WC teachers would have nothing to teach if...

[MysteriousPower]

If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.

[LoneTiger108]

Wow! I see T has a new fan :D Each to their own and all that.

Was this a discussion, or just your point of view?

[Vajramusti]

If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't know your teacher.Why use a broad paintbrush?

joy chaudhuri

[MysteriousPower]

I am not a fan of T per say(don't know him) or a fan of his incessant rants. But I see some truth to what he is saying.

In this technological day and age it should be pretty easy for one or some of you to post a video of traditional methods creating fighters. This is not a video challenge but a mere criticism. Otherwise all the traditional guys are just talk talk talk.

Seriously, to all wc people: just put up a video. That's all it would take to silence the critics. The fact that few have is telling.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Listen, the premise of this thread may apply to some - but far from all. Won't speak for other lineages, but in TWC there are numerous drills that are used. You do the forms, you do some double arm chi sao, and then you start working various drills designed to simulate real fighting/sparring...and then you spar.

Once in awhile you do the wooden dummy...and then more drills...and then you spar.

What drills? All kinds of very fight specific stuff.

He throws a straight lead punch to your head...
To your body...
He throws a straight rear hand punch...
He throws both in combination...
He hooks...
He hooks off the straight lead/jab..
He throws two hooks...
He throws low pounches...
He throws roundhouse kicks...
Front kicks...
He throws punches and kicks in combination...
You blatantly attack...
You attack and he counters...
You counter his counter...
He tries to shoot for your legs...
You defend...
Elbows...
Knees....

And a good 75-80% of your time is spent with these kinds of drills and sparring...and no more than 20-25% is spent with forms, chi sao, and wooden dummy.

[LoneTiger108]

Seriously, to all wc people: just put up a video. That's all it would take to silence the critics. The fact that few have is telling.

Lets say that we have the clips.

Lets say that it shows things being trained that have never before been seen in Wing Chun.

Lets say that all the students have no interest in fighting in competitions.

What use are they to you?

Seriously, to have to prove anything to people who are not willing to discuss, meet and touch hands or even spar with me is a waste of my time (and yours!) This is why I feel that there are no clips. A lack of respect for what we do imo and no willingness to really find out either.

Why should we show anyone outside our own four walls how we train to fight? The MMA world must be running out of ideas if they're pressing us for some knowledge!

Show me any boxing coach that will share that information with their opponents coach??

[MysteriousPower]

I am trying to keep things civil until T, knifefighter, and frost(the supposed mma badboys) come and butcher the thread.

This thread is mostly about wc teachers. In teaching the traditional way an instructor need not have any real skill. They never have to get " on the mat" so to speak.

Anyone one can teach fake drills and look good because they have been doing that drill for years. Real skill would be skill in being able to strike and/or possibly throw an aggressive opponent without getting your brains beat. That is basic. Skill is not doing a drill for so long that you become good at that drill.

[Vajramusti]

I am trying to keep things civil until T, knifefighter, and frost(the supposed mma badboys) come and butcher the thread.

This thread is mostly about wc teachers. In teaching the traditional way an instructor need not have any real skill. They never have to get " on the mat" so to speak.

Anyone one can teach fake drills and look good because they have been doing that drill for years. Real skill would be skill in being able to strike and/or possibly throw an aggressive opponent without getting your brains beat. That is basic. Skill is not doing a drill for so long that you become good at that drill.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mysterious Power- one size does not fit all. There are wc sifus who teach forms, drills, san sau,
chi sao, gor sao, show real applications and also with the famous label- with resisting opponents.
if someone is not learning much they can get a different sifu or try a good teacher in a different style. i "spar" too-ofcourse not for 12 rounds!

joy chaudhuri

[Kansuke]

I am trying to keep things civil until T, knifefighter, and frost(the supposed mma badboys) come and butcher the thread.

This thread is mostly about wc teachers. In teaching the traditional way an instructor need not have any real skill. They never have to get " on the mat" so to speak.

Anyone one can teach fake drills and look good because they have been doing that drill for years. Real skill would be skill in being able to strike and/or possibly throw an aggressive opponent without getting your brains beat. That is basic. Skill is not doing a drill for so long that you become good at that drill.


So, skill would be judged by the ability to demonstrate that skill in a real-time, unrestricted manner?

[LoneTiger108]

one can teach fake drills and look good because they have been doing that drill for years. Real skill would be skill in being able to strike and/or possibly throw an aggressive opponent without getting your brains beat. That is basic. Skill is not doing a drill for so long that you become good at that drill.

I Agree 100% as most boxing coaches I met back in the day only trained in the army, they had never competed.

Same can be said for most WC Sifus I think.

The problem I have with what you're saying here is that only real skill in fighting comes from fighting. Personally I think that's a croc of cr4p and designed to justify why people leave the Wing Chun behind in favour for the 'matt'.

Basically, they may have never been shown any skill whatsoever by their Sifu, or became disillusioned, or simply just had no interest in learning a Chinese Martial Art in the first place.

[wkmark]

If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.

I think what your sifu meant is that he can show you the skills and the drills, etc. But it's up to you to learn to apply them and see what works for you. Things that work for your sifu may not work for you because of size, weight, height difference.

Also, there is a Chinese saying for learning Kung Fu: First Courage, then Power, then skills of your Kung Fu.

Courage cannot be taught to you. You need to learn that on your own.

[LoneTiger108]

Courage cannot be taught to you. You need to learn that on your own.

Or they had no courage! :o

Or brains.

Or heart.

:D:D:D

[MysteriousPower]

I think what your sifu meant is that he can show you the skills and the drills, etc. But it's up to you to learn to apply them and see what works for you. Things that work for your sifu may not work for you because of size, weight, height difference.

Also, there is a Chinese saying for learning Kung Fu: First Courage, then Power, then skills of your Kung Fu.

Courage cannot be taught to you. You need to learn that on your own.


I know that's what he was saying but at the same time I think it's a cop out for teachers so they don't actually have to train their students to learn fighting skills. If teachers trained their students like fighting coaches than the above statement would make more sense but many do not.

There are some who will say that a Sifu is not a coach and he just leads a horse to water. That it's up to us to drink. Instead of being coaches they become drill givers. "Let me give you a drill for x. Here is how you train body structure...but you have to learn how to use it.". Honestly, I say forgo all the bs drills and skip right to the showing how to use.

Sifus should be coaches or they are short changing their students IMO. Or a Sifu should admit that he does not know how to train fighters to actually fight and not jst drill. It's misleading and dishonest.

[t_niehoff]

I am trying to keep things civil until T, knifefighter, and frost(the supposed mma badboys) come and butcher the thread.

This thread is mostly about wc teachers. In teaching the traditional way an instructor need not have any real skill. They never have to get " on the mat" so to speak.


I'll try not to butcher your thread. :)

You are correct, the TCMAs traditional way of learning/training is broken into two parts: the curriculum and using that curriculum (fighting or application). Anyone who knows the curriculum can teach it. But knowing it doesn't require or mean that you can use it to any significant degree. And this is why you have millions of people who know the WCK curriculum (including the masters and grandmasters), and almost none of them can use it to any degree (or the things they can use are very limited -- like front kick and chain punching).



Anyone one can teach fake drills and look good because they have been doing that drill for years. Real skill would be skill in being able to strike and/or possibly throw an aggressive opponent without getting your brains beat. That is basic. Skill is not doing a drill for so long that you become good at that drill.

The reality of the TCMAs, including WCK, is that the overwhelming majority of its practitioners don't really want to be fighters and/or develop significant fighting skills. The ones that do go and train with fighters. For the rest, WCK is a live action fantasy game that they play with like-minded people.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"Sifus should be coaches or they are short changing their students IMO. Or a Sifu should admit that he does not know how to train fighters to actually fight and not just drill. It's misleading and dishonest." (MysteriousPower)

***Now this is true. Wing Chun should not be about teaching students forms, chi sao, wd, and drills - and then telling them to go figure it out for themselves if they actually want to be able to fight with the material. If you're not actually teaching people how to fight with the system and providing a training method and environment to develop fighting skills...

you're not a sifu, imo.

Now my money says that we're going to get about another 100 posts over the course of 10 pages saying the same thing in countless ways, yeah?

[LoneTiger108]

Sifus should be coaches or they are short changing their students IMO. Or a Sifu should admit that he does not know how to train fighters to actually fight and not jst drill. It's misleading and dishonest.

I agree with you here. I was 'promoted' as a Sifu whilst teaching for/with my own Sifu. When I teach today, without my Sifu, I refer to what I do as coaching. I'm a Martial Art coach, but I wouldn't say that I'm the best fighting coach.

I believe that Wing Chun is suitable to practise at any age, young and old, but I couldn't say the same for fighting.

Fighting isn't the only skill everyone wants to use their Wing Chun knowledge for imho

[anerlich]

Seriously, to all wc people: just put up a video. That's all it would take to silence the critics. The fact that few have is telling.


Who gives a **** about the critics? Screw them and your demands for video.

Only a fool listens to the braying of the a$$.

[shawchemical]

I am not a fan of T per say(don't know him) or a fan of his incessant rants. But I see some truth to what he is saying.

In this technological day and age it should be pretty easy for one or some of you to post a video of traditional methods creating fighters. This is not a video challenge but a mere criticism. Otherwise all the traditional guys are just talk talk talk.

Seriously, to all wc people: just put up a video. That's all it would take to silence the critics. The fact that few have is telling.

YOu miss the point. Videos mean sweet **** all.

The critics do not need silencing, we hold no responsibility to shut them up. They can talk all they want, it should not affect us as individuals unless the reason you train is to look cool for other people.

If you are so weak that you are concerned with their opinion of you, you will never be able to beat our own worst enemy - ourselves.

[MysteriousPower]

If wing chun Sifus do not adjust to the changing martial art market wc schools will cease to exist except for "small training groups" which are not the same as having s successful money making school.

[anerlich]

If wing chun Sifus do not adjust to the changing martial art market wc schools will cease to exist except for "small training groups" which are not the same as having s successful money making school.

No kidding. You seem to assume that none of them are, which is incorrect. haven't seen any WC schools in my area closing down. Your reports of their imminent death are exaggerated.

[Sardinkahnikov]

Also, remember that all WC sparring videos are met with comments like "That's not WC", "My lineage is better" or "You're doing it wrong".

[Lee Chiang Po]

If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.

Your old teacher was absolutely right. He could teach you the concepts and the weapons of WC, but he can not teach you a mind frame. If you don't have what it takes to pop someone full in the face, you will not every have it. You have to have a conviction to what you are doing. He can not make you a fighting machine, and neither can any MMA coach. That is strictly up to you.
One very good way to test his ability to fight is to slap him in the face and jump on him. That way you could see just how effective his WC is. Don't wait for a video to show you, find out for yourself.

[k gledhill]

If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.


You need to understand what your developing in the first place....forms are simply solo time away from fighting. To refine line/elbow work without someone attacking you as you try.
The system relies on acute alignment drills to refine the ability to maintain strike integrity as you meet other forces or cut into available angles from your opponents movement while fighting. Distancing maintenance for delivering attacking force either coming or going ...many dont know this way of vt training so they get patchwork ideas and told to make sense of the arm shapes etc..ending up with a 'self-defense' using vt 'way' then they do sparring that turns into kickboxing with a bong, centerpunches and low kick and the ubiquitous pak sao ! Or they try to make the chi-sao drill work as it does with partners , because they cant make it work at any other way when sparring, so they seek to control by adopting the drill they feel comfortable in, from training so long without understanding why they are doing it, or what parts are redundant to actual fighting using VT.


Fighting with VT is the goal. It goes beyond a lead leg chain punch attack moving back and forth seeking a controlling clinch.
; )

[Hitman]

Originally Posted by MysteriousPower
If wc sifus did not teach forms and other classical ways they would not have nothing to teach. If they taught in a way that gave skills like the way T just described this would force them to actually have to do something. Since they don't teach real fighting they can sit on the side and instruct, teach imaginary techniques that "look" like they fit in the form, show basic hand drills, never explain or show how to actually use anything in combat, and finally make vague statements about fighting and martial arts in general. My old teacher used to tell me, "I can't teach you how to survive fights the way I have. I can't teach my mind set. I can only show you patterns and you need to figure it out."

The logical question that follows should be, "Then why the fuk are you claiming to be teaching combat and claiming that wc is for combat?"

The above statement goes for all form oriented martial arts/teachers.


http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=57



Opinion: Why Wing Chun Doesn't Work
As a prelude to this piece I will say this: Anyone who learned, trained, and fought with Wing Chun for a long period of time should understand some truths of the art. I do not discredit anyone's experiences or call anyone or any lineage the "true" one. Yip Man taught everyone differently, but this is what my research indicates. I don't mean to offend anyone or their lineage, I am in the same boat you are!

Wing Chun now is bashed by many as a crappy and ineffective martial art, despite what it claims. These same people usually promote grappling, boxing, muay thai, and other arts that are seen in popular MMA venues... And for the most part they are right. 97% of the "Wing Chun" and Wing Chun practitioners out there suck are are an embarrassment to the Art. I include all forms of the art from JKD to Ving Tsun, Wing Tsun, BlitzDefense, and etc. Just start looking at some of the Wing Chun clips on the net and you'll see in almost all the real fights or MMA fights that Wing Chun people are getting their ass beat. And don't tell me your lineage is better, I guarantee you that 95%+ of them would get their ass beat just as badly. I used to be proud to be known as a Wing Chun guy, now it is getting to be embarrassing.


Why is this? 1) People don't train hard enough to actually fight a trained fighter or a enraged, tough, and/or savvy street fighter. They can only beat other Wing Chun people up, classmates up, or other non-fighters. (Big Fish, little pond). 2) Wing Chun is for the most part watered down and a lost art. It's a empty shell. As Yip Man told Allan Lee, "It only looks like Wing Chun but it has no substance". And this is how Yip Man wanted it - he never sold out his true art.

Some people have either consciously or subconsciously realized this and tried to fill in the gaps with other tools/arts, but this is usually only slightly better, if not a lot worse. Others stubbornly stick to a "Pure" Wing Chun, but these purists are usually the ones getting their asses beat and giving the art a bad name. It is not always their fault, in principle they are right. Wing Chun, as a complete art, should be able to handle any type of fighter it faces. But the guys who modify Wing Chun to work for them are also right - why practice something that will get you beat up?

"Although Yip Man had multitudes of students... the number of formal disciples he accecpted could be counted on three fingers on one hand. To these few who pledged their fidelity in the ritual of three kneels nine kowtows in the traditional SiFu Worship Ceremony he taught Wing Chun Wugong. This includes Wing Chun Kung Fu plus Gongli, the art of exerting power, plus the practical application of Wing Chun fighting techniques..." Wing Chun Warrior

Yip Man said he passed on the complete knowledge to 5 people ONLY. The rest of his disciples and students only got the "empty shell" (This means you and your lineage (Sorry)). Sure, Yip Man's private students know all the forms and a lot of techniques, and drills, but the real system contains so much more. It required years of very tough training, a lot of pressure on the disciple, and years of sacrifice on top of mastering everything Yip Man taught to his private students. I don't want to bash any lineages or Sifus here, but the more Wing Chun I see the more I am convinced that this is right. Yip Man did not teach the entire art to anyone he trained publicly, or any of his publicly known private students/"disciples". He only taught about 1/2 of it. I don't even think his real students even trained with the public classes. So if your teacher learned in a classroom setting (even if it was private later on), then they probably fall into this group. Learning the other half of the system meant training daily with Yip Man in person for about 4-5 years on top of the rest. These Sifus who say they know it all and trained privately with Yip Man for 9 months, 2x a week, or even a year 7x a week, etc... They were not formal disciples, only private students. They are missing a lot. And now, so are we.

Yip Man let 9 people fight for his Hong Kong school. (Not including the 5 he passed the complete system on to - these 9 included Wong Shun Leung, Lok Yiu, Taun Hong, etc.). These fighters took that "empty shell" and made it work for them... for the most part. Most evidence points to the fact the Wing Chun fighters only did okay in the challange matches. They usually got just as beat up as their opponents and there was no clear cut winner. Even Wong Shun Leung. In his very highly publicized match with White Crane master Ni Wo-tang there was no clear cut winner and both combatants were bleeding. As everyone said, it was a boring match.

Therefore, in my opinion Yip Man had 14 "fighters" at the end of his life, 3-5 of which knew the complete system. Of these 5, the last true masters of the Art, only 1 or 2 have passed down their complete knowledge to date. The training is extremely hard and tough, and people now-a-days want instant kung-fu. It is my belief that this generation of masters will be the last, and I'm not alone in this thought. No one trains 6 hours a day with a dedicated teacher for the 5-7 years it takes to master this system the way it was meant to be.

So what can we do about it? Unless you are related to one of the 5 true inheritors of the system, in my opinion all you can do is train what you are given, and fight. Get better, fix your mistakes, fill in your gaps, and fight some more. Be like WSL, Bruce Lee, and etc. Take what you know and learn to make it work for you.

Yip Man once asked, "Do you think you can learn something from a famous SiFu?" He went on to explain that just because he is famous it doesn't mean that you can learn something worthwhile from him.

He gave a scenario. Suppose Yim Wing Chun comes alive to teach you and it turns out what you learn is not practical for use in a real fight. It's outdated and useless. Then someone who is nobody shows you some Wing Chun technique that really works in a fight. Which do you think is better?

He also asked one of his formal disciples once, "Do you belive everything I say?"

The disciple replied, "Of course."

Yip Man then said, "If you believe everything I say then you will never become a good fighter".

"Why shouldn't I belive you? You are my SiFu"

"Try [the techniques I teach you] out for yourself. And when you have a problem I will correct it".

Yip Man would say not to blindly believe everything he said. He wanted you to do your own research using common sense with his teachings as a guideline. After all, how do you know you are not being cheated? (Boy, this sure applies to today's world of Wing Chun). Yip Man told all of his students to go out and fight (and a few actually did, but not most, and not most of the ones teaching today). How many people do this today vs how many are teaching Wing Chun as if they know something?

Yip Man also had the habit of telling all of his student they were right. Even during his lifetime most of his senior students were using the hands and techniques differently. They all thought they were right. Most never took his advice and didn't believe him. They should have tested their Wing Chun as he told them to. Even his own son did not.

"Application is the only way to verify the truth"
Of course you have to respect your SiFu. Use your common sense. Accept what they say, research it. Test it. Don't mystify the art. If you can't see it, and if you can't feel it, then how do you know it is correct and practical? Go fight with it, this is the only way to understand.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Interestingly, if you want to have a vague discussion about WCK ask Terrence about how employ WCK in a fight or just talk about fight strategies in general for that matter.

[t_niehoff]

Interestingly, if you want to have a vague discussion about WCK ask Terrence about how employ WCK in a fight or just talk about fight strategies in general for that matter.

Strategy is general by its very nature -- it is a general plan for fighting.

How you carry out that plan will depend on what your opponent does. So you can't talk about how to specifically do it since it depends on what your opponent does.

In a nutshell, WCK's strategy is to get in and control the opponent while striking him. It starts with a certain body structure or way of using your body since if you don't have that, there is no way to control your opponent. Do you have that? Because if not, anything else I tell you won't make any sense.

[k gledhill]

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=57

Wonder why I dumped so many years training with a direct student of YM for a guy who learned from WSL directly in HK...? He had been taught something completely different
same parts of the puzzle, forms etc...but with elbow explanations :D how to connect the dots.

dont believe me ? up to you to find out. walk on....

[sanjuro_ronin]

No all sifu's teach WC as a PURELY fighting system, some teach it as an art and some teach it as a means of self protection.
Not ALL students WANT to b fighters or l;earning a fighting system, fact is the vast majority do NOT want that.

MA teachers need to be realistic in regards to WHO their MA is attracting, boxing, MT coaches, for example, don't really need to deal with that because their systems tend to attract people that want to fight.

There are WC Sifu's that teach a "pure fighting" system, but like most TMA teachers, they are the minority.

[MysteriousPower]

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=57


Let me guess, Hitman...your Sifu was one of those who "got the real deal.". Where have I heard this story before?? It smacks of self promoting bs.

You want the truth? I studied with Yip Man and got the whole story. I just didn't want to write a huge article about it. J/K.

These secret gong li techniques are what exactly? Superpushups? Let me guess it is some super secret nei gong method. Push ups are better than any nei gong/qi gong method.

[LoneTiger108]

Funny thing is, if you believe this piece of info within that write-up, you may as well believe anything!


Yip Man is said to have spread the knowledge among 5 of his public students as well each giving them 1/5th and telling them if they ever got their act together and stopped bickering they'd figure the system out. They never figured it out, but the 5 were supposedly: Wong Shun Leung, Chu Shong Tin (he got the internal aspects), Duncan Leung (external, condition, power generation, and swords), Hawkins Cheung, and Allan Lee.

[Ultimatewingchun]

....but not smart enough.

Smart because you lay out some unpleasant but true facts that many, many people have come to know to be true through the years - that Yip Man only gave out bits and pieces of wing chun to various people - and that very few people got all of his wing chun knowledge.

But not smart enough when you then decide to tell us exactly who got what.

To say that WSL didn't get all of the "power generation" fighting method is a complete joke.

To not even put William Cheung's name on the "list of 5" is another complete joke.

To say that Duncan Leung and Alan Lee got wing chun knowledge passed onto them that neither William nor Wong got is a complete joke.

And there are others besides these two that you leave off YOUR list who should be there.

Not that I'm disparaging Duncan Leung or Alan Lee - far from it. I know of Duncan's fighting skills, for example, for 35 years now. And in recent years I've seen vids of Alan Lee and his students in action and there's no doubt he's very good (I also have a number of Duncan's vids that prove the same thing).

But I also know that it was after Duncan saw William Cheng defeat multiple opponents in a streetfight that Duncan decided he wanted to learn wing chun.

And that Duncan started his wing chun training (before going to Yip Man) with Ng Chan - another name that does not appear on your list but should be there.

And I also know (because I witnessed it with my own two eyes) that Duncan is THE ONLY HIGH RANKING WING CHUN MAN who was willing to acknowledge William Cheung's abilities AFTER William went public with TRADITIONAL WING CHUN (TWC)....

before that anyone who knew anything about Yip Man's students acknowledged that William Cheung was a great wing chun fighter - but after his claims about what TWC was and who he (William) was in the eyes of Yip Man (his successor)...

virtually every one of Yip Man's students shunned William: BUT NOT DUNCAN.

He came to the Saturday session of William Cheung's first NYC seminar in February, 1984 (and made a special trip to do it since by then Duncan was no longer living in NY state)...and he stayed the entire day...and clearly was showing his respects to William Cheung.

Just one example of the part of your post that's bull5hit.

I'll leave it to others to expose more.

[MysteriousPower]

I noticed that Allan Lee, Duncan Leung, and Lok Yui were mentioned multiple time and I guess everyone else was under etc. Could that be because Allan studied with those 2? Yep.

That part where each disciple was taught 1/5 smacks of a Shaw Brothers movie. Hitman, you actually believed this fairytale? Please say no.


I have heard it from a few sources that William Cheung was the best fighter to come out of the Yip Man school. It's funny that he never talked about this so called body structure that plagues the wing chun world currently. I also heard that Hawkins learned it secretly from Yip Man and that Yip only chi saoed with people he liked, Hawkins being one of them. William Cheung lived with the old man...and the old man did not show him body structure or chi sao with him? BS. I think that Hawkins just combined his training from tai chi with wing chun and that is partly where this body structure bs secret came from. The longer we as a community propogate this making up stories the longer the joke will be on us.

I am butchering my own thread!! Back to the real topic.

If we had more video of all those rooftop fights from the Hong Kong Yip Man days I think it would be very telling on how wc was ACTUALLY used in fighting. I have only seen a 5 second clip of Bruce Lee during one a "fight.". I put fight in quotes because it could have been a gathering of friends. Who knows. But actual footage would be nice. I think it would show wc for what it is: A different flair of kickboxing or kickboxing with extra tricks in it.

Victor, do you have access to any old footage via William Cheung?

[Hitman]

Ultimatewingchun & MysteriousPower,
I did not write this article, please address your problems to the writer who actually wrote it.

http://wingchunfightclub.org/joomla/...d=12&Itemid=57


That part where each disciple was taught 1/5 smacks of a Shaw Brothers movie. Hitman, you actually believed this fairytale? Please say no.

NO, I do not believe it.

[MysteriousPower]

Hitman,
sorry about that. My remarks were toward the article and not you.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yes, I know you didn't write it - but why did you post it?

What was the purpose of doing that?

[chusauli]

I have heard it from a few sources that William Cheung was the best fighter to come out of the Yip Man school. It's funny that he never talked about this so called body structure that plagues the wing chun world currently. I also heard that Hawkins learned it secretly from Yip Man and that Yip only chi saoed with people he liked, Hawkins being one of them. William Cheung lived with the old man...and the old man did not show him body structure or chi sao with him? BS. I think that Hawkins just combined his training from tai chi with wing chun and that is partly where this body structure bs secret came from. The longer we as a community propogate this making up stories the longer the joke will be on us.



Mysterious,

How is Body Structure BS? Please tell us. WCK is not powered by the body? And please tell us how it is Tai Ji Quan.

Also, what is your real name? Whom did you learn from?

Also, Yip Man didn't use the term "Body Structure" - he probably used "Tai Lik" (Body Power) or other terms.

Many thanks. I look forward to your reply.

[MysteriousPower]

Tai chi, hsing I, and ba gua always talk about body structure. I believe that practicioners of these "internal" styles were the first to talk about tucking the tailbone and then others borrowed it.

I do not think body structure is bs but I think that spending time training it is utter nonsense. In judo and shuai jiao they do not spend time pushing on each other to see if they can withstand the push in a static stance. They just throw each other! A first year judo man would destroy a frat year wc man.

My name and who I studied with is inimportant as I am not promoting any products/services and do not represent my teachers. My opinion is not any less right or wrong based on my resume.

WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.

[LoneTiger108]

Also, Yip Man didn't use the term "Body Structure" - he probably used "Tai Lik" (Body Power) or other terms.

He also probably didn't use that term either ;)

I've mentioned this before too. The term is a cool one, as the idea of body structure alone has helped to highlight issues with robotic, and dare I say, videotape Sifus who may have never touched hands with a skilled Sifu!

BUT I would be more interested in what Ip Man DID call it, as I know that it was shown to most of his earlier students. There are more than a few stories of Lee Shing alone throwing people around like rag dolls during practise due to his understanding of this little idea. :D

[LoneTiger108]

WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.

Although you may not want to share your history, it is clear from this statement that you have not had access to a skilled Sifu in Wing Chun.

I'm sorry for your unfortunate misunderstanding of Wing Chun.

[MysteriousPower]

Lol. I guess since my opinins do not fit your wc world view my sifu was not skillful and neither am I.

Have you touched hands with a skillful wc sifu? Are you skillful.
*
*
*
Then put up a video of yourself sparring with wc. All such arguments fall apart when the video challenge is thrown.

[k gledhill]

My old sifu told me that Cheung Sifu would laugh at guys while he was fighting them ;)

[Wayfaring]

That part where each disciple was taught 1/5 smacks of a Shaw Brothers movie.

Naw, more like the Power Rangers. If they could just get together and touch hands, then say "Go Go Power Rangers", then they could really kick some @$$.

[MysteriousPower]

Captain Planet and the wing chun planeteers. With your powers combined I am Captain Wing Chun

[Niersun]

Thanks Victor for posting that.

I almost wanted to vomit when i read that article and didnt want to reply to it out of disgust. What a load of bull****. Its pathetic how the Non - TWC world is trying to exclude GM William Cheung from the history books.

Also, i ran into this argument not a while ago. "Wong Shun Leung started WC in 1954, so William Cheung couldn't have started in 1951 and couldn't have been a live in student in 1954".

If you ever run into this argument, point out the fact that Bruce Lee started in early 1954 so the late Wong Shun Leung had to have started a few years earlier than that.

[t_niehoff]

Tai chi, hsing I, and ba gua always talk about body structure. I believe that practicioners of these "internal" styles were the first to talk about tucking the tailbone and then others borrowed it.

I do not think body structure is bs but I think that spending time training it is utter nonsense. In judo and shuai jiao they do not spend time pushing on each other to see if they can withstand the push in a static stance. They just throw each other! A first year judo man would destroy a frat year wc man.


I agree with you (except the tucking the tailbone part) -- people who fight while attached develop body structure for doing that. One of the guys I train WCK with was before taking up WCK a Div. 1 wrestler, and he took to WCK body structure like a duck to water.

Robert's body structure tests are really just a way to get a person unfamiliar with it to experience it (oh, so that's what I am trying to do), nothing more. But that doesn't develop the skill/ability to any significant degree. As you point out, it is through using that skill under realistic conditions (like you do in judo or wrestling) that you really develop it.



My name and who I studied with is inimportant as I am not promoting any products/services and do not represent my teachers. My opinion is not any less right or wrong based on my resume.

WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.

I also completely agree. The traditional model of teaching martial arts (forms, unrealsitic drills, etc.) is by today's standards extremely poor. I can see retaining those aspects for historical preservation reasons, but there are much more effective ways to teach and train. But it seems that most people who take up traditional arts aren't progressive thinkers -- or in many cases, thinkers at all. :)

[MysteriousPower]

My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the "occasional gang fight.". He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights. He actually used bil gee in peoples' eyes and throats and groin strikes. He was mainly a striker and used joint locks regularly mixed with striking. I have often wondered why he never utilized body throws.

T and anyone else,
Why would a teacher who obviously knew how to fight teach the same way as everyone else? It has never made sense to me.

[Kansuke]

My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the "occasional gang fight.". He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights. He actually used bil gee in peoples' eyes and throats and groin strikes. He was mainly a striker and used joint locks regularly mixed with striking. I have often wondered why he never utilized body throws.

T and anyone else,
Why would a teacher who obviously knew how to fight teach the same way as everyone else? It has never made sense to me.


How many quarters did you have to put into him to play?

[MysteriousPower]

It is hard to believe but such individuals do exist. These men were born tough and lived in tough environments. When these men see mma fights they look at it and say, "That is not real fighting. Real fighting is much more violent and a lot less technique based.". IMO it would make sense that these teachers know the value of sparring and pressure testing. Some though just end up teaching the same tired curriculum. It is a mystery.

[Sardinkahnikov]

My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the "occasional gang fight.". He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights.



How many quarters did you have to put into him to play?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zZAYdeiYFvU/RqxEg0wuhoI/AAAAAAAACak/u637s9cOz4s/s320/Double_Dragon_NES_Screenshot.png

Yeah, it was the first thing that came in mind when I read MysteriousPower's post:D
Then again I'm a huge nerd.

[sanjuro_ronin]

It is hard to believe but such individuals do exist. These men were born tough and lived in tough environments. When these men see mma fights they look at it and say, "That is not real fighting. Real fighting is much more violent and a lot less technique based.". IMO it would make sense that these teachers know the value of sparring and pressure testing. Some though just end up teaching the same tired curriculum. It is a mystery.

Teachers teach what their students want to learn.

[wkmark]

If we had more video of all those rooftop fights from the Hong Kong Yip Man days I think it would be very telling on how wc was ACTUALLY used in fighting. I have only seen a 5 second clip of Bruce Lee during one a "fight.". I put fight in quotes because it could have been a gathering of friends. Who knows. But actual footage would be nice. I think it would show wc for what it is: A different flair of kickboxing or kickboxing with extra tricks in it.

Victor, do you have access to any old footage via William Cheung?

The roof top fight on youtube was not of Bruce Lee, FYI. It was of Wu Chan Nam after about 3 months of Wing Chun Training with Sifu Wong Shun Leung. Sihing Wu Chan Nam has confirmed this.

[Ultimatewingchun]

There is no footage of William Cheung from those days that I am aware of.

[wkmark]

I do not think body structure is bs but I think that spending time training it is utter nonsense. In judo and shuai jiao they do not spend time pushing on each other to see if they can withstand the push in a static stance. They just throw each other! A first year judo man would destroy a frat year wc man.

WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.

I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.

As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We don't learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.

[MysteriousPower]

I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.

As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We don't learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.

The basic drills you are talking about for hockey sound like they are drilled exactly. As they are used. Skating is a good example of this. For wc I feel like the basic drills are practiced one way and then somehow students are expected to spar/ fight with them. The drills are not practiced in a way they can be used.

[m1k3]

I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.

As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We don't learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.

The drills for hockey are good. The difference would be if your hockey coach made you do things like stand in a horse stance while someone pushed you, on ice of course. Or stand in a horse stance and shoot or pass the puck. You don't drill that because you don't do that in a game.

It is perfectly legit to isolate game skills and to drill them. It is not legit to drill skills that have no relevance to the game.

The same goes for the fight game also.

[MysteriousPower]

The drills for hockey are good. The difference would be if your hockey coach made you do things like stand in a horse stance while someone pushed you, on ice of course. Or stand in a horse stance and shoot or pass the puck. You don't drill that because you don't do that in a game.

It is perfectly legit to isolate game skills and to drill them. It is not legit to drill skills that have no relevance to the game.

The same goes for the fight game also.


Wkmark and m113,
those were excellent posts.

[chusauli]

How much of a class I teach structure drills?

If there is a two hour class, perhaps 5-10 minutes of it.

How much of a class is spent drilling usage of structure?

The remainder of the class...

In fact, the WCK I teach is based all upon the usage of the structure - the function. This creates the actual form or how it looks.

[sanjuro_ronin]

How much of a class I teach structure drills?

If there is a two hour class, perhaps 5-10 minutes of it.

How much of a class is spent drilling usage of structure?

The remainder of the class...

In fact, the WCK I teach is based all upon the usage of the structure - the function. This creates the actual form or how it looks.

I gotta ask you this Robert and I have been meaning to for a bit, WHY do you feel you NEED to teach structure in WCK?

[chusauli]

I gotta ask you this Robert and I have been meaning to for a bit, WHY do you feel you NEED to teach structure in WCK?

Paul,

Good question - it has everything to do with feeling the power and root and being connected. It is a neglected aspect of training that must be drilled, because that is WCK, for me.

Without it, WCK is nothing less than poor kickboxing, short hand Karate, or economical movement Kenpo.

WCK is not patty cake, and Chi Sao is not slap fighting. WCK without structure (alignment, body mechanics, etc.) is empty and not worth practicing. It would be like doing lousy Fujian boxing - a semblence of the same moves, but without the core root that makes it go. The body is so big in comparison to the arms. WHy not tap that power?

If I had to change a flat, I would rather use my whole body, than just my arms alone. Much of my early training only involved the arms, or what I could muster, but without the potential of the body, it was a shell.

It would be like having the Batmobile - but a movie version that needs to be pulled, and only gadgets that look good onscreen.

It'd be like having a woman, but without the sex. :eek:

Hope I made this clear.

[LoneTiger108]

Lol. I guess since my opinins do not fit your wc world view my sifu was not skillful and neither am I.

Your opinions are perfectly acceptable, I just thought that if you compare all drills you have practised to be suitable for toddlers then you may have missed the point of drilling.


Have you touched hands with a skillful wc sifu? Are you skillful.
*
*
*
Then put up a video of yourself sparring with wc. All such arguments fall apart when the video challenge is thrown.

I believe I am skillful in Wing Chun, and my Sifu is too. I honestly meant no disrespect here.

I find it strange to read of WCK students who are not confident with their art and use other methods to fill in the gaps they experience in their training. Don't get me wrong here either, as I too remember my days of self doubt. This has smoothed out over the years as I have never stopped learning and the training did take some time to settle into my little frame!

As for the sparring clips, I've said before that sparring needs a partner and these days I train alone for the most part due to my work and family committments.

FWIW My Sifu learnt from Lee Shing for approx 25 years and is considered one of his eldest descendants in the World today. His skill surpasses any Wing Chun Sifu or student I have ever met or seen online but I don't feel I need to promote this as he speaks for himself. He was a bit of a street kid too, growing up in Londons Chinatown, and had his fair share of scraps (or playfights as he calls them!)

He still teaches and he does have plenty to offer his students. I don't think he would even entertain coaching a competitive fighter though as it just doesn't interest him. If all you wanted to do was learn how to fight for competition, he would have sent you away to a boxing gym or simply pass you to an elder who had the same interest.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Paul,

Good question - it has everything to do with feeling the power and root and being connected. It is a neglected aspect of training that must be drilled, because that is WCK, for me.

Without it, WCK is nothing less than poor kickboxing, short hand Karate, or economical movement Kenpo.

WCK is not patty cake, and Chi Sao is not slap fighting. WCK without structure (alignment, body mechanics, etc.) is empty and not worth practicing. It would be like doing lousy Fujian boxing - a semblence of the same moves, but without the core root that makes it go. The body is so big in comparison to the arms. WHy not tap that power?

If I had to change a flat, I would rather use my whole body, than just my arms alone. Much of my early training only involved the arms, or what I could muster, but without the potential of the body, it was a shell.

It would be like having the Batmobile - but a movie version that needs to be pulled, and only gadgets that look good onscreen.

It'd be like having a woman, but without the sex. :eek:

Hope I made this clear.

Very clear.
But, other systems HAVE structure, but they don't "teach" it per say.
Boxing has it, MT, BJJ, Wrestling, etc.

[couch]

Very clear.
But, other systems HAVE structure, but they don't "teach" it per say.
Boxing has it, MT, BJJ, Wrestling, etc.

Exactly. I find it quite interesting that in WC, it 'needs' to be taught. In boxing, per se, it isn't taught but is just an inherent part of the striking and movement.

I think that because it needs to be taught in the WC, WC might be taught incorrectly - broken into too many bits and pieces.

Just my thoughts...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Exactly. I find it quite interesting that in WC, it 'needs' to be taught. In boxing, per se, it isn't taught but is just an inherent part of the striking and movement.

I think that because it needs to be taught in the WC, WC might be taught incorrectly - broken into too many bits and pieces.

Just my thoughts...

That is my thinking too, that is why I asked Robert.
I never once saw a horse stance or stance training or 'rooting" or structure talk/test in Boxing or MT and they do just "fine" ( fine being an under statement).
Of course I was exposed to this in my TJMA and TCMA.
One thing though, a few years ago when I "restarted" Hung Kuen I wasn't exposed to it, not as much as when I first learned it and when I was exposed to SPM to blend with my HK, it wasn't really brought up much either.
Oh there was always the talk and demo of "force issuing", but it was hands on and very dynamic, I don't recall my "stance being tested" once, know what I mean?

[LoneTiger108]

I think that because it needs to be taught in the WC, WC might be taught incorrectly - broken into too many bits and pieces.

Just my thoughts...

I wouldn't say body structure needs to be taught to everybody as some sport coaches draw it out from you naturally and you don't even realize that you have it already. Until you see a complete newbie that obviously has no structure to start with. :o

Other drills however may have specific purpose that benefit a Wing Chun practitioner, they weren't designed for the beginner at all. ;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

Well here's a few more thoughts...

I'm doing it 35 years now, and I find that a lot of what Robert is saying is valid. I did karate for a very brief stint before wing chun, and I've always followed boxing and wrestling - so I was used to seeing a good, solid, strong base to work from - as all good karate, wrestling and most boxing will teach...

And right from day one I've been amazed at the lack of what I'll call proper stance work/body alignment and structure within soooo much wing chun. And of course if you're not in a bent-kneed and properly balanced position as you move around, throw punches, kicks, blocks, parries, etc...then as Robert says, you not utilizing your whole body for power generation - you're mostly just utilizing your arms when you punch, block, etc..

Time and time again I've seen this within the wing chun world.

People stand too high, they neglect stretching and strengthening their legs, they neglect the development of good kicking skills, and they concentrate too much on multiple punches as fast as they can without any real power generation behind them through the use of the hips and body torque. And they lack a strong sense of balance as they may be moved around, pushed, pulled, etc. And quite often I've found that wing chun people don't have enough width when in their front stance - and the too-narrow structure can easily be become unbalanced.

You see it in the forms, in chi sao, in work on the wooden dummy, in drills, in sparring, etc.

It is a sore spot for many people, and is something I emphasize from day one when people join my class. And it can be particularly difficult, I've noticed, when someone with previous wing chun training has joined my school - the proverbial "hard to teach an old dog new tricks" kind of thing.

But it has to be done.

[m1k3]

I find it strange to read of WCK students who are not confident with their art and use other methods to fill in the gaps they experience in their training. Don't get me wrong here either, as I too remember my days of self doubt. This has smoothed out over the years as I have never stopped learning and the training did take some time to settle into my little frame!



I find this very interesting. I don't expect any art to be 'complete'. I don't expect my BJJ training to be complete. It has a specific focus. Is it worthy for self defense as is, as far as I can tell yes. I have seen enough of the Gracie challenge matches and the early days of UFC to see that it can work very well by itself. But by no means do I consider it complete. This is why I still work my WC drills, even if only by myself. It fills in some holes in the BJJ game. If I was serious about competing I would be taking MT or boxing. I wouldn't be taking WC as I'm not sure there are that many WC schools that are training MMA fighters to compete.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I find this very interesting. I don't expect any art to be 'complete'. I don't expect my BJJ training to be complete. It has a specific focus. Is it worthy for self defense as is, as far as I can tell yes. I have seen enough of the Gracie challenge matches and the early days of UFC to see that it can work very well by itself. But by no means do I consider it complete. This is why I still work my WC drills, even if only by myself. It fills in some holes in the BJJ game. If I was serious about competing I would be taking MT or boxing. I wouldn't be taking WC as I'm not sure there are that many WC schools that are training MMA fighters to compete.

And to add, BJJ was NOT complete and they knew it and fix that by adding MT and wrestling.
NO system is complete, NOT ONE and the highly specialized ones like WC even less.

[couch]

...
Oh there was always the talk and demo of "force issuing", but it was hands on and very dynamic, I don't recall my "stance being tested" once, know what I mean?

IMO, it doesn't need to 'be tested' because it's being tested all the time.

If my knees aren't bent, or my hips behind my strikes - I'll have an immediate indicator from hitting the heavy bag. If I take that 'information' and put it to work against a moving target - all is taught in the moment. Rinse and repeat the moment and I now have been taught how my 'stance' should be held.

I know watcha mean.

[chusauli]

That is my thinking too, that is why I asked Robert.
I never once saw a horse stance or stance training or 'rooting" or structure talk/test in Boxing or MT and they do just "fine" ( fine being an under statement).
Of course I was exposed to this in my TJMA and TCMA.
One thing though, a few years ago when I "restarted" Hung Kuen I wasn't exposed to it, not as much as when I first learned it and when I was exposed to SPM to blend with my HK, it wasn't really brought up much either.
Oh there was always the talk and demo of "force issuing", but it was hands on and very dynamic, I don't recall my "stance being tested" once, know what I mean?

Paul,

To side track a bit, Hung Gar is all about stance testing. And SPM certainly develops your structure in a Mantis way. Tales of NY's Lam Sang, last GM of Jook Lum, belie his small size.

In Hung Gar, you do the "Toi Ma" exercise, which you use Sae Ping, Ji Ng, Diu Ma, Kay Lun Ma to match against your partner. This is seen in many old '70's Shaw Bros movies, where they press against your knees.

The Hung forms all require you have this power from your root.

[MysteriousPower]

Paul,

To side track a bit, Hung Gar is all about stance testing. And SPM certainly develops your structure in a Mantis way. Tales of NY's Lam Sang, last GM of Jook Lum, belie his small size.

In Hung Gar, you do the "Toi Ma" exercise, which you use Sae Ping, Ji Ng, Diu Ma, Kay Lun Ma to match against your partner. This is seen in many old '70's Shaw Bros movies, where they press against your knees.

The Hung forms all require you have this power from your root.


I have seen clips from your student's DVD(Alan Or). Forgive me for this oversimplification but all that looks like is chi sao with pushing and pulling similar to tai chi push hands. Alan looks like a big guy. I doubt that little old Yip Man was doing that to bigger stronger opponents.

[chusauli]

I have seen clips from your student's DVD(Alan Or). Forgive me for this oversimplification but all that looks like is chi sao with pushing and pulling similar to tai chi push hands. Alan looks like a big guy. I doubt that little old Yip Man was doing that to bigger stronger opponents.

Yip Man wasn't always so little or frail as you see him in his last days. He was healthy and quite strong for his size. From stories I have heard, he always had people on their heels or on the balls of their feet, and always guided them into objects or into other classmates. He was able to do this with his manipulation of body power (structure, mechanics, alignment) through his bridges. Again, as I said, simply by doing the Cern Fuk and Cern Tok of the Jong, you can develop the 6 powers, but it must be done with the body.

The late Wong Shun Leung and I did Chi Sao back in 1987 in HK and later again in the early 1990's in SF. He pushed and pulled me about like I was nothing. Considering the size difference, I was very impressed. Ho Kam Ming also did the same to me when he visited Hawkins in 1988 in Los Angeles. These were two of Yip Man's students who have no Tai Ji training (which I assume you are referring to Hawkins), and practice and only taught WCK. If not for their body power, how could they move a big guy like me? Tsui Sheung Tien, whom I met in 1987 in Cheung Sha Wan area in Kowloon, also has this ability and very sticky, but he also learned Tai Ji Quan.

Others in WCK under Yip Man tell us that Yip Man hardly did Chi Sao with them. If this is so, how could they teach you this method? Hawkins Cheung is tiny - about 5' 4", 108 lbs. He has often controlled me and thrown me about when I did not understand his method. One Yip Man student I met had no such ability with his body and lacked a rooted stance, was of big size and strong arms, but totally lacking in this ability with his body. So it is not across the board.

Even others can tell you they will hit you during Chi Sao and there is nothing you can do about it and they do not use hand speed, but body control.

Alan Orr is not a big guy, he's big for his size, but he is a physically fit guy. In pictures on his website, you can see the difference in size between us.

I am sorry if you did not learn WCK like this, but it is a facet of Yip Man's art.

[Vajramusti]

Exactly. I find it quite interesting that in WC, it 'needs' to be taught. In boxing, per se, it isn't taught but is just an inherent part of the striking and movement.

I think that because it needs to be taught in the WC, WC might be taught incorrectly - broken into too many bits and pieces.

Just my thoughts...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't like to make too many generalizes comments about others who I have not seen do... but good structural and stance training? I was introduced to it in 1976 and I was checked regularly and I check my regular student's structure regularly not only in slt but in all dynamic moving footwork training.

joy chaudhuri

[wkmark]

Wkmark and m113,
those were excellent posts.

Thanks for your comments. Just trying to add some constructive comments here and there.

[anerlich]

I find it strange to read of WCK students who are not confident with their art and use other methods to fill in the gaps they experience in their training. Don't get me wrong here either, as I too remember my days of self doubt. This has smoothed out over the years as I have never stopped learning and the training did take some time to settle into my little frame!


WC is not a religion. It is a tool.

I find it strange that people adopt a fighting method as if it were a hammer and everything else in the world looks like a nail, and that of there are screws to be screwed and screwdrivers lying around that they persist with that hammer.

[Matrix]

Very clear.
But, other systems HAVE structure, but they don't "teach" it per say.
Boxing has it, MT, BJJ, Wrestling, etc.Do you feel that specifically incorporating structure into the cirriculum is a disadvantage? If so, why?
Just curious. Thanks

[Matrix]

Good question - it has everything to do with feeling the power and root and being connected. It is a neglected aspect of training that must be drilled, because that is WCK, for me.

Without it, WCK is nothing less than poor kickboxing, short hand Karate, or economical movement Kenpo.

WCK is not patty cake, and Chi Sao is not slap fighting. WCK without structure (alignment, body mechanics, etc.) is empty and not worth practicing. It would be like doing lousy Fujian boxing - a semblence of the same moves, but without the core root that makes it go. The body is so big in comparison to the arms. WHy not tap that power? IMO, this is spot on. Well said Robert. :cool:

[sanjuro_ronin]

Do you feel that specifically incorporating structure into the cirriculum is a disadvantage? If so, why?
Just curious. Thanks

Every system incorporates structure, I think that Roberts' tends to focus on it more in the beginning so that that "delivery platform" for their techniques is well developed.
Is that advantageous compared to system that don't?
To be honest, I don't know.
I can tell you this though, from experience I have learned that certain systems need to be trained a certain way to get the right development.

[m1k3]

Paul,

Good question - it has everything to do with feeling the power and root and being connected. It is a neglected aspect of training that must be drilled, because that is WCK, for me.

Without it, WCK is nothing less than poor kickboxing, short hand Karate, or economical movement Kenpo.

WCK is not patty cake, and Chi Sao is not slap fighting. WCK without structure (alignment, body mechanics, etc.) is empty and not worth practicing. It would be like doing lousy Fujian boxing - a semblence of the same moves, but without the core root that makes it go. The body is so big in comparison to the arms. WHy not tap that power?

If I had to change a flat, I would rather use my whole body, than just my arms alone. Much of my early training only involved the arms, or what I could muster, but without the potential of the body, it was a shell.

It would be like having the Batmobile - but a movie version that needs to be pulled, and only gadgets that look good onscreen.

It'd be like having a woman, but without the sex. :eek:

Hope I made this clear.

Robert, Paul sort of touched on this but I'm curious about the drills. In particular static vs mobile drills.

What I can best relate it to is my days of playing football. I played both offensive and defensive line. We did a lot of what you would probably call structure work. There was some static drills, mostly showing you how to set your base and set up your initial pre-contact structure, and then lots of drills working your in contact skills, keeping your balance, unbalancing the opposing lineman and of course foot work.

Would it be a fair assumption that you are doing similar things in your class based on a WC structure and the type of contact expected under those conditions?

[LoneTiger108]

I find this very interesting. I don't expect any art to be 'complete'. I don't expect my BJJ training to be complete. It has a specific focus. Is it worthy for self defense as is, as far as I can tell yes. I have seen enough of the Gracie challenge matches and the early days of UFC to see that it can work very well by itself. But by no means do I consider it complete. This is why I still work my WC drills, even if only by myself. It fills in some holes in the BJJ game. If I was serious about competing I would be taking MT or boxing. I wouldn't be taking WC as I'm not sure there are that many WC schools that are training MMA fighters to compete.

It may all depend on what you believe to be a 'complete' martial art. Basically, imho, any empty hand martial art is not complete. In fact, it is questionable if it martial at all (although it may definitely have a martial origin) I would also go as far to say that competitive fighting isn't martial, it's sport.

For me, a complete martial art is one that offers solo and group practice with and without weaponry. Now if you only want to learn a competitive combat sport, don't practise Wing Chun, unless you can find a club that trains for that purpose. Alan Orrs approach here in the UK is good example.


WC is not a religion. It is a tool.

I find it strange that people adopt a fighting method as if it were a hammer and everything else in the world looks like a nail, and that of there are screws to be screwed and screwdrivers lying around that they persist with that hammer.

I agree, it's not a religion. But I disagree, as I don't for one second think that it is only a 'tool' as you describe it. To attempt to fit Wing Chun neatly into a box/catergory is just unwise imo. Yes, Wing Chun has specifics that only Wing Chun people train, but that shouldn't mean that that's all we are known for.

For example, I trained with some students from other schools and found that their weaponry knowledge was zero. They had trained for over 5 years. This is a problem imo. They could also tell that I knew 'something' the moment they touched hands as it must've just felt completely different to anything they had felt before. The reason was I was a Weaponry Sifu.

[MysteriousPower]

Yip Man wasn't always so little or frail as you see him in his last days. He was healthy and quite strong for his size. From stories I have heard, he always had people on their heels or on the balls of their feet, and always guided them into objects or into other classmates. He was able to do this with his manipulation of body power (structure, mechanics, alignment) through his bridges. Again, as I said, simply by doing the Cern Fuk and Cern Tok of the Jong, you can develop the 6 powers, but it must be done with the body.

The late Wong Shun Leung and I did Chi Sao back in 1987 in HK and later again in the early 1990's in SF. He pushed and pulled me about like I was nothing. Considering the size difference, I was very impressed. Ho Kam Ming also did the same to me when he visited Hawkins in 1988 in Los Angeles. These were two of Yip Man's students who have no Tai Ji training (which I assume you are referring to Hawkins), and practice and only taught WCK. If not for their body power, how could they move a big guy like me? Tsui Sheung Tien, whom I met in 1987 in Cheung Sha Wan area in Kowloon, also has this ability and very sticky, but he also learned Tai Ji Quan.

Others in WCK under Yip Man tell us that Yip Man hardly did Chi Sao with them. If this is so, how could they teach you this method? Hawkins Cheung is tiny - about 5' 4", 108 lbs. He has often controlled me and thrown me about when I did not understand his method. One Yip Man student I met had no such ability with his body and lacked a rooted stance, was of big size and strong arms, but totally lacking in this ability with his body. So it is not across the board.

Even others can tell you they will hit you during Chi Sao and there is nothing you can do about it and they do not use hand speed, but body control.

Alan Orr is not a big guy, he's big for his size, but he is a physically fit guy. In pictures on his website, you can see the difference in size between us.

I am sorry if you did not learn WCK like this, but it is a facet of Yip Man's art.

That entire paragraph brought up another good point. This uprooting only really happens during contrived drills like chi sao. No one gets uprooted during sparring, only hit.

[Vajramusti]

That entire paragraph brought up another good point. This uprooting only really happens during contrived drills like chi sao. No one gets uprooted during sparring, only hit.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Not true IMO.

joy chaudhuri

[MysteriousPower]

-----------------------------------------------------------
Not true IMO.

joy chaudhuri

Very true, IMO. Why post if it's only going to be one sentence? Add something worthwhile to the discussion.

[chusauli]

That entire paragraph brought up another good point. This uprooting only really happens during contrived drills like chi sao. No one gets uprooted during sparring, only hit.

Mysterious, it would be good to know your background, who you studied with, what lineage, how long you studied and your real name. What is there to hide? Otherwise, I think you are just a Troll.

I don't have to talk about Wong Shun Leung's or Ho Kam Ming's background, neither Hawkins' or Tsui's. They are the pillars of the first generation of students under Yip Man.

Do you just think Chi Sao is just contrived? Chi Sao can be obviously planned, artificial, or lacking in spontaneity; forced; unnatural, especially if you have some poor instruction, or a beginner, but the converse is also true. And you have never been uprooted before in sparring? Then it is you who is lacking in experienced partners and are limited, not just in WCK, but in fighting. If you spar with other systems, you know people will try to trip you, throw you, take you down, and you will be uprooted.

I don't know what else to say.

This is not WCK's problem, this is your problem.

[MysteriousPower]

I do not know you or even know much of you. What I have witnessed is that the main reason people give you're opinions credence over someone like me is because of whatever reputation you have built up. If you were anonymous like me your opinins would not be taken as seriously. Try this. Try posting under a different name and see if people give your opinins so much credence.

Call me a troll? My opinion is worth as much as yours. You have a famous name. That is your only edge in posting.

I have been thrown and tripped before...but never by someone who trained in contrived structure drill training. They just train.


Mysterious, it would be good to know your background, who you studied with, what lineage, how long you studied and your real name. What is there to hide? Otherwise, I think you are just a Troll.

I don't have to talk about Wong Shun Leung's or Ho Kam Ming's background, neither Hawkins' or Tsui's. They are the pillars of the first generation of students under Yip Man.

Do you just think Chi Sao is just contrived? Chi Sao can be obviously planned, artificial, or lacking in spontaneity; forced; unnatural, especially if you have some poor instruction, or a beginner, but the converse is also true. And you have never been uprooted before in sparring? Then it is you who is lacking in experienced partners and are limited, not just in WCK, but in fighting. If you spar with other systems, you know people will try to trip you, throw you, take you down, and you will be uprooted.

I don't know what else to say.

This is not WCK's problem, this is your problem.

[LoneTiger108]

I do not know you or even know much of you. What I have witnessed is that the main reason people give you're opinions credence over someone like me is because of whatever reputation you have built up. If you were anonymous like me your opinins would not be taken as seriously. Try this. Try posting under a different name and see if people give your opinins so much credence.

Call me a troll? My opinion is worth as much as yours. You have a famous name. That is your only edge in posting.

Probably one of the most democratic posts I've seen of late! I have to admit, when I first started posting here I was in awe of people like Robert Chu mainly because I respect people who promote Wing Chun effectively.

BUT I have had my cross words with him too, and had all sorts of issues at the beginning as I was somehow pigeon holed as being a spokesman for Lee Shing Family and as that particular family is still relatively unknown outside the UK my opinions were sh1t on from a great height!

That was after I added my signature and declared who I learnt from so my advice is STAY ANONYMOUS!!! :D

[MysteriousPower]

Probably one of the most democratic posts I've seen of late! I have to admit, when I first started posting here I was in awe of people like Robert Chu mainly because I respect people who promote Wing Chun effectively.

BUT I have had my cross words with him too, and had all sorts of issues at the beginning as I was somehow pigeon holed as being a spokesman for Lee Shing Family and as that particular family is still relatively unknown outside the UK my opinions were sh1t on from a great height!

That was after I added my signature and declared who I learnt from so my advice is STAY ANONYMOUS!!! :D

Thanks for the support, buddy. No hard feelings for the other posts. I misread your posts and now all offenses have been cleared up.

[YungChun]

What Robert said is true and basic.. It doesn't matter who said it.. Truth needs no resume.. Conversely, erroneous blanket statements also need no resume to see them for what they are.

Interesting variation on the ad hominem attack though..

[chusauli]

I do not know you or even know much of you. What I have witnessed is that the main reason people give you're opinions credence over someone like me is because of whatever reputation you have built up. If you were anonymous like me your opinins would not be taken as seriously. Try this. Try posting under a different name and see if people give your opinins so much credence.

Call me a troll? My opinion is worth as much as yours. You have a famous name. That is your only edge in posting.

I have been thrown and tripped before...but never by someone who trained in contrived structure drill training. They just train.

Stick to the issue.

Who are you?

What is your lineage? How long have you trained?

If you've been tripped or thrown, then you have been uprooted.

Your opinion is as good as mine.

Don't worry about names. Maybe I have it all wrong; I can learn from anyone. If they're wrong, they can still teach me how not to be wrong; if correct, they can enhance my knowledge. All the "reputation" or "name" is silly.

A reputation is not even the real me - people think they know me here through the forum, but never met me in person. How do they know me?

[punchdrunk]

To say that pushing and pulling in chi sao is more like tai chi is simply incorrect. Hawkin's Cheung definately didn't make it up from his tai chi practice, it is an integral part of chi sao to work your balance and your partners. Take your partners balance and feel for yourself how much more control you have than just using "fast" hands.
I don't feel R. Chu's name gives him instant credit on the board, people argue with him all the time. However even if you disagree, he says interesting things and is willing to share.

[MysteriousPower]

I am not trying to start a war. Let us get back on track.

Everyone relax please.

[chusauli]

I am not trying to start a war. Let us get back on track.

Everyone relax please.

I'm relaxed and have no interest in a war of words. We are discussing here. Having a little tea like Yip Man, Sum Nung, and Yuen Kay Shan in the old days in Futshan.

Mysterious, who are you? What is your name? What is your lineage? How long have you trained?

We know mostly everyone here, so its good to know whom we speak to.

Here, there's no "famous" or "not famous", just WCK players.

Just curious to know.

[Wayfaring]

Having a little tea like Yip Man, Sum Nung, and Yuen Kay Shan in the old days in Futshan.


And I'm sure they never argued. :rolleyes:

[JPinAZ]

If mysterious doesn't want to give his background, he doesn't have too. There's no requirement of that to come to this forum and post views. While it's nice to know a bit about the person you're conversing with, he isn't required to qualify his views by listing his background.
This type of repeated questioning IMO is an attempt to see who he is and possibly discredit him or his views because of it. If it was just once, no biggy, but how many times has it been asked? 3?? Jeez, talk about attachment!

BTW, Robert has been asked a few times about his background by punch, which he's repeatedly ignored. :rolleyes:

[chusauli]

No interest in discrediting anyone.

I just like to know who I am speaking with and the background of whom I speak with.

No need for degeneration. I relate better to people rather than "handles".

[Matrix]

Every system incorporates structure, I think that Roberts' tends to focus on it more in the beginning so that that "delivery platform" for their techniques is well developed.
Is that advantageous compared to system that don't?
To be honest, I don't know.
I can tell you this though, from experience I have learned that certain systems need to be trained a certain way to get the right development.I think that's a fair assessment and a balanced response. Not something that we see very often in these forums. Thanks Paul.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think that's a fair assessment and a balanced response. Not something that we see very often in these forums. Thanks Paul.

Serious question deserves a serious answer.

[LoneTiger108]

If mysterious doesn't want to give his background, he doesn't have too. There's no requirement of that to come to this forum and post views. While it's nice to know a bit about the person you're conversing with, he isn't required to qualify his views by listing his background.
This type of repeated questioning IMO is an attempt to see who he is and possibly discredit him or his views because of it. If it was just once, no biggy, but how many times has it been asked? 3?? Jeez, talk about attachment!

BTW, Robert has been asked a few times about his background by punch, which he's repeatedly ignored. :rolleyes:

My point exactly. :rolleyes:

[sanjuro_ronin]

With all honesty, I never understood the issue with telling people your MA background, who you trained with and when.
I don't get it at all.
Sorry.
One should be proud of what they have accomplished in their MA journey.

[chusauli]

With all honesty, I never understood the issue with telling people your MA background, who you trained with and when.
I don't get it at all.
Sorry.
One should be proud of what they have accomplished in their MA journey.

My point exactly! :)

And conversely, what is there to hide?

My background is readily available in numerous magazines, interviews, and a few books and DVD's.

[MysteriousPower]

Your bios were made available by choice. I choose not to reveal mine. Honestly I do not care about any of your bios so I am baffled as to why you care about mine.

I have a novel idea. Stop asking me about my bio. You wanted to sell books, dvds, be a world famous teacher, etc so you put up your bio. I undersand that you are trying to guage my level of knowledge so you can bring me down when you do not agree with me. Forget it. You only get access to my opinions and occasionally bad spelling.

Can we all let it go now?

[wkmark]

That entire paragraph brought up another good point. This uprooting only really happens during contrived drills like chi sao. No one gets uprooted during sparring, only hit.

Um... Uprooting can happen in sparring but it also depends on who are you sparring with and with what type of equipment you are wearing. Are you sparring with someone with equal skills? If so then I would assume that both of you know enough to stay rooted on the ground. If that is the case then yes it's hard to uproot that person. If you are sparring with someone with less skills then you, sure you can uproot them.

Are you both wearing boxing gloves, if so then yes it's also hard to uproot someone using that. For me, uprooting someone is done when I am using MMA glove or no gloves and doing a palm strike with my body behind the strike.

If you look at my video that I have poster on youtube a while back, I was doing "gwoh Sau" with my SiHing. Please note it was just Gwoh Sau" and you can see clearly that couple times I was uprooted.

In Sparring if we are both using MMA gloves, can he do that to me, sure he can. For him to uproot me is at the same time to control my actions. Learning how to hit someone is easy, learning how to control is the other level.

However the main thing is to be able to experience the effect of uprooting someone either in the giving or the receiving end. No typing on a forum board will be able to show you that particular effect.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Your bios were made available by choice. I choose not to reveal mine. Honestly I do not care about any of your bios so I am baffled as to why you care about mine.

I have a novel idea. Stop asking me about my bio. You wanted to sell books, dvds, be a world famous teacher, etc so you put up your bio. I undersand that you are trying to guage my level of knowledge so you can bring me down when you do not agree with me. Forget it. You only get access to my opinions and occasionally bad spelling.

Can we all let it go now?

I've been on MA forums for a bit, I was even an admin on the infamous Bullshido for awhile and all the time I have never had issues with telling anyone who I was or under whom I trained, why would I?
When people ask me it is usually to gauge my experience and to weight what I post accordingly, just as you don't take the advice of a 1 year med student at the same level as a doctor of 20 years, it is the same in the MA.
To see it right off the bat as"
I undersand that you are trying to guage my level of knowledge so you can bring me down when you do not agree with me" sounds, well, paranoid and rather disturbing way to go through life.

[goju]

just as you don't take the advice of a 1 year med student at the same level as a doctor of 20 years, it is the same in the MA.

I disagree with this. Just because someone has clocked in more years doesn't mean it was time well spent. I've seen guys who have wasted their entire youth with a fraudulent teachers and schools and have nothing to show for it.

I would rather have one year of quality training that 20 years of crap.;)

[MysteriousPower]

I've been on MA forums for a bit, I was even an admin on the infamous Bullshido for awhile and all the time I have never had issues with telling anyone who I was or under whom I trained, why would I?
When people ask me it is usually to gauge my experience and to weight what I post accordingly, just as you don't take the advice of a 1 year med student at the same level as a doctor of 20 years, it is the same in the MA.
To see it right off the bat as" sounds, well, paranoid and rather disturbing way to go through life.

The last sentence of your post was unnecessary. You made a judement on me and you do not know anything about me. Imagine the ammo you would have if you knew other stuff! Your comment just proved my point. I did not give you what you wanted so you got all whiny and made a negative remark about my life. Nice job.

[MysteriousPower]

The current president of the US had less than one years experience as a politician and the majority of he country felt he was a better candidate than John Mcain.

There is a wing chun lesson to be learned in all of this. These gentleman are trying to get a sEnse of who I am or otherwise they do not know whether to agree with me or not. This is similar to wc needing to have a bridge or in T's words be a connected fighter. Without a bridge it is just "sloppy kickboxing".
I am providing no bridge for them and because of that they feel deficient.

Everyone, cheer up. It is Howdy Doody Time.

[Ultimatewingchun]

The current president of the US had less than one years experience as a politician and the majority of he country felt he was a better candidate than John Mcain.

There is a wing chun lesson to be learned in all of this. These gentleman are trying to get a sEnse of who I am or otherwise they do not know whether to agree with me or not. This is similar to wc needing to have a bridge or in T's words be a connected fighter. Without a bridge it is just "sloppy kickboxing".
I am providing no bridge for them and because of that they feel deficient.

Everyone, cheer up. It is Howdy Doody Time.

***THIS is an interesting post. While I am always inclined to want to know someone's credentials based upon their experience and their schooling...this point that Mysterious raises about "providing no bridge" is very thought provoking.

Hummm...

[YungChun]

The current president of the US had less than one years experience as a politician and the majority of he country felt he was a better candidate than John Mcain.


McCain had one serious drawback..

http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Entertainment/Images/sarah-palin-portrait.jpg

You betcha!

As far as identification goes.. No, it shouldn't matter "who you are" but more what you have to say... Trolls often will not ID themselves (although most here do) and this could be seen as cowardly..

Many folks like to pigeon hole folks and/or use ad hominem attacks and will use your info against you...

The issue should be the issue, not the person.. I don't care how many "years of experience" someone has if they say something I don't agree with, I still won't agree unless they can make the case for it.

[Ultimatewingchun]

She's gonna make one helluva talk show host someday, though...

You betcha.

After all, she can see Moscow from her roof !!!

[YungChun]

She's gonna make one helluva talk show host someday, though...

You betcha.

After all, she can see Moscow from her roof !!!

I always thought she'd be perfect for QVC..

God I hope she never gets in office.. Can you imagine a world with her finger on the button?

You Betcha!

[Ultimatewingchun]

Nooooooooooooooooo :eek:

All bets are off !!! :cool:
:D

[goju]

not one commented yet that she is hot?

WHATS WRONG WITH YOU GUYS AM I THE ONLY ON HERE WHO LIKES EM OLDER!!!!!:eek::mad:

[Ultimatewingchun]

Hell, I'm older than she is...

But anyway, what's hot got to do with it?!

I've known some reeeeeally hot women who I wouldn't vote for if they ran for dog catcher!!! :cool:

[YungChun]

not one commented yet that she is hot?

WHATS WRONG WITH YOU GUYS AM I THE ONLY ON HERE WHO LIKES EM OLDER!!!!!:eek::mad:

You only think she's hot because you're half her age.. No worries you'll grow out of it.. LOL

[YungChun]

Now at that age this is what hot looks like..

http://images.starpulse.com/pictures/2007/01/26/previews/Constance%20Marie-SGG-030099.jpg

Wapaa!

[Ultimatewingchun]

Ah hah!!!

So this thread is about body structure after all...;)

[goju]

You only think she's hot because you're half her age.. No worries you'll grow out of it.. LOL


well yeah once im your guy's age imagine how old a "cougar" would be for me LOL

i think it would qualify as sabertooth if anything:D

[YungChun]

Ah hah!!!

So this thread is about body structure after all...;)

And Constance does wonders with "structure in motion"... :)


Took a minute to find it..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSF9CKO8wIQ

[SavvySavage]

I'm with you, Goju. I love older women(have dated 2 in my life). The great thing about older women is that they have already been divoreced and are over that whole, "I want to have a family and go to church on Sunday daydream", they have money and aren't aren't cheap like younger women, and they can actually cook. Much of what I just mentioned was true for only one of the women(the other one expected me to buy her everything) so my generalizations are based on 50%. The key for the good one was that she had been divorced already. The biggest advantage to dating older women is that they're easier to approach because a younger guy flies under the radar and they don't know, or don't care, that you're hitting on them until sexy time is happening.

Sarah Palin is hot as hell. And the point MP was trying to make was the Obama was masslively inexperienced and people still felt he was better than Mcain cause they were mad at Bush. So the fact that Obama was elected proves that credentials don't mean sh!t and the only thing that matters is how people feel about a person.

[JPinAZ]

I disagree with this. Just because someone has clocked in more years doesn't mean it was time well spent. I've seen guys who have wasted their entire youth with a fraudulent teachers and schools and have nothing to show for it.

I would rather have one year of quality training that 20 years of crap.;)

Look at T as an example. He admittedly spent 17 years learning WCK and after that amount of time, still felt he needed to look somewhere else because he realized he hadn't learned anything. Time spent sometimes doesn't mean anything. And after getting 100 hours of what he calls 'good instruction' is still all over the yard at times. :o

If Mysterious wants to remain just that and still post here, I see no problem with it. Badgering him 3 times in a row demanding he prove his credentials and knowledge otherwise he's labeled as a troll is a bit much, 'specially from someone of such 'high standing and experiencs' as R.Chu. :rolleyes:

Mysterious's posts should, and IMO do, speak for themselves. A person's knowledge is based on the present - what they say and do - not where they've been. Robert shouldn't have to reminded of that by me..

[JPinAZ]

***THIS is an interesting post. While I am always inclined to want to know someone's credentials based upon their experience and their schooling...this point that Mysterious raises about "providing no bridge" is very thought provoking.

Hummm...

Agreed. I think it says a lot!

[goju]

Look at T as an example. He admittedly spent 17 years learning WCK and after that amount of time, still felt he needed to look somewhere else because he realized he hadn't learned anything. Time spent sometimes doesn't mean anything. And after getting 100 hours of what he calls 'good instruction' is still all over the yard at times. :o

If Mysterious wants to remain just that and still post here, I see no problem with it. Badgering him 3 times in a row demanding he prove his credentials and knowledge otherwise he's labeled as a troll is a bit much, 'specially from someone of such 'high standing and experiencs' as R.Chu. :rolleyes:

Mysterious's posts should, and IMO do, speak for themselves. A person's knowledge is based on the present - what they say and do - not where they've been. Robert shouldn't have to reminded of that by me..


Exactly and most importantly it's not like you can't lie about your history anyway lol

credentials mean nothing all that whats matter is what you can do when some one is trying to knock your block off and nothing else.

i dont know why guys on here think posting their real names or lists of who they supposedly studied with makes them look legit

if anything it makes them look like they are trying a bit too hard

no matter what we say we are all still hiding behind a computer

[MysteriousPower]

Exactly and most importantly it's not like you can't lie about your history anyway lol

credentials mean nothing all that whats matter is what you can do when some one is trying to knock your block off and nothing else.

i dont know why guys on here think posting their real names or lists of who they supposedly studied with makes them look legit

if anything it makes them look like they are trying a bit too hard

no matter what we say we are all still hiding behind a computer

Here it is: The official history of me,

I studied directly with Yim wing chun. Actually, not to brag or anything, but I was the brains behind the operation. I taught her everyhing but liberal media bias gave the credit to her to improve the standing of women at the time. My lawyer from the shaolin temple had his license taken away because the they did not want the truth to come out which was that Ms. Yim was just a pretty face and could do more push ups than the average woman. I lived for years in bitterness and in that time I learned to harness my anger and frustration into true power. Levitation? Done that. Brick breaking? I invented it but some Japanese s
fisherman told me he wanted to impress a woman and kneeled in front of me for discipleship. I taught him the secret if brick breaking but he was lazy. Wood was easier. At the time I did not suspect the extent of Japanese entrpreneurialship(sp?). He wbt back to Japan and invented something called Karate. His real name was Marian(John Wayne's real name) but he decided to be called Funokoshi.

The seducing of millions of women with my Kung Fu power? Who do you think pushed China's population to a billion?

Those are just some of the ways I harnessed internal Kung Fu. Then I was drafted into world war 1 and died

[duende]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimatewingchun
***THIS is an interesting post. While I am always inclined to want to know someone's credentials based upon their experience and their schooling...this point that Mysterious raises about "providing no bridge" is very thought provoking.


Originally posted by JPinAZ
Hummm...
Agreed. I think it says a lot!


It is a good point, but not so easy to do.


As like it or not, as soon as you enter your oponents space to strike, you are in fact creating a bridge.

That is unless:

1. you're fighting a scrub..

2. You have magical chi powers that can destroy your oponents without actual contact or having to be in striking range.

3. You hit 'em in the back of the head without them knowing. Aka... jumping them like a gangster initiation ritual or some Ninja technique.


Of course we do try our best to make the bridge a one way street. ;)

[Ultimatewingchun]

Took it very literally, huh Duende? :D

[duende]

Took it very literally, huh Duende? :D

Yeah Victor... It seems so. Haha. ;)


Best,

Alex

[shawchemical]

That entire paragraph brought up another good point. This uprooting only really happens during contrived drills like chi sao. No one gets uprooted during sparring, only hit.

Absolute nonsense.

People get jammed into the ground, and have their base lifted constantly in sparring and fighting.

You clearly don't have the slightest clue.

[MysteriousPower]

Absolute nonsense.

People get jammed into the ground, and have their base lifted constantly in sparring and fighting.

You clearly don't have the slightest clue.


I have been thrown before and knocked over while sparring. You do not have to do "structural drills" to pull of what my sparring partners did to me. In fact none of them ever have done wc structural drills.

How did Babe Ruth hit all those homeruns? Not by doing structural drills. He practiced hitting. To hurt another human being you do not need the wc curriculum at all. The wc curriculum presents another way of hurting someone but somewhere along the way wc teachers began feeling like the wc prospective was superior. That is how it is presented. The wc curriculum, in my opinion, tries to force people to adapt unrealistic and unnatural hand motions and reactions.

So is getting thrown uprooting? Yes. But it is not the same as two people standing with their hands together uprooting the other person.

[shawchemical]

I have been thrown before and knocked over while sparring. You do not have to do "structural drills" to pull of what my sparring partners did to me. In fact none of them ever have done wc structural drills.

How did Babe Ruth hit all those homeruns? Not by doing structural drills. He practiced hitting. To hurt another human being you do not need the wc curriculum at all. The wc curriculum presents another way of hurting someone but somewhere along the way wc teachers began feeling like the wc prospective was superior. That is how it is presented. The wc curriculum, in my opinion, tries to force people to adapt unrealistic and unnatural hand motions and reactions.

So is getting thrown uprooting? Yes. But it is not the same as two people standing with their hands together uprooting the other person.

YOu miss the point.

The standing with hands together is unrealistic. But that does not discount either jamming someone onto the ground causing them to be in a vulnerable position or getting them to stand taller through forcing their centre of mass higher thus making them more vulnerable.

There are many techniques to do it, but the ultimate goal is to have that person in a position where they absorb the greatest amount of kinetic energy without being able to dissipate it, thus the greatest amount of damage is caused. That is all that is meant by the uprooting.

[k gledhill]

I have been thrown before and knocked over while sparring. You do not have to do "structural drills" to pull of what my sparring partners did to me. In fact none of them ever have done wc structural drills.

How did Babe Ruth hit all those homeruns? Not by doing structural drills. He practiced hitting. To hurt another human being you do not need the wc curriculum at all. The wc curriculum presents another way of hurting someone but somewhere along the way wc teachers began feeling like the wc prospective was superior. That is how it is presented. The wc curriculum, in my opinion, tries to force people to adapt unrealistic and unnatural hand motions and reactions.

So is getting thrown uprooting? Yes. But it is not the same as two people standing with their hands together uprooting the other person.


You don't understand the system.

[YungChun]

As like it or not, as soon as you enter your opponent's space to strike, you are in fact creating a bridge.


Does not compute..

You could be standing a quarter inch from him but if there is no contact there is no bridge..

Also to T's point: You can make contact with their arm but contact does not equate to breaking their structure.. And if you strike their arm on the outside as in pak sao (for safety) and their structure is not broken there is nothing safe about it, in fact it's uber risky and it's a lost beat...

However, attacking their center can break their structure. It also forces them to deal with an actual real threat and that can also create a real bridge and a real chance to break their structure..

[duende]

Does not compute..


no kidding



You could be standing a quarter inch from him but if there is no contact there is no bridge..


If you can jump across a river to the other side.. Do you still need a bridge? The distance itself becomes the bridge for all intents and purposes.



Also to T's point: You can make contact with their arm but contact does not equate to breaking their structure.. And if you strike their arm on the outside as in pak sao (for safety) and their structure is not broken there is nothing safe about it, in fact it's uber risky and it's a lost beat...


For one thing.. it's not T's point! THAT'S BASIC WC101!!!

Seriously, what the hell do you guys think Chum Kiu means? Do you think one pak is a single beat? Haha... Do you not flow with energy?

To put it simply... Inside/outside, live side/dead side, techniques, beats.... it all don't mean $hit if your running away from the energy. And you can't break structure unless you take your medicine and get it over with!



However, attacking their center can break their structure. It also forces them to deal with an actual real threat and that can also create a real bridge and a real chance to break their structure..

Sure... if you can get past their guard. Otherwise, they'll just laugh at your "real threat" and bounce you off like a fly.

Or worse, they'll just happily trade some punches with you on the outside lines. You up for that??

Didn't think so. ;)

[YungChun]

If you can jump across a river to the other side.. Do you still need a bridge? The distance itself becomes the bridge for all intents and purposes.

No connection--no bridge.. The distance to make a bridge does not mean you have one--hell, having a bridge doesn't mean you can make use of it.



For one thing.. it's not T's point! THAT'S BASIC WC101!!!


First off it's not even clear what T means...and the key to any of this stuff actually working is in the details..

Secondly your tone suks.. Reaching out and hitting an arm may be your 101 but it's not mine and not many others..



Seriously, what the hell do you guys think Chum Kiu means? Do you think one pak is a single beat? Haha... Do you not flow with energy?


What is this supposed to mean?

In this case a single action is a single beat time.

Attempting to hit someone's arm doesn't equate to flowing, bridging or anything else.. Anyone who has sparred with a decent boxer will laugh at the notion of "simple 101 hitting their arm" to "break their structure".....



To put it simply... Inside/outside, live side/dead side, techniques, beats.... it all don't mean $hit if your running away from the energy. And you can't break structure unless you take your medicine and get it over with!


Right we just need to "take our medicine".. Thanks for clearing that up for me..

"Don't run away".. Very profound.



Sure... if you can get past their guard. Otherwise, they'll just laugh at your "real threat" and bounce you off like a fly.


Half the point of actually attacking is to meet their guard to gain contact...not get passed it but to make a strong connection to it..

THAT'S Chun 101...

Bounce me off like a fly if I attack with real energy but (trying) to hit their arm is going to incapacitate them?

Right, more likely it will make them belly laugh...



Or worse, they'll just happily trade some punches with you on the outside lines. You up for that??

So, trying to "strike" their weapon won't leave you open for the same huh? Not only will it leave you open but you didn't force them to deal with a real threat.. A real threat (and that doesn't have to mean a SDA) might actually have offered a brief moment of safety in order to continue the attack..

Sparred a lot of boxers eh?

Sure--let's see video of ANYONE doing this against a decent fighter.

[Niersun]

Does not compute..

You could be standing a quarter inch from him but if there is no contact there is no bridge..

Also to T's point: You can make contact with their arm but contact does not equate to breaking their structure.. And if you strike their arm on the outside as in pak sao (for safety) and their structure is not broken there is nothing safe about it, in fact it's uber risky and it's a lost beat...

However, attacking their center can break their structure. It also forces them to deal with an actual real threat and that can also create a real bridge and a real chance to break their structure..

If his one inch away, there is a bridge already because your in distance to hit.

Bridge does not mean you need to have to touch him, it means "your in striking distance".

Thats why another term is "bridging the gap".

Thats what i have been taught. Different schools vary. Different interpretations. I think we should all just move onto JKD and stop all this bickering. All these problems we address has already been addressed by Bruce Lee.

[YungChun]

If his one inch away, there is a bridge already because your in distance to hit.

Bridge does not mean you need to have to touch him, it means "your in striking distance".

Thats why another term is "bridging the gap".

Thats what i have been taught. Different schools vary. Different interpretations. I think we should all just move onto JKD and stop all this bickering. All these problems we address has already been addressed by Bruce Lee.

Bickering is what it's all about. ;)

Bridging the gap has nothing to do with bridging in its standard use. Bridging refers to a physical connection.... You must bridge in order to *effect* your opponent.

And while I love Bruce's stuff--whatever he did has nothing to do with this either.

[Niersun]

Bickering is what it's all about. ;)

Bridging the gap has nothing to do with bridging. Bridging refers to a physical connection....

And while I love Bruce's stuff--whatever he did has nothing to do with this either.

Just a different interpretation.

Its hard to explain, i guess you have been taught that "if there is no bridge (too much distance between you", then create one", i.e. pounce and strike and make him block, thus having a physical connection.

That is only one side of the coin. If he is in distance to be hit, then the bridge is already there, its just invisible. :)

[YungChun]

Its hard to explain

Actually it's not hard to explain.. I understand exactly what you mean, I just think it's obtuse.



i guess you have been taught that "if there is no bridge (too much distance between you", then create one", i.e. pounce and strike and make him block, thus having a physical connection.

Overly simplistic generalization... I am simply giving you a standard definition of the term as used in Chinese arts.

Bridging the gap is a generic term.

The term bridge has special significance in Chun as a verb and noun.



That is only one side of the coin. If he is in distance to be hit, then the bridge is already there, its just invisible. :)


I know you think that's clever but I think it's silly.. Not being in contact does not mean that the contact is there but "invisible"..:rolleyes:

In fact if you're in range and have not bridged you've probably goofed.. LOL

[Niersun]

I know you think that's clever but I think it's silly.. Not being in contact does not mean that the contact is there but "invisible"..:rolleyes:

In fact if you're in range and have no bridge you've probably goofed.. LOL

I take the word bridge to mean "in range" as well as "contact" and not limiting it to "contact".

So its not silly.

In regards to having goofed. Im just going off your example of being "half an inch, but with no contact, no bridge" statement.

Anyways.... Hows the weather in your neck of the woods??? :p

[duende]

No connection--no bridge.. The distance to make a bridge does not mean you have one--hell, having a bridge doesn't mean you can make use of it.


A bridge is just a means to an end. Fighting is random, you take advantage of opportunities when you can.




First off it's not even clear what T means...and the key to any of this stuff actually working is in the details..

Secondly your tone suks.. Reaching out and hitting an arm may be your 101 but it's not mine and not many others..


If you are not clear what T means... then why did you bring him up an quote him for that matter??

My tone sucks, because I don't know in what light you are quoting T (positive or negative) and either way, it's irritating... because I really don't care to be involved with your ongoing argument with him anyways.

Facing, intercepting, sinking the bridge are the first three critical elements to WC strategy. That's the 101.

Yes, there are many details to these understandings, and one sure isn't going to be able to pick them up on a forum.





What is this supposed to mean?

In this case a single action is a single beat time.


No it's not. A single beat is a collection of actions. NOT simply one action. Our whole body moves together!

A Pak Sau like any engagement techniques should strive to demonstrate an element of "Chum Kiu", or at least influence your opponent. Otherwise they are not doing there job. And what you are left with is men playing patty cake.





Attempting to hit someone's arm doesn't equate to flowing, bridging or anything else.. Anyone who has sparred with a decent boxer will laugh at the notion of "simple 101 hitting their arm" to "break their structure".....


You are not understanding what is being said here. One can Jam up a Boxer's timing, range, and facing. All this can work in our favor.



Right we just need to "take our medicine".. Thanks for clearing that up for me..

"Don't run away".. Very profound.


It is VERY profound. Face the music... take your medicine and get it over with... embrace the reality of combat...

All these sayings pretty much mean the same thing.

Running away from energy is giving up vital space, leverage, and momentum.




Half the point of actually attacking is to meet their guard to gain contact...not get passed it but to make a strong connection to it..

THAT'S Chun 101...

Bounce me off like a fly if I attack with real energy but (trying) to hit their arm is going to incapacitate them?

Right, more likely it will make them belly laugh...


Again... wake up! Don't bring your argument with T to me.


You attack an opponents center... of course.... no $hit. But you also attack their COG, and neutralize their energy transmission as well. Otherwise you most certainly will get bounced off..

The guard is just an obstacle or bridge to these goals... Not the end goal itself.

You are confusing attacking an opponents weapons, with bridging an opponents weapons.

FYI... A strike can be a bridge, as well as a block... all at the same time if you know how to occupy space with proper structure and energy awareness.





So, trying to "strike" their weapon won't leave you open for the same huh? Not only will it leave you open but you didn't force them to deal with a real threat.. A real threat (and that doesn't have to mean a SDA) might actually have offered a brief moment of safety in order to continue the attack..

Sparred a lot of boxers eh?

Sure--let's see video of ANYONE doing this against a decent fighter.

Again... Go find T and argue about with him.

I've explained things as clearly as I'm going to at this point.

[YungChun]

A bridge is just a means to an end.

No, it's a term.



If you are not clear what T means... then why did you bring him up an quote him for that matter??

So you don't want to discuss but you want to know why I brought him up... Uh huh.



My tone sucks, because I don't know in what light you are quoting T (positive or negative) and either way, it's irritating... because I really don't care to be involved with your ongoing argument with him anyways.

Yet you keep replying.



Facing, intercepting, sinking the bridge are the first three critical elements to WC strategy. That's the 101.

Doesn't address the issue....



Yes, there are many details to these understandings, and one sure isn't going to be able to pick them up on a forum.

Many details can be discussed and are.. Don't want to discuss? Then stop discussing.. LOL



No it's not. A single beat is a collection of actions. NOT simply one action. Our whole body moves together!


It's a single action time or timing.. That doesn't mean you can't use more than one action/tool in a single beat. I didn't make up the term..



A Pak Sau like any engagement techniques should strive to demonstrate an element of "Chum Kiu", or at least influence your opponent. Otherwise they are not doing there job. And what you are left with is men playing patty cake.

Whatever... I'd rather discuss with those who want to discuss--not with those who discuss theory and b1tch about doing so..:rolleyes:

[MysteriousPower]

You guys are basically arguing semantics. Can you all agree to disagree? Lol