be part of class.
You will never get as good a workout when you are learning in class then when class is devoted to conditioning, that is a given.
I recall when I was learning to box all those many years ago, the coach would stop me during my bag work or mitt work to correct this and that, to show this and that, to work on this and that, in doing so, giving me an "unearned" rest.
Of course the instructional part of Boxing and MT tends to be "more" personal than the typical TMA class.
Perhaps a best of both worlds with a couple of "learning oriented" classes and a couple of condintioning orietned classes.

[clam61]

I agree that physical conditioning is important. At the same time, I am paying to learn kung fu, not hire a personal trainer. Does this mean I don't want my kung fu classes to be strenuous? Nope. But in general, I want them to be focused on technique and application. I enjoy the conditioning we do in class, but in terms of my overall physical health/condition I see it as a supplement to what I do at home (in my basement gym).

thats true. hopefully your sifu teaches you weird chinese style excercises that you would not normally do that are specifically designed to help you perform the techniques

[martial09k]

Guys there's this thread on Wing Chun i'd like to share with you, i find it interesting though http://www.pragmaticmartialarts.com/forum/index.php?topic=266.0