- Feb 18, 2008
- Reaction score
- Melbourne, Australia
I'm trying to understand here. WC has concepts, and all styles have concepts. WC has strategies and tactics that are derived from the concepts. But then you acknowledge that all styles have this, but WC is then unique.... Can you be a little more specific? I'm a bear of very little brain. I'm just having some trouble following the logic.
Essentially, it comes down to the training methodology, rather than the make up of the art itself. Koryu systems teach via predetermined sequences of movement, known as kata. These teach the principles, actions, movements, strategies, and other aspects that can be refered to as "concepts", but the concepts themselves are implicit rather than explicit.
BJJ teaches by learning the mechanics of various movements (submissions, bars, chokes, escapes etc) and positioning, then trains them by applying them in rolling and competition. Again, what is in these movements and positions could be considered "concepts", but again they are implicit in the overall system, rather than explicit.
Tae Kwon Do teaches by learning the mechanics of the movements, as well as drills in application, as well as forms, and then tests them through sparring and competition. Again, although there can be considered to be "concepts" underlying all the movements, these are implicit, rather than explicit.
With Wing Chun, it teaches by exploration of the concepts themselves, supplemented with a few forms, and tested in various forms including things like Chi Sau. So the difference really isn't in what is involved in the art, but in the way it's trained (according to, and exploring, the concepts of Wing Chun); as opposed to the way other arts train, where the concepts are held within the training methods, Wing Chun puts it the other way around, starting with the concepts (or principles), and then developing the training drills around them.
Did that help at all?