Ip Man Wing Chun?

[nautavac]

I am new to the W/C forum. I am also very amazed at the various documentaries and movies that show W/C techniques. My question is this, how does one learn Wing Chun, of the Ip Man variety if such does exist, in an area such the Lexington Ky area? I would also like to understand why there are no teachers that appear on any of the web searches that I have done as well, but I suspect this is due to an abundance of factors. Anyhow, I am tired of playing around with some the techniques that I have seen through these sources and have a real desire to learn wing chun, but no one to learn from!:mad: Can anyone suggest or know of someone, regardless of whether or not they have a brick and mortar school, that comes from an identifiable lineage and would take on me and my children as students? Thank you for your replies and I am in the Somerset, Kentucky area.

[HybridWarrior]

You can also try ewingchun.com And the wing chun forum over at Martial Talk. I know there is a guy over there who teaches in the area you mentioned. Good luck.

[Almost A Ghost]

Looks like they may not be any schools listed in your area. However, I strongly suggest you e-mail/call the nearest schools as they may know of someone who is teaching privately (i.e. they are not interested in dealing with the random person just poking around martial arts schools) or may have a senior student who may live relatively close to you and may be interested in teaching.

Good luck in your search.

[JPinAZ]

Depending how badly you want to learn, you may have to travel some. After a few quick google searches, I see some clubs/schools in both Knoxville and Bowling Green by searching each of those cities and 'wing chun'. I know this isn't ideal, but I've known people to travel over 100 miles each way to learn MA's when there is nothing near by.

Good luck and let us know what you end up doing!

[nautavac]

You can also try ewingchun.com And the wing chun forum over at Martial Talk. I know there is a guy over there who teaches in the area you mentioned. Good luck.

Thank you for the website. A prelimenary look shows a couple of options in tennessee. I will look into this further, thank you so much.

[nautavac]

Looks like they may not be any schools listed in your area. However, I strongly suggest you e-mail/call the nearest schools as they may know of someone who is teaching privately (i.e. they are not interested in dealing with the random person just poking around martial arts schools) or may have a senior student who may live relatively close to you and may be interested in teaching.

Good luck in your search.

Thank you for your insight. I had not considered this idea. To be quite honest looking on the web is real discouraging. Especially for my area, and to make matters worse my family is really busy. I dont have the luxury of playing around with or poking around with schools. I will make a few calls etc and see what i can work out. Thank you

[nautavac]

Depending how badly you want to learn, you may have to travel some. After a few quick google searches, I see some clubs/schools in both Knoxville and Bowling Green by searching each of those cities and 'wing chun'. I know this isn't ideal, but I've known people to travel over 100 miles each way to learn MA's when there is nothing near by.

Good luck and let us know what you end up doing!

I may end up having to travel. I dont know how i can do it though. Was hoping someone on here might know someone around me. Would a good teacher from a respected lineage be very tolerant of me driving for class one day a week if that was all i could do? Work, kids, wife, like everyone else i understand, but a lot on my shoulders to add driving two to three hours one way and a lot of hardship on the family too. I think i will try the other suggestions and if no alternative exists probably will have to drive. I refuse to just give up, too interested in learning, using, and hopefully teaching way down the road sometime. We have too much need here for real martial art instructors. I know that i am sick and tired of reading about WC, watching movies about WC, and youtube videos of WC and just cant shake the thirst for WC, gonna have to do something about it soon. Thank you

[HybridWarrior]

Thank you for the website. A prelimenary look shows a couple of options in tennessee. I will look into this further, thank you so much.

You're welcome. Good luck in your search. You could also try the wing chun section over on Reddit.

[HybridWarrior]

Looks like they may not be any schools listed in your area. However, I strongly suggest you e-mail/call the nearest schools as they may know of someone who is teaching privately (i.e. they are not interested in dealing with the random person just poking around martial arts schools) or may have a senior student who may live relatively close to you and may be interested in teaching.

Good luck in your search.


This is very true. I know of three wing chun people in my area who live / train / teach quietly and privately.
nautavac, dig deep with your research. Post on craigslist, local newspaper, etc. I"m betting you'll find someone close to your town.

[HybridWarrior]

I may end up having to travel. I dont know how i can do it though. Was hoping someone on here might know someone around me. Would a good teacher from a respected lineage be very tolerant of me driving for class one day a week if that was all i could do? Work, kids, wife, like everyone else i understand, but a lot on my shoulders to add driving two to three hours one way and a lot of hardship on the family too. I think i will try the other suggestions and if no alternative exists probably will have to drive. I refuse to just give up, too interested in learning, using, and hopefully teaching way down the road sometime. We have too much need here for real martial art instructors. I know that i am sick and tired of reading about WC, watching movies about WC, and youtube videos of WC and just cant shake the thirst for WC, gonna have to do something about it soon. Thank you


A good teacher/SiFu shouldn't care about whether or not you travel to learn something you really want. I drive 9 hrs one way. Obviously I would prefer to drive across town and not across several states but as with most things in life...I've made my wing chun a priority goal/objective, etc and so don't mind.

Another option: get a small group together (say 6-12 folks) and then find a SiFu to 'come to your location'...i.e. intensive training weekends once a month, or perhaps quarterly seminars etc.

[Graham H]

If you want to learn Ip Man Wing Chun you will need one of these................:D:D:D

8731

[chousos]

I am new to the W/C forum. I am also very amazed at the various documentaries and movies that show W/C techniques. My question is this, how does one learn Wing Chun, of the Ip Man variety if such does exist, in an area such the Lexington Ky area? I would also like to understand why there are no teachers that appear on any of the web searches that I have done as well, but I suspect this is due to an abundance of factors. Anyhow, I am tired of playing around with some the techniques that I have seen through these sources and have a real desire to learn wing chun, but no one to learn from!:mad: Can anyone suggest or know of someone, regardless of whether or not they have a brick and mortar school, that comes from an identifiable lineage and would take on me and my children as students? Thank you for your replies and I am in the Somerset, Kentucky area.

you can also try wingchun-selfdefense.com which is a global directory!

[HybridWarrior]

If you want to learn Ip Man Wing Chun you will need one of these................:D:D:D

8731

hahahahaha...nice one! :D

[nautavac]

If you want to learn Ip Man Wing Chun you will need one of these................:D:D:D

8731

I would love to have one. Got one i could borrow? Or are you saying that Ip man WC only exists in the past? Sure would be nice to have a delorean with a working flux capacitor and a wild haired scientist to keep it working. Good suggestion

[chunner]

you can also try wingchun-selfdefense.com which is a global directory!

stop spamming

[LFJ]

stop spamming

How is it spamming to give a global directory to someone looking for a school near them?

[Graham H]

Or are you saying that Ip man WC only exists in the past?

Yes YMWC only exists in the past. Nobody these days is teaching it or practicing it they way it was up until 1972 although many claim to be.

Wing Chun has evolved sometimes for better sometimes for worse. IMO mostly for worse.

Let's pick two Yip Man students both at opposite ends of the spectrum in the context of fighting ability and thinking. Yip Chun and Wong Shun Leung. Both system are completely different and in many cases contradict each other. Surely if both were practicing Yip Man Wing Chun there would at least be some similarities. Outside of the names of the forms there are few. Unfortunately these days people use the "interpretation" excuse in order to justify this but any logical thinking person will know that's BS.

It is common knowledge that Yip Man was selective with his information and if the truth were to be believed only a small group of people studied under him to any great extent. The fact that there are millions of people that practice WC these days mostly taught by people that weren't there or weren't part of that group means that the majority of WC lineages are advocating something that will be quite different to what Yip Man was teaching and practicing over 40 years ago.

To make things even worse we have people who claim to be personal closed door students of Yip Man that are really teaching a load of old tosh but the said connection makes joe public flock to their like flies around sh!t.

Ironically that's what it is.........................

So no YMWC anymore!

[KPM]

I think one can look at the idea of "Yip Man WCK" in a number of different ways.

1. YMWCK is what Yip Man taught. But then you have to ask "taught when?" or "during which part of his career?" .....because Yip Man did and taught things a bit differently through-out his teaching career. What he taught before moving to Hong Kong was different than what he taught in his early career in Hong Kong which was different from what he taught in his final years.

2. YMWCK is what Yip Man himself did. No two people are exactly the same. Everyone will have a little different interpretation and a little different body type. Therefore YMWCK died with Yip Man.

3. YMWCK is the term for a lineage of WCK started by Yip Man. This lineage may have taken some twists and turns and differing interpretations, but it traces back to Yip Man himself and, even though various major branches can be quite different, they still have major common characteristics that originated with Yip Man and make them indentifiable with the lineage of WCK that he started.

Personally, I prefer to use #3 when referring to something as "Yip Man Wing Chun."

[Vajramusti]

It is common knowledge that Yip Man was selective with his information and if the truth were to be believed only a small group of people studied under him to any great extent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agree with that.

[Graham H]

I think one can look at the idea of "Yip Man WCK" in a number of different ways.

1. YMWCK is what Yip Man taught. But then you have to ask "taught when?" or "during which part of his career?" .....because Yip Man did and taught things a bit differently through-out his teaching career. What he taught before moving to Hong Kong was different than what he taught in his early career in Hong Kong which was different from what he taught in his final years.

2. YMWCK is what Yip Man himself did. No two people are exactly the same. Everyone will have a little different interpretation and a little different body type. Therefore YMWCK died with Yip Man.

3. YMWCK is the term for a lineage of WCK started by Yip Man. This lineage may have taken some twists and turns and differing interpretations, but it traces back to Yip Man himself and, even though various major branches can be quite different, they still have major common characteristics that originated with Yip Man and make them indentifiable with the lineage of WCK that he started.

Personally, I prefer to use #3 when referring to something as "Yip Man Wing Chun."

I don't agree and this discussion subject has been done to death already.

People are always pulling the "interpretation" card. VT is a very simple scientific approach to combat. It uses concepts which are open to misinterpretation not differing interpretations. There may be variations in how people move and what actions they prefer but conceptually and fundamentally we should ALL be on the same page. The fact is we are not so somewhere along the line somebody has got it wrong and/or filled in the gaps with their own ideas. As we can be pretty sure that the "group" of Yip Mans closest followers was very small it means that many people didn't get enough tuition but then went off and made their own ways. The reason people struggle to admit that is because it would like admitting they are doing things wrong. In many cases they are! That's not to say they cannot fight or use what they have very well but in the context of saying you are practicing YMWC you can never be sure. In fact in most lineages the further you go through the system the more vague and different things become compared to the next school up the road. This proves my theory IMO. Many similarities in SLT but massive differences and idea in say BJ or the weapons.

Yip Man is part of a line. His name has been popularized through out the world because he is regarded as the last Great Grandmaster. Most of this has come via the media and if stories were to be believed he shunned the limelight and was reluctant to teach many people.

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man. I find some it very amusing................

[GlennR]

I don't agree and this discussion subject has been done to death already.

People are always pulling the "interpretation" card. VT is a very simple scientific approach to combat. It uses concepts which are open to misinterpretation not differing interpretations. There may be variations in how people move and what actions they prefer but conceptually and fundamentally we should ALL be on the same page. The fact is we are not so somewhere along the line somebody has got it wrong and/or filled in the gaps with their own ideas. As we can be pretty sure that the "group" of Yip Mans closest followers was very small it means that many people didn't get enough tuition but then went off and made their own ways. The reason people struggle to admit that is because it would like admitting they are doing things wrong. In many cases they are! That's not to say they cannot fight or use what they have very well but in the context of saying you are practicing YMWC you can never be sure. In fact in most lineages the further you go through the system the more vague and different things become compared to the next school up the road. This proves my theory IMO. Many similarities in SLT but massive differences and idea in say BJ or the weapons.

Yip Man is part of a line. His name has been popularized through out the world because he is regarded as the last Great Grandmaster. Most of this has come via the media and if stories were to be believed he shunned the limelight and was reluctant to teach many people.

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man. I find some it very amusing................

Good post graham, not bad for an old wanker ;)

[Graham H]

Good post graham, not bad for an old wanker ;)

Yes a self proclaimed wanker not Grandmaster! I prefer it that way! :)

[HybridWarrior]

How many people today are Grandmasters? There seem to be many mostly self -proclaimed. Is Yip Chun a Grandmaster? Is Yip Ching? Does bloodline have anything to do with it? No it doesn't and IMO they are not.

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

[chousos]

stop spamming

It is a global directory, it is not spamming..

[Graham H]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

Most people in Wing Chun like all the stuff that goes with it. They like the wooden puppet on the wall with the picture of Yip Man above it, the chinese banners either side and the kung fu pyjamas. Being associated to such a well known figure must give them a sense of belonging. There's nothing wrong with that but when people claim they are teaching and/or practicing "authentic" "genuine" Hong Kong YMWC they are pulling the wool over their own and other peoples eyes.

For me Yip Man was responsible for an evolution in Ving Tsun. He was one of the stepping stones in a lineage. There was and is no BS attached to his character even though people like to play up to his social habits sometimes. He was just a normal human being with all the facets that come with it. He just so happened he was very good at Kung Fu. Good by today's standards? Who knows? It's like the Bruce Lee thing. If Bruce Lee were alive today you probably wouldn't even know him. There are Bruce Lee's everywhere now. Maybe it's the same with Yip Man. They were ahead of their time and very good at what they did but in was in their time not ours.

I also consider the person responsible for my direction in VT (Wong Shun Leung) to be one of those people but these days I am reluctant to say I practice WSLVT or YMVT. My ideas and my system are in conjunction with the ideas of Philipp Bayer who was taught by WSL and WSL was taught by YM.

Whether it is the same or a close representation of what YM practiced and taught really doesn't concern me.

[KPM]

It's better just to say you practice Wing Chun and are putting in the work to improve and develop yourself in your own bubble. Some people can make use of it and some people cannot. Some rely heavily on marketing and BS and some others do not.

No point in giving it any more thought than that. The problem is many people these days act like they were joined at the hip of Yip Man.

But there are many other varieties of Wing Chun other than Yip Man Wing Chun. I practice Pin Sun Wing Chun. So it is not unreasonable for someone to qualify what Wing Chun they actually practice for purposes of some clarity when speaking with others. At least calling it "Yip Man" Wing Chun puts someone in the ballpark and people will generally have an idea of what they do and that it is different from Pin Sun WCK, Sum Nun WCK, etc.

Too often everyone assumes that "Wing Chun" means the Yip Man variety and all of its off-shoots. Your posts sound that way as well. But in a world where more and more people are doing Wing Chun that didn't originate with Yip Man, using the "Yip Man" designation when talking about your Wing Chun is useful.

[KPM]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...

Keep in mind that this is based on a Confucian family model. Your Sifu is the equivalent of your father and therefore your Sigung is your grand-father. Putting it in modern western terms this becomes "master" and "grandmaster". So in actuality, anyone who has been around enough teaching Kung Fu that now has graduated students in the system that are also teaching his Kung Fu has become a "grandmaster" in the sense of "grand-father." It doesn't mean that he is some lofty fighter that can fly through the air kill people with only a touch! ;)

[BPWT..]

My ideas and my system are in conjunction with the ideas of Philipp Bayer who was taught by WSL and WSL was taught by YM. Whether it is the same or a close representation of what YM practiced and taught really doesn't concern me.

It's good that you are honest when saying it doesn't concern you. It shouldn't, as you have no way of knowing one way or the other. Yet you continue to talk about 'closed door students' (mainly referring to Leung Ting, I suppose) and say what they do is BS and that they (he) didn't learn much from Yip Man. Which is something you also have no way of knowing.

[Graham H]

[B]

But there are many other varieties of Wing Chun other than Yip Man Wing Chun. I practice Pin Sun Wing Chun. So it is not unreasonable for someone to qualify what Wing Chun they actually practice for purposes of some clarity when speaking with others. At least calling it "Yip Man" Wing Chun puts someone in the ballpark and people will generally have an idea of what they do and that it is different from Pin Sun WCK, Sum Nun WCK, etc.

Too often everyone assumes that "Wing Chun" means the Yip Man variety and all of its off-shoots. Your posts sound that way as well. But in a world where more and more people are doing Wing Chun that didn't originate with Yip Man, using the "Yip Man" designation when talking about your Wing Chun is useful.

I wasn't aware we were discussing "other" lineages of Wing Chun. My apologies. I must have missed it. :confused:

I have practiced another Foshan lineage of Wing Chun and can honestly say it was more of a mess than some of the worse YM lineages I have seen. Maybe I was just unlucky.

[Vajramusti]

Good post. I agree for sure. I wonder if those two think they are because their father was (?) And that somehow this makes them default to that title?
Dunno...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Students of a sifu recognize their teacher
as a sifu. A grandmaster is such to their student's students.


Ip Chun and Ip Ching have taught several generations of their students... so they are grandmasters to their grand-students.
I do not do their versions. My sigung Ho Kam Ming spent quality time including class time, lessons, discussion of principles and extensive chi
sao with IpMan and for a long time, regularly keeping in touch. And, Ip Man used to come to his school. That is fairly close to Ip Man wing chun. Jiu Wan, WSL , Leung Shun and TST were also good students of a true grandmaster.

On a side note- yeas IMWC is not the only wc. But without IM the attention to wing chun probably would not be the same.
Ip Man's wing chun at it's best is very conceptual. Speaking for myself, I would not have been attracted to other
variations of wing chun which has produced their own practitioners.

I have no problem with people practicing other varieties of wing chun except the spamming.Its a big world.There is room and time to tolerate each other.

[Graham H]

It's good that you are honest when saying it doesn't concern you. It shouldn't, as you have no way of knowing one way or the other. Yet you continue to talk about 'closed door students' (mainly referring to Leung Ting, I suppose) and say what they do is BS and that they (he) didn't learn much from Yip Man. Which is something you also have no way of knowing.

Correct but I listen to people with more know then you and I put together and they say the same things.

It's quite funny really. I had an feeling you would jump in at some point. I've no time to discuss Leung Ting. In my world he really is insignificant and has done more bad things to the system than most.

If LT was all we had I would not be practicing Wing Chun. Fortunately I am lucky he is not. He shines a bad light on Yip Man Kung Fu IMO

So I guess this is where the thread heads down so that's all I have to say...........

Ciao

[BPWT..]

@ Graham

Yes, people always talk, I guess. But if you'd grace us with a little more info it would be appreciated (rather than just issuing an insult and then leaving the thread without backing up why you believe what you believe).

Did you meet with WSL and he told you that Yip Man had told him that LT learned nothing much from him?
Or did you hear this from PB, who heard it from WSL, who heard it from YM?
Or did you hear it from PB and it's his opinion only?
Or did you hear it from other WSL students who, like PB, never actually met YM?

[BPWT..]

I've no time to discuss Leung Ting.

And yet when you come to the forum and post, you consistently make negative reference to him. You have no time to discuss him, but you seem to keep finding the time. :rolleyes:

[LFJ]

Yes, people always talk, I guess. But if you'd grace us with a little more info it would be appreciated

Info one way or the other won't compare to a possibly eyeopening firsthand experience of the approach Graham feels is on a completely different level.

People will love and defend what they do all their life if that's all they ever know. But the people who have switched systems and share the same opinion and could never go back likely number in the thousands. I suppose it's possible not everyone will have the same experience and opinion, but that point of view will never be understood through discussion alone.

[BPWT..]

I agree, LFJ.

But Graham's talk of others being BS, and how he's heard this, that and the other about LT and what he learned/didn't learn from YM should at least be explained with reference to who Graham actually heard this from. Otherwise the only BS is that coming from Graham himself.

As Graham never met YM, and I doubt that Graham met/spent much time with WSL - I find it more than likely that this nonsense comes from PB (a man with a grudge against LTWT, and someone who himself never actually met YM).

I never heard that WSL and LT were best buddies, but they were both alive and learning from YM at a time that intersects. There are photos of the two of them together (WSL and LT) at events. LT makes reference to WSL in his books (positive reference to WSL's fighting ability), and there is (or once was) a WT sign above LT's school (hand written calligraphy) that WSL wrote and gave to LT as a gift when LT opened his own school.

It is not impossible, I suppose, but I find it hard to believe that WSL would himself have said that LT "learned next to nothing from Yip Man" (Graham's assertion, based on hearing it from 'someone').

[LFJ]

I don't know or care much about stories because they are just that. It doesn't matter who told what to whom. Experience speaks louder than any testimony.

The point is if someone trains in one system and then switches to another and finds it to be on such a different level that nothing in the previous system is logical to them anymore (an understatement), then this would only cause them to have doubts about how much the founder of the previous system learned. It wouldn't compute that such a skilled master would end up teaching something like that to their "last closed-door disciple" when what a previous student taught is on such a different level.

Of course this doesn't conclusively prove anyone's story true or false, technically. But it's strong enough for those who've had the experience to form very strong opinions. Until one also has that experience those opinions may not make much sense.

[BPWT..]

I don't know or care much about stories because they are just that. It doesn't matter who told what to whom.

Well, I think if I said to you that I'd heard someone senior in the YMWCK family say that "WSL learnt next to nothing from Yip Man", you'd probably ask me who said it. Of course, if it was just me saying it that would be dumb. Just like Graham is dumb for saying it and then not saying who he heard it from. Though I think we all know :rolleyes:



Experience speaks louder than any testimony.

Sure, I agree. My experience with LTWT from Hong Kong has been a positive one. I haven't trained in every WCK lineage, but I know people (far better and more experienced than me) who have trained LTWT and also spent time with a direct student of WSLVT - and still carried on learning LTWT. Which is fine with me - just like it is fine with me that you train WSLVT, and Graham trains PBVT. My problem is not with who people train with... my problem is with Graham's lies.



The point is if someone trains in one system and then switches to another and finds it to be on such a different level that nothing in the previous system is logical to them anymore (an understatement), then this would only cause them to have doubts about how much the founder of the previous system learned.

Well, this is the eternal argument/debate, isn't it? All I would say is that Graham has never studied LTWT the way it is taught in Hong Kong. So what is his training point of reference when calling LTWT bullish!t? Is he basing this on training he's done with people who left the EWTO? If that's the training point of reference you are meaning, then he's sitting backwards in the canoe and paddling the wrong way.

I've never studied PBVT... so I don't call it BS. I'd say it looks different to what I do, but I wouldn't call it BS.

I'm sure you'd agree that Ho Kam Ming spent much time with Yip Man. But Graham and Kevin have panned Joy's Wing Chun. Presumably because it is not the same as PB's. What about Leung Sheung? Are people from his school training the way WSL guys do? They are not. Yet LS spent many years learning from YM. What about Tsu Sheung Tin? Many years with Yip Man - but his Wing Chun looks different to WSL's, no?

Would you question "how much the founder of the previous system learned" for all of these teachers?



It wouldn't compute that such a skilled master would end up teaching something like that to their "last closed-door disciple" when what a previous student taught is on such a different level.

But is it on a different level?

When we talked about Chi Sau and I said that in the LTWT system it is teaching us to strike and to control bridge work, for example, yourself and Graham disagreed. That's fair enough, as your WSL method sees things differently. But the definition and description I gave in previous discussions (from a LTWT perspective), the descriptions you disagreed with, fit not just with LT's understanding but also fit closely with what LS, TST, HKM, etc, taught/teach. They fit well with what Hawkins Cheung teaches, too. They also fit, often very closely, with WCK lines outside of the YM line.

They are all wrong? Only WSL is correct, in your opinion? What doesn't compute, to me, is that such a skilled master would end up teaching only one person the correct way. Or is WSL wrong and all the others and their methods are correct?

I don't like to think of any of those scenarios in absolute terms.

Rather, I would not say that WSL's method is wrong. It is just his method, based on what he was taught and how he interpreted that and then developed it - based on his own experiences and understanding. If you train that method and find it logical, that's great.

I'd say the same for Leung Ting, the same for TST, the same for LS, etc.



Of course this doesn't conclusively prove anyone's story true or false, technically.

Indeed. So maybe people who bandy around the word "Bullsh!t" when describing LTWT should not do so. Especially in Graham's case... he's never even studied it. :rolleyes:


But it's strong enough for those who've had the experience to form very strong opinions. Until one also has that experience those opinions may not make much sense.

Well I agree. Again, until Graham spends some time learning the LTWT Hong Kong method, he should reserve judgement on it. If he were to do so (actually learn it) and then reached the conclusion that it's BS... okay.

I might not agree with him, but I'd respect his opinion because he'd actually be in a place to make a real judgement. As opposed to him listening to PB bad mouth the LT system when he, Graham, pops over to Germany occasionally to attend a seminar.

[Faux Newbie]

Kung fu lineages don't lend themselves to uniformity. Teachers cannot enforce norms beyond their own schools, pretty much, and that's not always a bad thing.

[Wayfaring]

Sure, I agree. My experience with LTWT from Hong Kong has been a positive one. I haven't trained in every WCK lineage, but I know people (far better and more experienced than me) who have trained LTWT and also spent time with a direct student of WSLVT - and still carried on learning LTWT. Which is fine with me - just like it is fine with me that you train WSLVT, and Graham trains PBVT. My problem is not with who people train with... my problem is with Graham's lies.


Far be it from any of us on the forum to cast doubt upon the supreme almighty enlightened master of the universe (or the whatever similar title bestowed upon LT as rank before he was forced to remove it due to laughter injuries ) OR any of his underlings with similar Star Trek like titles.

Now someone NEEDS to do a dubstep remix of the KK slow flow chi sau vids.

[Grumblegeezer]

Kung fu lineages don't lend themselves to uniformity. Teachers cannot enforce norms beyond their own schools, pretty much, and that's not always a bad thing.

Agreed. Unfortunately a lot of WC people approach the system more like a religious cult and can't accept different points of view. This is especially true when it comes to personalities like William Chung and Leung Ting each of whom made exaggerated claims and tried to establish themselves as the preeminent figure in WC (WT).


Now Graham might not accept this, but like many here I have been exposed to a few different lineages. I also had the opportunity to train personally with LT. It is true that he has made exaggerated claims. It is also true that he has some truly exceptional skills and a very interesting perspective which has contributed to the overall body of knowledge in the the "universe" of WC/WT/VT.

[BPWT..]

Far be it from any of us on the forum to cast doubt upon the supreme almighty enlightened master of the universe

People can cast doubt. But that 'doubt' (that is to say, the comment that "Leung Ting learned almost nothing from Yip Man") should come from some actual evidence, rather than out of Graham's arse.

[LFJ]

All I would say is that Graham has never studied LTWT the way it is taught in Hong Kong. So what is his training point of reference when calling LTWT bullish!t?

This is what I've been trying to get at. It's all about perspective. Of course from a LTWT perspective you aren't gonna say anything bad about PBVT, only that it's different than what you do. That's because it's obviously a good system. At most, people say it's boring because it's the same thing over and over. But it's the simple things. Simplicity is one of the driving principles. From a LTWT perspective you will think LTWT is good and PBVT is good.

From a PBVT perspective, on the other hand, just looking at LTWT is enough. I've pained myself to sit through a couple of those really old LTWT overviews/tutorials, and watched the chi-sau "sections", and everything is so far away from what I'd want to do, I couldn't make myself actually go join a class and go through the motions. My body and mind would be screaming at me, telling me why I shouldn't do it that way.

So it's all perspective. If that's all you know, of course you'll think it's great and want to defend it. But if you have a different perspective that perhaps shows why those things are "bullsh!t", then you don't need to go through the motions to form an opinion of it. And naturally you'll have to doubt its origin.

So I'd say Graham's point of reference is his experience with really, really efficient VT.

Regarding other first generation Yip Man students, it just takes a comparison of their systems to see where things start to diverge. As Graham said, there's a lot of similarity in the first form, but as you get further into the system things start to change, sometimes drastically. Some for good, and some for baaaaaad. Besides interpretations of BJ, we can take for example LT's knife form. It's the most ridiculous of them all. Even beyond Yip Chun's.

[BPWT..]

This is what I've been trying to get at. It's all about perspective. Of course from a LTWT perspective you aren't gonna say anything bad about PBVT, only that it's different than what you do. That's because it's obviously a good system. At most, people say it's boring because it's the same thing over and over. But it's the simple things. Simplicity is one of the driving principles. From a LTWT perspective you will think LTWT is good and PBVT is good.

I wouldn't say PBVT looks boring, but yes - I would say it looks "simple", as you say. Perhaps the most bare-bones VT. Simple is good, of course, but I think there is more to WCK than just this singular interpretation. And that's how I see it. PB's interpretation of WSL's interpretation of Yip Man's teachings. So yes, I wouldn't say that PBVT is bullish!t. Equally, something that contains simple but also has more to it than just simple, is not bullish!t either, IMO.


From a PBVT perspective, on the other hand, just looking at LTWT is enough. I've pained myself to sit through a couple of those really old LTWT overviews/tutorials, and watched the chi-sau "sections", and everything is so far away from what I'd want to do, I couldn't make myself actually go join a class and go through the motions. My body and mind would be screaming at me, telling me why I shouldn't do it that way.

Putting aside the fact that there is nothing online from LT that is very detailed or comprehensive (in the sense that what you see is just short, simple bits of seminars explaining things), and that I have yet to find a clip of the Chi Sau sections that actually - really - explains what is behind them, again... simple snippets; and also putting aside the fact that the sections themselves are just the beginning of CS work, they are a single platform.... I can see what you're saying. If your Chi Sau is not about striking with bridge control, if it looks to avoid 'stick', however short, and is looking to disengage and simply strike alone, then yes - I can see that your mind would be screaming at you.

That doesn't mean, IMO, that the LT method is BS. If you experienced it with a good teacher, I think you'd see that. It is indeed not as simple as the method you train and describe - I give you that.


And naturally you'll have to doubt its origin.

If this simple, bare-bones VT is your marker then I can see where your views come from. But by that token, this means that you are saying Ho Kam Ming, Leung Sheung, Tsu Sheung Tin, etc - people who spent many years with Yip Man - are also teaching "bullish!t". Hawkins Cheung... bullish!t too? Duncan Leung? Less time with Yip Man, but more detail than simple VT you describe.

As its easier to do something simple than something more detailed, why would all of the above people not train the way you describe? Everyone's WC/VT/WT would look like PB's... if this is all that Yip Man taught. Yet pretty much all lines from Yip Man seem to have more detail than the method someone like PB is employing. Your argument seems to be that everyone else is training BS, and only the WSL guys are training the real system from Yip Man. I just don't see that as logical.

What about lines outside of Yip Man, lines that Yip Man exchanged with? Are they bullish!t too, because they have detail in their approach? YKS and Sum Nung taught BS in their Chi Sau?

Simple is good. But that doesn't mean that something more complex in its teachings is BS.

[LFJ]

If this simple, bare-bones VT is your marker then I can see where your views come from. But by that token, this means that you are saying Ho Kam Ming, Leung Sheung, Tsu Sheung Tin, etc - people who spent many years with Yip Man - are also teaching "bullish!t". Hawkins Cheung... bullish!t too? Duncan Leung? Less time with Yip Man, but more detail than simple VT you describe.

I wouldn't exactly say what some of these guys teach is bullsh!t, but much of it is not so efficient. But look at it this way, the further along you go in the system the more drastically they all diverge. I agree with Graham in that this suggests they have filled in their own gaps.


As its easier to do something simple than something more detailed, why would all of the above people not train the way you describe?

Simple doesn't mean easy. To sharpen your tools to a high level takes a lot of natural skill and training. Many people simply lack the ability, or didn't get that deep into fighting to address certain issues. That ultimately affects their understanding of the system and the practicality of their fighting theory.


Everyone's WC/VT/WT would look like PB's... if this is all that Yip Man taught.

We know Yip Man simplified what he taught quite a bit coming from the mainland, and then even further throughout his teaching career in Hong Kong. It was a process of making it more efficient. So it really depends on what period a student was with YM, how long they were with him, how studious they were, and how much fighting experience they got. Those are a lot of factors that can lead to many different (mis)interpretations.

[BPWT..]

Yes, simple doesn't mean easy. But simple, with hard work, is easier than something more complex, with hard work. It is illogical to think people would lack knowledge or understanding and so make what they do 'more' complex and therefore more difficult to make functional.

The vast majority of YM's long term students train WCK that has more in common with each other than with the WSL method. Perhaps WSL chose to strip the art down further, to make it more easily functional.

But that doesn't invalidate a more complex or detailed method. Those with more detail all say they learned it from YM. I don't think that a) they are lying, b) they 'all' misinterpreted.

To add: Imagine the scenario. Various names train for many years with Yip Man, and all of them misinterpret the system, add to it and make it more complex, all somehow do so in similar ways (and in ways that have a connection to how other WCK styles do things), and at no point during all of those years does Yip Man (their teacher and a person they spent so much time training with) say to these people, "You know, you're all doing it wrong."

As simpler is easier to understand and use than something more complex, and as YM refined the art over time, this would mean all of those who learned from YM in the later years (rather than the earlier years) in Hong Kong, would... what... have WC/VT/WT that looks more like WSL's, right?

I mean, it is easier to misinterpret something complex than it is to misinterpret something simple, and harder to train it too. And yet...

Leung Ting's contact with YM was in YM's later years. By your logic, what he learned would have been the most stripped down and simple version yet. And yet...

WSL fought, and this had to have had an impact on how he practised the art in his early VT years (teens and in his early to mid 20s). But Hawkins Cheung fought also, as did Duncan Leung. Both of these people do things in their Chi Sau training that you and Graham say are misinterpretations. Elmond Leung, a teenager when he started learning under YM, went on to learn with LT after YM retired. He's never said that what LT taught was grossly different to what YM had been teaching him.

[LFJ]

It is illogical to think people would lack knowledge or understanding and so make what they do 'more' complex and therefore more difficult to make functional.

It's illogical that people would do that, but they do. A lot of theory about what's going to work in a fight turns into complex systems, when what consistently works for anyone regardless of style, are the simple things.


Those with more detail all say they learned it from YM. I don't think that a) they are lying, b) they 'all' misinterpreted.

Sure, it may just be the case that they've over analyzed things with theory and made expansions they believe to be in line with what Yip Man was teaching, when in actual fact it may just be their own extension and they don't realize it has gone beyond, and so attribute it all back to Yip Man nonetheless... In some cases though, it's fairly obvious they're lying.

[BPWT..]

It's illogical that people would do that, but they do. A lot of theory about what's going to work in a fight turns into complex systems, when what consistently works for anyone regardless of style, are the simple things.

All of them? You believe that absolutely all of them did something illogical and that YM not once corrected them. I think it beggars belief.


Sure, it may just be the case that they've over analyzed things with theory and made expansions they believe to be in line with what Yip Man was teaching, when in actual fact it may just be their own extension and they don't realize it has gone beyond, and so attribute it all back to Yip Man nonetheless... In some cases though, it's fairly obvious they're lying.

Again, all of them? And YM never once corrected those students who were closest to him (those who were not simply casual students)?

I added to my earlier post, saying:

Imagine the scenario. Various names train for many years with Yip Man, and all of them misinterpret the system, add to it and make it more complex, all somehow do so in similar ways to each other (and in ways that have a connection to how other WCK styles do things), and at no point during all of those years does Yip Man (their teacher and a person they spent so much time training with) say to these people, "You know, you're all doing it wrong."

As simpler is easier to understand and use than something more complex, and as YM refined the art over time, this would mean all of those who learned from YM in the later years (rather than the earlier years) in Hong Kong, would... have WC/VT/WT that looks more like WSL's, right?

I mean, it is easier to misinterpret something complex than it is to misinterpret something simple, and harder to train it too. And yet...

Leung Ting's contact with YM was in YM's later years. By your logic, what he learned would have been the most stripped down and simple version yet. And yet...

WSL fought, and this had to have had an impact on how he practised the art in his early VT years (teens and in his early to mid 20s). But Hawkins Cheung fought also, as did Duncan Leung. Both of these people do things in their Chi Sau training that you and Graham say are misinterpretations. Elmond Leung, a teenager when he started learning under YM, went on to learn from Leung Ting after YM retired. He's never said that what LT taught was grossly different to what YM had been teaching him. He is therefore lying too?

C'mon. It makes far more sense, logically, that WSL taught VT the way he did because he wanted to make things as simple as possible. Those who witnessed his fights said they were very quick, very aggressive, and consisted mostly of entering with a kick and then chain punching. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this if it won him his fights, and nothing wrong at all with him teaching what he taught.

But again, that does not mean that all others = bullish!t.

[KPM]

I have a few points to interject that I feel have some bearing on this conversation. Maybe others will think so, maybe not.

1. From what I have read about Yip Man he was fairly easy-going and informal as a teacher. He does not come across as rigid in his thinking or demanding that everyone do Wing Chun exactly "his" way. If two students came to him to settle an argument over a technique or concept he was likely to tell them they were both right. So I can see him having no problem with his students developing their own interpretations of his art. He wouldn't have necessarily demanded that everyone do things exactly as he was doing them. But I wasn't there. I could be wrong.

2. Absolutely simpler is better. Some people make things very complex in Chi Sao. IMHO, there has been way too much emphasis on Chi Sao in some lineages. It has become a "thing" unto itself rather than just one phase of training. Some Wing Chun people have learned to play the Chi Sao "game" and made it more and more complex. You would think the purpose of Wing Chun training was to do Chi Sao...not to fight and defend oneself.

3. Even interpretations of Wing Chun that seem less efficient and "wrong" compared to others can still work well when the person has trained them enough.

4. "Bullsh!t" is a relative term. Compared to what? No one's Wing Chun is the "gold standard" for comparison to everyone involved in Wing Chun. BS to one lineage may be perfectly acceptable and workable to another lineage.

[HybridWarrior]

I have a few points to interject that I feel have some bearing on this conversation. Maybe others will think so, maybe not.

1. From what I have read about Yip Man he was fairly easy-going and informal as a teacher. He does not come across as rigid in his thinking or demanding that everyone do Wing Chun exactly "his" way. If two students came to him to settle an argument over a technique or concept he was likely to tell them they were both right. So I can see him having no problem with his students developing their own interpretations of his art. He wouldn't have necessarily demanded that everyone do things exactly as he was doing them. But I wasn't there. I could be wrong.

2. Absolutely simpler is better. Some people make things very complex in Chi Sao. IMHO, there has been way too much emphasis on Chi Sao in some lineages. It has become a "thing" unto itself rather than just one phase of training. Some Wing Chun people have learned to play the Chi Sao "game" and made it more and more complex. You would think the purpose of Wing Chun training was to do Chi Sao...not to fight and defend oneself.

3. Even interpretations of Wing Chun that seem less efficient and "wrong" compared to others can still work well when the person has trained them enough.

4. "Bullsh!t" is a relative term. Compared to what? No one's Wing Chun is the "gold standard" for comparison to everyone involved in Wing Chun. BS to one lineage may be perfectly acceptable and workable to another lineage.


Good post KPM

[Graham H]

.................regarding Leung Ting

The press conference of the Wing Chun School gained wide attendance and the people there were emotional. Apart from the many chief instructors of the School, it was attended by senior members of more than ten schools and more than ten leading members of the Chinese Martial Arts General Association of Hong Kong, as well as innumerable journalists.

During the session, Sifu Wong Sheun Leung pointed out: Leung Ting did not begin to claim himself head of the school now. In fact, even before Grandmaster Ip Man passed away, he already identified himself the future head of the school to a reporter of a foreign martial arts magazine [where he figured he could get away with saying anything he wanted]. Leung Ting even went so far as to say that he represented Wing Chun, “Leung Ting” is tantamount to Wing Chun, Wing Chun is tantamount to “Leung Ting”. He also said that Grandmaster Ip Man personally selected him as the leader of the instructors of the Wing Chun School. In many of his own articles, the self-styled “Chief Instructor of the Wing Chun School”, “Grandmaster Ip Man’s youngest disciple”. He even blatantly printed the words ’8th Dan Black Belt of Wing Chun on his business cards.”

Sifu Wong Sheun Leung went on to point out: “The Wing Chun School is a Chinese kung fu school. It has no black belts and white belts at all, neither is its practiced to divide disciples into dans or levels. Leung Ting has persistently falsified, claiming himself “Leader of instructors”, “chief instructor”, “head of the school”, and the “youngest disciple”. All these are his tricks to raise his position. Now he even dares to deceitfully claim himself head of the school. We, members of the Wing Chun School can no longer tolerate this in muteness and allow a traitor to fledge in order to appease him.”

Now, after all, is Leung Ting a disciple of Grandmaster Ip Man? Ip Man’s eldest son Sifu Ip Chun testified that he had never seen his father teaching pugilism to Leung Ting. This proves that Leung Ting is not a disciple personally-tutored by Ip Man.

Some asked that if Leung Ting was not Ip Man’s pupil, he was at least Sifu Leung Sheung’s pupil. (in other words, he was Ip Man’s second-generation disciple.) But Sifu Leung Sheung declared that neither was Leung Ting his disciple. The Sihing of the Wing Chun School Leung Sheung said at the press conference: “I have a disciple called Chong Pei, Leung Ting has followed Chong Pei to learn kung fu.”

This unambiguously establishes that Leung Ting was a junior member of the Wing Chun School, instead of being Ip Man’s disciple, he is Sifu Leung Sheung’s second generation disciple, or Grandmaster Ip Man’s third-generation disciple, up to now the most junior member in the Wing Chun School.

[HybridWarrior]

.................regarding Leung Ting

The press conference of the Wing Chun School gained wide attendance and the people there were emotional. Apart from the many chief instructors of the School, it was attended by senior members of more than ten schools and more than ten leading members of the Chinese Martial Arts General Association of Hong Kong, as well as innumerable journalists.

During the session, Sifu Wong Sheun Leung pointed out: Leung Ting did not begin to claim himself head of the school now. In fact, even before Grandmaster Ip Man passed away, he already identified himself the future head of the school to a reporter of a foreign martial arts magazine [where he figured he could get away with saying anything he wanted]. Leung Ting even went so far as to say that he represented Wing Chun, “Leung Ting” is tantamount to Wing Chun, Wing Chun is tantamount to “Leung Ting”. He also said that Grandmaster Ip Man personally selected him as the leader of the instructors of the Wing Chun School. In many of his own articles, the self-styled “Chief Instructor of the Wing Chun School”, “Grandmaster Ip Man’s youngest disciple”. He even blatantly printed the words ’8th Dan Black Belt of Wing Chun on his business cards.”

Sifu Wong Sheun Leung went on to point out: “The Wing Chun School is a Chinese kung fu school. It has no black belts and white belts at all, neither is its practiced to divide disciples into dans or levels. Leung Ting has persistently falsified, claiming himself “Leader of instructors”, “chief instructor”, “head of the school”, and the “youngest disciple”. All these are his tricks to raise his position. Now he even dares to deceitfully claim himself head of the school. We, members of the Wing Chun School can no longer tolerate this in muteness and allow a traitor to fledge in order to appease him.”

Now, after all, is Leung Ting a disciple of Grandmaster Ip Man? Ip Man’s eldest son Sifu Ip Chun testified that he had never seen his father teaching pugilism to Leung Ting. This proves that Leung Ting is not a disciple personally-tutored by Ip Man.

Some asked that if Leung Ting was not Ip Man’s pupil, he was at least Sifu Leung Sheung’s pupil. (in other words, he was Ip Man’s second-generation disciple.) But Sifu Leung Sheung declared that neither was Leung Ting his disciple. The Sihing of the Wing Chun School Leung Sheung said at the press conference: “I have a disciple called Chong Pei, Leung Ting has followed Chong Pei to learn kung fu.”

This unambiguously establishes that Leung Ting was a junior member of the Wing Chun School, instead of being Ip Man’s disciple, he is Sifu Leung Sheung’s second generation disciple, or Grandmaster Ip Man’s third-generation disciple, up to now the most junior member in the Wing Chun School.


Hmmm...interesting. I hadn't heard this before. Thx for posting!

[Graham H]

Hmmm...interesting. I hadn't heard this before. Thx for posting!

Unfortunately for BPWT he really doesn't know too many things about the world of Wing Chun....................

Perhaps he has Daddy issues but IMO he could not have picked a worse person in that clown Leung Ting to support.

[KPM]

Where and when is this account from Graham? LT does have the typical teacher/student posed photos with Yip Man. But for all I know Yip Man was willing to pose with anyone who asked!

[BPWT..]

.................regarding Leung Ting

Oh, man... where to start? Is this what you base these opinions on, Graham? Do you even know the details behind this story? I think not. So... here goes.


Leung Ting gave an interview and said he was the head of the school. The Wing Tsun school. His school. The one he taught at - to his students. He's given himself all sorts of ranks over the years... ranks in his own school and organisation.

The journalist in question didn't write Wing Tsun, he wrote "Wing Chun." And hence everyone ****ed their pants and a big conference was called.

In itself, this wasn't even necessary. As soon as the article was published and Leung Ting saw it, Leung Ting himself asked for a correction because the journalist had been inaccurate in his spelling of "Wing Tsun".

I have no idea if he ever got that correction - but I doubt it. But it makes no difference either way. Because...

Leung Ting made it clear to the Hong Kong Wing Chunners what had happened. It was funny, really. How could someone so junior be named the head of Yip Man's school? But LT explained the situation anyways. But things weren't so simple - the HK WCK guys called their conference anyways - presumably to simply make it clear to the general public that Leung Ting was not the head of Yip Man's WCK.

I'm sure people were emotional, LOL, as your quoted text says. Who do you think called all the journalists? And why? It doesn't take much thought to work it out, fella.

"He also said that Grandmaster Ip Man personally selected him as the leader of the instructors of the Wing Chun School."

Leung Ting was appointed to a position as one of the Chief Instructor at Yip Man's Ving Tsun association. Appointed by Yip Man. If the journalist wrote what he did, the way he did, then that is his bending of the data, not Leung Ting's. LT has never made the claim that he was a leader, or teacher, of the other instructors. How could he be. He was junior to so many. Probably, if such a thing were to have happened, it would have gone to Leung Sheung - or whomever else was most senior in Hong Kong. Certainly not to Leung Ting, LOL... which he knew full. They all knew this... and yet the conference was called anyways. Worked it out yet, Graham?

Sifu Wong Sheun Leung went on to point out: “The Wing Chun School is a Chinese kung fu school. It has no black belts and white belts at all, neither is its practiced to divide disciples into dans or levels."

Yes, traditionally there might not have been dans, levels, belts etc, whatever we want to call them. But in Leung Ting's "Wing Tsun" organisation he created a curriculum. It was structured around levels. That was his choice. His teaching method, to his students. He created uniforms too. Guess what... most Wing Chun organisations in the world today do a similar thing (uniforms, curriculum, levels). Leung Ting gave himself a rank. A rank in his own organisation. Not a rank in the Wing Chun world as a whole. He was crystal clear on this, and always has been.

"Now, after all, is Leung Ting a disciple of Grandmaster Ip Man? Ip Man’s eldest son Sifu Ip Chun testified that he had never seen his father teaching pugilism to Leung Ting. This proves that Leung Ting is not a disciple personally-tutored by Ip Man."

This might just be the best bit of all the garbage you quote from, Graham. Ip Chun doesn't see his father teaching Leung Ting. Ergo, his father didn't do so. :D Hilarious.

This, of course, is said following his father's death. Why? Because when YM was alive and well, everyone knew he was teaching Leung Ting. How? Because Yip Man said it himself in an interview with New Martial Hero.

Yes, that's right - Yip Man himself said it. I guess Ip Chun didn't get the memo (read the article). :rolleyes:

So why is all of this such a concern, and why hold conferences, etc, when Leung Ting had already made everything very clear to those who mattered (the senior students of Yip Man)?

The answer is dead simple. Leung Ting was gaining attention. And gaining large numbers of students. Some people didn't like it. First chance they got... called a conference; invite the press, ignore the fact Leung Ting has already explained that the original reporter f*cked things up. What Leung Ting found stupid and kinda funny, turned out to be quite serious to others.

But why so serious, you ask? Because everyone knew that Yip Man had retired from public teaching and had taken on Leung Ting as a student, regardless. Because in doing so, YM had allowed this generation jumping - which was unusual at the time. Because this, combined with the fact that LT was clearly a talented teacher and good at his art, and clearly knew how to market himself and his Wing Tsun after YM's death... caused a problem.

He, LT, was gaining more public recognition than people senior to him.

Simple. As. That.

[BPWT..]

Of course, you can ignore all of that if you like, Graham. Just stick with whatever nonsense you hear about Leung Ting from PB. Right? :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

Where and when is this account from Graham? LT does have the typical teacher/student posed photos with Yip Man. But for all I know Yip Man was willing to pose with anyone who asked!

It was from a meeting that was held years and years ago. Listen man! Everybody knows the history of LT. The only people that have fallen for his BS is people like BPWT. If wants to be that guy then let him get on with it. I just wish he would stop posting lines and lines of rubbish about the whole YM connection when it is completely false information!

LT would be the first to stand by these ridiculous claims as he made them all up and BPWT has fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

If you think LT is the only one he is not! He may be the worst of a bad bunch but there are more. Ironically though most of it is in the WT umbrella. I find all those guys twisted and weird. Fortunately there isn't much of it in the UK so it's not my problem but in other parts of Europe it's like a brain washing cult. I've seen footage of things that go on in it and it's just downright bizarre.

Leung Ting is like Chinese Pied Piper so when BPWT keeps on about him I think he must be one of the easily led children. The lengths he goes to to defend it though has to be admired but its less than significant in reality.

There is loads more dirt out there on LT. Some false but much true. You can't argue with facts!

..............unless you are BPWT of course. :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

Oh, man... where to start? Is this what you base these opinions on, Graham? Do you even know the details behind this story? I think not. So... here goes.


Leung Ting gave an interview and said he was the head of the school. The Wing Tsun school. His school. The one he taught at - to his students. He's given himself all sorts of ranks over the years... ranks in his own school and organisation.

The journalist in question didn't write Wing Tsun, he wrote "Wing Chun." And hence everyone ****ed their pants and a big conference was called.

In itself, this wasn't even necessary. As soon as the article was published and Leung Ting saw it, Leung Ting himself asked for a correction because the journalist had been inaccurate in his spelling of "Wing Tsun".

I have no idea if he ever got that correction - but I doubt it. But it makes no difference either way. Because...

Leung Ting made it clear to the Hong Kong Wing Chunners what had happened. It was funny, really. How could someone so junior be named the head of Yip Man's school? But LT explained the situation anyways. But things weren't so simple - the HK WCK guys called their conference anyways - presumably to simply make it clear to the general public that Leung Ting was not the head of Yip Man's WCK.

I'm sure people were emotional, LOL, as your quoted text says. Who do you think called all the journalists? And why? It doesn't take much thought to work it out, fella.

"He also said that Grandmaster Ip Man personally selected him as the leader of the instructors of the Wing Chun School."

Leung Ting was appointed to a position as one of the Chief Instructor at Yip Man's Ving Tsun association. Appointed by Yip Man. If the journalist wrote what he did, the way he did, then that is his bending of the data, not Leung Ting's. LT has never made the claim that he was a leader, or teacher, of the other instructors. How could he be. He was junior to so many. Probably, if such a thing were to have happened, it would have gone to Leung Sheung - or whomever else was most senior in Hong Kong. Certainly not to Leung Ting, LOL... which he knew full. They all knew this... and yet the conference was called anyways. Worked it out yet, Graham?

Sifu Wong Sheun Leung went on to point out: “The Wing Chun School is a Chinese kung fu school. It has no black belts and white belts at all, neither is its practiced to divide disciples into dans or levels."

Yes, traditionally there might not have been dans, levels, belts etc, whatever we want to call them. But in Leung Ting's "Wing Tsun" organisation he created a curriculum. It was structured around levels. That was his choice. His teaching method, to his students. He created uniforms too. Guess what... most Wing Chun organisations in the world today do a similar thing (uniforms, curriculum, levels). Leung Ting gave himself a rank. A rank in his own organisation. Not a rank in the Wing Chun world as a whole. He was crystal clear on this, and always has been.

"Now, after all, is Leung Ting a disciple of Grandmaster Ip Man? Ip Man’s eldest son Sifu Ip Chun testified that he had never seen his father teaching pugilism to Leung Ting. This proves that Leung Ting is not a disciple personally-tutored by Ip Man."

This might just be the best bit of all the garbage you quote from, Graham. Ip Chun doesn't see his father teaching Leung Ting. Ergo, his father didn't do so. :D Hilarious.

This, of course, is said following his father's death. Why? Because when YM was alive and well, everyone knew he was teaching Leung Ting. How? Because Yip Man said it himself in an interview with New Martial Hero.

Yes, that's right - Yip Man himself said it. I guess Ip Chun didn't get the memo (read the article). :rolleyes:

So why is all of this such a concern, and why hold conferences, etc, when Leung Ting had already made everything very clear to those who mattered (the senior students of Yip Man)?

The answer is dead simple. Leung Ting was gaining attention. And gaining large numbers of students. Some people didn't like it. First chance they got... called a conference; invite the press, ignore the fact Leung Ting has already explained that the original reporter f*cked things up. What Leung Ting found stupid and kinda funny, turned out to be quite serious to others.

But why so serious, you ask? Because everyone knew that Yip Man had retired from public teaching and had taken on Leung Ting as a student, regardless. Because in doing so, YM had allowed this generation jumping - which was unusual at the time. Because this, combined with the fact that LT was clearly a talented teacher and good at his art, and clearly knew how to market himself and his Wing Tsun after YM's death... caused a problem.

He, LT, was gaining more public recognition than people senior to him.

Simple. As. That.


My point proven again and not worth the read............................................. Get over it son!

[Graham H]

Of course, you can ignore all of that if you like, Graham. Just stick with whatever nonsense you hear about Leung Ting from PB. Right? :rolleyes:

It's not from PB. In fact why do you keep bring him into it? PB doesn't like LT or his Kung Fu. He thinks he is an idiot as do most people.


Get over it FFS!

[BPWT..]

My point proven again and not worth the read............................................. Get over it son!

You prove your idiocy once again. You make dumbarse claims, post idiotic things that came about because of jealousy, pure and simple. So I set you straight. But you refuse to read it because it will burst your little bubble.

Whatever (as another legend in the PB camp liked to say).

[BPWT..]

I just wish he would stop posting lines and lines of rubbish about the whole YM connection when it is completely false information!

So you're calling Yip Man a liar.

Nice, Graham, nice.

Wait... don't tell me.... you're going to say, "I don't care what Yip Man said."

LOL.

[BPWT..]

LT does have the typical teacher/student posed photos with Yip Man. But for all I know Yip Man was willing to pose with anyone who asked!

Pics together training (wooden dummy work)
Pics together at Leung Ting's opening of a school
Pics together at Leung Ting WT exhibitions
Pics together at Leung Ting's wedding
Interview with Yip Man - Yip Man's own words

But according to Graham, it's all false information. :D:D:D

Why? Because in his eyes this connection might invalidate all the BS he writes here, and all the nonsense he hears from PB who, apparently, doesn't like Leung Ting.

Kindergarten games and logic.

[Graham H]

Pics together training (wooden dummy work)
Pics together at Leung Ting's opening of a school
Pics together at Leung Ting WT exhibitions
Pics together at Leung Ting's wedding
Interview with Yip Man - Yip Man's own words

But according to Graham, it's all false information. :D:D:D

Why? Because in his eyes this connection might invalidate all the BS he writes here, and all the nonsense he hears from PB who, apparently, doesn't like Leung Ting.

Kindergarten games and logic.

Yadda yadda yadda. You really are a complete tw@t!

[BPWT..]

And you really don't have a leg to stand on in this argument.

You are simply happy to explain it all away by calling Yip Man a liar. Heck, you're even calling WSL a liar if you think about it, as he too knew that LT was learning from YM - who appointed him as a chief instructor to the association WSL was a president of.

But yeah... no connection between LT and YM, right?

There really is no end to your stupidity. :(

(by the way, this is the same WSL who gave a sign with his hand-written calligraphy on it - as a present to LT when he opened his school. A sign LT proudly placed above his school's entrance)

[LFJ]

Just for the record, this is the man in question:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmftLF6QbWA

:D

[BPWT..]

And here he is again. This 'junior' guy who apparently had no connection to Yip Man but who somehow seems to have been a part of the family of long-term students, etc.

So very strange, isn't it? :rolleyes:

[LFJ]

It's not difficult to be around and get into pictures.

One of my teachers in another style has people from all over the world come and train periodically at his school. He's very welcoming and they end up with all kinds of pictures which they take back to their countries and use to open their schools claiming to be his disciples.

So really, a few pictures with some people over the years doesn't really say anything except that they got in on some photo opportunities. I'd rather look at what they have to show for their training with such a master. Those who know better will spot it right away, and those who don't will fall for their stories and defend them against all logic.

It's not a rare occurrence or unique to Wing Chun. Seen it a thousand times.

[BPWT..]

Yeah, that must be it. He just happened to turn up. It was a case of lucky timing, LFJ :rolleyes:

And he was given a chief instructor role by YM at YM's Ving Tsun association because... I don't know, LT walked in at the right time for a cup of tea and the position just happened to be vacant? :rolleyes:

Maybe if he hadn't got stuck in traffic that day and he'd got there earlier he would have been given the president's position before WSL slipped on a banana peel, fell into the room and landed in the president's chair? :rolleyes:

Keep grasping at straws guys.

[LFJ]

What I'm saying is that it says nothing about those people's positions or relationship. It's just a picture and people are generally nice about taking photos with anyone. It'd be really awkward for anyone to tell someone to get out of the frame. People usually don't think about how pictures may be used in the future to embellish stories. They just let it snap.

Pictures, ranks, and titles are not their substance though. That's all that really matters.

[Vajramusti]

Are thread titles meaningful?
A title of Ip Man wing chun now has deteriorated to discussion of Leung Ting!

[Faux Newbie]

Yes, it's much easier to argue lineage than discuss method.

I know people who teach my style who are better, and some who are worse. The only thing that can damage mine is how I practice and how I present myself.

I'm not sure some wing chun people get that how and who one chooses to argue with can reflect more poorly on them than that someone is doing or teaching their style wrong.

This is why you aren't part of the same school. In China, it is not uncommon to view someone who has learned a style teaching it their way, even altering it. MOST choose to get along anyway. The ones who argue seem to annoy them, though they are stuck, due to their ties to others, not voicing their opinions.

[Faux Newbie]

Perhaps if people could define what THEY view as IMWC, instead of what and who is not, someone could actually prove their point!

Of course, this will have wait until I perfect the rocket packs for my army of pigs.

[BPWT..]

Sure. But what I'm saying is look at images (LT and VT seniors, and LT and Yip Man in a teaching environment); look at the relationships (Yip Man present at LT's school openings, exhibitions, his wedding); look at statements from Yip Man (saying he was teaching LT privately, YM appointing LT to a teaching position within YM's VT association); look at the time spent (LT learned from the LS line and then spend 1.5 years having weekly private lessons + 2 hour+ meetings with Yip Man).

It is illogical to add up all of this... and then "Pull a Graham" and say that that there was no relationship/connection between LT and YM. No one can be that blind. It is lying, wilful BS from Graham.

In another thread Graham pulled off another one of his spectacular bullish!t one-liners. He said, "Dude, LT learnt hardly anything from Yip Man."

And I said: "If you, Graham, had learnt most of the WSL system from a teacher, and then you met PB and had the chance to have a private lesson with him each and every week... for about a year and a half... and in addition, each time you visited you also later grabbed a coffee with the man and spend a couple of hours talking WCK and asking all and any questions you liked... are you saying you'd have 'learnt hardly anything' from PB during that year and a half?"

Of course, he didn't respond. Because he can't. He knows it is illogical to think LT would have learned 'hardly anything' under those circumstances, and he knows it is bullish!t to claim YM wasn't a private student. The only way he can do so is to say that YM lied about it. Which he doesn't directly do. He just says, "I don't care what Yip Man said." Which is basically the same thing, he's just not honest enough to admit it. :rolleyes:

And yet... he continues to make this dumb@rse claims.

Why? Because the truth is ugly for him. LTWT is different to PBVT, and he (and possibly you too) can't marry two things (that difference, and the rather obvious truth that LT learned from Yip Man). Anything he sees - from any given WC/VT/WT group - that is different to what he does, must, by default, be a misinterpretation from those other people.

Why? Because the only alternative is for him to admit that there might be more out there, and that what is out there isn't necessarily "Bullsh!t".


Here's a clip of Chris Collins. He describes forward pressure in Chi Sau, and how you should train this with a partner. Simple, LTWT, as it is taught in Hong Kong. Nothing illogical about it. Maybe its different to the WSL method. Maybe it's different to PB's interpretation of the WSL method. But the method being shown here, and the simple idea behind it, is the way LT has taught it since having lessons with YM and having opened his own schools in Hong Kong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_JO8QEabjI

[BPWT..]

Yes, it's much easier to argue lineage than discuss method.

This is true. But often they're the same argument. WSL's method, PB's method, LT's method.

[Faux Newbie]

This is true. But often they're the same argument. WSL's method, PB's method, LT's method.

If method comes up. Otherwise, it's just arguing lineage.

I'm not calling anyone the real whatever, but the quickest way to shut down BS is to bring up technical discussion. Technical discussion drives out the people who only really know lineage arguments.

Arguing lineage always ends up citing a bunch of sifus, and the odds of citing 5 sifus, no matter how good their kung fu, and none of them are gossiping hens, are suspiciously similar to the odds the guidance system for my rocket powered pig army is going to work.

[Faux Newbie]

Here's a clip of Chris Collins. He describes forward pressure in Chi Sau, and how you should train this with a partner. Simple, LTWT, as it is taught in Hong Kong. Nothing illogical about it. Maybe its different to the WSL method. Maybe it's different to PB's interpretation of the WSL method. But the method being shown here, and the simple idea behind it, is the way LT has taught it since having lessons with YM and having opened his own schools in Hong Kong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_JO8QEabjI

Interesting. Aside from lineage and who attends whose birthday parties, what technical differences do you see as existing between the competing lines of YMWC?

That (the birthday party thing) wasn't aimed at you, just a joke.

[BPWT..]

Interesting. Aside from lineage and who attends whose birthday parties, what technical differences do you see as existing between the competing lines of YMWC?

That's a huge question to answer. So many YM lines, each with little differences, some with larger ones. Some differences in forms, some in approach to Chi Sau, some with regards to power (generation of, use of), some in how the concepts are interpreted, some in body method, some in stepping methods. The list is endless.

Perhaps the biggest point of contention between, for example, me (LTWT line) and the PBVT line (Graham)/WSL line (LFJ) would be Chi Sau - what its for, what its meant for, how it is trained.

Take a look back in the forum pages - do a search - there have been pages and pages, reams and reams, of discussion (read: argument, slanging matches, back patting, etc). Often from a technical standpoint, or a conceptual standpoint, rather than a pure lineage one (when the two things can, on occasion, be separated).

[BPWT..]

Here's a clip of Chris Collins. He describes forward pressure in Chi Sau, and how you should train this with a partner. Simple, LTWT, as it is taught in Hong Kong. Nothing illogical about it.

Maybe its different to the WSL method. Maybe it's different to PB's interpretation of the WSL method. But the method being shown here, and the simple idea behind it, is the way LT has taught it since having lessons with YM and having opened his own schools in Hong Kong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_JO8QEabjI


Interesting.

Interesting as in you find it logical, good; or interesting as in you find it illogical, bad, or just different to how you train?

[Vajramusti]

Interesting as in you find it logical, good; or interesting as in you find it illogical, bad, or just different to how you train?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No preaching.

Different assumptions probably on structure from LT and WSL ad what I do.
Seems like a lot of muscling in the video you put up. But hey--- there is diversity in wing chun.

[Faux Newbie]

Interesting as in you find it logical, good; or interesting as in you find it illogical, bad, or just different to how you train?

Interesting in the sense that the arms are not so stiff, heavier hitting through softness. I do a southern internal style that has some common ground, but some very different approaches overall, so what I do is not a determining factor. I just found it interesting, would have to examine and think more on it to say more.

[LFJ]

Here's a clip of Chris Collins. He describes forward pressure in Chi Sau, and how you should train this with a partner. Simple, LTWT, as it is taught in Hong Kong. Nothing illogical about it.

There's nothing illogical about anything to someone unaware of anything more logical.

It's hard to tell what exactly he's doing with his back to the camera, but I just see a bunch of flailing noodle arms and no forward pressure as I would understand it. This kind of thing might work when both partners are just standing there flailing at each other, not really exchanging anything. A lot of complex things can be developed and thought to work under such circumstances. Bring them into another situation and...


Maybe its different to the WSL method. Maybe it's different to PB's interpretation of the WSL method. But the method being shown here, and the simple idea behind it, is the way LT has taught it since having lessons with YM and having opened his own schools in Hong Kong.

Even granting pureness and legitimacy of lineage (which we aren't), it's ultimately the substance that counts and means anything. If it were very good it would speak for itself and his lineage wouldn't need to be brought into question.

[BPWT..]

There's nothing illogical about anything to someone unaware of anything more logical.

It's a nice soundbite, but I don't really agree with this. Plenty of times in life (sports, work, relationships) I've known that something wasn't really logical even if I wasn't aware of an exact better option at the time.


It's hard to tell what exactly he's doing with his back to the camera, but I just see a bunch of flailing noodle arms and no forward pressure as I would understand it. This kind of thing might work when both partners are just standing there flailing at each other, not really exchanging anything.

Granted, you have to feel things to really know them in Chi Sau. But I think you should, as an experienced Wing Chunner, be able to see what is happening, and if you add that to what he is saying. The roll (Poon Sau) looks relaxed, but there is forward pressure - it's the springboard that lets the arms fill the gap ("I just want my arms to go").

Everything, then, is receiving, redirecting, adjustments in angle, filling gaps that open or are created - all flowing with a relaxed force. LLHS, LSJC. ("You're a Wing Tsun guy, learn the Wing Tsun way") - he's talking, of course, about the methodology ("When I'm letting my arms go I don't think about trying to be relaxed or trying to be heavy, I just want the natural weight of my arms to go").

Even with his back partially to the camera I think you can see this.


A lot of complex things can be developed and thought to work under such circumstances. Bring them into another situation and...

The point I was trying to make when I said that this is "simple, LTWT, as it is taught in Hong Kong" is that it isn't complex.

Bringing them into another situation... well, this is what Chris is all about - functionality. He knows what it's like to fight (competition, on the street, in a war zone), unarmed and with weapons, so he's not teaching a methodology that he knows doesn't translate.



If it were very good it would speak for itself and his lineage wouldn't need to be brought into question.

Let's be honest. The people who bring lineage into question are those from another lineage who often want to try and prove something regarding their own. Like I said before. To someone like Graham, LTWT can't come from Yip Man because if it does, then it invalidates (in his mind) all the things he's been posting for years on forums like this one.

[LFJ]

It's a nice soundbite, but I don't really agree with this. Plenty of times in life (sports, work, relationships) I've known that something wasn't really logical even if I wasn't aware of an exact better option at the time.

Have you never been convinced that something you believe is logical and then learned better? That's my point. Until you learn better, you'll continue on believing there's nothing illogical about it.


he's talking, of course, about the methodology ("When I'm letting my arms go I don't think about trying to be relaxed or trying to be heavy, I just want the natural weight of my arms to go").

The explanation sounds like how it looks. Just letting your flailing noodle arms go.


Bringing them into another situation... well, this is what Chris is all about - functionality. He knows what it's like to fight (competition, on the street, in a war zone), unarmed and with weapons, so he's not teaching a methodology that he knows doesn't translate.

Cool story, bro.


Let's be honest. The people who bring lineage into question are those from another lineage who often want to try and prove something regarding their own.

What did Leung Sheung or Wong Shun Leung have to prove about their lineage?

As the senior-most student of Yip Man in Hong Kong, Leung Sheung didn't have to prove anything to anyone about his lineage. And Wong Shun Leung obviously let his hands do the talking.

[LFJ]

To someone like Graham, LTWT can't come from Yip Man because if it does, then it invalidates (in his mind) all the things he's been posting for years on forums like this one.

He said if LT is all we had he wouldn't be doing Wing Chun.

Luckily Yip Man having ever taught WT concepts isn't an issue.

[BPWT..]

Have you never been convinced that something you believe is logical and then learned better? That's my point. Until you learn better, you'll continue on believing there's nothing illogical about it.

I honestly don't know. I've known things were logical and they proved to be so. I've also known things were illogical and later found a logical way. I can't think of something that I thought was logical - really believed it to be logical - and then realised that it wasn't. Maybe there has been, but I can't think of one. Honest answer.



The explanation sounds like how it looks. Just letting your flailing noodle arms go.

I'm sorry that all you can see here is "flailing" and "noodle arms." I think you're smart enough, and experienced enough, to actually see what is here - but I think you're reluctant to admit that.



Cool story, bro.

I don't get you guys, sometimes. If something doesn't fit with your way of thinking, you insinuate something is bullish!t/lies. You think Chris is lying when he says he boxed and has wrestling experience? You think he is lying when he says he's needed to protect himself outside of the ring? You think he is lying about having been in the Marines for 9 years? :(



What did Leung Sheung or Wong Shun Leung have to prove about their lineage? As the senior-most student of Yip Man in Hong Kong, Leung Sheung didn't have to prove anything to anyone about his lineage. And Wong Shun Leung obviously let his hands do the talking.

Leung Sheung never questioned that Leung Ting had learned from Yip Man. Wong Shun Leung never questioned it either. YM said it was so - they believed him (actually, Leung Sheung was said to be unhappy about it).

The lineage argument we're talking about is Graham's claim that Leung Ting's connection to Yip Man is false. Graham is talking out of his arse. I never said WSL needed to prove his lineage (we all know it), and the same applies to LS. I don't think anyone questioned this - so I'm not sure where you get this from.

[BPWT..]

He said if LT is all we had he wouldn't be doing Wing Chun.

He also said:

"To make things even worse we have people who claim to be personal closed door students of Yip Man that are really teaching a load of old tosh."

"Dude LT learnt hardly anything from Yip Man."

"I just wish he [BPWT] would stop posting lines and lines of rubbish about the whole YM connection when it is completely false information!"

Graham spouts BS every time he comes here to post. Never able to back up his claims, yet still keeps posting his lies.

[LFJ]

I think you're smart enough, and experienced enough, to actually see what is here - but I think you're reluctant to admit that.

Whatever puts you at ease with it.


I don't get you guys, sometimes. If something doesn't fit with your way of thinking, you insinuate something is bullish!t/lies. You think Chris is lying when he says he boxed and has wrestling experience? You think he is lying when he says he's needed to protect himself outside of the ring? You think he is lying about having been in the Marines for 9 years? :(

It's just that everyone says that. All it amounts to is a cool story... unless they caught it on film, which they rarely do.


I never said WSL needed to prove his lineage (we all know it), and the same applies to LS. I don't think anyone questioned this - so I'm not sure where you get this from.

You said the people who bring lineage into question are those from another lineage who often want to try and prove something regarding their own. So WSL and LS's (and other seniors') comments at the press conference were to prove something about their own lineage?

[BPWT..]

It's just that everyone says that. All it amounts to is a cool story... unless they caught it on film, which they rarely do.

Everyone? I know plenty of teachers who haven't boxed or wrestled, haven't been in street fights and have not served in the military. It doesn't matter to me if they haven't. But to imply Chris a liar, well... that's pretty low.


You said the people who bring lineage into question are those from another lineage who often want to try and prove something regarding their own. So WSL and LS's (and other seniors') comments at the press conference were to prove something about their own lineage?

The seniors at that conference were not questioning that LT learned from YM - they were not questioning his lineage. They were saying that he was not the head of the YM family. LT agreed with them, as he'd never said he was.

They knew this, as he'd spoken about it after he read the inaccurate magazine article. He told them it was inaccurate. He found it absurd and, frankly, funny that someone would write that he was the head honcho over people who were clearly more senior to him. LT has always acknowledged that many people were senior to him. He didn't question their lineage either.

But they held the conference anyway. As was their right. These guys liked to hold meetings and conferences.

When William Cheung claimed to have been the only person to have learned the real Wing Chun from Yip Man, and it was said that he claimed to be the "number one student of Yip Man", another conference was held so that the YM WCK family could clarify things - presumably for the general public.

Wong Sheung Leung was the Chairman at that VTAA meeting. And the Vice Chairman was... Leung Ting. (yeah... the same Leung Ting that Graham says is all false information regarding a connection to Yip Man...). Lok Yiu was the President, Ho Kam Ming was a Vice President.

[LFJ]

But to imply Chris a liar, well... that's pretty low.

Yeah, well, get bent. I never implied anyone is a liar, especially not someone I don't know or give two sh!ts about. All I'm implying is that cool stories don't impress me. Anyone can have a cool story and still do less than practical things with their training partners.


The seniors at that conference were not questioning that LT learned from YM - they were not questioning his lineage.

You need to have a look at the record. That's exactly what they were doing.

[BPWT..]

You need to have a look at the record. That's exactly what they were doing.

Not really. Was Leung Ting the head of the school? That was the central question at the meeting - which was not even really a question. LT never claimed to be.

Was Leung Ting a student all of YM's? They all knew he was - with the exception of Yip Chun (apparently), who tried to claim that because he never saw any teaching, it didn't happen. Again, idiocy... YM said himself that he was teaching LT, and some photos of the training were taken too (obviously Yip Chun was not present at the training - why would he be?).

To say that the seniors (plural) were questioning the teacher/student relationship, is false. Yip Chun alone posed the question, and I don't think many today would really place much significance on his assertions. Journalists present at the meeting, might have, however. A good story is always a good story.

Now, there could indeed be debate over whether LT was a "disciple". Personally, I don't think LT ever was. Having private lessons is one thing, being a disciple is another. I haven't ever heard LT make the claim he was one of YM's disciples.


I never implied anyone is a liar, especially not someone I don't know or give two sh!ts about.

Okay, you are not saying he is a liar. Though rather than say Chris has some interesting experience, history, etc... you say 'cool stories.' Story kinda implies that you think it is fictional. But okay, if that's not what you meant then I take it back.

[LFJ]

A couple links:

http://kwansao.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/a-scandal-of-wing-chun-leung-ting-denounced/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cool%20story%20bro

[KPM]

I've never been a fan of Leung Ting. I don't like his Wing Chun body structure and I don't like his marketing. The "leaning back while hitting" thing never made any sense to me. But.....through the years I have been involved in Wing Chun it has never really been a question that Leung Ting studied with Yip Man. There has been plenty of photos and such to back it up.

From what Graham posted earlier:

Sifu Wong Sheun Leung went on to point out: “The Wing Chun School is a Chinese kung fu school. It has no black belts and white belts at all, neither is its practiced to divide disciples into dans or levels. Leung Ting has persistently falsified, claiming himself “Leader of instructors”, “chief instructor”, “head of the school”, and the “youngest disciple”. All these are his tricks to raise his position. Now he even dares to deceitfully claim himself head of the school. We, members of the Wing Chun School can no longer tolerate this in muteness and allow a traitor to fledge in order to appease him.”

To me, WSL clearly is questioning LT's authority and position within the Yip Man lineage. He never says that LT didn't learn from Yip Man.

Now, after all, is Leung Ting a disciple of Grandmaster Ip Man? Ip Man’s eldest son Sifu Ip Chun testified that he had never seen his father teaching pugilism to Leung Ting. This proves that Leung Ting is not a disciple personally-tutored by Ip Man.

This is something included by whoever wrote up the coverage of the press conference. It isn't a quote. It doesn't say that Ip Chun was actually present and pointed this out. Who knows if Ip Chun actually said this at all?


Some asked that if Leung Ting was not Ip Man’s pupil, he was at least Sifu Leung Sheung’s pupil. (in other words, he was Ip Man’s second-generation disciple.) But Sifu Leung Sheung declared that neither was Leung Ting his disciple. The Sihing of the Wing Chun School Leung Sheung said at the press conference: “I have a disciple called Chong Pei, Leung Ting has followed Chong Pei to learn kung fu.”

LS says here that LT studied primarily with Chong Pei rather than himself. He does not state that LS never studied with Yip Man afterwards.

I have don't have any stake in this either way. But I have to say that I agree with what BPWT has been saying as far as LT's "lineage." For what its worth.....

[zuti car]

Many bad things can said about Leung Ting but...His style is still most popular and has more followers in Europe than all other styles\lineages together . Ting brought WT in Europe and opened the door for all others who came later . He made WT most popular kung fu style in Europe .He is the person who earned the most from WT . This may be the reason why a lot people hate him . There is nothing wrong with Ting's style , and it is totally unimportant whether or not he had learned from Yip Man directly, there are only people who cannot stand his successes , that is all .

[BPWT..]

A couple links:

http://kwansao.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/a-scandal-of-wing-chun-leung-ting-denounced/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cool%20story%20bro

Yes, the first one is, I believe, where Golden Graham pulled his quote. It was, to quote the article, "To deal with Leung Ting’s self-proclamation of being Head of the Wing Chun School, the three main organizations of the Wing Chun School immediately held a joint conference."

Like I said, he never made this claim.

The second link: well, forgive me, I'd never heard this expression (sounds American). As someone who has fought (in most scenarios linked to the word), and someone who studies and teaches Wing Tsun, I thought you'd be interested in Chris' take on things - rather than indifferent to it. But it doesn't matter, I posted the link to show method and approach (which I think is logical).

[LFJ]

Like I said, he never made this claim.

Or he thought to switch the spelling as an excuse to cover his arse...

[BPWT..]

Many bad things can said about Leung Ting but...His style is still most popular and has more followers in Europe than all other styles\lineages together . Ting brought WT in Europe and opened the door for all others who came later . He made WT most popular kung fu style in Europe .He is the person who earned the most from WT . This may be the reason why a lot people hate him . There is nothing wrong with Ting's style , and it is totally unimportant whether or not he had learned from Yip Man directly, there are only people who cannot stand his successes , that is all .

To be honest, there was Wing Chun in Europe before Leung Ting.

But yes, he certainly made it popular in a way no one else had before him. Many people hated him for his success - and some still do! It is the root of the problems between Leung Sheung and Leung Ting. The former even claiming he never taught him. And, again to be fair, LT had many negative things to say about LS too.

Mostly it is all childish. Being childish is not beneath Leung Ting. ;)

But I'm interested in his system, not in the nonsense that is the politics of Hong Kong Wing Chun.

[BPWT..]

Or he thought to switch the spelling as an excuse to cover his arse...

While I would be the first to admit that LT is capable of saying something controversial, and sometimes needlessly so... I can't believe he would give interviews and make claims like this, thinking no one would hear about the article, read it, share it, etc. :rolleyes:

A journalist made a mistake, or maybe was looking to stir up a bit of excitement. Add this to the controversial comments LT had made, mixed with his success and money... and the knives come out. (which in Hong Kong means: call a press conference and thump your chest).

[zuti car]

To be honest, there was Wing Chun in Europe before Leung Ting.

But yes, he certainly made it popular in a way no one else had before him. Many people hated him for his success - and some still do! It is the root of the problems between Leung Sheung and Leung Ting. The former even claiming he never taught him. And, again to be fair, LT had many negative things to say about LS too.

Mostly it is all childish. Being childish is not beneath Leung Ting. ;)

But I'm interested in his system, not in the nonsense that is the politics of Hong Kong Wing Chun.

As far as I know , Ting was the first who taught WT to European people back in 1977. There are some claims that some VT guy in England came in 60s but he never taught white people ,so...Ting was first

I have started with WT in high school ...

[BPWT..]

That might be true. Though I am pretty sure Keith Kernsphect learned some Wing Chun in London before he met Leung Ting. Then again, KK was not the first European to learn from LT... there was someone from Scandinavia, I believe, who started just before him.

[LFJ]

While I would be the first to admit that LT is capable of saying something controversial, and sometimes needlessly so... I can't believe he would give interviews and make claims like this, thinking no one would hear about the article, read it, share it, etc. :rolleyes:

Sometimes unbelievable things do happen.


A journalist made a mistake, or maybe was looking to stir up a bit of excitement.

How do you know? Changing the spelling sounds like a nice save. When did LT officially choose his new spelling? Is it documented anywhere verifiably prior to this blunder?

[BPWT..]

@LFJ

A person blowing their own trumpet to promote their classes is one thing, making false claims about being the head of the entire Yip Man Wing Chun family is another. Someone would only say the latter - that they were essentially Yip Man's successor - if they actually had proof of it.
And if they had proof, the first people they would have shared it with would have been the VTAA... the people who would have mattered in such a case.

Instead we are to believe that LT shared this valuable little gem of huge significance with a journalist? And despite having no proof to back up the claim? But in the hope that the journalist wouldn't print it? Or the hope that it would be printed, but that no one senior to LT would read it or hear about it?

It's almost too silly for words.

Leung Ting was, and is, constantly being interviewed by newspapers, magazines and TV shows. He loves the media attention. Sometimes he rubs people up the wrong way. We all know that. He is what he is - for better or worse.

Look at this forum - how many times have people had words misinterpreted or bent out of shape. Just today I misunderstood something you said (cool story) and thought your were implying someone else was not telling the truth.

Sh!t happens.

Leung Ting has often spoken about being the head of his organisation and classes. The highest ranked person in his school. He promotes himself often by telling of how he was a closed door student. He never claims to have been the only private student.

And so on and so forth. An article that's inaccurate doesn't sell any less copies - it might even sell more.



When did he officially choose the new spelling? I've no idea. I don't know when was it registered. Or when he first changed the spelling and used it in promotion - something that could have happened earlier, I suppose. I heard that he often simply referred to what he did as Leung Ting Wing Tsun. When he spoke, people knew he was referring to his Wing Tsun, not what WSL was doing, or TST was doing, etc, etc. This had to be the case as often people weren't writing it down in English - they were speaking and writing in Chinese. However differently you and I spell the word, we pronounce it the same.

[LFJ]

I've seen crazier things in the TCMA world to put anything past anyone!

A guy came to China to a very well-known master claiming to be an original disciple of this master's late master a decade prior to the master's arrival. To the master's face, the guy told him he was very happy that he (the master) came along because now they are the original brothers under the grandmaster. The whole story was BS and it was his first time in China, yet he had the gall to say this directly to the master, via interpreter. After getting a bunch of training pictures and such with the master who didn't consider what those pictures could be used for later, upon return to his country he was suddenly this master's "disciple" and "official representative" in his country. He grew an enormous following.

This is one of a number of similar cases I've personally witnessed with this one master. People think when they go back to their country nobody knows their truth and they can get away with whatever they want to say, and to an extent that's true. Leung Ting can claim to have been the last indoor disciple of Yip Man so no one knows what went on behind those closed doors. With that, he can say and teach whatever he wants, and who's to say otherwise?

Still, as I've said, the substance of these people's teachings speak for itself, and certainly they are able to grow large followings due to their marketing and students not knowing any better, factually or technically.

So seriously, with these kinds of stories I wouldn't put anything past anyone! Changing the spelling to Wing Tsun is a good save though. Just too bad it doesn't help the system.

[Vajramusti]

That might be true. Though I am pretty sure Keith Kernsphect learned some Wing Chun in London before he met Leung Ting. Then again, KK was not the first European to learn from LT... there was someone from Scandinavia, I believe, who started just before him.
------------------------------------------------------

Lee sing first came to London with wing chun. Then came Paul Lam a student of Leung Shun. My friend Alan Lamb learned from Lee Sing school then Paul Lamb before going to Hong Kong.
Kernsphecht already was making arrangements to teach out of a castle, He met up with Alan Lamb but Alan was headed for the US and K hooked up with Leung Ting.

GrecoWong from Moy Yat line came later. Together with Clausenitzer of Australia who was living in the Uk at the time they wrote the first wc book in English.

[LoneTiger108]

------------------------------------------------------

Lee sing first came to London with wing chun.

It's not a fact many outside the UK are aware of but yes, Lee Shing was the first to represent Yip Man here. Also the first to start promoting the Martial Arts Athletic Assoc. too from it's inception in 1967. My own Sifu had already been with Lee Shing for 2 years when that happend, and he see and witnessed many things!

[Paddington]

I have a question about Ip Man wing chun for people such as Joy and others with a lot of experience. To what extent are the knives and the way they are integrated into the wider system, a hallmark and key to what people call 'Ip Man wing chun'?

[Vajramusti]

I have a question about Ip Man wing chun for people such as Joy and others with a lot of experience. To what extent are the knives and the way they are integrated into the wider system, a hallmark and key to what people call 'Ip Man wing chun'?\---------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ip Man imo taught only about 4 people the full coordinated use of the knives. Two are now dead , one no longer practices leaving one: Ho Kam Ming who is except for some corrections of students and grandstudents is basically retired. Ho Kam Ming taught his senior students the knives.WSL taught Petersen, Bayer and others the knives. WSL and his students have taught many their version of the knives. Nowadays people "learn" from videos and Youtube. HKM finished his knife training with IM before WSL though WSL started wing chun before HKM. Ip Man called his knife usage- bot jom do. Others have different names for the knives.. double knives, butterfly knives etc.Many knives are poorly made- some more appropriate for hung ga and other styles.
Proper control of hands and legs ( body integration) is important imo for learning the knives well. Hence knives cap the Ip Man curriculum.
One does not walk around with bjds these days. ..though I knew a guy years ago who claimed that he used them in a NYC street fight.

But the knives properly used add to the movement skills of wing chun.

[HybridWarrior]

Proper control of hands and legs ( body integration) is important imo for learning the knives well. Hence knives cap the Ip Man curriculum. But the knives properly used add to the movement skills of wing chun.


Good post!

[Paddington]

\---------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ip Man imo taught only about 4 people the full coordinated use of the knives. Two are now dead , one no longer practices leaving one: Ho Kam Ming who is except for some corrections of students and grandstudents is basically retired. Ho Kam Ming taught his senior students the knives.WSL taught Petersen, Bayer and others the knives. WSL and his students have taught many their version of the knives. Nowadays people "learn" from videos and Youtube. HKM finished his knife training with IM before WSL though WSL started wing chun before HKM. Ip Man called his knife usage- bot jom do. Others have different names for the knives.. double knives, butterfly knives etc.Many knives are poorly made- some more appropriate for hung ga and other styles.
Proper control of hands and legs ( body integration) is important imo for learning the knives well. Hence knives cap the Ip Man curriculum.
One does not walk around with bjds these days. ..though I knew a guy years ago who claimed that he used them in a NYC street fight.

But the knives properly used add to the movement skills of wing chun.

Thanks for the reply Joy! I very much agree with your last line and the knife form as I was shown it, is more in this vein. However, despite the form being shown to me through one of Ip Chun's senior students, it is a form that is very much different from those four you cite (I assume Lok Yiu is the 4th you refer too?), and I've found that I have had to turn elsewhere to be effective when sparring weapon on weapon (that could just be my inexperience with the form I was shown).

Joy, when you learnt the knife form were you told about the different properties of the edge and flat of the blade and their kinship with or likeness to the flat and edge of the forearm and hand?

I open that question up to others too, particularly those training through one of the many Ip Man lineages.

[Vajramusti]

Thanks for the reply Joy! I very much agree with your last line and the knife form as I was shown it, is more in this vein. However, despite the form being shown to me through one of Ip Chun's senior students, it is a form that is very much different from those four you cite (I assume Lok Yiu is the 4th you refer too?), and I've found that I have had to turn elsewhere to be effective when sparring weapon on weapon (that could just be my inexperience with the form I was shown).

Joy, when you learnt the knife form were you told about the different properties of the edge and flat of the blade and their kinship with or likeness to the flat and edge of the forearm and hand?

I open that question up to others too, particularly those training through one of the many Ip Man lineages.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No- I don't think that Lok Yiu was the fourth one.

[Paddington]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No- I don't think that Lok Yiu was the fourth one.

What about the other question? :)

[LoneTiger108]

\---------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ip Man imo taught only about 4 people the full coordinated use of the knives. Two are now dead , one no longer practices leaving one: Ho Kam Ming who is except for some corrections of students and grandstudents is basically retired...

Ip Man called his knife usage- bot jom do

I like that you mention Ip Man named 'his' own knife form, as this too is what I have heard from my Sifu. Similar too to his 108/116 wooden man, pole and cohesive curriculum of Forms and Chisau? This is what I feel makes Ip Man Wing Chun physically identifiable, and something my Sigung was very honoured to represent even if it wasn't set up exactly how he had learnt Wing Chun himself both from Yip Man and others.

In a true sense, it all started when the HK limited company called 'Yip Man Martial Arts Athletic Association' was formed by the man himself, as that was the only legally named business for Wing Chun with Yip Mans name attached to it. The first of it's time and something that caused quite a stir in the HK Martial Arts community back then because it didn't say 'Wing Chun/Ving Tsun'! I have heard dates like 1967 for it's beginnings but have only seen evidence it was actually formed in 1972. The YMMAAA is now owned by Sam Lau I believe. (see attched image)

Then came the Ving Tsun Athletic Association after Yip Man died, something most of his students joined under and currently still teach by in their Nathan Road HQ, which was followed by both Ip Chun and Ip Chings own VTAA.

A very interesting, and amazingly deep subject really.

http://www.yipmanwingchunasso.com/images/YipmanAssoCover.JPG

[Vajramusti]

What about the other question? :)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All sides of the bjd have their purposes. I have a pair of the Ip Chun designed knives
prefer using a less broad version.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1271725]I like that you mention Ip Man named 'his' own knife form, as this too is what I have heard from my Sifu. Similar too to his 108/116 wooden man, pole and cohesive curriculum of Forms and Chisau? This is what I feel makes Ip Man Wing Chun physically identifiable, and something my Sigung was very honoured to represent even if it wasn't set up exactly how he had learnt Wing Chun himself both from Yip Man and others.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The 108 is not an uncommon organizational principle in many Asian arts and arrangement- sometimes artificially imposed- depending on what you count. The origins of the 108 are in Hindu and later Buddhist astronomy.

oops gotta get back to FIFA-glad that Belgium and Algeria won their rounds. Hope that the USA wins today though Ronaldo
of Portugal is a team by himself..
Messi was marvel yester day dribbling past 7 players for his final left footed goal. UK has been asleep at the wheels.
Glad that mexico held Brazil to a draw. OOPS- I am outta here.

[BPWT..]

I have heard dates like 1967 for it's beginnings but have only seen evidence it was actually formed in 1972. The YMMAAA is now owned by Sam Lau I believe. (see attched image) Then came the Ving Tsun Athletic Association after Yip Man died, something most of his students joined under and currently still teach by in their Nathan Road HQ, which was followed by both Ip Chun and Ip Chings own VTAA.

According to this, the VTAA was formed in 67, when Yip Man was still alive.

http://www.vingtsun.org.hk/Origin.HTM

They also have a "history and development" page for 1961-1970, but for some reason you can't link to it the specific dates...

http://www.vingtsun.org.hk

[LoneTiger108]

According to this, the VTAA was formed in 67, when Yip Man was still alive.

http://www.vingtsun.org.hk/Origin.HTM

They also have a "history and development" page for 1961-1970, but for some reason you can't link to it the specific dates...

http://www.vingtsun.org.hk

I do like that resource, and maybe it was the VTAA I had heard about being set up in 1967? But I am sure the 'Company' I heard had Yip Mans name attached?? Something like Yip Man Wing Chun Tong or something, like it suggests in it's write up at the top of the page. More like a 'Fellowship'.

Still, whatever happened it is good to see these groups still active today as everything else that came afterwards is Sifu and practitioners personal development. I actually like the 'Fellowship' idea and it would be great to see something like that accessible to everyone.

[nautavac]

Distance learning in wc? Has anyone looked into this? If so, is there one that could be recommended. Btw, i have tried to contact sifu? Correy in Tn asking about local or closer possible training options but have had no reply and in the process have turned up DLPs and wandered what the opinion of these were. Any thoughts? Iron shin, arm, and palm training tomorrow night so getting my typing in before my arms are too tired.

[HybridWarrior]

Distance learning in wc? Has anyone looked into this? If so, is there one that could be recommended. Btw, i have tried to contact sifu? Correy in Tn asking about local or closer possible training options but have had no reply and in the process have turned up DLPs and wandered what the opinion of these were. Any thoughts? Iron shin, arm, and palm training tomorrow night so getting my typing in before my arms are too tired.


Sent you a PM nautavac...

[nautavac]

Sent you a PM nautavac...

Sent you a pm hybridwarrior, thank you for your correspondence

[T.D.O]

I do like that resource, and maybe it was the VTAA I had heard about being set up in 1967? But I am sure the 'Company' I heard had Yip Mans name attached?? Something like Yip Man Wing Chun Tong or something, like it suggests in it's write up at the top of the page. More like a 'Fellowship'.

Still, whatever happened it is good to see these groups still active today as everything else that came afterwards is Sifu and practitioners personal development. I actually like the 'Fellowship' idea and it would be great to see something like that accessible to everyone.



I remember reading that Ip man was the chairman of an association (maybe the vtaa) then one day was voted out without being notified, cant remember much more about it, think it was in "portrait of a kung fu master".

[T.D.O]

I remember reading that Ip man was the chairman of an association (maybe the vtaa) then one day was voted out without being notified, cant remember much more about it, think it was in "portrait of a kung fu master".


Got that wrong, says gm Ip man was the lifetime chairman. Then says later that "At one point during the VTAA years the current administrator decided to change the agreement as to how much Ip man was to recieve without talking it over with him first. This irritated Ip man so much that he walked away from the association with all of his students that could instruct classes, he stated that "its not the money, its the principle. you should have talked to me first." This left the association in a terrible bind. So they enlisted the help of a rogue wing chun instructor. This caused an untrusting tension between this instructor and Ip man for the rest of his days."

[Vajramusti]

Got that wrong, says gm Ip man was the lifetime chairman. Then says later that "At one point during the VTAA years the current administrator decided to change the agreement as to how much Ip man was to recieve without talking it over with him first. This irritated Ip man so much that he walked away from the association with all of his students that could instruct classes, he stated that "its not the money, its the principle. you should have talked to me first." This left the association in a terrible bind. So they enlisted the help of a rogue wing chun instructor. This caused an untrusting tension between this instructor and Ip man for the rest of his days."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Garbled old stuff. How does it matter?

[HybridWarrior]

Sent you a pm hybridwarrior, thank you for your correspondence

Anytime. Hope you have some luck. Let us know how it goes...

[KPM]

I have a question about Ip Man wing chun for people such as Joy and others with a lot of experience. To what extent are the knives and the way they are integrated into the wider system, a hallmark and key to what people call 'Ip Man wing chun'?

I would question the idea that the knives are a "hallmark" or "key" to Yip Man Wing Chun...or any Wing Chun method for that matter. The knives are typically seen as an extension of the empty hand method. This is in contrast to a lot of other CMA styles were weapons are a "thing unto themselves." In Pin Sun WCK originally Leung Jan taught no knife form. One simply applied each of the short sets with the knives and explored application from there. I think this likely happened a lot in other WCK methods, which is why everyone's knife form is different. As long as what you do with the knives is in line with the concepts and structure of what you do empty-hand, then the sequence of a form doesn't really matter. The knives follow the empty-hand methods, not the other way around. Therefore I don't see how they would be a "hallmark" or "key" to any Wing Chun system. Typically the knives aren't taught until the end of the curriculum in most lineages. Some don't ever get that far into their Wing Chun. So again, how could the knives be a "hallmark" or "key" to the method?


Contrast this to the typical Filipino martial art which teaches stick work right from the beginning and bases most of what they do on it. Any empty hand method typically comes later in the curriculum and is an out-growth of the stick method. The stick method itself is usually seen as just a training version of learning to use the blade. So in this case, one could say that the blade is a "hallmark" or "key" to most FMA styles. But this isn't how it works in Wing Chun. So my answer to the question is "not to a very large extent at all!" But that's just my opinion.

[Paddington]

Thanks for the reply KPM. If martial arts such as wing chun formed during periods where weapons were commonly used, to the extent that it made sense to train your weapon use as a priority i.e. 'bringing a fist to a sword fight', then would that mean there may be quite a bit of the empty hand techniques being informed by weapon use rather than the other way around? Of course, I am talking from a historical perspective and I don't know the answer.

In terms of one version of the knife form I was taught I agree with you, it is akin to a boxer using a small dumbbell weight to enhance their fist striking. That said, in one lineage I have trained through quite a bit of the interpretation for the empty hand forms is seen as preparation for weapons training and conditioning the body for it and here bui jee was often cited as an exemplary form, with respects to body conditioning and preparation for knife work. In this case there seems to be a greater contingency between the empty hand techniques and the knife techniques.

I must admit, and I know I have said this before so sorry for repetition, I see a lot of sword or blade based principles in wing chun's empty hand movements such as the well known 'flat / edge' distinction as talked about in medieval sword manuals. Nothing definitive, I know, but definitely a line of questioning that peaks my interest and one I should follow up more thoroughly.

[HybridWarrior]

Thanks for the reply KPM. If martial arts such as wing chun formed during periods where weapons were commonly used, to the extent that it made sense to train your weapon use as a priority i.e. 'bringing a fist to a sword fight', then would that mean there may be quite a bit of the empty hand techniques being informed by weapon use rather than the other way around? Of course, I am talking from a historical perspective and I don't know the answer.

In terms of one version of the knife form I was taught I agree with you, it is akin to a boxer using a small dumbbell weight to enhance their fist striking. That said, in one lineage I have trained through quite a bit of the interpretation for the empty hand forms is seen as preparation for weapons training and conditioning the body for it and here bui jee was often cited as an exemplary form, with respects to body conditioning and preparation for knife work. In this case there seems to be a greater contingency between the empty hand techniques and the knife techniques.

I must admit, and I know I have said this before so sorry for repetition, I see a lot of sword or blade based principles in wing chun's empty hand movements such as the well known 'flat / edge' distinction as talked about in medieval sword manuals. Nothing definitive, I know, but definitely a line of questioning that peaks my interest and one I should follow up more thoroughly.

Paddington, between the two knife forms/training you've experienced, would you say one is "better" than the other WRT applicability(?).

[Paddington]

Paddington, between the two knife forms/training you've experienced, would you say one is "better" than the other WRT applicability(?).

I've been exposed to more than two forms but I can't say that I am any good at all of them! Could I ask by applicability are you referring to 1) enhancing empty hand techniques in empty hands fighting and self defense or 2) applicability in weapon on weapon scenarios?

[HybridWarrior]

I've been exposed to more than two forms but I can't say that I am any good at all of them! Could I ask by applicability are you referring to 1) enhancing empty hand techniques in empty hands fighting and self defense or 2) applicability in weapon on weapon scenarios?

Hmmm....I guess overall I was thinking do the knife form(s) you know seem to "make sense" from both an empty hand perspective as well as with the knives, etc? Are the knife forms you know of the Yip Man variety?
Put another way: if you were to remove the knives from your hands and then do the form, do you see correlations between the ideas contained in the knives and your empty hand interpretation of Wing Chun?

[Paddington]

Hmmm....I guess overall I was thinking do the knife form(s) you know seem to "make sense" from both an empty hand perspective as well as with the knives, etc? Are the knife forms you know of the Yip Man variety?
Put another way: if you were to remove the knives from your hands and then do the form, do you see correlations between the ideas contained in the knives and your empty hand interpretation of Wing Chun?

Yes two of them are from the Ip Man variety. If I were to remove the knives I see a lot of applicability and correlations in the form taught by Ip Chun, an awful lot. Indeed, when I am doing a knife training session working my form, specifically the one taught by Ip Chun, I always perform it empty handed after performing it with the knives. The loss of mass via not using the knives is very noticeable and enhances my relaxation and fluidity in the movements and my use of fa jing, at the right moments too. What I found really helpful in terms of cementing the correlations and fluidity was then to go work the movements on the dummy. If I were forced to focus on one general aspect that really stood out, it would be that I found learning the knife form really enhanced my ability to attack and go on the offensive in empty hand scenarios.

[HybridWarrior]

Yes two of them are from the Ip Man variety. If I were to remove the knives I see a lot of applicability and correlations in the form taught by Ip Chun, an awful lot. Indeed, when I am doing a knife training session working my form, specifically the one taught by Ip Chun, I always perform it empty handed after performing it with the knives. The loss of mass via not using the knives is very noticeable and enhances my relaxation and fluidity in the movements and my use of fa jing, at the right moments too. What I found really helpful in terms of cementing the correlations and fluidity was then to go work the movements on the dummy. If I were forced to focus on one general aspect that really stood out, it would be that I found learning the knife form really enhanced my ability to attack and go on the offensive in empty hand scenarios.

Cool...thx for the reply. I don't think I've seen his knife form but appreciate the response!

[Graham H]

Yes two of them are from the Ip Man variety. If I were to remove the knives I see a lot of applicability and correlations in the form taught by Ip Chun, an awful lot. Indeed, when I am doing a knife training session working my form, specifically the one taught by Ip Chun, I always perform it empty handed after performing it with the knives. The loss of mass via not using the knives is very noticeable and enhances my relaxation and fluidity in the movements and my use of fa jing, at the right moments too. What I found really helpful in terms of cementing the correlations and fluidity was then to go work the movements on the dummy. If I were forced to focus on one general aspect that really stood out, it would be that I found learning the knife form really enhanced my ability to attack and go on the offensive in empty hand scenarios.

The form taught by Ip Chun is an abomination and not from Ip Man! Fact!

[Paddington]

Cool...thx for the reply. I don't think I've seen his knife form but appreciate the response!

Here you go, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhFU0_iBRBE . It is interesting to note that some of his students perform the form differently though the overall pattern remains the same, so I don't know to what extent Ip Chun has changed it over the years.

[Wayfaring]

The form taught by Ip Chun is an abomination and not from Ip Man! Fact!

Is it true that Ip Man's sons really didn't train with him that much when he was alive because they had other interests? And it's later in life that they developed an interest in wing chun?

I've heard that story / rumor but I'm not from an Ip Man lineage so don't have any private stories or perspectives on that.

[Graham H]

Here you go, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhFU0_iBRBE . It is interesting to note that some of his students perform the form differently though the overall pattern remains the same, so I don't know to what extent Ip Chun has changed it over the years.

Need I say more? Right from the start it is a complete shambles!

[Graham H]

Is it true that Ip Man's sons really didn't train with him that much when he was alive because they had other interests? And it's later in life that they developed an interest in wing chun?

I've heard that story / rumor but I'm not from an Ip Man lineage so don't have any private stories or perspectives on that.

No need to discuss rumors. You can see just by watching. If Ip Chun was to use the blades like that he would maim himself not others. Right from the outset its completely incorrect and dangerous!

[Graham H]

I have seen this in real life several times and listened to his ideas as well. In the days when I didn't know better I believed anything he said...................

[HybridWarrior]

Is it true that Ip Man's sons really didn't train with him that much when he was alive because they had other interests? And it's later in life that they developed an interest in wing chun?

I've heard that as well...

[Paddington]

Is it true that Ip Man's sons really didn't train with him that much when he was alive because they had other interests? And it's later in life that they developed an interest in wing chun?

I've heard that story / rumor but I'm not from an Ip Man lineage so don't have any private stories or perspectives on that.


Yes I've heard the same. I find other versions of the knife form better suited for weapon on weapon scenarios. I say that having been fortunate enough to practice, albeit briefly, with people who practice European sword fighting skills from the medieval and late-medieval period.


The form taught by Ip Chun is an abomination and not from Ip Man! Fact!


Need I say more? Right from the start it is a complete shambles!

Well, many are able to distinguish between the merits of the form taught and the relative skill of the person performing it. Ip Chun is a very good teacher and very good at chi sau and the many great boxing coaches are testament to the fact that you don't have to be the best 'in performance', to be a great coach and to train champions.

I am not overly concerned about debates regarding providence as my concerns are more about 'does it work', in the sense of the reasons for training it a particular way; something that WSL was very much at pains to stress. In terms of the reasons for training the Ip Chun form, in my experience it does work by the terms of reference I cite above. If it is the case that Ip Chun created many aspects of this form, then I tip my hat to him because I indeed find it useful and an enhancement to my 'empty hand' wing chun.

Graham, yes I would like you to say more from your perspective about the practice of the knife forms you have been taught. I am very much interested to read your thoughts.

[Graham H]

Well, many are able to distinguish between the merits of the form taught and the relative skill of the person performing it. Ip Chun is a very good teacher and very good at chi sau and the many great boxing coaches are testament to the fact that you don't have to be the best 'in performance', to be a great coach and to train champions.

I am not overly concerned about debates regarding providence as my concerns are more about 'does it work', in the sense of the reasons for training it a particular way; something that WSL was very much at pains to stress. In terms of the reasons for training the Ip Chun form, in my experience it does work by the terms of reference I cite above. If it is the case that Ip Chun created many aspects of this form, then I tip my hat to him because I indeed find it useful and an enhancement to my 'empty hand' wing chun.

Graham, yes I would like you to say more from your perspective about the practice of the knife forms you have been taught. I am very much interested to read your thoughts.

Although Ip Chun is not the worst at chi sau IMO he certainly is up there. Any way what does being good at chi sau mean? Its a training drill FFS!

He is an ok guy I'll give him that but the way his students suck up to him makes me sick.

Dude if you use you knives like Ip Chun you would be in trouble if somebody came at you with a weapon intent on hurting you but if you like it then thats fine. Not for me!

You want to ask a question about the knives then fire away but firstly I can ask you one. Why does Ip Chun punch at the start of the knife form? Do you know the reason why that is very bad and why you should in fact kick?

[HybridWarrior]

Why does Ip Chun punch at the start of the knife form? Do you know the reason why that is very bad and why you should in fact kick?


Hmm...looking forward to hearing the response/reasons for this!!! I always thought it began with a kick(???)...

[Graham H]

I always thought it began with a kick(???)...

Care to explain why?

[HybridWarrior]

Care to explain why?

Dunno...I've always thought it odd that some folks when doing their version of BJD have the knives cradled in one hand and then awkwardly punch and/or kick as they try to re-grip the knives, etc. It's just always looked very unnatural. Kind of like the flipping stuff too...

[Paddington]

Although Ip Chun is not the worst at chi sau IMO he certainly is up there. Any way what does being good at chi sau mean? Its a training drill FFS!

He is an ok guy I'll give him that but the way his students suck up to him makes me sick.

Dude if you use you knives like Ip Chun you would be in trouble if somebody came at you with a weapon intent on hurting you but if you like it then thats fine. Not for me!

You want to ask a question about the knives then fire away but firstly I can ask you one. Why does Ip Chun punch at the start of the knife form? Do you know the reason why that is very bad and why you should in fact kick?

Hi Graham, you seemed to have missed the points I made. No problem, I'll briefly mention them again. First, I've already said that I find other versions of the knife form better suited to weapon on weapon scenarios such as in post 136, you know, the post of mine you actually cite but missed including that part. I also make that point indirectly in post 127, so there are lines of agreement between us.

I am more interested in your general view of the knife form you have been taught and particularly if you see, as Hybridwarrior asked, any correlation with the empty hand techniques you know. I don't have any direct questions for you, primarily because I don't want to be aggressive and come across as attempting to catch someone out with closed questioning.

Consequently I am not going to answer your closed question as it would lead, I believe, to negative responses. I've already shared my general thoughts and you are free to offer yours, which I very much welcome. The choice is yours.

[Paddington]

Dunno...I've always thought it odd that some folks when doing their version of BJD have the knives cradled in one hand and then awkwardly punch and/or kick as they try to re-grip the knives, etc. It's just always looked very unnatural. Kind of like the flipping stuff too...

Others state that the knives were kept in the boot or about the lower leg, whilst others still will talk about being jumped and using your longest ranged body weapon to give you time to draw your own bladed weapon.

[HybridWarrior]

Others state that the knives were kept in the boot or about the lower leg, whilst others still will talk about being jumped and using your longest ranged body weapon to give you time to draw your own bladed weapon.

Cool. Thx. Of the two things you mentioned...the latter seems more common sense. Thx.

[Graham H]

Hi Graham, you seemed to have missed the points I made. No problem, I'll briefly mention them again. First, I've already said that I find other versions of the knife form better suited to weapon on weapon scenarios such as in post 136, you know, the post of mine you actually cite but missed including that part. I also make that point indirectly in post 127, so there are lines of agreement between us.

I am more interested in your general view of the knife form you have been taught and particularly if you see, as Hybridwarrior asked, any correlation with the empty hand techniques you know. I don't have any direct questions for you, primarily because I don't want to be aggressive and come across as attempting to catch someone out with closed questioning.

Consequently I am not going to answer your closed question as it would lead, I believe, to negative responses. I've already shared my general thoughts and you are free to offer yours, which I very much welcome. The choice is yours.

F78k me! Are you a politician?

Have a nice weekend.

[Paddington]

F78k me! Are you a politician?

Have a nice weekend.
(my emphasis)

Yes, just not a very good one. Besides, I clearly did state what I said in post 136. Graham, I really do welcome your constructive comments on the themes Hybridwarrior and I were discussing. I think you have a lot of constructive and informative things to say.

[Paddington]

Cool. Thx. Of the two things you mentioned...the latter seems more common sense. Thx.

No problem. I don't know which one is correct or even if there is one correct answer. Perhaps Graham can tell us his thoughts?

[GlennR]

Care to explain why?

Because hes about 300 years old now and cant kick anymore?

[GlennR]

F78k me! Are you a politician?

Have a nice weekend.

No, apparently he is a psychologist G!

[Wayfaring]

No, apparently he is a psychologist G!

And I'm an Aussie psychologist. Now cheer the f up. :D:D:D

[GlennR]

And I'm an Aussie psychologist. Now cheer the f up. :D:D:D

Bwahahahhaahah........ ya wanker!

[Paddington]

I came across this video of another one of Ip Man's students, Wong Long Ching, that I've not had the opportunity to see much of before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60f38xFDH88

Has anyone got any further information or links to other clips of Wong practicing wing chun, that they would not mind sharing?

[HybridWarrior]

I came across this video of another one of Ip Man's students, Wong Long Ching, that I've not had the opportunity to see much of before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60f38xFDH88

Has anyone got any further information or links to other clips of Wong practicing wing chun, that they would not mind sharing?


Nice video! Thx. Had not heard of him before.

[GlennR]

I came across this video of another one of Ip Man's students, Wong Long Ching, that I've not had the opportunity to see much of before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60f38xFDH88

Has anyone got any further information or links to other clips of Wong practicing wing chun, that they would not mind sharing?

I didn't mind that

[KPM]

Dunno...I've always thought it odd that some folks when doing their version of BJD have the knives cradled in one hand and then awkwardly punch and/or kick as they try to re-grip the knives, etc. It's just always looked very unnatural. Kind of like the flipping stuff too...

HW I agree with you on both counts. One idea for the starting kick....you are surprised at close quarters and essentially "kick the opponent away" to make enough space to bring the knives into play. Another is that the knives are in a sheath on the lower leg and you are lifting up the leg to put the knives within reach rather than bending over to draw them. Another is that the kick is actually a deflection of a pole or spear thrust as you are bringing the knives into play from wherever you have them stashed.

But its just a form. Wing Chun forms are not a choreographed fight. So whether the form starts with a kick or a punch is irrelevant.

[Paddington]

I didn't mind that

This video at 22 secs-ish reminds me very much of the dummy form shown by WSL, albeit applied on a training partner;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE_DKNqC4yM

Here are some more clips, there are some great bits of information there and I believe the gentleman of a portly stature, and whom wears spectacles, is the same gent that interviewed WSL with respects to the dummy form on another video.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wong+long+ching

[nautavac]

Distance learning in wc? Has anyone looked into this? If so, is there one that could be recommended. Btw, i have tried to contact sifu? Correy in Tn asking about local or closer possible training options but have had no reply and in the process have turned up DLPs and wandered what the opinion of these were. Any thoughts? Iron shin, arm, and palm training tomorrow night so getting my typing in before my arms are too tired.

Disregard this please. I posted this before searching for DLP's on this forum. Sorry. I was just enamored with the kwok program which seems to have Mark Beardsall (sp) promoting it. I would still appreciate some insight for Kwok's program if one had a vigorous training schedule, partner, and took advantage of Kwok's tele-meetings and such to straighten out techniques. Any thoughts? BTW made contact with Sifu Corey in TN bia email. A very nice and helpful individual too, but still looking for a teacher within distance for work and family time as well. Thanks in advance.

[nautavac]

Disregard this please. I posted this before searching for DLP's on this forum. Sorry. I was just enamored with the kwok program which seems to have Mark Beardsall (sp) promoting it. I would still appreciate some insight for Kwok's program if one had a vigorous training schedule, partner, and took advantage of Kwok's tele-meetings and such to straighten out techniques. Any thoughts? BTW made contact with Sifu Corey in TN bia email. A very nice and helpful individual too, but still looking for a teacher within distance for work and family time as well. Thanks in advance.

in my last post I stated, "disregard this please" I was referring to my post asking about DLP's. I was reading the post and realized the mistake.

[HybridWarrior]

BTW made contact with Sifu Corey in TN bia email. A very nice and helpful individual too, but still looking for a teacher within distance for work and family time as well. Thanks in advance.


I would still try over at http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63-wing-chun

Start a thread about WC in Kentucky and see what pops up.

[Graham H]

But its just a form. Wing Chun forms are not a choreographed fight. So whether the form starts with a kick or a punch is irrelevant.

I disagree!

[Graham H]

This video at 22 secs-ish reminds me very much of the dummy form shown by WSL, albeit applied on a training partner;

Nothing like it!

[Graham H]

HW I agree with you on both counts. One idea for the starting kick....you are surprised at close quarters and essentially "kick the opponent away" to make enough space to bring the knives into play. Another is that the knives are in a sheath on the lower leg and you are lifting up the leg to put the knives within reach rather than bending over to draw them. Another is that the kick is actually a deflection of a pole or spear thrust as you are bringing the knives into play from wherever you have them stashed.

But its just a form. Wing Chun forms are not a choreographed fight. So whether the form starts with a kick or a punch is irrelevant.

This is actually a pretty ridiculous idea!

So you think that in a fight where weapons are drawn you would lift you leg up to bring your own knives into play? I'm glad I'm not your student. And you also think that if somebody is attacking you with a spear or pole that you would try and deflect it with a part of your body. Really KPM that is the most stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I feel sorry for you cheated students.

[GlennR]

This is actually a pretty ridiculous idea!

So you think that in a fight where weapons are drawn you would lift you leg up to bring your own knives into play? I'm glad I'm not your student. And you also think that if somebody is attacking you with a spear or pole that you would try and deflect it with a part of your body. Really KPM that is the most stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I feel sorry for you cheated students.

Evening graham, tactful as ever;)

Yes I agree, I welcome someone kicking me while I have a knife

[Graham H]

Tactfulness is not my strong point but I'm sure KPM will spend hours trying to justify his rubbish as will Paddington Bear who also talks a lot of sh!t.

[Graham H]

..................the first action from Bil Jee. If the odds are against you, you must escape but according to KPM you can block weapons with kicks. What a load of nonsense! :D

[Graham H]

.....................whoops I forgot. Actually Wing Chun players have two big knives tucked in their socks.

[GlennR]

Tactfulness is not my strong point but I'm sure KPM will spend hours trying to justify his rubbish as will Paddington Bear who also talks a lot of sh!t.

You have a way with words G, yes they do waffle on a bit

[GlennR]

..................the first action from Bil Jee. If the odds are against you, you must escape but according to KPM you can block weapons with kicks. What a load of nonsense! :D

Block??? No!!

It's a disarm, you kick the knife out of his hands!!!

[Graham H]

Block??? No!!

It's a disarm, you kick the knife out of his hands!!!

Or you could be like Ip Chun and throw a punch first and them move into the attacking weapon! lmao

Ip Chun also has the added benefit of cutting his own arms off during combat :D:D

[LFJ]

This is actually a pretty ridiculous idea!

So you think that in a fight where weapons are drawn you would lift you leg up to bring your own knives into play? I'm glad I'm not your student. And you also think that if somebody is attacking you with a spear or pole that you would try and deflect it with a part of your body. Really KPM that is the most stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I feel sorry for you cheated students.

Jackie Chan makes similar tricks work all the time.

[Graham H]

yes they do waffle on a bit

Yes very true and full of fresh air

[Graham H]

Jackie Chan makes similar tricks work all the time.

Most of the people on this forum live in kung fu movies so its not surprising. The rate at which the manure spreads is really mind boggling.

[Graham H]

This is what I think of Jackie Chan

8790

[GlennR]

Or you could be like Ip Chun and throw a punch first and them move into the attacking weapon! lmao

Ip Chun also has the added benefit of cutting his own arms off during combat :D:D

Yes, its another lineage called Wing Stump!

[Paddington]

Just to reply to Graham here and those joining him in all the p i s s taking. It was actually Graham that asked what the opening kick was used for in the knife form and he asked in a way that indicated that there was an answer and that he knew it. Some offered suggestions for the kick and asked Graham what he thought it was there for, Graham did not answer.

I would also add that it seems a bit of a contradiction for Graham and others to take a literal interpretation in terms of 'application', of the punch Ip Chun performs in the opening of the knife form he shows. For Graham and others quite a bit of word space has been generated on these boards arguing against a one-to-one mapping of movements from forms to applications, in preference of a more 'principle' or 'concept' based interpretations. IMO, that punch is just an opening of the form and serves the same purpose as you see it in the empty hand forms.

Once again, Graham, GlennR and even LFJ are unable to actually contribute substantive points on topics and themes being discussed by others, even when they are invited to take the floor to give their opinions. All they seem to manage is p i s s taking, derision and the demeaning of others. We all welcome your input and your opinions about the forms you practice, here the knife form, and your interpretations. It could be the case that you just don't know, which is fine, as most of us don't claim to know it all either.

[KPM]

This is actually a pretty ridiculous idea!

So you think that in a fight where weapons are drawn you would lift you leg up to bring your own knives into play? I'm glad I'm not your student. And you also think that if somebody is attacking you with a spear or pole that you would try and deflect it with a part of your body. Really KPM that is the most stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I feel sorry for you cheated students.

Well, here we have another member of the "a55hole and proud of it" group making every thread an argument, jumping to conclusions, and being as abrasive as possible. I was throwing out ideas that I have heard over the years. I don't teach that. I already stated that I thought it was irrelevant. If you want to talk about why you disagree with that statement, what the kick is for, and how it IS relevant in a polite fashion, then please do. No statement about the fate of my students is necessary.

[Graham H]

Just to reply to Graham here and those joining him in all the p i s s taking. It was actually Graham that asked what the opening kick was used for in the knife form and he asked in a way that indicated that there was an answer and that he knew it. Some offered suggestions for the kick and asked Graham what he thought it was there for, Graham did not answer.

I would also add that it seems a bit of a contradiction for Graham and others to take a literal interpretation in terms of 'application', of the punch Ip Chun performs in the opening of the knife form he shows. For Graham and others quite a bit of word space has been generated on these boards arguing against a one-to-one mapping of movements from forms to applications, in preference of a more 'principle' or 'concept' based interpretations. IMO, that punch is just an opening of the form and serves the same purpose as you see it in the empty hand forms.

Once again, Graham, GlennR and even LFJ are unable to actually contribute substantive points on topics and themes being discussed by others, even when they are invited to take the floor to give their opinions. All they seem to manage is p i s s taking, derision and the demeaning of others. We all welcome your input and your opinions about the forms you practice, here the knife form, and your interpretations. It could be the case that you just don't know, which is fine, as most of us don't claim to know it all either.

Oh ****! You only mentioned my name 7 times! :(

FWIW you are completely wrong! The empty hand forms (apart from BJ) and the knives conceptually are completely different!

Talking about knowing it all I think I do. Ving Tsun is a very easy and clear system to understand. All elements compliment each other. There is nothing I can't explain until you add the element of BS and internet forums. I would not feel comfortable or be able to teach if I had any grey areas.

Like I said before, usually the further one gets through the system the more erratic it becomes. This is proof that the system is not really understood in many lineages. People are just flailing around in the dark.

Why else would all these threads descend into chaos? We should all be on the same page but as soon as the BS rocks up then all goes to rubbish.

[KPM]

Just to reply to Graham here and those joining him in all the p i s s taking. It was actually Graham that asked what the opening kick was used for in the knife form and he asked in a way that indicated that there was an answer and that he knew it. Some offered suggestions for the kick and asked Graham what he thought it was there for, Graham did not answer.

I would also add that it seems a bit of a contradiction for Graham and others to take a literal interpretation in terms of 'application', of the punch Ip Chun performs in the opening of the knife form he shows. For Graham and others quite a bit of word space has been generated on these boards arguing against a one-to-one mapping of movements from forms to applications, in preference of a more 'principle' or 'concept' based interpretations. IMO, that punch is just an opening of the form and serves the same purpose as you see it in the empty hand forms.

Once again, Graham, GlennR and even LFJ are unable to actually contribute substantive points on topics and themes being discussed by others, even when they are invited to take the floor to give their opinions. All they seem to manage is p i s s taking, derision and the demeaning of others. We all welcome your input and your opinions about the forms you practice, here the knife form, and your interpretations. It could be the case that you just don't know, which is fine, as most of us don't claim to know it all either.


=1..................

[KPM]

Oh ****! You only mentioned my name 7 times! :(

FWIW you are completely wrong! The empty hand forms (apart from BJ) and the knives conceptually are completely different!

Talking about knowing it all I think I do. Ving Tsun is a very easy and clear system to understand. All elements compliment each other. There is nothing I can't explain until you add the element of BS and internet forums. I would not feel comfortable or be able to teach if I had any grey areas.

Like I said before, usually the further one gets through the system the more erratic it becomes. This is proof that the system is not really understood in many lineages. People are just flailing around in the dark.

Why else would all these threads descend into chaos? We should all be on the same page but as soon as the BS rocks up then all goes to rubbish.

Another whole post and you still didn't even answer your own question. :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

..................and I already offered you to ask me any question regarding the system to which your response was usual.........................jibberish.

[Paddington]

Oh ****! You only mentioned my name 7 times! :(

FWIW you are completely wrong! The empty hand forms (apart from BJ) and the knives conceptually are completely different!

Talking about knowing it all I think I do. Ving Tsun is a very easy and clear system to understand. All elements compliment each other. There is nothing I can't explain until you add the element of BS and internet forums. I would not feel comfortable or be able to teach if I had any grey areas.

Like I said before, usually the further one gets through the system the more erratic it becomes. This is proof that the system is not really understood in many lineages. People are just flailing around in the dark.

Why else would all these threads descend into chaos? We should all be on the same page but as soon as the BS rocks up then all goes to rubbish.

Graham they descend into chaos because of yours, and others, tone and choices to say the things you do and the way you say it. You also consistently fail to state your opinions and demonstrate that you know what you are talking about.

I am very sympathetic to PB's wing chun and I have engaged in lengthy email conversations with some of PB's students to understand that perspective. Indeed, I even wrote to PB to ask if I could visit him or his school in Germany to chi sau and to experience his arms first hand to see, for myself, just how good he is. I even said I was willing to pay for his time and that I was very impressed with the system as he teaches it and wanted to learn more. I did not get a reply and to be honest I did not expect to.

It is somewhat frustrating, then, to be met by your constant avoidance strategies when pressed for fuller explanations, even when people are respectful and want to know more. As I indicated, I am beginning to seriously doubt your level of understanding and I have no problem admitting that my understanding is not a full one, and that I still have a lot to learn.

EDIT: My asking you to give a general overview of the knife form as you practice it is not gibberish. I'll say it again, I welcome your general thoughts on the knife form as you practice it and if you want to start with the first few moves, as a way to focus your answer, please feel free to do so. That is straight forward request with very little ambiguity and saying that it is gibberish to the extent that you can't answer is BS and an example of your avoidance strategies.

[GlennR]

Another whole post and you still didn't even answer your own question. :rolleyes:


Once again, Graham, GlennR and even LFJ are unable to actually contribute substantive points on topics and themes being discussed by others, even when they are invited to take the floor to give their opinions. All they seem to manage is p i s s taking, derision and the demeaning of others.

Mate, all i said was that you and Paddington "waffle on a bit", if you think thats "demeaning" then you should...........

.............. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unkIVvjZc9Y..............

[GlennR]

Graham they descend into chaos because of yours, and others, tone and choices to say the things you do and the way you say it.

They descend into chaos due to your insistence that people converse in a certain "way".

If you dont get that, well, you know the video link

[Paddington]

Mate, all i said was that you and Paddington "waffle on a bit", if you think thats "demeaning" then you should...........

.............. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unkIVvjZc9Y..............

GlennR, you have a choice. You can contribute on topic substantive points or just make off hand remarks. I have enjoyed reading your posts when they have been focused and on topic and I welcome your input on the discussion here about the knife form. Let's move away from our mutual bashing and onto the topic at hand. Again, I welcome your thoughts on the knife form.

EDIT: By certain way I mean not constantly p i s s taking and criticizing others but rather contributing substantive points from your own perspective.

[GlennR]

GlennR, you have a choice. You can contribute on topic substantive points or just make off hand remarks. I have enjoyed reading your posts when they have been focused and on topic and I welcome your input on the discussion here about the knife form. Let's move away from our mutual bashing and onto the topic at hand. Again, I welcome your thoughts on the knife form.

Thats the thing P, im not having a bash, just a bit of a laugh.
Your choice if you want to bet all upset about it.

Knives? Ive only played a bit with them and im not qualified to comment....... but ill still have a laugh

[Paddington]

Thats the thing P, im not having a bash, just a bit of a laugh.
Your choice if you want to bet all upset about it.

Knives? Ive only played a bit with them and im not qualified to comment....... but ill still have a laugh

That's fine GlennR, I still welcome your thoughts despite your limited experience with the knives. What have been your initial impressions?

[GlennR]

That's fine GlennR, I still welcome your thoughts despite your limited experience with the knives. What have been your initial impressions?

Good question, having dinner and ill respond after

[Graham H]

I am beginning to seriously doubt your level of understanding :

Amazing........... :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Graham H]

Well, here we have another member of the "a55hole and proud of it" group making every thread an argument, jumping to conclusions, and being as abrasive as possible. I was throwing out ideas that I have heard over the years. I don't teach that. I already stated that I thought it was irrelevant. If you want to talk about why you disagree with that statement, what the kick is for, and how it IS relevant in a polite fashion, then please do. No statement about the fate of my students is necessary.

You seem to be involved in most arguments these days Ken so don't give me that BS!

[Paddington]

Amazing........... :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Graham, what are your thoughts about the first few movements of the knife form as you practice and know it?

In the knife form you practice, do you view different sections as engaging with different ranges or length of reach of a weapon? For example, which sections do you see as designed to overcome longer ranged weapons such as a pole and which sections do you view as designed to overcome a closer ranged weapon, such as a short sword?

[Graham H]

........and as usual nobody is asking any direct questions. They are merely trying to further their knowledge via internet trolling. I have no questions on Ving Tsun. My system is sound. No grey areas which is why it doesn't take me long to see through the BS.

I converse with Ip Man in my dreams :D:D:D:D:D:D

[LFJ]

=1..................

Equals one. lol


Mate, all i said was that you and Paddington "waffle on a bit", if you think thats "demeaning" then you should...........

.............. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unkIVvjZc9Y..............

And I just said Jackie Chan makes similar tricks work all the time. That's obviously proof in support of the kicking weapons away argument, or flipping knives up in the air with your feet so you can keep upright and fight.

[Graham H]

Graham, what are your thoughts about the first few movements of the knife form as you practice and know it?

In the knife form you practice, do you view different sections as engaging with different ranges or length of reach of a weapon? For example, which sections do you see as designed to overcome longer ranged weapons such as a pole and which sections do you view as designed to overcome a closer ranged weapon, such as a short sword?

Phew! At last!

The first few movements? Well it depends on certain situations and most answers were correct. Kind of. The kick is to create space (if required) so you can draw your weapons. There are a whole set of actions for development and tactical awareness dependent on engaging an opponent who has long and/or short weapons. Like the long pole the first actions are more for exercise than application.

In Ip Chuns form he is basically saying that you have enough time to punch the person away, draw the knives (whilst holding them in a very nice way) and move forward which is complete BS. He would be dead.

[Graham H]

Graham, what are your thoughts about the first few movements of the knife form as you practice and know it?

As I practice it and know it is how it is. There is no time for stupid ideas as your opponent may be armed. If he has a gun its game over but a stick or a blade then you have a potential plan as long as you also have weapons.

The VT weapons do not necessarily mean butterfly knives or an 8ft pole. They mean long or short range weapons. Its a conceptual approach to weapon fighting in general based on VT theory.

[GlennR]

That's fine GlennR, I still welcome your thoughts despite your limited experience with the knives. What have been your initial impressions?

Well, like the empty hand stuff, WC weapons are part of a peculiar system.

8 foot long pole or a couple of odd knives as weapons........ go figure
Not only un-obvious weapons, particularly the pole, but impractical.
When the hell are you going to have either handy?????

Personally, i think they are there to compliment the training of the empty hand system

[Paddington]

Others state that the knives were kept in the boot or about the lower leg, whilst others still will talk about being jumped and using your longest ranged body weapon to give you time to draw your own bladed weapon.

This is the reason for the kick that I was told by one of Ip Chun's senior students.


Phew! At last!

The first few movements? Well it depends on certain situations and most answers were correct. Kind of. The kick is to create space (if required) so you can draw your weapons. There are a whole set of actions for development and tactical awareness dependent on engaging an opponent who has long and/or short weapons. Like the long pole the first actions are more for exercise than application.

In Ip Chuns form he is basically saying that you have enough time to punch the person away, draw the knives (whilst holding them in a very nice way) and move forward which is complete BS. He would be dead.

On the first bit I place in bold we can see that we are in agreement and that it is the same as Ip Chun explains. On the second bit I place in bold, no, Ip Chun does not say this and it is more to do with the reasons I cite.

For the record KPM said the same about the kick;


HW I agree with you on both counts. One idea for the starting kick....you are surprised at close quarters and essentially "kick the opponent away" to make enough space to bring the knives into play. Another is that the knives are in a sheath on the lower leg and you are lifting up the leg to put the knives within reach rather than bending over to draw them. Another is that the kick is actually a deflection of a pole or spear thrust as you are bringing the knives into play from wherever you have them stashed.

But its just a form. Wing Chun forms are not a choreographed fight. So whether the form starts with a kick or a punch is irrelevant.

But of course rather than say of KPM's post, 'hey I think the bit in bold is more the case', you ignored it and said;


This is actually a pretty ridiculous idea!

So you think that in a fight where weapons are drawn you would lift you leg up to bring your own knives into play? I'm glad I'm not your student. And you also think that if somebody is attacking you with a spear or pole that you would try and deflect it with a part of your body. Really KPM that is the most stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I feel sorry for you cheated students.


........and as usual nobody is asking any direct questions. They are merely trying to further their knowledge via internet trolling. I have no questions on Ving Tsun. My system is sound. No grey areas which is why it doesn't take me long to see through the BS.

I converse with Ip Man in my dreams :D:D:D:D:D:D

Actually I did ask you a direct question when I gave you my thoughts about the kick and asked you to share your thoughts. Also, asking for your thoughts on the knife form more generally is a direct question, just an open one. Are you aware of the distinction between open and closed questions?

I am sorry to use quotes like this as it is commonly thought of as an aggressive and confrontational posting style. However, it does allow me to illustrate that you have a habit of not reading what people say and when you do, choosing to ignore the bits that are in agreement with your perspective so you can just take the p i s s , insult people and demean them. All of this BS and the disruption to this thread could have been avoided had you chosen to behave differently.

[Graham H]

Well, like the empty hand stuff, WC weapons are part of a peculiar system.

8 foot long pole or a couple of odd knives as weapons........ go figure
Not only un-obvious weapons, particularly the pole, but impractical.
When the hell are you going to have either handy?????

Personally, i think they are there to compliment the training of the empty hand system

Yes, when are we ever going to have poles and knives on us these days so the weapons are about strategies and tactics in general.

As a cross over to the hands the knives are different but the pole is quite the same. Chum Kiu and Pole both LSJC. The knives not. Like BJ the knives teach awareness of danger and tactical footwork. One attacks the central mass first the other attacks the limbs first (depending). Different thinking.

[Graham H]

This is the reason for the kick that I was told by one of Ip Chun's senior students.



On the first bit I place in bold we can see that we are in agreement and that it is the same as Ip Chun explains. On the second bit I place in bold, no, Ip Chun does not say this and it is more to do with the reasons I cite.

For the record KPM said the same about the kick;



But of course rather than say of KPM's post, 'hey I think the bit in bold is more the case', you ignored it and said;





Actually I did ask you a direct question when I gave you my thoughts about the kick and asked you to share your thoughts. Also, asking for your thoughts on the knife form more generally is a direct question, just an open one. Are you aware of the distinction between open and closed questions?

I am sorry to use quotes like this as it is commonly thought of as an aggressive and confrontational posting style. However, it does allow me to illustrate that you have a habit of not reading what people say and when you do, choosing to ignore the bits that are in agreement with your perspective so you can just take the p i s s , insult people and demean them. All of this BS and the disruption to this thread could have been avoided had you chosen to behave differently.

I think you are weird! :confused:

[Paddington]

Well, like the empty hand stuff, WC weapons are part of a peculiar system.

8 foot long pole or a couple of odd knives as weapons........ go figure
Not only un-obvious weapons, particularly the pole, but impractical.
When the hell are you going to have either handy?????

Personally, i think they are there to compliment the training of the empty hand system

Hi GlennR, thanks for taking the time to respond. I think you are right here, particularly with respects to wing chun in today's era. This is the type of thing Ip Chun teaches and how I have been instructed to practice the knife form in that lineage. Granted, that is not 100% the case and there are weapon on weapon themes but overwhelmingly most do practice it to compliment the empty hand system. If you want to I am more than happy via email to share a knife form as I know it and how it relates empty hand techniques. Perhaps email may be a better way to do this so feel free to PM if you want to know more from my perspective. I don't know it all but you might find useful the bits I do. Cheers.

[BPWT..]

However, it does allow me to illustrate that you have a habit of not reading what people say and when you do, choosing to ignore the bits that are in agreement with your perspective so you can just take the p i s s , insult people and demean them. All of this BS and the disruption to this thread could have been avoided had you chosen to behave differently.

This is Graham's modus operandi these days. Ever since the forum's collective jaw dropped at the Kevin Gledhill footage, Graham's been very quiet. Only raising his head to create a little BS and to state the blindingly obvious - like this little gem:


Like the long pole the first actions are more for exercise than application.

No sh!t, Einstein. :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

This is Graham's modus operandi these days. Ever since the forum's collective jaw dropped at the Kevin Gledhill footage, Graham's been very quiet. Only raising his head to create a little BS and to state the blindingly obvious - like this little gem:



No sh!t, Einstein. :rolleyes:

LOLAGE...................and guess what BPWT pops up :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

KG's thing was nothing to do with me. It's between him and Obassi and nothing to do with you either! The fact that you like to bring it up just proves the fact even more that are a bit of a tit!

[Paddington]

Yes, when are we ever going to have poles and knives on us these days so the weapons are about strategies and tactics in general.

As a cross over to the hands the knives are different but the pole is quite the same. Chum Kiu and Pole both LSJC. The knives not. Like BJ the knives teach awareness of danger and tactical footwork. One attacks the central mass first the other attacks the limbs first (depending). Different thinking.

Graham, when Hybridwarrior and I were conversing earlier on we talked about these themes and I talked about the knives as helping me learn how to attack better, as well as other things, inasmuch as tactical footwork etc. It is interesting to note that you are able to give your general thoughts when a perceived comrade of yours (sorry GlennR I don't mean to lump you together or insult you here) passes a comment but when others such as myself ask, you insult and engage in avoidance. Perhaps it is because you don't like the things I say, they way I say them, the type of wing chun I practice or even the way I look.........online. I think you have a lot of prejudice, that is you pre-judge, before reading the content of what people say.


I think you are weird! :confused:

Because you know you are in the wrong with respects to your behaviour and selective quoting to make others seem of a lesser knowledge and skill set to you, all you can do is insult and not engage with the point being made.

[Graham H]

FWIW I would have never engaged in "chi sau" with Obassi.

If I wanted to prove any points I would have fought him and if I came out second then no problem. I have no time for Wing Chun Ronins with security issues.

[Graham H]

Because you know you are in the wrong .

Hmmmm its true. lol

[Graham H]

lesser knowledge and skill set to you

Skill set? I'm not sure. Knowledge? Yes definitely.

[LFJ]

Perhaps it is because you don't like the things I say, they way I say them, the type of wing chun I practice or even the way I look.........online.

Tread lightly with your references. The new mods don't play that.

[BPWT..]

KG's thing was nothing to do with me.

Sure. Just a coincidence that all the PBVT guys kinda disappeared from here, right? LOL :D

But I love what you've done on this thread - say you have no grey areas, talk about others and their BS, take the p!ss... and then say of what others said, "most the answers were correct.":rolleyes:

Did you just return from a Lap Sau seminar and now you're all fired up and feel the need to spread the Word... again? :D

[BPWT..]

FWIW I would have never engaged in "chi sau" with Obassi. If I wanted to prove any points I would have fought him and if I came out second then no problem. I have no time for Wing Chun Ronins with security issues.

Great! I'm sure you can email him and work to set that fight up.

Never. Gonna. Happen.

[Paddington]

Tread lightly with your references. The new mods don't play that.

I clarify exactly what I said and illustrated with quotes and his actual posting behaviour to justify my charge that he pre-judges to the extent that he fails to see or read what people write. That is the definition of a prejudice btw which is not a racialised one as prejudice is a more general term and of which racism is but one type. Often when people have prejudices, the prejudice operate like a veil or filter that renders them unable to see things as they are. The only person that should be concerned about the mods stating that they are not playing around any more, is Graham himself. It is incredibly bad form to suggest that the onus is on me to modify my behaviour or incur moderation, such as a ban.

[Graham H]

Sure. Just a coincidence that all the PBVT guys kinda disappeared from here, right? LOL :D

But I love what you've done on this thread - say you have no grey areas, talk about others and their BS, take the p!ss... and then say of what others said, "most the answers were correct.":rolleyes:

Did you just return from a Lap Sau seminar and now you're all fired up and feel the need to spread the Word... again? :D

Boring.............................

It's GHVT by the way. No need to involve Bayer anymore. I'm not part of any associations. PB knows as well as me that the internet is full of idiots. I just like being one and I like fighting with muppets like you. xx

[Graham H]

Great! I'm sure you can email him and work to set that fight up.

Never. Gonna. Happen.

Why would I want to but you can stir the sh1t up if you like. You're very good at it but unfortunately you WC knowledge needs a little work

[LFJ]

It is incredibly bad form to suggest that the onus is on me to modify my behaviour or incur moderation, such as a ban.

Oh, shut up. You were obviously making a stupid reference to what Ali recently got banned for accusing someone of. Not amusing.

[Graham H]

I clarify exactly what I said and illustrated with quotes and his actual posting behaviour to justify my charge that he pre-judges to the extent that he fails to see or read what people write. That is the definition of a prejudice btw which is not a racialised one as prejudice is a more general term and of which racism is but one type. Often when people have prejudices, the prejudice operate like a veil or filter that renders them unable to see things as they are. The only person that should be concerned about the mods stating that they are not playing around any more, is Graham himself. It is incredibly bad form to suggest that the onus is on me to modify my behaviour or incur moderation, such as a ban.

Jesus man! WTF are you on about? This is the problem with WC these days. The system has been plagued by d1ckheads.

It's not all bad though. The occasional witty comment by Glenda or some rubbish by the nutty professor (Joy) makes it all worth while.

[Graham H]

Oh, shut up. .

...............my thoughts exactly!

[BPWT..]

It's GHVT by the way. No need to involve Bayer anymore. I'm not part of any associations. PB knows as well as me that the internet is full of idiots. I just like being one and I like fighting with muppets like you. xx

So he cut you loose?

Clever man.

[BPWT..]

Why would I want to but you can stir the sh1t up if you like.

Paper Tiger. Talk of how you'd have fought the guy to prove a point, when of course you'd never do so - maybe just dream about it.

[Paddington]

Jesus man! WTF are you on about? This is the problem with WC these days. The system has been plagued by d1ckheads.

It's not all bad though. The occasional witty comment by Glenda or some rubbish by the nutty professor (Joy) makes it all worth while.

The problem is people like yourself and the others on this forum that engage in disruptive posting behaviour, rather than attempting to further the conversation along politely via constructive comments. You may be surprised to learn that there is a majority of users of this forum, most who merely just lurk, that feel the same way too. In the past I have received many PMs and emails from people voicing their complaints at people like you and offering support to me when I have challenged your behavior. If I were managing these forums I would be issuing temporary bans in an attempt to encourage you and these others, to self moderate their own posting behaviour so as not to be so disruptive and push people away from contributing to these forums.

It is incredibly ironic that you use this term d1ckhead, Graham, but one I imagine that often pops into your head every time you look in the mirror.

[LFJ]

If I were managing these forums

But you're not, so harden the fnck up!

[Paddington]

But you're not, so harden the fnck up!

I wait in anticipation to witness exactly what SR meant by saying 'things are soon to change around here'.

[Paddington]

Oh, shut up. You were obviously making a stupid reference to what Ali recently got banned for accusing someone of. Not amusing.

I agree, it is not amusing and is indeed very, very sad. Perhaps you should take it up with Graham.

[Graham H]

Paper Tiger. Talk of how you'd have fought the guy to prove a point, when of course you'd never do so - maybe just dream about it.

Schoolyard wimp..............

[BPWT..]

It's GHVT by the way. No need to involve Bayer anymore. I'm not part of any associations.

Sorry, I'm still cracking up over this.

No more Bayer. GHVT... :D:D:D:D

[Graham H]

Sorry, I'm still cracking up over this.

No more Bayer. GHVT... :D:D:D:D

Yep. Free to make my own decisions and directions and my VT is an expression of my own experiences and work. The fact that you still jump on everything I post is a bit boring now. You got ***** slapped over your clown leader and you won't let anything lay now. No problem. Crack on. Your posts are amusing.

[BPWT..]

Yep. Free to make my own decisions and directions and my VT is an expression of my own experiences and work. The fact that you still jump on everything I post is a bit boring now. You got ***** slapped over your clown leader and you won't let anything lay now. No problem. Crack on. Your posts are amusing.

You left PB, or he asked you to go? :D:D

I jump on your posts because they are often little more than BS, aimed simply at insulting others. I don't think I've ever responded in a negative way to something you wrote that wasn't all about you stroking your ego and insulting others.

Regarding LT, I've yet to hear anything from you that can't be shot down as being BS logic, outright lies, or nothing more than your own opinion (which is based on, well, pretty much nothing that makes any actual sense).

I wait with baited breath to hear what decisions and directions you are going to take with.... GHVT :eek: :eek::eek:

[BPWT..]

Ps. Just a suggestion: you could always go with... "Golden Graham's Wing Chun - bringing authentic Kung Fu from Hong Kong, via Germany, to the mean streets of Gloucestershire"... I can't wait to see the T-Shirts.

[Vajramusti]

Another thread headed for toilet

[Paddington]

Another thread headed for toilet

Unfortunately so.

[LFJ]

Another thread headed for toilet

What is that, a toilet brush for your avatar? Get back to work with it.

[Vajramusti]

What is that, a toilet brush for your avatar? Get back to work with it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny? Not!
That is northeastern tribal tomahawk.

[LFJ]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny? Not!
That is northeastern tribal tomahawk.

Which tribe?

[JPinAZ]

Yes, when are we ever going to have poles and knives on us these days so the weapons are about strategies and tactics in general.

As a cross over to the hands the knives are different but the pole is quite the same. Chum Kiu and Pole both LSJC. The knives not. Like BJ the knives teach awareness of danger and tactical footwork. One attacks the central mass first the other attacks the limbs first (depending). Different thinking.

In my lineage, the bridging concepts of the knives have many direct connections with our Kiu Sau hand bridging methods & concepts.


Another thread headed for toilet

Too late, it's already in it and has been swirling down the drain for about 4 pages now.

[KPM]

Phew! At last!

The first few movements? Well it depends on certain situations and most answers were correct. Kind of. The kick is to create space (if required) so you can draw your weapons. .

I do believe I said that already. Yet you chose not to acknowledge it at all. Instead you made some inane comment about my poor students. :rolleyes: You're really something Graham!

[KPM]

They descend into chaos due to your insistence that people converse in a certain "way".

If you dont get that, well, you know the video link

Expecting people to converse in a respectful manner causes threads to descend into Chaos? What world do you live in? Do you act this way at work?

[KPM]

You seem to be involved in most arguments these days Ken so don't give me that BS!

My name isn't "Ken" and I get involved when I actually attempt to carry on some kind of productive conversation with people like you. Look how far this thread has come and how it has gone down the tubes when you could have simply provided us with your opinion on why there is a kick in the knife form right from the start. Instead you have to play this BS game and taunt people for responses.

[GlennR]

Expecting people to converse in a respectful manner causes threads to descend into Chaos? What world do you live in? Do you act this way at work?

Oh get over yourself, his tone is condescending and he has been told that.
If he doesn't want to modify it then the response is his doing

[Graham H]

You're really something Graham!

For once I agree with you!

[Graham H]

My name isn't "Ken" .


Aren't you Master Ken from AMERI-DO-TE then?

[Graham H]

.............oh! you are Dr Spock from Vulcan Wing Chun?? :confused::D:D

[Graham H]

Too late, it's already in it and has been swirling down the drain for about 4 pages now.

Like all the other threads............................

If you can't beat them join them and everybody on this forum is as bad as the next.

[KPM]

Oh get over yourself, his tone is condescending and he has been told that.
If he doesn't want to modify it then the response is his doing

No, you get over yourself Glenn. Behaving badly and then blaming others when they call you on it is pretty juvenile. Its really a "catch 22" here. We have people that just can't seem to carry on a civil conversation without turning it into an argument or insulting other people. If someone tries to counter their BS, then they get drawn into the argument and end up being part of the problem. If people point out their bad behavior and try to get things to change a little they are told to "get over themselves" or "harden the fxck up." If someone tries to stay above the fray, keep things as civil as possible and encourage others to do the same they are told they have a "condescending tone." Its becoming pretty apparent that nothing is going to change here until a moderator comes in with an iron fist and shakes things up.

[KPM]

Like all the other threads............................

If you can't beat them join them and everybody on this forum is as bad as the next.

Now its my turn to LOL! You started the whole process and have been the main instigater Graham, and you can't even see that!

[BPWT..]

You started the whole process and have been the main instigater Graham, and you can't even see that!

Of course he can see it, KPM. It was his intention.

[Graham H]

Graham, and you can't even see that!

Oh yes I can....................

8803

[GlennR]

No, you get over yourself Glenn. Behaving badly and then blaming others when they call you on it is pretty juvenile. Its really a "catch 22" here. We have people that just can't seem to carry on a civil conversation without turning it into an argument or insulting other people. If someone tries to counter their BS, then they get drawn into the argument and end up being part of the problem. If people point out their bad behavior and try to get things to change a little they are told to "get over themselves" or "harden the fxck up." If someone tries to stay above the fray, keep things as civil as possible and encourage others to do the same they are told they have a "condescending tone." Its becoming pretty apparent that nothing is going to change here until a moderator comes in with an iron fist and shakes things up.

Its all about opinion.

I dont think iv done anything wrong, just tried to lighten up you and Pads uber-serious-pseudo-intellectual approach

Your opinion seems to be that ive "behaved badly", "blamed others" and "insulted people".... i see it as a light hearted poke at the pair of you
So fine, call the moderators in to unleash their unbridled fury..... if i cant have a bit of fun on here im happy to leave

[Graham H]

No, you get over yourself Glenn. Behaving badly and then blaming others when they call you on it is pretty juvenile. Its really a "catch 22" here. We have people that just can't seem to carry on a civil conversation without turning it into an argument or insulting other people. If someone tries to counter their BS, then they get drawn into the argument and end up being part of the problem. If people point out their bad behavior and try to get things to change a little they are told to "get over themselves" or "harden the fxck up." If someone tries to stay above the fray, keep things as civil as possible and encourage others to do the same they are told they have a "condescending tone." Its becoming pretty apparent that nothing is going to change here until a moderator comes in with an iron fist and shakes things up.

Like I said, you are just as bad and I agree with Glenda. You need to get over yourself! :p

[GlennR]

Oh yes I can....................

8803

Bwahahhahahah

[LFJ]

There is something wrong with people who are so clingy on a message board that they can't remain unaffected by other people's posting styles.

I read what people say, post what I want, and move on. Getting your panties in a bunch over someone disrespecting your opinion on the internet is stupid.

8804

[BPWT..]

You know how it is, sometimes the trolls can't be ignored... :D

[Rik-M]

You know how it is, sometimes the trolls can't be ignored... :D

Wow, you guys get so wound up by Graham that you can't even take a step back to contemplate that he might be talking sense. There seems to be no debate over the information that he presents, just no graham said it so we don't like it!
Small-mindedness will forever hold people back, with an open mind you stand some chance to learn.

[BPWT..]

There seems to be no debate over the information that he presents, just no graham said it so we don't like it!

His main assertion is that others have things wrong and that the method he has is correct. So I wouldn't say there's no debate over his 'information'. In this very thread he implies people are wrong, ignores what they actually said, and then says, well, that most answers others gave "were correct."

He's all over the place, and rarely talks "sense." Often he just talks BS and comes here with the intention of insulting others. Now that he's seemingly left PBVT to create... Graham H Ving Tsun.... God only knows what rubbish he'll come up with next.

[Paddington]

Its all about opinion.

I dont think iv done anything wrong, just tried to lighten up you and Pads uber-serious-pseudo-intellectual approach

Your opinion seems to be that ive "behaved badly", "blamed others" and "insulted people".... i see it as a light hearted poke at the pair of you
So fine, call the moderators in to unleash their unbridled fury..... if i cant have a bit of fun on here im happy to leave

GlennR, you are not the worst offender and I really enjoy reading your posts that contain substantive points. I guess from my perspective I would like to see some semblance of forum etiquette or 'online etiquette' adhered to and it has nothing to do with wing chun but rather how online communication works and how miscommunication, flames and conflict online can be avoided.

I welcome humor but that is not what we are seeing on these forums. What we see are outright attacks on other forum users and behaviour that disrupts the conversation of others and shuts it down. Take some of the examples in this thread where Graham contradicts himself and ignores where people agree with him just to antogonise and disrupt the conversation. He even admits it and revels in it and it is not the simple case of trying to lightly poke people for humors sake.