Interesting interview with Robert Chu

[BPWT]

One time I asked Hawkins “When you touched hands with Ip Man, what was it like? Did he dominate you? Did he smash you? Did he punch you very fast?” He goes “No! Playing with the Old Man was very fun, he would lead you into the wall, push you out the door, guide you here or there, you were always on your tippy toes or heels, you could never control your balance with him.”

Interesting info on Hawkins Cheung, WSL, David Peterson, Yip Man, etc. :)

http://wingchungeeks.com/robert-chu-interview/

[Vajramusti]

One time I asked Hawkins “When you touched hands with Ip Man, what was it like? Did he dominate you? Did he smash you? Did he punch you very fast?” He goes “No! Playing with the Old Man was very fun, he would lead you into the wall, push you out the door, guide you here or there, you were always on your tippy toes or heels, you could never control your balance with him.”

Interesting info on Hawkins Cheung, WSL, David Peterson, Yip Man, etc. :)

http://wingchungeeks.com/robert-chu-interview/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A good interview.

[KPM]

Yes! Great interview. I've read it before. :)

[k gledhill]

I like his attention to structure.

[Ali. R]

You’re only as good as your stance, structural awareness, structural integrity; and structural sensibility has always been a strong building block in developing good wing chun.

That’s something I’ve always been heckled over for years, along with ‘physics’ and as well with kinesiology and biomechanics. I guess it took someone who is well known to make it an interesting and good subject.

That’s something I’ve only and always talked/wrote about for well over eight years here on this forum. It makes me feel better knowing that we’re all on the same page, thank’s to Robert Chu.


Take care,

[KPM]

You’re only as good as your stance, structural awareness, structural integrity; and structural sensibility has always been a strong building block in developing good wing chun.

That’s something I’ve always been heckled over for years, along with ‘physics’ and as well with kinesiology and biomechanics. I guess it took someone who is well known to make it an interesting and good subject.

That’s something I’ve only and always talked/wrote about for well over eight years here on this forum. It makes me feel better knowing that we’re all on the same page, thank’s to Robert Chu.


Take care,


Hi Ali!

Robert has been teaching this way for well over 10 years. He used to be pretty active here on the forum a few years back. Surely you two had some interesting discussions?

[Ali. R]

I’ve been teaching this way for over 20 years, and no, Robert Chu has never keyed in on one of my post and I have never seen a post of him speaking on this subject before, (I’m not saying he hasn’t), and that’s not until I’ve heard this interview.

I’ve been following this forum for almost 12 years now; and you wouldn’t know it because I’ve been banned numerous of times from just speaking and debating on this subject alone. Well that was how most of the crap got started.


Take care,

[JPinAZ]

LOL, always the unappreciated, misunderstood, ignored victim... at least he's consistent :D

Just a note, things like stance, structure, mechanics, etc in WC is nothing new, mysterious or complicated. It's what every WC student should know and be focusing on very early on in their training - like from day one. It's simple common knowledge. Someone claiming that they've been saying it for 8, 10 years, 20 years, is like claiming "hey, I've been walking since I was 1 year old" - I just don't understand the argument here

[Ali. R]

It seems that you like to ague, and I have no complaints whatsoever, in fact I’m very happy about the situation and I’m only stating a fact.

When I brought up this subject over 12 years ago and continued to ever since, I was ridiculed (in the nastyest ways) over and over again by at least two dozen posters for years on end, even as recently on some of my posting within two years ago.

And the posters’ know who they are, but they seem to be very quiet about this Robert Chu interview. I guess maybe it’s why he never really wrote about it here on this forum.

This has always been a part of my wing chun training from day one. It’s nothing new at all; it just seems to be more acceptable from another person other than myself.


Take care,

[KPM]

And the posters’ know who they are, but they seem to be very quiet about this Robert Chu interview. I guess maybe it’s why he never really wrote about it here on this forum.

Ali....Robert Chu wrote about this often! He was known for his "structure tests." He wrote articles in the major magazines years ago, and more recently has been writing a regular column in Wing Chun Illustrated about structure. You sound like this is the first time you are hearing about Robert Chu? Dude...where have you been! :)

JP...I agree that good structure should be common knowledge and common practice in Wing Chun. But the whole reason Robert started speaking out and writing way back when was because as he was meeting and exposed to various Ip Man lineages he found that it wasn't common knowledge. Even today, plenty of people stand in their YGKYM with their weight all back on their heels and their shoulders behind their hips so that a little girl could push them over backwards. But none of what I am saying applies to Hung Fa Yi. I've never seen HFY or TWC guys do those kinds of things.

[Ali. R]

No, I’ve haven’t read his recent stuff.

Yes, I’ve heard of him, but I haven’t seen him speak on structure testing 12 years ago as I did. And I’m very glad he’s doing so. It’s lets me know that there are others on the same page as myself.


Take care,

[k gledhill]

Hopefully the next 10+ years we can move on to fightng , using mobility and angling instead of beginner level coaching a stance.

[Sihing73]

Hopefully the next 10+ years we can move on to fightng , using mobility and angling instead of beginner level coaching a stance.

Kev,

So you can pass ALL of Roberts Structure Tests, right?

Also, isn't it Roberts guys, through Allan Orr, who are entering and competing?
Seems to me like they found something that works, for them at least.

To be fair, since your comment seems to be a bit disparaging, why not show us you passing all of the structure tests, or competing? I mean that way we can see that you are also beyond the "beginner" stage. ;)

After all, aren't you one of the ones telling everyone else how they have it all wrong. So why not show us how to do it right?

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Sihing73;1249232]Kev,

So you can pass ALL of Roberts Structure Tests, right?

Also, isn't it Roberts guys, through Allan Orr, who are entering and competing?
Seems to me like they found something that works, for them at least.

To be fair, since your comment seems to be a bit disparaging, why not show us you passing all of the structure tests, or competing? I mean that way we can see that you are also beyond the "beginner" stage. ;)

After all, aren't you one of the ones telling everyone else how they have it all wrong. So why not show us how to do it right?[/QUOTE----------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A comment after tiring of KG's repetitious, frequent and arrogant posts.
I don't think he advances PB's reputation.
I have seen his wing chun in his Victor Kan days- stiff and muscled.
Sporadic training with PB is not enough to change some long term basic patterns.
See his chi sao with PB during the PB seminar.

[k gledhill]

Kev,

So you can pass ALL of Roberts Structure Tests, right?

Also, isn't it Roberts guys, through Allan Orr, who are entering and competing?
Seems to me like they found something that works, for them at least.

To be fair, since your comment seems to be a bit disparaging, why not show us you passing all of the structure tests, or competing? I mean that way we can see that you are also beyond the "beginner" stage. ;)

After all, aren't you one of the ones telling everyone else how they have it all wrong. So why not show us how to do it right?


I met Robert and chi sao'ed with him year back. I am REPEATING a common quote from WSL including, ....many students invent things for NOT realizing the high degree of angling and mobility in VT, along with kicking for all situations. ...."

Standing in slt for a test is simple beginners attention to structure. We need more than this to fight ; ). And not a waddling basic stance.

[k gledhill]

[QUOTE=Sihing73;1249232]Kev,

So you can pass ALL of Roberts Structure Tests, right?

Also, isn't it Roberts guys, through Allan Orr, who are entering and competing?
Seems to me like they found something that works, for them at least.

To be fair, since your comment seems to be a bit disparaging, why not show us you passing all of the structure tests, or competing? I mean that way we can see that you are also beyond the "beginner" stage. ;)

After all, aren't you one of the ones telling everyone else how they have it all wrong. So why not show us how to do it right?[/QUOTE----------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A comment after tiring of KG's repetitious, frequent and arrogant posts.
I don't think he advances PB's reputation.
I have seen his wing chun in his Victor Kan days- stiff and muscled.
Sporadic training with PB is not enough to change some long term basic patterns.
See his chi sao with PB during the PB seminar.

Joys holding a grudge and still so negative , rubbit, ribbit, ; ) frankly Joy your opinion holds little weight.

[Frost]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1249235]

Joys holding a grudge and still so negative , rubbit, ribbit, ; )

so that's another no when it comes to clips ftom you then passing the test and also actually fighting then :) yet you are still happy knocking people who are posting them.
. shock!

[k gledhill]

[QUOTE=k gledhill;1249241]

so that's a another no when it comes to clips ftom you then passing the test and also actually fighting then :) shock!

Why would I openly teach a vanka like you ? To prove myself to a troll : )

I have loads of clips I share with similarly minded students. I don't sell DVDs so I don't have a " look at me everybody " approach. : )

My confidence may seem arrogant.

[Sihing73]

My confidence may seem arrogant.

No Kev, confidence is a good thing.
What makes you seem arrogant is your inability to acknowledge that anyone who does not agree with you could have a valid pov. When you keep telling everyone else they are wrong and have no clue yet you cannot seem to back up what you say that comes across as arrogance.

I think it is great to be confident, but you dismiss others who are also confident in their methods because they do things differently. Again=arrogance.

[LaRoux]

Why would I openly teach a vanka like you ? To prove myself to a troll : )



This further reinforces the fact that you have no clue about how training or fighting works.

[k gledhill]

This further reinforces the fact that you have no clue about how training or fighting works.

Whatever .....

[KPM]

Standing in slt for a test is simple beginners attention to structure. We need more than this to fight ; ). And not a waddling basic stance.

I'm sure Robert would agree with you! But how can someone progress to good fighting skills if they don't have that solid foundation to start from? The point was that he noticed that some, if not many, Ip Man lineages didn't have this simple solid foundation. And I agree that we should be progressing well beyond that after all these years!!! But you and I both know there are plenty of WCK folk that still ignore those simple biomechanical guidelines for good structure.

[KPM]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1249235]

Joys holding a grudge and still so negative , rubbit, ribbit, ; ) frankly Joy your opinion holds little weight.

You're calling Joy negative, yet you completely ignore your buddy Graham's recent negative blitzkrieg on multiple threads????? And it appears I'm not the only one that feels the way you guys have been representing PB isn't doing him any favors. ;) And I, for one, think Joy's opinion holds plenty of weight. Whereas any opinion we get from the PB guys we already know is going to be entirely biased towards what they have learned in PB seminars.....to the point that they have decided that ONLY PB has learned the "real" Wing Chun. How can you get more biased than that??

[KPM]

[QUOTE=Frost;1249243]

I have loads of clips I share with similarly minded students. I don't sell DVDs so I don't have a " look at me everybody " approach. : )

.

Really!!!! :eek: You PB guys come swooping into threads and declare that no one knows what they are talking about over and over and keep telling us that we have all misunderstood or have been poorly taught Wing Chun.....and you don't think that is a "look at me everybody approach"!!!!!

[JPinAZ]

It seems that you like to ague, and I have no complaints whatsoever, in fact I’m very happy about the situation and I’m only stating a fact.

When I brought up this subject over 12 years ago and continued to ever since, I was ridiculed (in the nastyest ways) over and over again by at least two dozen posters for years on end, even as recently on some of my posting within two years ago.

And the posters’ know who they are, but they seem to be very quiet about this Robert Chu interview. I guess maybe it’s why he never really wrote about it here on this forum.

This has always been a part of my wing chun training from day one. It’s nothing new at all; it just seems to be more acceptable from another person other than myself.

I like to argue?? I was just making a statement.

Again, all of the above is 'playing the victim'. Why are you tying yourself to R.C.'s article anyway? I thought this thread was about him, not you...
Again, for me, this is basic knowledge EVERY WC student should know. Someone bragging about having said 12 years ago is pretty silly when it's been the basic information of WC for 100's of years yeah? :)


JP...I agree that good structure should be common knowledge and common practice in Wing Chun. But the whole reason Robert started speaking out and writing way back when was because as he was meeting and exposed to various Ip Man lineages he found that it wasn't common knowledge. Even today, plenty of people stand in their YGKYM with their weight all back on their heels and their shoulders behind their hips so that a little girl could push them over backwards. But none of what I am saying applies to Hung Fa Yi. I've never seen HFY or TWC guys do those kinds of things.

Fair enough!

Interesting story, Robert tried correcting some HFY practitioners in regards to our high tan sao structure during a visit to HFY HQ in San Francisco about 10-12 years ago. Needless to say, they passed his 'test' with flying colors - even while doing what he said was ' an incorrect tan sao' :rolleyes:.
LOL, so I guess sometimes even the 'experts' get it wrong ;)

[JPinAZ]

I'm sure Robert would agree with you! But how can someone progress to good fighting skills if they don't have that solid foundation to start from? The point was that he noticed that some, if not many, Ip Man lineages didn't have this simple solid foundation. And I agree that we should be progressing well beyond that after all these years!!! But you and I both know there are plenty of WCK folk that still ignore those simple biomechanical guidelines for good structure.

Good post. If you can't even stand up straight (self centerline) and hold proper/basic structure, how are you going to be able to apply WC principles in a fight?

[Ali. R]

I like to argue?? I was just making a statement.

Again, all of the above is 'playing the victim'. Why are you tying yourself to R.C.'s article anyway? I thought this thread was about him, not you...
Again, for me, this is basic knowledge EVERY WC student should know. Someone bragging about having said 12 years ago is pretty silly when it's been the basic information of WC for 100's of years yeah? :)



Again, I have no problem with the situation; I’m very happy about it all. And; very little has seen it as common knowledge 12 years or even two years ago.

This is why you’re the only one still trying to make something out of nothing, and it’s obvious you were not around back then.

I’m only stating a fact, about something that you clearing do not like. And I have no problem with you distorting or trying to erase the past.

This is what history has always shown us; that someone like you will always try to do or even have done, which is just your human nature (hate), other than that what is your point?

By keep claiming that I'm a victum only hepls bring more attention to the truth in which I've just spoken. There are many here that can dispute what I'm saying, but you are the olny one that's speaking out/against me about this whole situation.


Take care,

[k gledhill]

[QUOTE=k gledhill;1249241]

You're calling Joy negative, yet you completely ignore your buddy Graham's recent negative blitzkrieg on multiple threads????? And it appears I'm not the only one that feels the way you guys have been representing PB isn't doing him any favors. ;) And I, for one, think Joy's opinion holds plenty of weight. Whereas any opinion we get from the PB guys we already know is going to be entirely biased towards what they have learned in PB seminars.....to the point that they have decided that ONLY PB has learned the "real" Wing Chun. How can you get more biased than that??

Whatever, enjoy hand chasing in lalaland with joy.

[k gledhill]

No Kev, confidence is a good thing.
What makes you seem arrogant is your inability to acknowledge that anyone who does not agree with you could have a valid pov. When you keep telling everyone else they are wrong and have no clue yet you cannot seem to back up what you say that comes across as arrogance.

I think it is great to be confident, but you dismiss others who are also confident in their methods because they do things differently. Again=arrogance.

Differently = subjectively. Just because a guy is a " siphoo " doesn't make him right.

VT is like an iceberg. Most see the surface on top of the water and try to copy it unaware of the subsurface or real substance, leaving a very unstable shallow idea floating around.

[Sihing73]

VT is like an iceberg. Most see the surface on top of the water and try to copy it unaware of the subsurface or real substance, leaving a very unstable shallow idea floating around.

Agree that being a Sifu does not make one right.
Plenty of examples to be found on this forum as well.
Aren't you a Sifu? Perhaps you are also not right about everything.

As to the quote above;
Some are like the Captain of the Titanic, thinking they are invincible and have the true answer and are "unsinkable" only to strike that "iceberg" (another approach which may also have merit) and get sunk in the process. Yet the Captain of the Titanic thought he was safe and unsinkable much like those who believe their way is the only true way. ;)

Perhaps I should refer to some of the PB group as Captain Sifu :D

[guy b.]

I think it is great to be confident, but you dismiss others who are also confident in their methods because they do things differently. Again=arrogance.

How can the wing chun of Yip Man have multiple different interpretations that all work equally well? The answer is that it can't, because it was designed to work in only one way.

This means that anyone believing they have the genuine art will be dismissive of different (i.e. wrong) approaches. People with different approaches either have a different understanding (which if right means your own approach is wrong or lacking!), or they have changed the art and it is no longer the wing chun of Yip Man.

Simple as that.

There can't be multiple different wing chuns that respect each other as the same art

[GlennR]

Hopefully the next 10+ years we can move on to fightng , using mobility and angling instead of beginner level coaching a stance.

And you generate your power from where?

[guy b.]

And you generate your power from where?

Power is the ground rebound force transmitted through the shape of the stance (hip to elbow). No point in obsessing over it once you can do it however.

[GlennR]

Power is the ground rebound force transmitted through the shape of the stance (hip to elbow). No point in obsessing over it once you can do it however.

Yet Barry Lee, a WSL senior and renowned for his striking power, advocates standing in the stance for long periods of time.

And he does that for?

[GlennR]

...is it just for $hits and giggles ?

Not sure, ask Jim on the wallbag thread

[k gledhill]

Agree that being a Sifu does not make one right.
Plenty of examples to be found on this forum as well.
Aren't you a Sifu? Perhaps you are also not right about everything.

As to the quote above;
Some are like the Captain of the Titanic, thinking they are invincible and have the true answer and are "unsinkable" only to strike that "iceberg" (another approach which may also have merit) and get sunk in the process. Yet the Captain of the Titanic thought he was safe and unsinkable much like those who believe their way is the only true way. ;)

Perhaps I should refer to some of the PB group as Captain Sifu :D

I don't play " master " games or grade students to " master " level . Skill finds its own level, like water.

Regardless of your response, it remains a fact. Many " seafood " are handing out arm chasing subjective ideas.


I like to think I am the iceberg ; ) doesn't look much on the surface until you run into it. : )

[KPM]

How can the wing chun of Yip Man have multiple different interpretations that all work equally well? The answer is that it can't, because it was designed to work in only one way.

Not true. NO ONE is really doing the Wing Chun of Yip Man. That died with Yip Man himself. Everyone puts there own little adaptation on things because everyone has their own body type, understanding and talents to deal with. Wing Chun is a conceptually based system. Just ask the PB guys!!!! :p That means that a given concept may be expressed in more than one way. I think TRay called it "non-specific." This makes things rather adaptable. Your way of expressing a given concept may not be the exact same as mine, but you may be able to make it work just as well. As long as we are both sticking to the concept, how can you say I am wrong and you are right? And it could be that a given lineage of Wing Chun is lacking in some areas but fine in others. So maybe there are things that could learn from others and improve. But that doesn't make what they do totally wrong and worthless.

Simple as that.

No. That only happens when someone closes their mind to the idea that someone else could have a different but equally workable idea. That only happens when someone becomes convinced that their Sifu is the ONLY one that got it right! Its the whole "my daddy can beat up your daddy!!!" mindset.

[k gledhill]

And you generate your power from where?

Really ? You need a step by step ?

[k gledhill]

Yet Barry Lee, a WSL senior and renowned for his striking power, advocates standing in the stance for long periods of time.

And he does that for?

But he doesn't fight standing still on a basic stance .

[BPWT]

Differently = subjectively. Just because a guy is a " siphoo " doesn't make him right.

VT is like an iceberg. Most see the surface on top of the water and try to copy it unaware of the subsurface or real substance, leaving a very unstable shallow idea floating around.

Quite ironic, considering how the 'depth' of your system boils everything down to a punch. :rolleyes:

[k gledhill]

How can the wing chun of Yip Man have multiple different interpretations that all work equally well? The answer is that it can't, because it was designed to work in only one way.

Not true. NO ONE is really doing the Wing Chun of Yip Man. That died with Yip Man himself. Everyone puts there own little adaptation on things because everyone has their own body type, understanding and talents to deal with. Wing Chun is a conceptually based system. Just ask the PB guys!!!! :p That means that a given concept may be expressed in more than one way. I think TRay called it "non-specific." This makes things rather adaptable. Your way of expressing a given concept may not be the exact same as mine, but you may be able to make it work just as well. As long as we are both sticking to the concept, how can you say I am wrong and you are right? And it could be that a given lineage of Wing Chun is lacking in some areas but fine in others. So maybe there are things that could learn from others and improve. But that doesn't make what they do totally wrong and worthless.

Simple as that.

No. That only happens when someone closes their mind to the idea that someone else could have a different but equally workable idea. That only happens when someone becomes convinced that their Sifu is the ONLY one that got it right! Its the whole "my daddy can beat up your daddy!!!" mindset.

Your misunderstanding is obvious. There is a template to develop with, for lack of knowing, guys argue your rational. You're making a case for subjective ideas. VT is a skill it's not something you guess by doing a form or make up **** with tan and bong for 1:1 applications. This is exactly why vt guys can't fight outside a contrived delusional sticking hand mess. : )

[k gledhill]

Quite ironic, considering how the 'depth' of your system boils everything down to a punch. :rolleyes:

Yeah before I learned vt, a punch was just a punch, then it became a work in progress, and now its " just " a punch again. If you go into a fight with anything less than a strong, faster, sustained punching ability, capable of breaking bones and ko'ing quickly you're in for a surprise. Kicks too ; )

[GlennR]

Really ? You need a step by step ?

Me? I dont, fancy some lessons on angles and mobility?

[GlennR]

But he doesn't fight standing still on a basic stance .

Id suggest the basic stance is there all the time..... because he practiced it a lot

[GlennR]

Yeah before I learned vt, a punch was just a punch, then it became a work in progress, and now its " just " a punch again. If you go into a fight with anything less than a strong, faster, sustained punching ability, capable of breaking bones and ko'ing quickly you're in for a surprise. Kicks too ; )

And how do you improve your punching power kev?

[k gledhill]

And how do you improve your punching power kev?

No more information, you just hit that wall bag mate good luck.

[k gledhill]

Id suggest the basic stance is there all the time..... because he practiced it a lot

Wonderful lets leave it there then.

[GlennR]

No more information, you just hit that wall bag mate good luck.

And youd be standing in what stance?

[GlennR]

Wonderful lets leave it there then.

You need some stance work Kev, builds up your internal fortitude ;)

[k gledhill]

You need some stance work Kev, builds up your internal fortitude ;)

Ah yes along with running and sprinting regularly because basic stance don't give you cardio ; ). Cardio ? Why would you need that fighting ? Just do a basic stance and hit a wall bag Glenn. ; )

[GlennR]

Ah yes along with running and sprinting regularly because basic stance don't give you cardio ; ). Cardio ? Why would you need that fighting ? Just do a basic stance and hit a wall bag Glenn. ; )

Cardio?
Streetfight?
No, id prefer other attributes if i had a choice like hitting hard and direct without any telegraphing......... oh yeh, i think thats called WC

Thats cool though, you run while i stand ;)

[k gledhill]

Cardio?
Streetfight?
No, id prefer other attributes if i had a choice like hitting hard and direct without any telegraphing......... oh yeh, i think thats called WC

Thats cool though, you run while i stand ;)

Right a common vt delusion. Fitness ? Who needs to go rounds ? My wall bag punch is all I need : )

VT is a holistic approach to FIGHTING not self delusion. Fighting fit won't come doing a basic stance. Unless you're Glenn the omnipotent one.

[GlennR]

Right a common vt delusion. Fitness ? Who needs to go rounds ? My wall bag punch is all I need : )

VT is a holistic approach to FIGHTING not self delusion. Fighting fit won't come doing a basic stance. Unless you're Glenn the omnipotent one.

See i disagree with you there Kev, its a self defense style and IMO the fight should be over in seconds...... win or lose.

And having said that i box now Kev so i humbly suggest im fitter than most on the forum (for my age) so im all for fitness.

But for true self defence? Ill lean toward a pig hard punch, good balance and effective defense......... cardio isnt my prime concern

[k gledhill]

See i disagree with you there Kev, its a self defense style and IMO the fight should be over in seconds...... win or lose.

And having said that i box now Kev so i humbly suggest im fitter than most on the forum (for my age) so im all for fitness.

But for true self defence? Ill lean toward a pig hard punch, good balance and effective defense......... cardio isnt my prime concern

The intensity of your vt training seems less than " others " I know.
Here is a glaring difference in our approaches. I fight with my vt because its no longer an application based 1:1 self defense idea. Kicking and striking in a ring for a several rounds or Bjj is physically very taxing. I guess we have differing ideas about vt.

[GlennR]

The intensity on your vt training seems less than " others " I know.
Here is a glaring difference in our approaches. I fight with my vt because its no longer an application based 1:1 self defense idea. Kicking and striking in a ring for a several rounds or Bjj is physically very taxing. I guess we have differing ideas about vt.

Fair call, but if i didnt box and still WC'd id train to that intensity, but mainly because i just enjoy hard training.

But... i wouldt sacrifice the fundamentals for cardio

[k gledhill]

Fair call, but if i didnt box and still WC'd id train to that intensity, but mainly because i just enjoy hard training.

But... i wouldt sacrifice the fundamentals for cardio

There is no sacrifice involved, the opposite really. I use pole work in deep stances regularly along with less taxing ygkym along with moving stances etc....kicking drills , heavy bag kicking , blah blah blah. And run the equivalent o a marathon a week with sprints too. All good. PB is totally into the fighting approach, he showed us some really demanding dills on heavybags. I also put guys through pad work etc... So fitness becomes clear to all very quickly.

[KPM]

Your misunderstanding is obvious. There is a template to develop with, for lack of knowing, guys argue your rational. You're making a case for subjective ideas. VT is a skill it's not something you guess by doing a form or make up **** with tan and bong for 1:1 applications. This is exactly why vt guys can't fight outside a contrived delusional sticking hand mess. : )

Your opinion carries no weight, remember? ;) I could point that your misunderstanding of what "conceptual" means is obvious. Nobody said anything about "guessing." And you haven't yet proven that your version of WCK allows you to "fight" any better than the rest of us misguided unfortunates that learned the wrong things. So I think that whole idea is rather "delusional." :rolleyes:

[k gledhill]

Your opinion carries no weight, remember? ;) I could point that your misunderstanding of what "conceptual" means is obvious. Nobody said anything about "guessing." And you haven't yet proven that your version of WCK allows you to "fight" any better than the rest of us misguided unfortunates that learned the wrong things. So I think that whole idea is rather "delusional." :rolleyes:

Cool , whatever. : )

[Sihing73]

How can the wing chun of Yip Man have multiple different interpretations that all work equally well? The answer is that it can't, because it was designed to work in only one way.

This means that anyone believing they have the genuine art will be dismissive of different (i.e. wrong) approaches. People with different approaches either have a different understanding (which if right means your own approach is wrong or lacking!), or they have changed the art and it is no longer the wing chun of Yip Man.

Simple as that.

There can't be multiple different wing chuns that respect each other as the same art

Then why would each student of Yip Man have gotten different things?
There is the story of Yip Man being asked by two students about a specific technique and who was right. Short answer is Yip Man told both their interpretation was correct. So what Yip Man a liar or was this pointing out the personalization possible within the system?

If there is "one" method which is best then why has that "one" method not been able to subdue all of the others? Also, did Yip Man teach differently during the various periods of his lifetime? I would say yes as it is only natural to change over time.

If you teach a class of High School students how to drive a car will they all drive the same way and with the same level? Yet they will all be able to drive a car.

[guy b.]

Then why would each student of Yip Man have gotten different things?

I can only assume that most got nothing at all.


If there is "one" method which is best then why has that "one" method not been able to subdue all of the others?

Wing chun doesn't fight very often


If you teach a class of High School students how to drive a car will they all drive the same way and with the same level? Yet they will all be able to drive a car.

Most wing chun is not able to drive the car. It is sitting in the driving seat pushing buttons and pretending like a young child.

[GlennR]

There is no sacrifice involved, the opposite really. I use pole work in deep stances regularly along with less taxing ygkym along with moving stances etc....kicking drills , heavy bag kicking , blah blah blah. And run the equivalent o a marathon a week with sprints too. All good. PB is totally into the fighting approach, he showed us some really demanding dills on heavybags. I also put guys through pad work etc... So fitness becomes clear to all very quickly.

Nice, sounds like a serious workout every week.
How many days a week Kev?

[k gledhill]

Nice, sounds like a serious workout every week.
How many days a week Kev?

I teach full time with a school in New Jersey and New York. Everyday I do several hours training and after running etc.... As they say If you go the extra mile you will find it isn't so crowded there. ; )

[Wayfaring]

Then why would each student of Yip Man have gotten different things?
There is the story of Yip Man being asked by two students about a specific technique and who was right. Short answer is Yip Man told both their interpretation was correct. So what Yip Man a liar or was this pointing out the personalization possible within the system?


Since this was ignored I thought I would answer the obvious. Also, I'm not a Yip Man lineage WCK practitioner, so don't have an opinion on "who spent the most time with Yip and therefore got the proper goods".

My impression from reading and stories is that Yip Man continued to learn more and more and his teaching methods changed over the time he taught. He did seem to have a tendency to personalize what he taught to individual students. I do think the fundamentals of what he taught did not vary across the board very much at all.



If there is "one" method which is best then why has that "one" method not been able to subdue all of the others? Also, did Yip Man teach differently during the various periods of his lifetime? I would say yes as it is only natural to change over time.


From the opinion I have formed regarding the overall lack of sparring in wing chun, I would surmise that even if someone had the "one" method, then it's highly unlikely they would get enough repetition in under pressure to be able to subdue much of anything. And, those that do spar a lot could probably use sub-optimal methods to win.