What do you teach somone during thier first Wing Chun Class?

[Sihing73]

Hello,

I still have my teaching syllabus from WT and use it as a good reference.

First off I would teach the stance and explain the principles behind it, also stressing this is not a fighting stance.

I would teach how to form a fist and throw a single punch. I would show one or two basics techniques, usually Pak Sau and Gaun Sau and have them practice those in the air and then with a partner, one punching one "blocking".

Then at the end of the class I would have them try to combine the block and strike together. Only for about 10 to 15 minutes and then end class.

This would be for a formalized class at a school. Training in my backyard may be a bit different.

[Wu Wei Wu]

1st lesson with Leung, Kwok-Keung sifu, in Opera Wing Chun was;
Part of 1st form
Kung Fu based stretching
Seung Huen Sau Chi Sau (Double Circling Hand Sticking)

1st lesson with Jesse Glover, my Non-Classical Gung Fu instructor was;
Straight Punching on pads
Big Punch on pads
Back Fist on pads
Non-classical Sticking Hand
Calisthenics

If I taught a new student it would be;
Tabata conditioning for fighting *bag work, pad work, sprints, skipping
Straight punching on pads
Sparring *starting light
Chi Sao
*if any time, part of 1st form

Suki Gosal

[Hendrik]

I would teach her to learn how to open and close a heavy swing door.


Wing Chun is just that. open and close a heavy swing door practice for next few decades.

[EternalSpring]

For the sake of discussion, how do you guys feel about teaching any form of chi sao on the first lesson (i noticed it was mentioned in this thread)? Personally it's something I never thought of doing because I feel that the Ving Tsun I have been taught requires that at least the basics of Siu Nim tao are known decently well. But then again, there are are many ways to train Ving Tsun. For those of you who say that you'd teach some form of chi sao on the first lesson, what exactly would you teach? The first sensitivity drills I would teach a student before any other sensitivity training would involve sensitivity in san sao type techniques such as pak sao-pak da and lop sao.

[GlennR]

For the sake of discussion, how do you guys feel about teaching any form of chi sao on the first lesson (i noticed it was mentioned in this thread)? Personally it's something I never thought of doing because I feel that the Ving Tsun I have been taught requires that at least the basics of Siu Nim tao are known decently well. But then again, there are are many ways to train Ving Tsun. For those of you who say that you'd teach some form of chi sao on the first lesson, what exactly would you teach? The first sensitivity drills I would teach a student before any other sensitivity training would involve sensitivity in san sao type techniques such as pak sao-pak da and lop sao.

Id leave Chi sao out for a long time

[EternalSpring]

Id leave Chi sao out for a long time

Same. I'm guessing you'd aim for having students develop their technique first before moving into sensitivity? I know some people have a different approach (which is cool as well). For example, a friend who trains JKD showed me how they start chi sao but it was just a really simplified form of sensitivity where if someone pushes on your bridge/forearm you practice moving with the force and so on, kinda like push hands in tai chi.

[GlennR]

Same. I'm guessing you'd aim for having students develop their technique first before moving into sensitivity? I know some people have a different approach (which is cool as well). For example, a friend who trains JKD showed me how they start chi sao but it was just a really simplified form of sensitivity where if someone pushes on your bridge/forearm you practice moving with the force and so on, kinda like push hands in tai chi.

Personally, i just dont see the need for chi-sauo at an early stage.
Im thinking just being able to kick and punch solidly, while maintaining balance, is much more useful skill set.
Id leave chi-sao out for at least 12 months

[EternalSpring]

Personally, i just dont see the need for chi-sauo at an early stage.
Im thinking just being able to kick and punch solidly, while maintaining balance, is much more useful skill set.
Id leave chi-sao out for at least 12 months

Very true, especially since there's no way that i can think of to get around not having those skills.

[wingchunIan]

For what it's worth in my opinion most students will struggle to get beyond YGKYM, and basic punch and centreline theory in a first lesson. Introducing even basic turning is way too much for most new students and is normally the limit of what I introduce in lesson one. New students can obviously observe the rest of the class to see other things being taught and trained and are encouraged to ask questions but I always limit their physical training to the above in the first lesson .

[Graham H]

For what it's worth in my opinion most students will struggle to get beyond YGKYM, and basic punch and centreline theory in a first lesson. Introducing even basic turning is way too much for most new students and is normally the limit of what I introduce in lesson one. New students can obviously observe the rest of the class to see other things being taught and trained and are encouraged to ask questions but I always limit their physical training to the above in the first lesson .

Good thinking!!

I don't teach any turning until Chum Kiu. SLT is for developing the correct basic postions and behaviour of the left and right arms whilst maintaining the correct leg positions for supporting the punch later on. YGKYM is only a training satnce and is a precursor to pivoting and stepping. SLT and then Dahn Chi Sau must run ok before any turning, stepping and punching exercises commence. The introduction of the wall bag is important but not until after SLT and DC. The elbow behaviour for the Ving Tsun straight punch is the most important idea.

In my lineage CK is taught considerably sooner than most other lineages because without CK, SLT will make no sense. SLT is for training NOT fighting.

The introdcution of pivoting and stepping and punching drills too soon will lead to errors in which case when the student begins sparring he/she will resort back to things we can do already through habit if the correct foundations have not been laid.
This is why SLT is performed slowly and NOT because we are culivating chi or praying to the buddha as I have seen in some schools.

The first months will create a good future VT practitioner but if the system is flawed then he/she will just dart around chain punching the air because no fundamental skill has been aqquired.

Spending too much time locked to peoples arms also creates bad fighters!!!!

GH

[HumbleWCGuy]

I think that my philosophy of the first lesson is to lay down a theoretical base so that they can begin to train. I show the fist because I think that so many beginners hurt their hands due to bad fist making.

[Tom Kagan]

Don't try to explain the whole system in one lesson.

Yes. Most sifus don't seem to know how to shut the f@ck up. (Given what's written in this thread, maybe some of them post here? ;-) )

I'm going to be a contrarian today:

It's one class. Try to teach them nothing. Everyone seems to fail at that, of course.

Still, since it's the first class, maybe there should be a one time exception to that rule: teach them the price that day.

[Wu Wei Wu]

The simple fact of the matter is the way Wing Chun is commonly taught (confirmed by the comments here) is to put the art before the fighting. This IMO is the wrong way around.

Go to any boxing, MMA or Muay Thai school and theory is figured out WITHIN framework of;

1) conditioning, and;
2) sparring.

This is why these arts are EFFECTIVE and Wing Chun, not so much.

Suki

[HumbleWCGuy]

The simple fact of the matter is the way Wing Chun is commonly taught (confirmed by the comments here) is to put the art before the fighting. This IMO is the wrong way around.

Go to any boxing, MMA or Muay Thai school and theory is figured out WITHIN framework of;

1) conditioning, and;
2) sparring.

This is why these arts are EFFECTIVE and Wing Chun, not so much.

Suki

Notice the lack of a bullet point mentioning technical foundation. Honestly, I see a lot of guys who claim MMA or Muay Thai who are so lacking in technical ability that had it been me, I would have been embarrassed to get into the ring.
This kind of crap http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbXXbHywcfI
isn't technically sound at all. What advantage does that type of martial artist have over the average football player? A football player is both conditioned and used to taking punches.

I am not against conditioning, I am just saying that technical base is priority one. If you don't value that as a first lesson then you don't know what you are talking about.

Muay thai is a great art that I like a lot, but I have to think that your understanding of it is what is in that video if you don't appreciate technical understanding. In which case, don't nut hug it so hard because anyone can get into shape and trade hay makers.

Edit:
Let's also consider that you won't go into a Muay Thai school any night of the week and see a bunch of sparring. Striking isn't trained that way. It's always a mix of pads, light sparring, and hard sparring. Seriously dude, get a grip.

[GlennR]

This kind of crap http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbXXbHywcfI
isn't technically sound at all. What advantage does that type of martial artist have over the average football player? A football player is both conditioned and used to taking punches.

What was wrong with it? His 1st fight, maintained a good guard and posture, effective strikes, and maintained balance and distance.

Muay thai is a great art that I like a lot, but I have to think that your understanding of it is what is in that video if you don't appreciate technical understanding. In which case, don't nut hug it so hard because anyone can get into shape and trade hay makers.

Looked ok to me