Siu Lim Tau Comparison

[Vajramusti]

Wing chun and hung ga? No serious relationship.

 

[Nobody Important]

I just watched the video again and I noticed that the TWC guy on the right does the same thing (lifting the bong sau) at 4:14.
Are there any TWC people here who could shed some light on that?

What I seen there is a Dai Bong transitioning to Jung Bong. In Yuen Family our Jung Bong is slightly angled with elbow higher than wrist. It comes under incoming punch lifting & pressing forward simultaneously. Just as KPM described his Crane Wing. Odd to me to see that transition from Dai Bong to Jung Bong, but their reasoning is undoubtedly based upon their theoretical approach.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Wing chun and hung ga? No serious relationship.

Any theories about the similarities of techniques?

 

[Nobody Important]

Wing chun and hung ga? No serious relationship.

Wing Chun & Hung Gar were taught side by side in various Zhong Yi Associations prior to the government crackdown on these organizations in mid to late 1800s. The Leung family school funded by Leung Jan's father in Foshan was one such Zhong Yi hall.

The oral traditions of White Crane, Wing Chun & Hung Gar are essentially the same story. Lam Sai Wing learned a form of Wing Chun from his grandfather called Red Boat Hung Gar. It consisted of the Arrow Palm form, Flowing Moon Double Knives & 6 1/2 Point Pole. You can see it's influence throughout Lam Family Hung Gar.

The 12 Bridges theory of Hung Gar is from Wing Chun White Crane it can also be seen in Lau Fu San Chi Kung. Lau Fu San is a bridging art that contains all of Wing Chun's bridge positions & transitions.

While not Wing Chun proper, Hung Gar & Wing Chun share a long history of intermingling. Each evolved differently, evidence of concepts, movement, theory etc. is very evident in the forms, though function has taken on different roles.

 

[Nobody Important]

Not sure which part of the form that you are referring to. Do you mean the techniques in the opening bow?

Sorry I got lost in the barrage of replies. What I was referring to was any sections of Jow Ga forms that resemble the opening sequences of forms like Tiger & Crane. The goat stance, short bridge, Tan, Bong, Fook stuff.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sorry I got lost in the barrage of replies. What I was referring to was any sections of Jow Ga forms that resemble the opening sequences of forms like Tiger & Crane. The goat stance, short bridge, Tan, Bong, Fook stuff.

Oh ok. then the answer to that would be yes to sections that resemble the opening sequences of Tiger & Crane and no to Tan , Bon, and Fook Sau as far as I've seen.

 

[LFJ]

When Wing Chun (and this isn't a put down of Wing Chun) can effectively neutralize Western Boxing using the methodology you present, I'll give your branch a serious look. So far I'm unaware of this happening on any consistent basis, which suggests to me; if you are using your Wing Chun as strictly a striking method, your better off with Western Boxing.

How about at least one instance of a good WSLVT guy easily handling a good western boxer??

I'm assuming you guys have multiple clips of your branches easily handling good Western Boxers using your methodologies.

Can we see a few of them?

Otherwise, by your logic, shouldn't you also be better off doing Western Boxing, since you have an even broader arsenal but aren't effectively neutralizing Western Boxing on a consistent basis?

 

[Nobody Important]

I'm assuming you guys have multiple clips of your branches easily handling good Western Boxers using your methodologies.

Can we see a few of them?

Otherwise, by your logic, shouldn't you also be better off doing Western Boxing, since you have an even broader arsenal but aren't effectively neutralizing Western Boxing on a consistent basis?

You're absolutely right if you take the statement out of context. The difference is we're not the ones making claims of superiority. We aren't insinuating it by saying others systems are broken because they aren't cohesive with ours. I made the remark that if WSLVT was a superior striking method it should be able to easily contend with Western Boxing. This was based on Guy's remark that Boxing wasn't cohesive and WSLVT is.

All we're asking is for you all to back off on the rhetoric, you have no more proof of your claims than anyone else. It's all speculation based on belief & personal experience. Without empirical evidence it's all just pandering. Is this agreeable?

 

[LFJ]

I don't think guy b. was making the claim that WSLVT is a superior striking method to Western Boxing.

Western Boxing not being a coherent method as compared to YMVT is that it is not one system. Many styles of it exist. YMVT is a single system with one clear approach to fighting.

I don't think you know what empirical evidence means. It is available for anyone to examine. Refusing to do so doesn't mean you get to say it doesn't exist outside of your limited personal experience.

 

[Nobody Important]

Western Boxing not being a coherent method as compared to YMVT is that it is not one system. Many styles of it exist. YMVT is a single system with one clear approach to fighting.

So let me simplify this, Western Boxing is incoherent because several versions of it exist, but Wing Chun (Yip Man branch in particular) is coherent because there is only one version. I think it fair to surmise that you clearly fail to see the fallacies in your logic.

I'm not buying what you're selling. Thanks for playing.

 

[LFJ]

You can't just compare YMVT and "Western Boxing" as if the latter is also one method.

Besides the fact that they have entirely different strategies and tactics and are not just "punching", as you erroneously simplify it.

 

[Nobody Important]

You can't just compare YMVT and "Western Boxing" as if the latter is also one method.

Besides the fact that they have entirely different strategies and tactics and are not just "punching", as you erroneously simplify it.

And you can't just always direct a conversation to advance your narrative, especially one no one wants to hear about. Kindly go derail someone else's thread.

 

[guy b]

Sorry you believe that. I find boxing to be very coherent.

I guess that's just inexperience of boxing speaking. There is no systematised method of boxing- it is the sport of hitting with gloved fists and there are many different approaches to teaching, understanding and fighting. It lacks a strategic approach as VT snd different coaches and boxers favour different ways.

I will agree that Wing Chun takes longer to learn, but then again, I'm approaching it differently by placing emphasis on aspects other than simply punching and the means to utilize a punch.

WSL VT is not "simply punching"

I would assume that a branch of Wing Chun dedicated to punching and supporting elements to facilitate punching would be relatively easy to learn

You assume wrong

 

[guy b]

When Wing Chun (and this isn't a put down of Wing Chun) can effectively neutralize Western Boxing using the methodology you present, I'll give your branch a serious look

WSL VT does quite well against people with boxing skills in my experience, but since there isn't a standardised thing that iswestern boxing I think direct comparisons difficult

 

[Nobody Important]

I guess that's just inexperience of boxing speaking. There is no systematised method of boxing- it is the sport of hitting with gloved fists and there are many different approaches to teaching, understanding and fighting. It lacks a strategic approach as VT snd different coaches and boxers favour different ways.

Yet you don't believe that this also applies to Wing Chun. Interesting.

 

[guy b]

You just did it with your reply. Do you seriously not see that? It may be a branch coming from Yip Man, but it isn't your branch. Their approach may be different than yours.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to refrain from commenting on YM VT.

 

[KPM]

Otherwise, by your logic, shouldn't you also be better off doing Western Boxing, since you have an even broader arsenal but aren't effectively neutralizing Western Boxing on a consistent basis?

You certainly have quite a selective use of "logic."

 

[Transk53]

I guess that's just inexperience of boxing speaking. There is no systematised method of boxing- it is the sport of hitting with gloved fists and there are many different approaches to teaching, understanding and fighting. It lacks a strategic approach as VT snd different coaches and boxers favour different ways.

Not sure I understand what you mean by no strategic approach in boxing. Different ways of teaching yes, but to say no strategy is idiotic.

 

[LFJ]

You certainly have quite a selective use of "logic."

Yes, I have to suspend logic to follow your line of thought.

 

[KPM]

Yes, I have to suspend logic to follow your line of thought.

No. I don't think you ever really try to follow anyone's line of thought other than your own. That has become pretty clear on this forum.