Sifu Wang Zhi Peng Wooden Dummy Explanation

[Jansingsang]

Another little treasure to share wid me lovelies ;) ... I believe this fella has some interesting ideas n regard to his usage of his Vt no doubt .. I do like the leg sweep practical usage He seems to have incorporated throws ? within the form..

Offcourse he touches the basic principles of correction arm leg synchronization, Interesting take on borrowing the force and redirecting back to opponent, shifting the attack . Which leads us back to the squabble of Too Bridge or not Too Bridge :rolleyes:

Enjoy & dicuss:cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv24-f54q78

[WC1277]

First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it. About time....;)

[Jansingsang]

First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it. About time....;)

Care too elaborate mate as far as i know our Wsl lineage always advocate hitting rather than pushing although pushing does have its place under given circumstances So... No we dont all walk round with mattresses :D

[k gledhill]

First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it. About time....;)

Yeah I was getting impatient too :rolleyes:

[guy b.]

Another little treasure to share wid me lovelies ;) ... I believe this fella has some interesting ideas n regard to his usage of his Vt no doubt .. I do like the leg sweep practical usage He seems to have incorporated throws ? within the form..

Based on his other clip I would say he got his throwing from judo (or "shuai jiao"), because that is what it resembles. In this clip it looks like he is working practical throwing skill back into his wing chun rather than the other way around, but still much more practical than standard unbalanced wing chun legwork and good stuff. He is a practical guy and I like his stuff.

[YouKnowWho]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv24-f54q78

When you use your leg to hook/jam/bite on your opponent's leg, your opponent can't kick you at that moment. That will be your advantage.

At 4.08, he used his right leading leg to hook his opponent's right leading leg from inside. He had just created a "leg bridge" and be able to sense his opponent's leg intention.

When you are facing your opponent, you can use your right leg to hook his

- right leg from outside (1st side),
- right leg from inside (2nd side),
- left leg from inside (3rd side),
- left leg from outside (4th side).

As long you are a "practical guy", and you don't have attitude such as "My style doesn't do this", it's easy to integrate such "leg moves" into any style that you train. After all, it's your legs. Nobody can stop you from using your own legs.

[Jansingsang]

Based on his other clip I would say he got his throwing from judo (or "shuai jiao"), because that is what it resembles. In this clip it looks like he is working practical throwing skill back into his wing chun rather than the other way around, but still much more practical than standard unbalanced wing chun legwork and good stuff. He is a practical guy and I like his stuff.

Precisely shuai jiao" Stuff which i think works pretty well with the Vt platform I believe if it compliments the system use it :) on the lines of Simplicty directnesss efficencey of use bring it on VT needs to keep evolveing because the fighting of two hundred years ago isnt the same as of the modern era You just have too look at boxing too see that .... And yes i like practical not just talk but do Individuals Thats what inspires us all :)

[LFJ]

First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it. About time....;)
Care too elaborate mate as far as i know our Wsl lineage always advocate hitting rather than pushing although pushing does have its place under given circumstances So... No we dont all walk round with mattresses :D

Same here... As usual, WC1277 is confused.

[WC1277]

Originally Posted by Jansingsang

Care too elaborate mate as far as i know our Wsl lineage always advocate hitting rather than pushing although pushing does have its place under given circumstances So... No we dont all walk round with mattresses

Same here... As usual, WC1277 is confused.

A little much, don't you think?....

http://youtu.be/VjcozWSvpjs

[Jansingsang]

A little much, don't you think?....

http://youtu.be/VjcozWSvpjs


No i dont ? ..What his doing is a variety of things not just pushing the bloke ..And fwiw when he does push him as in 0.41 the guy loses his balance its not just about striking, but destroying structures .Angling distance management the devils in the detail Its only a clip.. One never knows untill your on the recieveing end :rolleyes:

[WC1277]

In that clip totalling just 1:37, you see Philipp hit his training partners what?.... 70 - 80 times? :D:

I counted 29 "pushes" give or take and 52 actual "hits" give or take in 1:37 worth of footage. That's at least 50%.

Just saying...

btw I wasn't intentionally targeting PB. Jansingsang had an insecure response to me saying "First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it." It was refreshing to be honest with you. And come on, you have to admit that, overall, there's quite a bit of pushing the opponent away in that entire line.

[Graham H]

I counted 29 "pushes" give or take and 52 actual "hits" give or take in 1:37 worth of footage. That's at least 50%.

Just saying...

btw I wasn't intentionally targeting PB. Jansingsang had an insecure response to me saying "First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it." It was refreshing to be honest with you. And come on, you have to admit that, overall, there's quite a bit of pushing the opponent away in that entire line.

You actually counted them? lmfao

You are right off the mark! :D:D

[WC1277]

You actually counted them? lmfao

You are right off the mark! :D:D

It's not hard with 1:37 of footage, especially when you have an average of every 3 seconds a "push" is happening.

Like I said before the insecure response of the PB crowd, I like that Wang Zhi Peng made it a point to emphasize striking instead of pushing.

[Jansingsang]

I counted 29 "pushes" give or take and 52 actual "hits" give or take in 1:37 worth of footage. That's at least 50%.

Just saying...

btw I wasn't intentionally targeting PB. Jansingsang had an insecure response to me saying "First WSL guy I've seen that doesn't train to "push" his opponent and even states it." It was refreshing to be honest with you. And come on, you have to admit that, overall, there's quite a bit of pushing the opponent away in that entire line.

For the record ive no insecurity what's so ever to what you said just wanted you to elaborate more on your statement no biggy mister :rolleyes: FWIW point us in the right direction as what you feel is good VT :)

[BPWT]

I think the comments he makes on pushing and striking are good, but obvious. As is how you use the palm. Same thinking in most lineages, IMO.

What was more interesting was this:

Wang Zhi Peng says: "Another point is how to change the direction in order to use the force of the opponent. When the force of the opponent is huge, how do you borrow his force to hit him? When you feel the force, you quickly shift to the other side to attack..... suddenly he gave me a lot of force, how can I change the force to my benefit?

Change direction
Borrowing force
Feel the force
Change the force

Interesting as some WSL lineage guys routinely poo-poo the idea of feeling force, changing its direction, borrowing force, etc.

I guess Wang Zhi Peng is another one of those guys who misinterpreted WSL's words? ;)

[Graham H]

It's not hard with 1:37 of footage, especially when you have an average of every 3 seconds a "push" is happening.

Like I said before the insecure response of the PB crowd, I like that Wang Zhi Peng made it a point to emphasize striking instead of pushing.

3 seconds a push? :D

PB also puts emphasis on striking The whole system is based on striking but you can use both depending on the situation. You wouldn't know that though would you because you've never met or trained with PB so have no effing clue about any of it! :rolleyes:

[LFJ]

I guess Wang Zhi Peng is another one of those guys who misinterpreted WSL's words? ;)

Did you ever hear of WSL teaching shuaijiao or qinna in his VT?

[Graham H]

Interesting as some WSL lineage guys routinely poo-poo the idea of feeling force, changing its direction, borrowing force, etc.

I guess Wang Zhi Peng is another one of those guys who misinterpreted WSL's words? ;)

Yes I'm definately one who poo poo's feeling force, changing its direction etc etc etc!

[LFJ]

Like I said before the insecure response of the PB crowd, I like that Wang Zhi Peng made it a point to emphasize striking instead of pushing.

I'm afraid you may not know the difference, but WZP was talking about fighting, not just chi-sau practice. It's scary the way you compare the two.

[Graham H]

Did you ever hear of WSL teaching shuaijiao or qinna in his VT?

Like with a lot of people these days it looks like WZP has added his own stuff into his system. It's up to him I suppose. I personally don't like what he said and showed.

[Jansingsang]

I guess is another one of those guys who misinterpreted WSL's words? ;)

Wang Zhi Peng is a disciple of Li Heng-Chang who inturn was a disciple to Si gung .Wsl

[BPWT]

Did you ever hear of WSL teaching shuaijiao or qinna in his VT?

Nope. :) But that's not the point I was making.

Wang Zhi Peng talks about feeling force, changing force, borrowing force, etc, and then what you see him doing in relation to this on the dummy or with his student is not connected to his throwing and joint-locking skills. Rather, it is in relation to striking and the positions etc, are clearly VT.

Of course, to change force and borrow force you first need to feel it/detect it... and of course this is done via contact. But in WSL lineage you don't want to make contact, feel force, redirect force, etc, right?

The point is that Wang Zhi Peng is talking about doing things within VT (not shuaijiao or qinna) that many people on this forum say don't exist in WSL VT.

[BPWT]

Yes I'm definately one who poo poo's feeling force, changing its direction etc etc etc!

:) Great. If you ever visit Wang Zhi Peng, please explain to him how what his is doing is wrong. You know, poo-poo it to his face. And then show him the error of his ways :) (but please don't forget to video it for us). :D

[Graham H]

Nope. :) But that's not the point I was making.

Wang Zhi Peng talks about feeling force, changing force, borrowing force, etc, and then what you see him doing in relation to this on the dummy or with his student is not connected to his throwing and joint-locking skills. Rather, it is in relation to striking and the positions etc, are clearly VT.

Of course, to change force and borrow force you first need to feel it/detect it... and of course this is done via contact. But in WSL lineage you don't want to make contact, feel force, redirect force, etc, right?

The point is that Wang Zhi Peng is talking about doing things within VT (not shuaijiao or qinna) that many people on this forum say don't exist in WSL VT.

Like I said before it all depends on the contact the student had with WSL and whether he shared his thinking. Is that hard for you to swallow or something???

It would be the same in any skill learning situation. If the information is flawed or you don't spend enough time learning and exchanging then how can you expect to have the correct ideas and way of Ving Tsun?

Anybody can say they are a close student of WSL. Look what Leung Ting did with Yip Man. It's no different.

[BPWT]

Like I said before it all depends on the contact the student had with WSL and whether he shared his thinking. Is that hard for you to swallow or something???

It would be the same in any skill learning situation. If the information is flawed or you don't spend enough time learning and exchanging then how can you expect to have the correct ideas and way of Ving Tsun?

Anybody can say they are a close student of WSL. Look what Leung Ting did with Yip Man. It's no different.

I understand, and I am not disagreeing. But you can surely see the problem? If you listen to what Wang Zhi Peng says, and what David Peterson says, etc, and then you listen to what PB says... lots of different opinions.

How do you know who spend the most time with WSL? How do you know who WSL gave the details to? How do you know who could best understand the language and words of WSL? How do you know that stories back-up by others are not just about saving face and maintaining nice friendly martial respect for Kung Fu relatives?

You don't. You can never really know. But some people, like yourself, despite the above questions, are more than happy to tell others that what they do is wrong, misunderstood, etc.

Can you not see the irony? You train in your method and enjoy it (which is great), but cannot comprehend how something different, might also be correct/right (even within your own lineage). :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

I understand, and I am not disagreeing. But you can surely see the problem? If you listen to what Wang Zhi Peng says, and what David Peterson says, etc, and then you listen to what PB says... lots of different opinions.

Yes very true.

I'm not going to explain why again. Like you said...it has been beaten into a bloody pulp.

[BPWT]

Yes very true.

I'm not going to explain why again. Like you said...it has been beaten into a bloody pulp.

No need to explain again. But everyone thinks they have the secret sauce. If you met a current student of Clive Potter and asked him if Clive teaches good, accurate, comprehensive WSL VT, he/she would probably say 'Yes!"

Ask the same lineage-based question to any student, from any lineage, and you will hardly ever hear the response: "Well, I like what I train but I realize it is more to do with the abilities and personality of my teacher, than about it being accurate, good, comprehensive VT."

For example, I get the impression you cannot comprehend how PB might have missed something, not been taught something, misinterpreted something, etc. He's clearly very talented, but you can't know that he got the full picture (just like we can't know that David Peterson did, etc etc).

In short: There's more than one way to skin a cat. What's the right way? Many ways might be right - different, but right.

The only constant that is always wrong, always making a mistake, always getting things ar*e backwards... is Graham. :D

[LFJ]

The point is that Wang Zhi Peng is talking about doing things within VT (not shuaijiao or qinna) that many people on this forum say don't exist in WSL VT.

Yes.

I don't consider for example LTWT and WSLVT to be the same system at all. Even though both are generally called "Wing Chun" and have the "same" forms, their philosophies are so different they can hardly be considered the same art. What you do in LTWT does not apply in WSLVT. It is not "within VT". It is foreign.

My point is that some of what WZP is doing "within VT" is just as foreign as the shuaijiao or qinna he adds to it. Although it may resemble things from your art, remember, we (you, he, and I) don't train the same system at all.

Is he wrong? Well, no. He can do whatever he wants. Whether or not it's WSL's method is another question.

[BPWT]

So, basically, I think that if your VT doesn't include ideas on how to: Redirect force,
change direction, borrow force, etc, then your VT might be missing something.

There's enough direct students of Yip Man who talk about these things to make it viable to think it came from Yip Man. Even with WSL lineage there are those who talk about it.

So if you VT doesn't have it... that's a shame :D:D:D

[Graham H]

No need to explain again. But everyone thinks they have the secret sauce. If you met a current student of Clive Potter and asked him if Clive teaches good, accurate, comprehensive WSL VT, he/she would probably say 'Yes!"

You never give up do you? :rolleyes:

Yes a student of Clive Potter would think he was right until he met PB.


Ask the same lineage-based question to any student, from any lineage, and you will hardly ever hear the response: "Well, I like what I train but I realize it is more to do with the abilities and personality of my teacher, than about it being accurate, good, comprehensive VT."

Yes but I chose to investigate. Many don't or don't feel the need to. I wasn't happy with my previous Wing Chun. I thought it was all sh1t.


For example, I get the impression you cannot comprehend how PB might have missed something, not been taught something, misinterpreted something, etc. He's clearly very talented, but you can't know that he got the full picture (just like we can't know that David Peterson did, etc etc).

I've yet to find something he may have missed. I'm the one that keeps making discoveries and the more I find out the more I stand by what I say.


In short: There's more than one way to skin a cat. What's the right way? Many ways might be right - different, but right.

yes but when it comes to VT I want to know I'm practicing the best with no gaps and any questions or uncertainties. many of the explanations about WC on this forum sound like people are just fumbling around in the dark.


The only constant that is always wrong, always making a mistake, always getting things ar*e backwards... is Graham. :D

If you say so but I'm yet to read anything you write that makes sense. :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

......................its not your fault though. It's your Clown leader! :p

[BPWT]

I don't consider for example LTWT and WSLVT to be the same system at all. Even though both are generally called "Wing Chun" and have the "same" forms, their philosophies are so different they can hardly be considered the same art. What you do in LTWT does not apply in WSLVT. It is not "within VT". It is foreign..

To be sure, there are differences. That's not a problem, in my book.

But what WZP mentions in that short video is very much in-line with LTWT. David Peterson recently wrote an article about LLHS-LSJC for Wing Chun Illustrated - that too has many similarities with LTWT ideas. WSL himself in seminar footage describes things in the forms the same way that LT describes them.

For this reason, there are clearly cross-overs. So yes, I agree they are not the same system. But there are many connecting points. Within WSL lineages there are more conflicting points, IMO.


My point is that some of what WZP is doing "within VT" is just as foreign as the shuaijiao or qinna he adds to it. Although it may resemble things from your art, remember, we (you, he, and I) don't train the same system at all.

I too wasn't really looking at the throwing and locking he does, to be honest. I was talking purely about what he was doing with this VT work. It is not entirely the same as what I do, but what interested me was that it certainly appears to have the WSL engine behind it. It has that WSL flavor, no? Maybe to you it doesn't look anything like WSL VT, in which case, fair enough.

But to me it seems to have that WSL flavor, but within that he talks about force, redirecting it, borrowing it etc, and these are certainly ideas found also in LTWT.


Is he wrong? Well, no. He can do whatever he wants. Whether or not it's WSL's method is another question.

I agree. But if you met him and you asked him about redirecting and borrowing force, and asked him did he learn this from his WSL lineage teacher, and did he in turn learn it from WSL, and he said "Yes, of course", would you consider him to be:

a) A liar
b) Someone confused on these points
c) Someone who learned something which, simply, perhaps you/your teacher did not

[LFJ]

For example, I get the impression you cannot comprehend how PB might have missed something, not been taught something, misinterpreted something, etc. He's clearly very talented, but you can't know that he got the full picture (just like we can't know that David Peterson did, etc etc).

Would you say more mistaken thinking is corrected by year-round personal instruction than off and on guidance?

[BPWT]

You never give up do you? :rolleyes:

No. I just keep trying with you, hoping to break through :D


I've yet to find something he may have missed. I'm the one that keeps making discoveries and the more I find out the more I stand by what I say.

Okay, but I'm interested in how you see this. If WZP and whomever else talk about redirecting force, but PB does not, how do you know that WZP introduced it himself, and that PB didn't miss it?

I think it is impossible to know it, 100%. What I find interesting is that some of the PB students seem absolutely convinced that if something in this art is trained by others and it is something not in the PB system, then it must be wrong, or misinterpreted, or a misconceived understanding of a concept, etc.


If you say so but I'm yet to read anything you write that makes sense. :rolleyes:

That's what I'm talking about! You are so convinced that what you learn is the one true way, that you can't even understand what someone else is saying. Your mind is so closed to it, it just doesn't compute.

I think you might have been brainwashed a little, you know...

[BPWT]

Would you say more mistaken thinking is corrected by year-round personal instruction than off and on guidance?

I would say that a fundamental misunderstanding would have been corrected in mere minutes - by WSL or by any teacher.

But it does raise an interesting point. Maybe WSL taught his system the same way Yip Man taught his. Different people got different info, some got more than others, some were taught in detail, some not, etc.

And everyone thinks their teacher got it all. :)

[LFJ]

But what WZP mentions in that short video is very much in-line with LTWT. David Peterson recently wrote an article about LLHS-LSJC for Wing Chun Illustrated - that too has many similarities with LTWT ideas.

In DP's Cham-kiu DVD he even borrows some analogies from writings of LT to illustrate a point on sensitivity and the proper way to perform the yi-bong/laan-sau section- slowly so as to feel and borrow the opponent's force. He says it should be like the first section in SNT and that if someone does it fast and with power then they've misunderstood it. But no video you can find of WSL has him doing it slowly the way DP does. I think in his off time away from HK and WSL, DP must have done some reading and filled in some blanks himself. That's what you do when you have off and on guidance, rather than year-round instruction and hands-on access to your sifu.


I agree. But if you met him and you asked him about redirecting and borrowing force, and asked him did he learn this from his WSL lineage teacher, and did he in turn learn it from WSL, and he said "Yes, of course", would you consider him to be:

a) A liar
b) Someone confused on these points
c) Someone who learned something which, simply, perhaps you/your teacher did not

I would consider at some point along the transmission some blanks were filled by looking at other approaches. As I said in another thread, the more time people spent with WSL the more their thinking matches PB's. The less time, the less so. That says a lot.

WSL did used to say people will often add things to VT for lack of understanding.

[LFJ]

I would say that a fundamental misunderstanding would have been corrected in mere minutes - by WSL or by any teacher.

Yes, and my point being that when you're a visiting student, when you go back home you're left to yourself and your mistakes. Without daily hands-on access to your sifu you're likely to start looking around, thinking away, taking advice from other sources, etc. to fill in your gaps. Then when you revisit, those mistakes may not be presented to your sifu and left to persist. Your sifu will know your mistakes a lot more if you are a full-time student and he will fill your gaps.

[Graham H]

My thoughts that BPWT is a little retarded are definately being proven right!

Why do you keep saying that I have been blinded by one true way? My way is based on years of trial and error within other lineages.

Unlike you I am one of those people that if I see something that I do not understand I go to find out. As well as that if people make claims I will also go and find out.

As for Ving Tsun PB is considered one of the best students and representations of WSLVT. I'm not interested in anything else because I have proven to myself that other systems compared to WSLPBVT are less than below average....................in my experience.

Do you not see that or what? :confused:

[BPWT]

I would consider at some point along the transmission some blanks were filled by looking at other approaches. As I said in another thread, the more time people spent with WSL the more their thinking matches PB's. The less time, the less so. That says a lot.

That may well be the case. So who studied with WSL the longest? What did they write or record on the subject? So a comparison can be made between their understanding and others.


Yes, and my point being that when you're a visiting student, when you go back home you're left to yourself and your mistakes. Without daily hands-on access to your sifu you're likely to start looking around, thinking away, taking advice from other sources, etc. to fill in your gaps.

That too might be true. So out of interest, how many years did PB spend in Hong Kong, learning directly from WSL?

[BPWT]

My way is based on years of trial and error within other lineages. Unlike you I am one of those people that if I see something that I do not understand I go to find out.

Okay, so you tested.


I'm not interested in anything else because I have proven to myself that other systems compared to WSLPBVT are less than below average....................in my experience.

Okay, so even in a single post you confuse things.

You are the sort of person who goes to find out, but you also not interested in anything else, based, by your own admission, on your past experience. So what you learned years ago has closed your mind to any future new understanding or appraisal.


Why do you keep saying that I have been blinded by one true way?

See above. Because you keep telling us this yourself.


My thoughts that BPWT is a little retarded...

So a conflicting view means, to you, mental deficiency? :rolleyes:

[k gledhill]

I would say that a fundamental misunderstanding would have been corrected in mere minutes - by WSL or by any teacher.

But it does raise an interesting point. Maybe WSL taught his system the same way Yip Man taught his. Different people got different info, some got more than others, some were taught in detail, some not, etc.

And everyone thinks their teacher got it all. :)

Ving Tsun is VERY ABSTRACT in it approach to combat. It is easy in a room of students to converse about a subject and hear that several students didn't hear " that part " of an explanation. Or they think the pressure we exchange with each other is a 1:1 for combat. : /
I know from experience that you will feel force from PB, in milliseconds of striking exchanges. He will push/palm so he doesn't break your jaw, his control skill allows precise shots , iow he doesn't have to push it just so he doesn't break the partners he is working with.
When we do vt we have to have a " partner " who is matching our lines of force and pressure us to test balance, coordination of arms etc... It is easy to get into the idea of fighting with bridges constantly exchanging force.
But you try this in a boxing exchange or muay thai and you're going to find yourself chasing air.
Philipp directly mentioned that the exercises we do are abstract intentionally due to the nature of our focus in drills. The elbows have no way of getting a workout except from equally minded students. So the chest strikes vt has been labeled with aren't to attack the sternum, its the line our fist takes when the partner strikes so each uses elbow joint angles together. If we strike jaw to jaw our wrists make primary force in drills. We push on elbows and move our stances to recover positions but we can't expect an opponent to do this too. Iow it's abstract nature of the elbow drilling gets confused for fighting 1:1.
WZP is working WITH another vt guy issuing similar lines of force.

[k gledhill]

VT is like an ice berg. Visually if you see vt or learn from observation you get " skin and hair " tip of the ice berg not a deeper structural stability or the significant submerged portion of skill in unity of mass in motion. No short range ko force so the compensation moves to touch arms trying to hit us .To develop this unity of force requires mutual fraternal goals to defeat common enemies.

VTs own popularity and living off the fighting reputation left it arrogantly unopposed to many so it's easy to see the egos turned on themselves internally . The ranks of vt used drills to fight others as fighting period. Abstract turned into 1:1 , elbows got lost for wrists in the ensuing 1000's of unchecked teachers and students lost the way.

[Frost]

Would you say more mistaken thinking is corrected by year-round personal instruction than off and on guidance?

Hey kev how far are you away from PB again ...:)

[k gledhill]

Hey kev how far are you away from PB again ...:)


Face to face his fist to my jaw, lost count. I had a black and blue punch mark on my sternum from same power shots he hit me with.

[LFJ]

That may well be the case. So who studied with WSL the longest? What did they write or record on the subject? So a comparison can be made between their understanding and others.



That too might be true. So out of interest, how many years did PB spend in Hong Kong, learning directly from WSL?

Not only in Hong Kong. WSL spent a lot of time with him in Europe as well and was in the process of moving over there. Someone closer could answer your question more accurately. All I know is, the less time spent with WSL, the more folks tend to incorporate the 'sensitivity' and other 'skills' found in other general WC lineages, the more time, the less so.

Take the three western students you mentioned in this thread for example;

CP => DP => PB

[Frost]

Not only in Hong Kong. WSL spent a lot of time with him in Europe as well and was in the process of moving over there. Someone closer could answer your question more accurately. All I know is, the less time spent with WSL, the more folks tend to incorporate the 'sensitivity' and other 'skills' found in other general WC lineages, the more time, the less so.

Take the three western students you mentioned in this thread for example;

CP => DP => PB

and where would you put barry lee on that list?

[LFJ]

I'm not a good person to ask, as I don't know much about Barry Lee's VT. But I've heard as someone who also lived in HK and trained full-time with WSL, his approach again matches more closely to PB's. Kevin just had a student of his at the PB seminar. Perhaps he had something to say.

[k gledhill]

I'm not a good person to ask, as I don't know much about Barry Lee's VT. But I've heard as someone who also lived in HK and trained full-time with WSL, his approach again matches more closely to PB's. Kevin just had a student of his at the PB seminar. Perhaps he had something to say.

The b Lee student said they had similar ideas. He seemed to have a grasp of drills we did using speed and coordination with elbow alignment. He was equally amazed at PBs speed and power while executing, a lot of guys saw what wsl used to defeat so many ; ). Awesome stuff. Lightning fast striking and movement , no arm bridges simply because they leave us open to be grabbed. Why we do lap sao ; )

[BPWT]

Awesome stuff. Lightning fast striking and movement, no arm bridges simply because they leave us open to be grabbed. Why we do lap sao ; )

Well, lap sau is an arm bridge, as is bong and pak. But we've been there already :)

But even from the videos alone it can be see PB is very fast, and has great coordination and timing.

Regarding the photo you posted - this is from PB's visit to NY, or has PB relocated to the US? I'm asking as I'm interested how much time people get to study with him. If you don't live in Germany, do you visit occasionally and he visits you from time to time (for seminars, etc)?

Or does it work like it does with someone I know, who would visit LT and his guys in Hong Kong once or twice a year, for approximately 2-2.5 months at a time.

[BPWT]

Abstract turned into 1:1 , elbows got lost for wrists in the ensuing 1000's of unchecked teachers and students lost the way.

This is an interesting point/view. And it would certainly explain problems generations removed from Yip Man. But how does it explain those taught directly by Yip Man?

Hawkins Cheung, Duncan Leung, Leung Ting, Ho Kam Ming - all of these people (and numerous others) learned directly from Yip Man, and all I believe are intelligent, educated people who would have understood the abstract nature of the art.

LT particularly asked about the abstract nature, the theory and the concepts and how they relate to real use.

But you call these guys arm-chasers and wristy chi sau doers. :)

[k gledhill]

Well, lap sau is an arm bridge, as is bong and pak. But we've been there already :)

But even from the videos alone it can be see PB is very fast, and has great coordination and timing.

Regarding the photo you posted - this is from PB's visit to NY, or has PB relocated to the US? I'm asking as I'm interested how much time people get to study with him. If you don't live in Germany, do you visit occasionally and he visits you from time to time (for seminars, etc)?

Or does it work like it does with someone I know, who would visit LT's and his guys in Hong Kong once or twice a year, for approximately 2-2.5 months at a time.


Lap sao is a drill we use to develop a lot of various techniques to avoid grabbing or having our arms xed . Many just learn grab n punch with bong wu counter and repeat for ever without knowing what's going on... You learn to attack into others timing not me hit ....you hit .... Me hit ; ) or maybe a fast fac sao pose : )
His instructors come regularly to teach along with a steady flow of student from branches too. We all have the same ideas too so skills are tested not subjective combat egos. We had a coaching for about a year recently when a guy located to NYC for his work. Philipp can clarify things by actions and subtleties I mention here as the details only face to face can convey using real fighting speeds and power. He is constantly doing seminars for his branches so nobody gets him in one place for long : /



Nb we drill laap sao WITH each other abstractly. ; )

[k gledhill]

This is an interesting point/view. And it would certainly explain problems generations removed from Yip Man. But how does it explain those taught directly by Yip Man?

Hawkins Cheung, Duncan Leung, Leung Ting, Ho Kam Ming - all of these people (and numerous others) learned directly from Yip Man, and all I believe are intelligent, educated people who would have understood the abstract nature of the art.

LT particularly asked about the abstract nature, the theory and the concepts and how they relate to real use.

But you call these guys arm-chasers and wristy chi sau doers. :)

Yeah weird huh ? I met Hawkins personally and his students nice guy. I met Robert Chu we all exchanged. This is while I was with V Kan. I don't doubt they got the same information. But I doubt that in the isolation of setting up in their chosen homes in USA and elsewhere they had anyone come and correct THEM ; )
I am guilty of not being perfect too, the system is a checking testing ground for abstract ideas. If you lose the abstract nature and things slide, one gets lazy and accepts whatever they do as artistic license or freedom of expression to do their own thing. That is fine too. But there is a razor sharp testing level out there in the world now. If you don't care then no amount of logic will matter. Your ideas will allow your way to function with bridges and pressure of arms looking for arms. When you encounter ving tsun all the redundant aspects come straight to the top quickly and you're left with concrete ideas.

[k gledhill]

Lets no forget that just because a guy decides to teach vt
And claims xyz its no guarantee of anything. Maybe they were the only guy around ? Who could you compare with like today's interweb. ?

[Graham H]

and where would you put barry lee on that list?

I would remove CP from that list completely. He is a charlatan

[Graham H]

This is an interesting point/view. And it would certainly explain problems generations removed from Yip Man. But how does it explain those taught directly by Yip Man?



Its the exact same reason why there are differences in the WSL lineage.

[k gledhill]

I would remove CP from that list completely. He is a charlatan

I met CP and didn't think much on him either. Skin and hair.

[k gledhill]

Its the exact same reason why there are differences in the WSL lineage.

Exactly , some grasp abstractions easier than others.

[k gledhill]

Ego or saving face along with hierarchical arse kissing rights are big in some cultures too. Why did some spend so much effort getting close to Y M and only behind closed doors ? It would allow the addition or missing, personal ideas to go unchallenged.

[LFJ]

I would remove CP from that list completely. He is a charlatan

That's why I put him at the other end and at all because BPWT mentioned him. Little time with WSL and polar opposite from PB.

Not sure, I think these guys might be from Barry Lee's;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnvGuzqDvOs

[WC1277]

I'm afraid you may not know the difference, but WZP was talking about fighting, not just chi-sau practice. It's scary the way you compare the two.

What's scary is the way your mind blocks out information.

To qoute WZP while showing his palm pushing on his partners throat/lower jaw: "It's not pushing. You should always PRACTICE your strength." relating it, by example, to you should instead be releasing power into the partner. He gives an example of what PB did 20 some odd times in that 1:37 clip. "It's not pushing him. What if he comes toward me and I cannot push him away?"

[guy b.]

But what WZP mentions in that short video is very much in-line with LTWT.

LOl, there is literally nobody in LTWT that is anywhere close to WZP. Clips of his wing chun movement are very WSL, regardless of what he does in teaching demos or the explanations he uses. WZP is a very good wing chun practitioner. LTWT is a very weak wing chun system

[Paddington]

I really enjoyed watching this video, thanks for posting. The dummy drills to help train the techniques you see @4:24ish and earlier, really work IMO. That said I am biased, I love leg techniques.

[guy b.]

I agree. But if you met him and you asked him about redirecting and borrowing force, and asked him did he learn this from his WSL lineage teacher, and did he in turn learn it from WSL, and he said "Yes, of course", would you consider him to be:

a) A liar
b) Someone confused on these points
c) Someone who learned something which, simply, perhaps you/your teacher did not

This is a false trilemma since there are other possibilities but closest to the truth is probably A

If you asked him he would probably even say the judo in this clip came from WSL

[k gledhill]

What's scary is the way your mind blocks out information.

To qoute WZP while showing his palm pushing on his partners throat/lower jaw: "It's not pushing. You should always PRACTICE your strength." relating it, by example, to you should instead be releasing power into the partner. He gives an example of what PB did 20 some odd times in that 1:37 clip. "It's not pushing him. What if he comes toward me and I cannot push him away?"


Really , you think I have to smash my palm heel into your jaw to prove my ability each time ; )

[WC1277]

Really , you think I have to smash my palm heel into your jaw to prove my ability each time ; )

No, you can "see" when someone is delivering actual power in chi sao or sparring regardless Kevin.

Once again, this back and forth started because I said 'I like that WZP said don't push like 'this' in "practice", focus on releasing your power instead'. That's it. It was a refreshing statement from a line that seems to overuse pushing. The insecure PB crowd had to respond to that statement, as expected, and now, here we are...:rolleyes:

[k gledhill]

No, you can "see" when someone is delivering actual power in chi sao or sparring regardless Kevin.

Once again, this back and forth started because I said 'I like that WZP said don't push like 'this' in "practice", focus on releasing your power instead'. That's it. It was a refreshing statement from a line that seems to overuse pushing. The insecure PB crowd had to respond to that statement, as expected, and now, here we are...:rolleyes:

Again, you prove you're clueless. Lets move on.

[BPWT]

LOl, there is literally nobody in LTWT that is anywhere close to WZP.

WZP looks good to me, but sorry guy b., I had no idea you'd met and trained with my Sifu, Maday Norbert here in Central Europe. When did you meet him, to form this judgement?


Clips of his wing chun movement are very WSL, regardless of what he does in teaching demos or the explanations he uses.

Yes, WZP's movement looks very WSL-orientated. So you're saying he is good and his VT looks like WSL lineage... but that he talks bullish*t?


WZP is a very good wing chun practitioner.

Yes, he looks good to me.


LTWT is a very weak wing chun system

Okay. :rolleyes: So who did you learn from, again?

[GlennR]

WZP looks good to me, but sorry guy b., I had no idea you'd met and trained with my Sifu, Maday Norbert here in Central Europe. When did you meet him, to form this judgement?



Yes, WZP's movement looks very WSL-orientated. So you're saying he is good and his VT looks like WSL lineage... but that he talks bullish*t?



Yes, he looks good to me.



Okay. :rolleyes: So who did you learn from, again?

To go along with BPWT here, you lot (PB boys) cant have it both ways.

ALL of you have commented how much you like his previous clips, that includes you G, yet when he pits up a clip explaining what/why/how he does what he does you start questioning his knowledge and how much he "really" learnt of the WSL way.

FWIW, his explanation is sound to me and actually deals with some of the issues you guys wont or cant answer....

Like how to deal with those pesky arms hey Graham? ;)

[guy b.]

To go along with BPWT here, you lot (PB boys) cant have it both ways.

ALL of you have commented how much you like his previous clips, that includes you G, yet when he pits up a clip explaining what/why/how he does what he does you start questioning his knowledge and how much he "really" learnt of the WSL way.

I'm not a PB student. I like WZP's wing chun a lot and I'm don't really understand the feud between some forum members and the PB students. FWIW, I think his point about pushing is being overblown. He is saying understand the use of the palm and that it isn't a good idea to rely on pushing or to think that the palm is generally a push. He means in fighting. In drilling or light contact sparring you make light contact with the palm for obvious reasons and sometimes push through to show you are in the correct position. There is also actual pushing, but he isn't talking about that.

His point about judo throws in wing chun? lol

[WC1277]

I'm not a PB student. I like WZP's wing chun a lot and I'm don't really understand the feud between some forum members and the PB students. FWIW, I think his point about pushing is being overblown. He is saying understand the use of the palm and that it isn't a good idea to rely on pushing or to think that the palm is generally a push. He means in fighting. In drilling or light contact sparring you make light contact with the palm for obvious reasons and sometimes push through to show you are in the correct position. There is also actual pushing, but he isn't talking about that.

His point about judo throws in wing chun? lol

I swear. It's amazing how dense people are. To QUOTE again.

WZP while showing his palm pushing on his partners throat/lower jaw: "It's not pushing. You should always PRACTICE your strength." relating it, by then showing an example, to you should instead be releasing power into the partner. He gives an example of what PB did 20 some odd times in that 1:37 clip, by example, to show what not to do. "It's not pushing him. What if he comes toward me and I cannot push him away?"

[Grumblegeezer]

I'm not a PB student.

Guy, there's nothing posted in your profile. Whose WC/VT do you study?

[LFJ]

I swear. It's amazing how dense people are. To QUOTE again.

WZP while showing his palm pushing on his partners throat/lower jaw: "It's not pushing. You should always PRACTICE your strength." relating it, by then showing an example, to you should instead be releasing power into the partner. He gives an example of what PB did 20 some odd times in that 1:37 clip, by example, to show what not to do. "It's not pushing him. What if he comes toward me and I cannot push him away?"

The problem is you don't understand the words that are coming out of his mouth.

He's talking about fighting application. What he says about practice is that "it's good to train your hardness and strength" referring to palm and wrist training so that when you apply your palm strikes you can "severely injure the opponent".

Now, in practice we may push to not break our training partner's jaw or ribs, but he's reminding us to train wrist strength so we don't get hurt and to prefer striking in actual combat to "badly hurt the opponent".

Would you prefer PB broke his student's jaw and shattered his ribs? I'm sure WZP doesn't do that to his.

[GlennR]

I'm not a PB student. I like WZP's wing chun a lot and I'm don't really understand the feud between some forum members and the PB students.

Seems pretty obvious why there's a feud, some of the PB boys bag anything non-pbvt and the other guys bite back.



FWIW, I think his point about pushing is being overblown. He is saying understand the use of the palm and that it isn't a good idea to rely on pushing or to think that the palm is generally a push. He means in fighting. In drilling or light contact sparring you make light contact with the palm for obvious reasons and sometimes push through to show you are in the correct position. There is also actual pushing, but he isn't talking about that.


I dont have a problem with the push thing, seems to me if you get yourself in a position where you can give the guy a solid push at about 3/4 arm extension, then you could certainly turn that into a punch.

It shows youve got the superior position which is a major component of WC IMO.


His point about judo throws in wing chun? lol

Ill be honest, i didnt get far enough into it to hear that

[Graham H]

...........going around in circles not getting anywhere again? :rolleyes:

[GlennR]

...........going around in circles not getting anywhere again? :rolleyes:

Haha, it has since 2005!

[EternalSpring]

Wang Zhi Peng at it again. This guy is freakin awesome. Some will say he added shuai jiao to his Ving Tsun (which has its truth to it of course), but he seemed to say himself (according to translations which can be shady) that throwing was a part of all chinese arts in some sense. You all saw it for yourselves, he's not making up new Ving Tsun, just looking at the same thing in a light that some people may not be used to. Cross training opens the mind.

[Graham H]

Haha, it has since 2005!

...........2005?..............it says 2006 on your profile! :p

[GlennR]

...........2005?..............it says 2006 on your profile! :p

Does it?? I was having a guess............

[Graham H]

7 long drawn out years wasted for both of us! :D:D

[GlennR]

7 long drawn out years wasted for both of us! :D:D

Hahahahaah.......... what else would we ***** about!?!?

[Graham H]

Good point. As this forum is like comedy central most of the time we could be those two guys off the Fosters advert. I'm assuming you get that there.

Toodleroo! :)

[guy b.]

I swear. It's amazing how dense people are. To QUOTE again.

WZP while showing his palm pushing on his partners throat/lower jaw: "It's not pushing. You should always PRACTICE your strength." relating it, by then showing an example, to you should instead be releasing power into the partner. He gives an example of what PB did 20 some odd times in that 1:37 clip, by example, to show what not to do. "It's not pushing him. What if he comes toward me and I cannot push him away?"

Pushing with the palm is just a way of showing what position you are in wrt the opponent in chi sau. There are also intentional pushes, but he is not discussing these here, he is focusing on palm strikes.

The way I read what he is saying is that he comes from the dummy (where you practice "your strength") and shows why you need to remember the palm is a strike with a person. I don't think he is asking for full power palm strikes to the partner in chi sau and gor sau (which is what PB is doing)..do you? If he is then I think he is talking nonsense, but I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

While full power bare knuckle sparring is necessary as often as you can manage it, I don't see the point in whacking your opponent in the cooperative drill that is chi sau.

[Graham H]

We use the palm on the dummy so we don't damage the fist and also in certain situations to correct the shoulders. It's ok to palm strike in fighting if the person wants to but most of the "hits" on the dummy are punches and for improve/develop the elbow behaviour.

The Po pai jeung section in the dummy is abstract. We are training many different things inside that sequence of movements.

[Jansingsang]

Pushing with the palm is just a way of showing what position you are in wrt the opponent in chi sau. There are also intentional pushes, but he is not discussing these here, he is focusing on palm strikes.

The way I read what he is saying is that he comes from the dummy (where you practice "your strength") and shows why you need to remember the palm is a strike with a person. I don't think he is asking for full power palm strikes to the partner in chi sau and gor sau (which is what PB is doing)..do you? If he is then I think he is talking nonsense, but I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.

While full power bare knuckle sparring is necessary as often as you can manage it, I don't see the point in whacking your opponent in the cooperative drill that is chi sau.

I would say that's a accurate break down of what he was trying to convey Just people want too only believe what they think is right. But the reality is there way off the mark ;)

[russellsherry]

hi guys my first teacher Barry pang trained with Wong, for a time . mister pang is very big on borrowing force and dissolving it . with good footwork and body position and side stepping or stepping out to the side , I have always thought this is a very good approach, but as Mr. pang does not give the wooden dummy to his students to 20 years with him it is a weakness of there teaching . wing chun is not just about straight punches it about how you develop it for your own needs ps Philip bayer is really good but as someone said Wong may have taught people differently. and I don't like to say this in public but I thought Barry pang was much better than Wong Wong's kung fu was for Hong Kong. Mr pangs was more for the western world . Like the great Stephan tk Chan the person from hk that has a more modern approach cherrs