Jake104
Black Belt
Ditto
Long and short range Tan Sao
- Thread starter futsaowingchun
- Start date
Panic stations. Maybe I didn't get the real wing chun?
Again I feel that you are doing the equivalent of making a hot drink using a chocolate tea pot in trying to fit wing chun into that box. it just isn't a good use of anyone's time and effort, and the end result is not optimised. I would ask, why do it?
Uh, yeah, that really doesn't make any sense. Why would you burn bridges by saying who you study with (unless you aren't being truthful about something?) Or maybe you're hiding out from the law? lol
Anyway, I'm not so interested that I would go thru the hassle to start finding who teaches WSL method and then make guesses. But since you want people to guess - I know the last time you mentioned you studied under someone, they didn't seem to know who you were you. Maybe this is why you're hesitant. Anyway, no big deal Mr. Mystery!
I would burn bridges because I have been offensive to some people I shouldn't have, and because my views are at odds with some of those I train with.
Anyway, I'm not so interested that I would go thru the hassle to start finding who teaches WSL method and then make guesses. But since you want people to guess - I know the last time you mentioned you studied under someone, they didn't seem to know who you were you. Maybe this is why you're hesitant. Anyway, no big deal Mr. Mystery!
I don't want anyone to guess. I just can't say on a forum.
Jake104
Black Belt
Can I guess? Does the first name start with a P? Does the last name start with a B? Am I getting warm? Switzerland?
Did he is translate for WSL?
Did he is translate for WSL?
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,283
- Reaction score
- 312
-----------------------------------
I am nota WSL guy- though I respect him. But he just visited the Uk several times.
In any case, wing chun involves control of one's "united "body for self defense-attack or defense
You dont have to nor should you chase hands in close quarters work or on the ground.
The view that wing chun is only for hitting is a very very limited one... but of course everyone has an opinion
In a private courtyard lesson- Ip Man threw good kickers all over the place. And in well known challenge match in Fatshan-
Ip man defended against a Northern mantis master. IM had his back to the audience and on the stage he threw the mantis master with lop sao and thhe mantis guy went flying- clashing onto and breaking a tea table.
Quite a few of Augustine Fong proteges in Tucson and Phoenix can handle themselves on the ground or deal with grapplers.
One should be careful about over generalizations.
While wing chun has spread- good wing chun remains a rare art.
[QUOTE="Vajramusti, post: 1727064, member: 22174
While wing chun has spread- good wing chun remains a rare art.[/QUOTE]
Do you ever see a renaissance taking place or will WC simply fade away in the coming generations as we get further away from the era of Ip Man and his ilk?
While wing chun has spread- good wing chun remains a rare art.[/QUOTE]
Do you ever see a renaissance taking place or will WC simply fade away in the coming generations as we get further away from the era of Ip Man and his ilk?
Agree! The moment that your hand grab on your opponent's arm, you are entering that grappling door.Why chase you around and try punching you when I can keep you in one spot, punch choke and slam your face in the ground? Maybe it's not technically WC strategy? I don't know. But it's my strategy. Good for me bad for you.
Here are examples:
Danny T
Senior Master
"The Real Wing Chun"
What specifically is the real wing chun?
Yours, your instructor, his instructor? Are they all exactly the same, no differences, no variances?
Yip Man's wing chun was quite different from many of his students and many differences within the different students. Why? Why so many differences? What is the Real wing chun?
I think Guy was joking. Anyway @Guy: I fully understand why you might want to keep your identity under wraps. Some WC people are so hypersensitive that just honestly speaking your mind on a forum like this can get you blackballed. I've been in that situation. Now I'm old and my current Assn. tolerates me carrying on like this. They probably figure no one who matters is listening.
Anyway, unlike that other forum, we don't really care about the details of who trained with. It is useful to know that it was WSL lineage, and that you have trained with several people. Just so we know where you're coming from. Beyond that, who gives a rat's behind. Please, carry on....
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,283
- Reaction score
- 312
Do you ever see a renaissance taking place or will WC simply fade away in the coming generations as we get further away from the era of Ip Man and his ilk?[/QUOTE]
---------------------------------------------------
IMO wing chun is not fading away, there are good people to carry it forward.
Lol, are you saying from the perspective of Arizona that the UK lacks any decent WSL VT?
There were 3 reasonably available people in the UK that claimed to have learned directly from WSL (that I know of). There are now also infuences from elsewhere.
Simply being on the ground is either failure or hand chasing, as I see it. Using wing chun on the ground is...not the best use of that tool.
I don't see much in wing chun that is not about hitting. I would be genuinely interested to hear your views on what the different stages of learning are teaching so that I can understand where you are coming from.
In lessons and events people do things that are non-optimal for a variety of reasons. Were you in Fatshan or the private courtyard when YP showed the power of wing chun grappling, or is it a story you heard?
Good for them, although I can think of several easier and more effective ways to become proficient at ground fighting, if that is your aim. All of wing chun should be able to "deal with" grapplers or anyone else. I think that it does this best by preserving the ability to hit in situations where most other approaches would fail, not by playing to the desires of the person trying to stop you hitting them. Keeping hitting is what wing chun does above all else.
How true
Thanks for that
Maybe, but depends on what you mean by 'grab'. If one means grab=hold, then WC doesn't look to 'grab'in that sense. Even in the case of lap sau, while some could define this as a grab, it's different as you are typically not involving the thumb. And it's only temporary - we aren't looking to hold - so no real grappling IMO. But you can hold if you want, but when you do you start moving away from WC's primary functions.
Here are examples:
Yes, I agree, these are examples of grabbing and moving into grappling. But IMO both are perfect examples of what I'm talking about as bad examples of WC technique & principle because they are holding, collapsing their structures, pulling their opponent into their space and creating long/short reach problems.
I can agree with that first part. And maybe you used the wrong term, but looking at WC as a tool is missing the point of the system IMO.
While yes many of the techniques (tools) of WC don't translate to 'the ground', as well as many body methods (for obvious reasons), many WC the principles, concepts, strategy/tactic, etc do still apply to ground figting. Not all of course, but some do translate easy enough. And many that even parallel what we would find in more ground-based arts (physics is still physics and the human body is still the human body whether we're upright or on the ground).
And I'm not advocating that WC is better than say BJJ for on the ground, but if we look at WC as a system of principles/concepts, then yeah it applies to all aspects of fighting.
So, WC doesn't cease to exist simply because we've lost our range or upright posture, even if some of it's tools have.
I'd suggest you may change this view as you experience more WC lineages. It's not a cave man art. In WC, we don't just look to hit willy-nilly (what a silly term!). We typically look to hit when we have a superior position and some disruption of our opponent's facing/COG. So how do we achieve this? by simply throwing a punch and hoping it lands? Of course now. WC's chi sau technologies are how we achieve that (along with applicable theories like loi lau hoi sung, 2 lines offense/defense, 2 hands working as one, dui yeng/jui yeng facing principles, etc)
Lol, I would agree mostly. Not sure what you are arguing about?
loi lau is engage centre, hoi sung is capitalise on errors, take up surrendered space. In short pressure the centre with structure and eat space.
But why did you neglect the second part of the maxim; lat sau jik chung? Surely that is the most important bit, since it is all about capitalising on the situation you have imposed and winning the fight wing chun style?
Well obviously wing chun is much much worse than bjj for the ground. This goes without saying. But I think you may also be wrong about the principles applying on the ground. Lat sau jik chung for example will just get you armlocked or triangled on the ground against a competent grappler. It also isn't possoible to move and control as it is standing. The wing chun power generation via hip and elbow is regularly nullified, and so on. I think that while in a survival situation with no other knowledge you might have no choice but to think wing chun on the ground, in the modern world it is at best negligent to assume it will suffice. It is at very best a third rate ground system.
What long/short reach problems are you talking about?
The major difference between CMA and boxing is CMA guys like to pull your opponent into your punch. Since boxers have gloves on, it's hard to "pull".
When your opponent
- moves back, your punching power will be A - B < A.
- is static, your punching power will be A = A.
- moves forward, your punching power will be A + B > A, a perfect head on collision effect.
Last edited:
This is the main difference? Are you sure?
Long/short reach problem with the hands. Basic WC acing principles.
Interesting though that you cherry picked my reply ignoring most of it...
Again, right back to non-WC generalities
Since you posted on a WC subject on a WC forum with WC pictures, I was hoping we could continue the discussion in that regards for at least one post.WC does not pull the opponent into their own personal space for reasons I mentioned in my previous post (which you didn't reply to). To better understand you, were you saying the 2 pictures you posted represent your understanding of WC lap sau, 'pulling' and range/structure considerations? Did you want to discuss that - otherwise, why post them?
you said "I don't see much in wing chun that is not about hitting. " - I was disagreeing and pointing out that there is a LOT more to WC then being being 'about hitting'! And, I was giving examples. Without WC bridging technology, how do you guarantee the 'hit' from a position of advantage? surely not just hoping you're faster/luckier than the next guy!
But at least we agree now that it is surely about more than hitting if you agree with my reasoning
I left out a lot of things to keep the list short. no big deal.
But no, lat sau jik chun is not the most important part. It all goes hand-in-hand. You can't have yin without yang. And in this case, you can't focus on basting fwd and hitting without also knowing how to receive/escort incoming energies/obstacles. Without first being able to deal with our opponent's attack/bridge/energy, we can't reliably hit safely - all you have is cave man punching. This is simple wing chun fighting 101.
Like I already said some apply, some don't. You will surely pick 5 that don't, but I can also point to 5 that do. But it seems you are only interested in arguing the negative, so no point in going further.[/QUOTE]
