The fourth internal art

Oily Dragon

Senior Master
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
3,257
Reaction score
1,650
Most of the MA systems label the system by using the offensive techniques. Why does WC use defense techniques to label the system?
I don't think this is true, the part about "most".

Like, what is a "defensive" technique in Wing Chun?

If we went down the list of Wing Chun hand techniques they are almost all strikes.

But like he just said, you're talking about a simultaneous attack/defense system, where a pak sau slapping block can parry a strike, or slam into the side of someones head, using basic hip rotation and short range motion.

Wing Chun is a very aggressive system in theory, but I don't think that really shows in a lot of the online demos, sparring etc. you will only see it in full contact competiton and maybe light contact sparring.
 
Last edited:

Oily Dragon

Senior Master
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
3,257
Reaction score
1,650
I've never understood why some WC people say this. I never heard of this until it was said on one of the many WC movies (Donnie Yen perhaps?). I'm not sure. But anyway, my upbringing in WC had absolutely nothing to do with centering the art around those three terms.

But, depending on your lineage, instructor(s), and how one personally interprets the art...one could also say that WC has straight punch, uppercut, hook, kick etc.

And finally, there are qualities of Bong/Fuk/Tan that are most certainly offensive!

Heck, a WC punch is offensive AND defensive by nature! (*notice I placed offensive first, defensive second). If you watch closely, the everyday average centerline punch in WC has the qualities and attributes of Fuk, Tan, Jut as it travels away/back, etc.
Not to mention one of the major hallmarks of good Wing Chun training is slap blocking and significant forearm conditioning.
 

Oily Dragon

Senior Master
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
3,257
Reaction score
1,650
The Wong Shun Leung branch of Wing Chun is a good example of a school that kept things honest. You'll often find people from this particular side of WC critical of the majority.

Back during the golden era of kung fu cinema (which was populated with legit practicioners), you'd have a hard time finding better.

Look at the forearms on these dudes. That's a lot of damage.

 
Last edited:

Callen

Purple Belt
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
333
Reaction score
279
Most of the MA systems label the system by using the offensive techniques. Why does WC use defense techniques to label the system?
For us, the labels of Bong, Fuk and Taan are not really defensive terms. They are also not defensive actions.

In Canto, Paau Bong , means throwing bong sau. When spoken with the correct Cantonese intonation, Bong can also mean to scaffold. Fuk Sau 隡 has a very colloquial meaning, indicative of the Cantonese language and culture. "Fuk!" 隡, in Cantonese is something you would tell you dog to control him, to get him down. In my training, Fuk Sau means hands on top, or subduing hand. Hands on top to control and become a punch (SNT), and subdue to control from the outside (CK). Taan Sau 斗 means to spread, which we interpret as a proactive shape.

But anyway, my upbringing in WC had absolutely nothing to do with centering the art around those three terms.
The three seeds? We sometimes use them to explain how their shapes are actually many actions and positions, which can be used interchangeably (parts of the same whole). When training Taan (inside) as an example, it can become any of the following actions:

Controlling Taan (first section of SNT)
Jing Jeung (Vertical Palm)
Pak Sau
Gaan Sau
Biu Sau (can also be an outside action)
Laap Sau

When training Fuk (outside, Chum Kiu Fuk Sau) as an example, it can become any of these actions:

Jam Sau
Jut Sau
Pak Sau
Fak Sau
Wu Sau, can be both an inside and outside action; so both Taan and Fuk.
 
Last edited:

geezer

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
7,371
Reaction score
3,584
Location
Phoenix, AZ
For us, the labels of Bong, Fuk and Taan are not really defensive terms. They are also not defensive actions.
I was just re-reading this and noticed the the statement above could be confusing. I assumed you meant that these techniques are not defensive, but part of your offensive flow. At least, that would sense to me.

In my limited understanding, bong, fuk and tan are a a way to continue your offense, or kinda what happens as your hand moves forward to attack ...if you encounter resistance. When you meet opposing force, you do not abandon your forward energy, instead, you use these positions to deflect, dissolve, or remove the obstructing force as you continue to press the attack. Or, as you stated below:

When training Taan (inside) as an example, it can become any of the following actions:

Controlling Taan (first section of SNT)
Jing Jeung (Vertical Palm)
Pak Sau
Gaan Sau
Biu Sau (can also be an outside action)
Laap Sau

When training Fuk (outside, Chum Kiu Fuk Sau) as an example, it can become any of these actions:

Jam Sau
Jut Sau
Pak Sau
Fak Sau
Wu Sau, can be both an inside and outside action; so both Taan and Fuk.
What we don't do in the branch of WC I trained, is throw bong sau as an attack in itself. Neither do we throw bong sau as a defensive movement. Bong (like tan and fuk above) is how the arm flexes when your attack meets opposing force. Bong deals with the opposing force and then it becomes something else ...like fak sau, kup jarn or gwai jarn, etc. to continue the attack. But bong never stays.
 

Oily Dragon

Senior Master
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
3,257
Reaction score
1,650
I was just re-reading this and noticed the the statement above could be confusing. I assumed you meant that these techniques are not defensive, but part of your offensive flow. At least, that would sense to me.

In my limited understanding, bong, fuk and tan are a a way to continue your offense, or kinda what happens as your hand moves forward to attack ...if you encounter resistance. When you meet opposing force, you do not abandon your forward energy, instead, you use these positions to deflect, dissolve, or remove the obstructing force as you continue to press the attack. Or, as you stated below:

What we don't do in the branch of WC I trained, is throw bong sau as an attack in itself. Neither do we throw bong sau as a defensive movement. Bong (like tan and fuk above) is how the arm flexes when your attack meets opposing force. Bong deals with the opposing force and then it becomes something else ...like fak sau, kup jarn or gwai jarn, etc. to continue the attack. But bong never stays.
It's the "tying hand" which kind of implies that like tying a belt or a shoe there's a sequence to follow. Even in the Shaolin Iron qigong the wait is barely a second, but it's there (the "flex"). These are essential Crane and Dragon style elements.

I think the basic motion works fine for defense, like Terrible Tim's observation about the Philly Shell.

I've used bong sao on the ground in BJJ defending my neck while holding someone's gi pantleg, so as a grappling technique I was sold on bong sao a long time ago.

Universal applications, which is why there are so many versions, IMHO.
 
Top