Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45

Thread: "Mastering Wing Chun" series review

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662

    "Mastering Wing Chun" series review

    Hi Guys!

    I finally got around to putting up a review of the "Mastering Wing Chun" series on my website. No offense intended to Master Kwok. I just tell it like I see it.

    Check it out here:

    http://riograndewingchun.com/gpage.html

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rio Grande Valley, Texas
    Posts
    132
    Well as Master Kwok's grandstudent and Sifu Tony Massengills student (Author and co-author respectively), I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with the review only because I think the reviewer had an expectation of the videos that it was not intended by the authors to give. The purpose was to standardize what was Ip Man's Wing Chun Method, particularly the forms. Even the "slouch" was something that Ip Man himself did and taught. There are numerous photos of the Great Grandmaster is such a "slouch" position. The videos were not meant to be exhaustive (can you imagine the size of the DVD library it would take to explore that!!! Holy SCHNIKEE's)

    As per the many different versions of Ip Man's methods...you have to remember that only 4 people en toto completed the system under him, including his own son, Ip Ching. Many MANY MANY people - even the early students of foshan trained with him only for a while but did not finish. They say "well he taught me this" but Ip Chun has gone on record saying that his father did not teach different things to different people. According to Ip Chun, his oldest son, that would have made his father dishonest. According to his sons, Ip Man would teach a person the correct method...if they veered into error, he would correct them. If they persisted a third time, Ip Man would allow them to continue into error. He was a very stern teacher and somewhat of a perfectionist it seems (This is from Ip Chun's book "Wing Chun" with Danny Connor). From what I have been told, many of the "early" students didnt' finish the system. That is why their Chum Kiu's and Biu Jees and Mook Yan Jong forms, and the pole and especially the knives look COMPLETELY different!!! Ip Ching has told the history of Wing Chun before and related this exact story. Ip Ching lived and trained with his father for 10 straight years recieving intimate knowledge of his Father's own kung fu. Ip Ching lived with Ip Man night and day and according to Ip Ching "training till 3 in the morning" (1999 VTAA World Conference, after Biu Jee demonstration). The truth is out there, but there are many people who are using Ip Man's name to give credibility to things that Ip Man never taught!! There are people with kicks in their Siu Lim Tao form for crying out loud saying that that is what they learned from Ip Man "training with him night and day for 9 months before leaving to America"....come on!!!

    The purpose of the videos was to standardize the forms that Ip Man taught. Those were the order of movements that he taught. That was even the purpose of attempting to get all of the forms on 8mm just before Ip Man passed away. At that time, people were already starting to branch away and say they learned from Ip Man. Funny how people's Siu Lim Tao or Chum Kiu doesn't look like Ip Man's? Could it be that even Ip Man isn't doing Ip Man Wing Chun?

    As for the Chi sao explanations, there is a further video series on chi sao that was just filmed and will be released later this year as well as a two DVD (I believe its two) that will be on the Mook Yan Jong (according to Ip Man, Ip Ching has some slight differences that he introduced as well in the biu jee form which Master Kwok acknowledges in the Biu Gee DVD).

    Master Kwok will be in TExas in October of this coming year for a seminar (2 days maybe!!), hopefully with Master Massengill as well. He can tell you himself that he has trained with some of the early students with the intentions to track down Ip Man's wing chun. That is his personal quest; to find the true Ip Man System. He's found that in BOTH of Ip Man's sons, Grandmasters Ip Chun and Ip Ching.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Moses Flores
    Texas Representative
    Traditional Ip Man Wing Chun Assocation, Samuel Kwok Wing Chun Martial Arts Assocation

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    Hi Guys!

    I finally got around to putting up a review of the "Mastering Wing Chun" series on my website. No offense intended to Master Kwok. I just tell it like I see it.

    Check it out here:

    http://riograndewingchun.com/gpage.html
    I have quite a few dvd''s series from various MA and I must say that, in terms of quality and instructional value, the vast majority of TCMA ones are far inferior to the other systems.
    The exception being Wing Lam's stuff.
    I don't know if it is on purpose or simple because they are more demos clips than instructionlas or maybe because they are "cheaper production value".
    Whatever the reason I think that anyone deciding to make a video should remember one simple thing:
    This video is what you and your MA will be judged on by many AND it may will be your "legacy".
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Hi Moses!

    Thanks for your feedback. As I said, no offense intended to Samuel Kwok or Tony Massengill. Maybe I did have the wrong expectations. But I stand by my assessment that the videos could have been done in a way to "spice them up" and make them more interesting. Alternate screen shot angles would have helped. Captioning for the terminology used would have helped. Simply organizing the material presented in a better way would have helped.

    I also stand by my impression that Ip Man likely taught things a little differently at different stages of his career or to different people. Ip Man had a long teaching career. It just stands to reason that he adjusted and modified some things over the years. After all, Wong Shun Leung and Leung Sheung are considered by most to be two of Ip Man's top students. Yet their Wing Chun is somewhat different. A part of this may be their own personal interpretation and expression, but a part may also be how they were taught.

    As far as the "Wing Chun slouch"....yes I have noted that pictures of Ip Man in his final years show him prominently in this posture. That doesn't change the fact that is it not the best biomechanics. You can read why I think this way on my website. Is it a Wing Chun "sin" to suggest that Ip Man himself could have done things better?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rio Grande Valley, Texas
    Posts
    132
    Hi Keith,

    I certainly wouldn't say that it is a sin to say that Ip Man could have done things a little differently. After all, his son Ip Ching did change some the performance of some of the techniques in the forms for added power (eg. the Biu Punch as demonstrated in the 1999 VTAA world conference, as well as adding more Yiu Ma) as Ip Ching was taller (5'10" compared to Ip Man's 5'4" stature)and the uppercut punch did not suit him. According to him, he changed that with the approval of his father...I do know that Ip Man did remove the metaphysical language in wing chun including the 5 elements as he felt that it only confused the learning process (IP Ching has this documented in an article about Ip Man on the VTAA website). Ip Chun relates the same story in his book "Wing Chun". Also in that book, Danny Connor was able to interview some of the early Fosham students and their impression of the Hong Kong students saying that while they do not use the same language to describe the techniques, they still use the same techniques.

    Its too bad that more of Ip Man's method was not documented before he passed away, but we at least have his Siu Lim Tao form and his Chum Kiu form and Mook Yan Jong (though the video most people see seems a bit disjointed at times). It would have been great to see his biu jee form (though the students that completed under him seem to be pretty uniform on that with the exception of the form order and the biu punch for Ip Ching), and his pole form and Baat Cham Do. Again, I would also have to point out that only 4 people completed all the way to the knives with him. BUT, he did pass on his knives to Ip Ching as well as some kung fu manuals and the 8mm film was given to Ip Ching's family. Master Kwok now has Ip Man's knives as well as other priceless wing chun material from Ip Man that were gifts from his teacher, Ip Ching (as seen in the Photo album section on the Mastering Wing Chun book).

    I'll take a look at the article on the slouch sometime. God bless

    Moses

  6. #6

    Production Quality

    Hi Guys,

    I must agree with Keith on the production quality in some ways. I myself was a bit disappointed when I saw them. But Master Kwok had nothing to do with the production or layout. The editing was done by the producers of the DVD series, Empire Media.

    As for the content. There are two more DVDs in production, one on Chi Sao and the other on the Jong. Please don't expect Slow Motion, Special Effects, Explosions, Car Chases or any thing like that. From my understanding, George Lucas still doesn't work for Empire Media. So if you have an interest in these DVDs, please purchase them for the Wing chun and not for the apparently expected dazzling video effects.

    Master Kwok teaches the system as it has been passed to him through Ip Chun, Ip Ching and hours of training and research with other first generation students of Ip Man, including Wong Shun Leung.

    I can personally attest to his mastery of the system, and have seen him cross hands with literally hundreds of people in Hong Kong and Foshan. His Wing Chun is first rate.

    As for "The background of Ip Chun and Ip Ching" the questions of their depth of training is usually brought up by people who are trying to inflate their own prowess. I think it defies common sense to suggest that Ip Man wouldn't teach his sons. Ip Ching shared a home with his father for almost 10 years. He was present and used as a training partner during many of Ip Man's private sessions with other students. But, everyone needs to make up their own mind as to who to believe and follow in their search for Wing Chun.

    As for me, I wish everyone success in their training, and hope that we can in some way help to at least clarify our way of doing the system.

    God Bless

    -Tony Massengill

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    295
    RGV:

    Do you not see the irony in some of your statements? You say that Sifu Kwok's purpose in creating these videos was to standardize the forms to be exactly the way that Yip Man did them. Yet, you also say that Ip Ching changed his Biu Jee uppercut to a punch and added more waist power-- all with his father's approval because he was taller. So will you teach your taller students the straight punch and shorter students the uppercut? Which one becomes "the standard"?

    Further, Yip Man made changes to his own forms-- the early students were taught jum sao after tan sao in section 3 part 2 of Siu Lum Tao. After Wong's fight, some people changed it to Gang Sao with Yip Man's permission. Other students wondered if that tan sao should come out with the palm down or with the palm up -- Yip man said it didn't matter. These are both well-known stories.

    So all these people who learned differently will stick to what they were taught. Does that make them wrong?

    When Ip Chun may say that his father did not teach anyone differently-- but he was not even in Hong Kong for the first 12 years. And, all those senior students say that Yip Man emphasized different aspects based on body type and character. Doesn't that correspond with him approving of his son's change of the Biu Jee form based on his size?

    My personal opinion is that a lot of practitioners and teachers who do forms and applications about 90% the same. That 10% difference can become dogmatic lines of division; but it also has the potential to be a diversity that enriches our own understanding, interpretation and application of Wing Chun.
    JK-
    "Sex on TV doesn't hurt unless you fall off."

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by Sifu MASS View Post
    Hi Guys,
    As for "The background of Ip Chun and Ip Ching" the questions of their depth of training is usually brought up by people who are trying to inflate their own prowess. I think it defies common sense to suggest that Ip Man wouldn't teach his sons. Ip Ching shared a home with his father for almost 10 years. He was present and used as a training partner during many of Ip Man's private sessions with other students. But, everyone needs to make up their own mind as to who to believe and follow in their search for Wing Chun.
    I would hazard to guess that a lot of the negativity toward the Ip brothers comes not from anything they have said or done; but is based on the actions of some of their students who continually promoted themselves up as the ONLY lineage teaching AUTHENTIC Ip Man Wing Chun. While the most blatant of these has passed on, the negativity he planted (and which has torn his own organization apart) did not sit well with a lot of Yip Man's students who did not realize that these issues stemmed from a student and not the brothers themselves.

    They were probably thinking, "the brothers were not even here when we were learning, who are they to say what we know or don't know?" And that's how the stories start. It should be a valuable lesson in how we should not promote our art.
    JK-
    "Sex on TV doesn't hurt unless you fall off."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Rio Rancho New Mexico
    Posts
    671
    The slouch - Using pictures of Yip Man to justify the slouch in and of itself doesn't make it correct. However the question is the position during contact not while at rest.

  10. #10

    Standard and Changes

    Hi Guys,

    The question of more than one method of performing Ip Man Wing Chun is a good one. Even Ip Ching has made some modifications to the way he teaches Wing Chun. But the qualifier here is, he advises the student that his father taught "This way" and this method I am showing you is a modification I made due to, and then he states his reasons. He doesn't attribute "His" changes to some secret method his father taught him, but lets the student know that the change is his. He also teaches what his father taught in addition to his modification.

    As to a standard. My school is near several military bases. So I often get students who have trained under other instructors. In several instances, and one that really stands out, I had a young man who had trained under a prominent Chinese instructor who had been a student of Ip Man. This young man called my school and inquired as to the lineage of our school. Needless to say, he was very happy to find a "Ip Man Wing Chun" school in which he could continue his training.

    He stated that he had been training for 2 1/2 years and was finished with Chum Kiu and just beginning the training of Biu Gee. So he was excited to find a school that could pick up his training where he had left off.

    When he came in and demonstrated his forms, they were no where near the forms as Ip Man had performed them on the 8MM film he did for his sons, which was the standard we use in the school. In this young mans Siu Lim Tao, he did the entire form with Dynamic Tension and the order and movements were not as I had been taught. His Bong Sao was more like a Karate High Block, There were movements which resembled parts of Biu Gee, mixed with some "Shaolin Long Fist" looking movements. Mid-way through the form he even stopped and did Stance Shifting.
    Unfortunately his Chum Kiu followed the same pattern for not matching what we taught.

    When I explained that what we taught was much different, he became upset and angry. When I explained that his forms were not the way Ip Man demonstrated he began to argue and stated "My teacher was a Chinese Master who trained directly with Ip Man. Who the hell are you, a white man, to say my forms are not in line with Ip Man." I asked the gentleman if he had ever seen Ip Man do the forms. He stated that he had not. So I showed him my copy of the footage. He was heartbroken and upset.

    Minor changes are to be expected, but if one is doing what they are calling "Ip Man Wing Chun" it should have some resemblance to what Ip Man left behind on film. It was important enough to Ip Man to get out of what was essentially his death bed and put the forms on film. I believe he had a good reason for doing this.

    -Tony

  11. #11
    in the 8mm films of yip man doing his forms, it looked like he was "leaning back".

    has anyone investigated why he did that? to say that he did it that way 'because' he was old and tired is not entirely correct in my opinion

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rio Grande Valley, Texas
    Posts
    132
    I'm definitely going to agree with that assessment. Being that we cannot ask him personally, it would be an assumption on one's part to say "laziness" or "old age". It seems that Ip Man certainly taught the "slouch" as it straightens out the lower spine in alignment being that the sacrum(?) tend to protrude out naturally....

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    I'm definitely going to agree with that assessment. Being that we cannot ask him personally, it would be an assumption on one's part to say "laziness" or "old age".

    ---True statement. That may very well be an inaccurate assumption on my part. But we don't see the "slouch" in many of Yip Man's top students from his early years.

    It seems that Ip Man certainly taught the "slouch" as it straightens out the lower spine in alignment being that the sacrum(?) tend to protrude out naturally....

    ---That is an inaccurate statement. The "slouch" flattens out the lower back at the expense of increasing the curve in the mid-back. It throws off the alignment of the spinal column. The sacrum does not protrude if your posture is good.

  14. #14
    tan sao has nothing to do with the hand , thats why YM says it doesn't matter
    slouching is a by-product of keeping what in ..? elbows ..why ?

    Yip Ching & Yip Chun are different in chi-sao as well...Yip Ching being more 'standard' Yip Chun being more a perimeter jump in jump out kind of thing ...people forget and make mistakes ...we [ you and me ] suffer for the excuses they make.

    It doesn't matter what your seeing on the surface of guys form work, if you understand whats being developed by the SYSTEM.

    I can have my arms down up sideways ...as long as I know why before hand.
    The height of the elbow is very critical in the early stages of training SLT ...but after the idea is learned you aren't a slave to it any more , you become a freefighter like a boxer , thai boxer, etc...simpl vying for your positions etc.. relative to theirs. No pre-set move, fighting arms that suddenly stop and freeze in the air while you do a few 'moves' ; )

    Tan & jum are trained earlier in SLT than the later sections ..WHY ? there lies a simple truth if you don't know.

    The main partnership of attacking along our line is as the tan elbow spreads off the line laterally while the same arm strikes directly forwards [ ballistic ging shock force in the elbow leaving the line , not a flying elbow out wedge] the forc e it meets as it leaves such an acute angle 'cuts ' away force as it strikes in, creating a poweful [ging again ; ) ] displacing lateral force in the direction of that arm's elbow either leaving the line [slt training is to keep elbow on] or staying on the line [ slt jum sao] endurance to KEEP THE SIMPLE ABILITY in SLT...ie right arm displacement right of our centerline, jum sao displacement inside the line laterally as it strikes forwards using the elbow in as the 'holding' line to our centers, tan or jum follow each other, lead or follow only depends what side you are controlling as you STRIKE IN ATTACKING in rotation, the rest of SLT is to hep if either is interrupted .The reason we do both tan & jum [jum aka side palm, sidepalm makes the elbow do what ? make it vertical then turn it horizontal and watch your elbow ; ) ] on the dummy is so we can touch with either one equally ..which one leads depends on the strike we deliver at that point in time along the flank...to test the facing , not as a two extended arm attack, that would contravene the primary attack idea.

    the chi-sao forms etc...simply address the modulation of important sequences ..balance facing the idea , recovery of the idea ...weapons that give the idea is tactical ideas ...get it ? the rest is to help develop/nurture and help if intercepted.

    redundancy in chi-sao is rampant when the process is understood .

    simple genius I'm the one who screws it up so I keep training for perfection of a simple idea.


    time spent training is no guarantee of understanding. The 'legacy' being left might not be a good one.

    to make the whole arm thinking work one needs to move it around using chum kil ...to make the movment work you need the knives..

    something MANY students never learned from Yip Man ...the tactical ideas stem from the knife...not standing like SLT in a basic stance, ready to be chopped up like iceberg lettuce for a salad.

    2 weapons either capable of delivering arcing blows to you from either side ? what are your tactics ?
    these carry over to the hands , for the same higher percentage % of survival...dont be in the center of someones charge firing your machine gun from left to right , righ to left. Even gunners know to put themselves on a side so the charging soldiers form a dominoe effect before them. Fighting one isolated 'dominoe' and so on the whole line of dominoes never being able to face you as one force, just a weak single piece unable to correct itself quick enough.


    Ballistic displacement force while holding the line to target striking is from the pole...many dont do either, so how can they convey the fighting idea beyond a centerline strike & now lets do chi-sao and have sticky fun ?
    Last edited by k gledhill; 04-30-2008 at 06:43 AM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    2,662
    Quote Originally Posted by k gledhill View Post
    tan sao has nothing to do with the hand , thats why YM says it doesn't matter
    slouching is a by-product of keeping what in ..? elbows ..why ?

    Good points make in your post Kevin. But if it had something to do with the "slouch", then I didn't follow what you were getting at.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •