SLT & Sam Chien

[YouKnowWho]

Slt was designed different then San chin since the beginning.

Hendrik,

Do you think WC guys should use YGKYM in fighting?

[Hendrik]

Hendrik,

Do you think WC guys should use YGKYM in fighting?

one must first know what is a WCK YGKYM, instead of define it as like it and speculate from there.


Slt has its own definition

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ8h4UM...%3DMQ8h4UMRFU8

[Ozzy Dave]

you think that at one point SLT was perhaps MORE like sam chien?

I certainly think this is a possibility, I personally do play SLT/SNT like San Jan sometimes with the use of various degrees of tension to condition the "structure".

I'm not saying its THE way to play the form but it is A way to do it that derives benefits.

Trouble with most WC/VT people IMO is they are too focused on arguing about what is THE way to do things.

Dave

[Hendrik]

The set define itself, from system to details .

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ8h4UM...%3DMQ8h4UMRFU8

Got nothing to do with WC/VT people.

I certainly think this is a possibility, I personally do play SLT/SNT like San Jan sometimes with the use of various degrees of tension to condition the "structure".

I'm not saying its THE way to play the form but it is A way to do it that derives benefits.

Trouble with most WC/VT people IMO is they are too focused on arguing about what is THE way to do things.

Dave

[GlennR]

one must first know what is a WCK YGKYM, instead of define it as like it and speculate from there.


Slt has its own definition

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ8h4UM...%3DMQ8h4UMRFU8

Here , this will help you

http://www.downvids.net/wing-chun-st...in-179432.html

[Ozzy Dave]

Got nothing to do with WC/VT people.

I don’t view WC/VT as you do.

Specifically, I don’t view WC/VT as something particularly unique, a niche certainly but not unique - it wasn’t developed in a vacuum after all.

There are a few systems from the same region (Guangdong / Southern Fujian) which behave combatively in a similar fashion to WC/VT (high horse, close technique), though the training methodologies vary they are likely related in evolutionary terms.

Therefore, I do see relevance in exploring related methodologies to train a similar set of attributes and if viable cross training those methodologies.

Dave

[LoneTiger108]

Here , this will help you

http://www.downvids.net/wing-chun-st...in-179432.html

Wah! Who recognizes anyone here other than Chu Shong Tin??

FWIW This is basic alignment stuffs and CST is one of the only guys I have seen online who actually gives hands on instruction like this... as awkward as it looks sometimes lol!

[LoneTiger108]

And with relation to Shotokans Sanchin... I see dead people!

http://youtu.be/u9iqsfIbwLQ

[sanjuro_ronin]

And with relation to Shotokans Sanchin... I see dead people!

http://youtu.be/u9iqsfIbwLQ

Shotokan has no sanchin...

[guy b.]

Shotokan has no sanchin...

Lol, by shotokan he must have meant "karate"

[Hendrik]

It is beyond who's view.

It is what Wck is. It is not the generalization speculation of high horse, close technics.....etc.

It is the body structure, power zone, momentum, timing all has to work as one piece and making sense. Not an explanation but all these things has to work and support each others in the same time

If one doesn't practice according to the wck common denominator as in the following clip. How is it Wck? How is it going to work fully?


http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=R3keW...%3DR3keW8Sc9t8


The moment one perform Wck tan sau as karate or white crane side outward block, that no longer Wck because it is never intended for it to work that way. And in fact it doesn't work properly to produce expected result.

I don’t view WC/VT as you do.

Specifically, I don’t view WC/VT as something particularly unique, a niche certainly but not unique - it wasn’t developed in a vacuum after all.

There are a few systems from the same region (Guangdong / Southern Fujian) which behave combatively in a similar fashion to WC/VT (high horse, close technique), though the training methodologies vary they are likely related in evolutionary terms.

Therefore, I do see relevance in exploring related methodologies to train a similar set of attributes and if viable cross training those methodologies.

Dave

[sanjuro_ronin]

WC can't be understood or explained WITHOUT DOING what it was designed for:
FIGHTING.
Period.

[guy b.]

WC can't be understood or explained WITHOUT DOING what it was designed for:
FIGHTING.
Period.

With respect, jumping right into fighting without understanding will not lead to understanding of wing chun. You might cobble together something that works, but what are the chances of your recreating wing chun from nothing?

[sanjuro_ronin]

With respect, jumping right into fighting without understanding will not lead to understanding of wing chun. You might cobble together something that works, but what are the chances of your recreating wing chun from nothing?

Who said anything about "jumping in"?
That said, it doesn't seem to hurt pretty much ALL the full contact Ma out there...
Fighting systems that are oriented towards full-contact/full-resistance tend to put people "sparring" as hard as THEY can as soon as they can and the results tend to be pretty good.

[guy b.]

Who said anything about "jumping in"?

Common practice in wing chun. Why do you think nobody agrees?

That said, it doesn't seem to hurt pretty much ALL the full contact Ma out there...
Fighting systems that are oriented towards full-contact/full-resistance tend to put people "sparring" as hard as THEY can as soon as they can and the results tend to be pretty good.

These are natural systems that are not principle based. Wing chun is the opposite