Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,283
- Reaction score
- 312
---------------------------------------------------- Regarding the first sentence- that is not what I said.
A complete Wing Chun system
- Thread starter zuti car
- Start date
Perhaps, and perhaps not.Yip Man did not stay with Chan Wah Shun and Ng Chun So as long as some, but his skill in his prime was said to be unsurpassed.
On the other hand I spent more time with my sifu (although not nearly enough!) than some of my kung-fu brothers who quickly surpassed me. What you learn and what you achieve is a complex equation. Time is one factor. Some other factors include athletic ability, intelligence, drive and desire, and available time and money.
So although the great master Ho Kam Ming spent a very long time with Grandmaster Yip, that alone doesn't explain his skill. That Yip Chun is the eldest son of GM Yip certainly has not caused him to be recognized as the best, or as an "inheritor" of the system. By contrast, my own sifu had very limited time with GM Yip, yet IMO his technical skill was quite good, in fact better than many of his seniors in the art. His problems are more a matter of ego, and shameless self promotion. Only the great William Cheung apparently surpassed him in that!
Works for me!
You have to keep in mind that what you view as complete may not be true for another. This doesn't make one opinion correct over another, it simply expresses a different view. People study TMA for a variety of reasons that may not necessarily have anything to do with the completeness of the martial tactics involved. Some may practice simply for exercise, others to learn form, some to refine one aspect of defense such as wrestling. To them they may feel as what they do is complete as what they are doing fulfills all their requirements for doing it.
Well a lot of the discussion on the thread has leaned toward comparing WC to other WC lineages. So within that context I'll the topic alone. These discussions go on within my FMA system, some groups have things other groups don't, as a result some groups consider themselves more "complete" in relation to other lineages within the system. It can be a mess to sort out.
But if we're talking about a "complete system" as the saying is generally used in martial arts things are different. It has nothing to do with why people study. Obviously people train for different reasons. It doesn't matter if a person thinks what they do is "complete" or not. When an instructor says "we offer a complete martial arts system" it means the system covers all training areas, striking, weapons, grappling, ect. I'd be curious if anyone can find an instance where an art advertised as "complete" is supposed to mean anything different. A die hard boxer might say "boxing is all I need" and tell himself that it's a "complete" art but most everyone else will agree that boxing fails to prepare you for some key areas of fighting.
I'm saying the term "complete" as it's often used to promote a martial arts system infers that said system prepared you for all fighting ranges, this there is no need to train elsewhere. Few systems actually meet this standard but many claim to.
Well the OP actually states "A Complete Wing Chun System". To answer this we have to address what is Wing Chun. Is it striking, locking, throwing or kicking? Is it equal in each aspect or based on unequal percentages of one persons preference & understanding? Is there enough principle & theory in the concepts to address all the aspects & variables involved? Can anyone person claim to know or understand it all? Is it in reality the person that is incomplete and not the art? How much specialization in each field of striking, locking, throwing & kicking does one need to attain? Basic fundamentals of each or attainment of black belt in Jujutsu, Muay Thai, Boxing & Shuai Jiao in order to be competent? Each aspect of fighting is able to defeat another based on ones proficiency in that field. Completeness does not exist outside of one feeling competent in what they do. Moot points can be argued back & forth until all involved are blue in the face. At the end of the day all that matters is if what you do makes you feel what you have is complete, not what someone advertises as such.
Kwan Sau
Purple Belt
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2013
- Messages
- 349
- Reaction score
- 60
I believe these are profound questions by dlcox. Well done sir. And, in my extremely humble opinion...here goes:
Q1: Yes, absolutely. All "seeded" in SLT, and the ideas (and hopefully their applied understanding) grow from there.
Q2: Heck no. Anyone who does...equates to a closed mind. Simply congratulate them and walk on...
Q3: Heck yeah!
Q4: Just enough to reduce the threat sufficiently so that I can walk away, and they are admitted to the ICU.
See my previous quote below in response to you.
Early on in the thread it wasn't evident to me that the op was comparing WC to wc. I choose not to compare one WC group to another. It's internal politics that don't concern me. I can only contribute to the discussion of what a "complete" art is.
I'd agree completeness may not exist. But I have stumbled across lead instructors and masters that believe their art has it all and claim that their art is complete. Weather they are complete or not is an issue that must address the person making the claim. But as the term complete is commonly used it is not open to interpretation in the way you explain. I could care less if you find your art complete. If you tell me or any other person about your art and you say "it is a complete system" you are implying that a practitioner does not need to train anything else. A person making such a claim may believe it fills all of their needs but by telling me that their system is "complete" they are inferring that the system will meet all of my needs too.
I don't disagree with you, but it isn't so cut & dry. There are so many variables to factor in that it becomes a rabbit hole. Ones view of completeness will be different than another's, just as ones learning process differs, just as comprehension differs. To decide what is needed for completeness will invariably be based upon individual needs and not just consensus. I get what your saying but you are also dismissing an important aspect as not being relevant, and that is of the individual perception as it plays into decision making. It all comes down to what someone views as "complete", everyone will have different criteria that needs addressed. As far as an art being "complete", especially an art like Yong Chun, I'd say yes it theoretically is, problem is can any one individual apply it's principles & concepts to Ti, Da, Shuai & Na a manner that is coherent. So while in essence the art may truly be complete, the man is not complete in the understanding of it. I agree that the generic use of the word complete does not have the connotation's that I put to it in its general interpretation. However, the understanding of the definition will vary in many degrees depending on the context it is subjected to. When someone describes their art as complete, in reference to fighting theory & technique I generally take it with a grain of salt. Their opinions of what constitutes complete may widely vary from mine. We all have needs on varying levels that no one individual has the answers for, complete does not exist, it is philosophical, it is not tangible and is ambiguous outside of clearly defined context. Even then I'm not sure, perhaps we need a better word to convey our meaning.
I think we both agree that "complete" is generally a bs way to advertise a system. It infers that the person who's system is complete has all the answers, few people outside of that system would agree with such a claim.
Every style has a chink in its armor, everyone has varying levels of needs. For a teacher to make broad statements about the ability to address those needs, because they believe what they have is complete, without knowing of or understanding those individual needs is a huge red flag. With every style there is bias towards specific tactics & techniques. A boxer with rudimentary wrestling skills that are rarely reinforced may not be the best person to learn how to grapple from, simply because they have some knowledge. This is no fault of the style though, maybe it is a method that has a lot of grappling in it and the teacher just prefers boxing. The fault then lies in the man promoting the style as "complete".
PiedmontChun
Purple Belt
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2013
- Messages
- 323
- Reaction score
- 134
Some might say it is a complete system, and some may not. The question is, a "complete system" for what exactly? I would think WC/WT is complete for defending oneself competently in all empty handed ranges. I think its folly for people to think they have to cross train other arts just to be a well equipped fighter.
Is it complete for extensive weapons fighting like many japanese systems? No, as it intentionally only trains two weapons. Is it complete for use in the ring match where the rules favor a grappler? No. Is it complete against a skilled wrestler determined to take you to the ground and more comfortable staying there to fight than you are? You see where I am going with this.....
Is it complete for extensive weapons fighting like many japanese systems? No, as it intentionally only trains two weapons. Is it complete for use in the ring match where the rules favor a grappler? No. Is it complete against a skilled wrestler determined to take you to the ground and more comfortable staying there to fight than you are? You see where I am going with this.....
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,881
- Reaction score
- 540
Sifu Leung Jan reorganized the way he taught Wing Chun in Ku Lo village at the end of his life.
It wasn't JUST taught as ad hoc short sequences of techniques for drilling.
Each of the San Sik sequences in KLPS has a specific body mechanic, intent, "theme", "gong", or whatever you'd like to call it.
Leung Jan took this into careful consideration when he designed the San Sik.
They are progressive in nature, meaning you work on them in a particular order and they develop your body and your "gong" in a specific way.
Each San Sik has an accompanying two man application drill so you know exactly what it is training you to do.
Some of them have more than one way to train them as two man drills.
Each San Sik is also applied on the dummy. So in KLPS you start using the wooden dummy right away. Like on day one.
You don't wait for to be 3 handfoms into the curriculum before being exposed to wooden dummy practice, as regular WC would have you do.
And of course each San Sik is applied in Chi Sao (Sticky hands) as well as Jao Sao (sparring).
Leung Jan knew time was short at the end of his life and has a very narrow window to pass on the culmination of his life's experience training and fighting with the art of Wing Chun and he came up with an ingenious and effective way to do this.
Each of the 12 San Sik contains one cycle with 3 motions, or 3 separate points, totaling at 36.
Each Small Set may be practised Solo in the Air, Solo on the dummy (Jong Sau), in a 2 man set, and with the Yee Gee Dao.
If I had to define Leung Jan's art... using musical terms. He created Jazz. While he used traditional forms for the source he broke them up and allowed to keep the techniques.
It was live, it was improv but rooted in standards broken into bite sized bits.
Leung Jan earned the title of “Wing Chun Kuen Wong” or "King of Wing Chun Fist" over the course of his life from winning over 300 challenges in which he remained undefeated.
He retired to his home village of Ku lo, after selling his family business (a medical pharmacy) at age 73, In 1883 according to my notes, but most say 1885.
This is when he taught the last of his students, who were mostly relatives.
It is also believed by most WC historians, that, during the opera ban in post-1855, Leung Yee Tai and Wong Wah Bo lived in the surrounding area of Foshan.
At this time, Leung Jan continued his WC studies (started post 1840s), and some oral traditions credit Leung Jan alongside his second teacher Wong Wah Bo with creating the three hand forms which are the main vehicle for the transmission of the Pin Sun Wing Chun system.
When Dr. Leung Jan's pupils would ask what the difference was between their boxing and the boxing outside their village Dr. Leung Jan would say;
The Wing Chun outside our village is the Jing Sun (Straight Body) "Facing" style, which is divided into three parts; Siu Lin Tau, Chum Kiu, Biu Jee. The Wing Chun from our village is the Pin Sun (Side Body) style, which is taught in one part but differ very little and are really from the same family!
The pole method of the Facing style is the Luk Dim Boon Gwun (6.5 Pole) but in our village it is the Som Dim Boon Gwun (3.5 Pole).
Over the next three years Dr. Leung Jan taught his students all his skills but unfortunately, do to old age, passed away at the age of 76.
His most senior student, Wong Wah Sam, went on to teach Fung Chun, Fung Min, Fung Lim, Koo Siu Lung, and others the Pin Sun Wing Chun art.
Fung Chun, the last living grand student of Dr. Leung Jan, is now retired living back in Koo Lo village where he is the head of the Fung family Pin Sun Wing Chun clan.
Last edited:
A footnote. Fung Chun passed away in 2012, R.I.P.
T.S.D. are you now training in Gu-lo village Wing Chun?
TSDTexan
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,881
- Reaction score
- 540
This was the wing chun style my Judo Coach trained in.
These were the only two arts he trained in
Sad to hear Fung Chen died.
No. Not currently training in any lineage of WC.
If I was it would be something like Robert Chu MasterClass...
Or sifu Klaus Brand... for the hair...
Or...
Ngo Dac Na type WC with Sifu Phu Ngo, over at entershaolin.com
Or Applied WC..
I look at WC for strategy, tactics, and training methods.
I do the 3 handforms in Sanchin Dachi, as if I were doing Sanchin. Sometimes I actually do sanchin loops while doing bridge hand or little idea hand forms.
Both as dynamic tension and as if I were in normal WC pigeon horse.
I use a pheonix eye vertical punch either with the lower three per orthodox wc or the one knuckle when working accuracy drills for pressure points.
What I teach my students is nothing like my personal mutant art. Karate, and WC are not so far apart, as everyone thinks.
Its a perception thing.
Uchei Ryu is really at its core pangainoon gungfu.
Reviving Meotode: The Ancient Okinawan Karate Concept of Kicking *** | KARATE by Jesse
The Husband/Wife hands (meotode) of Motobu Choki are in total agreement with WC tenets... block&strike as one instead of block then strike.
Both hands defend, both hands attack.
"Upon seeing this, I grabbed his hand, took up a position of kake-kumite ( something like "pushing hands" at the outside wrist) and said, 'what will you do?" -Motobu Choki.
He also used a one inch punch that was very powerful.
The difference between most WC (and most types of karate)that is biggest is Side on stance like nihanchi usually is in, and the Square centered symmetrical WC "frontal" horse.
And power generation methods for strikes, recycling energy, and breathing.
If anything I do experiment with WC stuff in my karate and I am not a wing chunner.
I love hard/soft arts.
Last edited:
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,283
- Reaction score
- 312
Steve, that sounds like it was taken from one of Jim Roselando's articles.
