Wing Chun: Evolving or Devolving?

[geezer]

I was talking with some very skilled WC guys recently and it became apparent that there are two divergent ways to view WC. One perspective, often characteristic of very traditional Chinese instructors and their followers, is that Wing Chun reached it's pinnacle of perfection in the distant past.

According to this viewpoint, the grandmasters of past generations attained a superior level of skill and understanding, and today's practitioners of the art have should look back to such luminous figures as Yip Man, Leung Jan, or even Ng Mui for inspiration, and should seek to train with a modern master who has maintained the purest and most complete body of this ancient wisdom.

A second, more characteristically occidental point of view is that although the ancient Wing Chun was good in it's time, the world changes. So, Wing Chun must also adapt, change and move ever forward to maintain it's edge, while still following our basic principles such as efficiency, simplicity, and economy of motion.

I call the first perspective, "devolutionary" since it basically espouses that the highest level of the art has already been attained by our illustrious anscestors and sadly is slipping away from us in present times. But, by seeking out a really well trained, traditional sifu, perhaps we can endeavor to preserve the essence of this art for another generation.

I've termed the second, forward looking outlook as "evolutionary". The assumption is that each generation moves the art forward and makes it better. In its most extreme form it leads to something like JKD. Others try to stay true to the essence of wing chun, but are not afraid to investigate new solutions to the age-old challenges of hand-to hand combat.

Which perspective best describes you and your school? Or, like most of us, are you a mix of both?

 

[Danny T]

Geezer,
Wing Chun is a “Training System” for using the body and mind in a physical confrontation. The human body has not changed and therefore the ways it can be utilized has not changed what does change is the individual. It is the individual that must evolve. The person who has trained within the system must evolve from training into what is functional in whatever is happening at the moment. I feel one of the greatest strengths of the wing chun training system is the principles and concepts the practitioner should learn can be utilized in all situations. Unfortunely, it is this same strength that can be the individual’s weakness, however the weakness is not the systems but the individual’s. This is what I believe many would consider evolution; the individual must expand the knowledge learned from the training system into as many different environments and situations one can. For example, multiple opponents, weapons, ground, limited mobility or with injury. Those who would argue this point with statements the like of; “If you trained properly you would not be taken down” are leaving huge holes in their training and in turn will very limited in understanding, knowledge, and skill.

If "Wing Chun reached it's pinnacle of perfection in the distant past" then I have wasted a lot of years using it and passing it on.

Danny T

 

[chinaboxer]

hey Geezer, this is a very intelligent question, i like it.

i keep telling people the same thing over and over and that is..wing chun is NOT based on technique. it's completely a "concept" based martial art. if you only see the technique, then yes, it can be outdated and pretty much useless.

but if you study and focus on the "concepts" behind the movements. then how can it ever be outdated?

"shortest route from A to B is a straight line" how can that be outdated?

"when you meet an obstacle go around it but continue to go straight" how is that outdated?

"use two hands to defend and attack simultaneously" how is that ever going to be outdated?

problem is that the majority of wing chun taught today is all about "giving you a fish" vs "teaching you to fish". they show you a technique, then the counter then the counter to the counter and they make you pay for each new "technique", this makes you dependent on them to "feed you" or else you "starve". if you train like this, then you'll never truly understand how wonderful and unique the study of wing chun really is.

that's why i created my website in the first place, to help people make that distinction, which is why all my videos are geared to "teach you to fish" for yourself.

Jin

 

[profesormental]

Greetings.

Interestingly enough, both processes are happening.

What I find interesting in my experience, is how much of the Martial Science has been lost, yet has been codified in Wing Chun.

I'm finding that starting from pure biomechanical/Neuromuscular effcient and effective movements for martial applications, I come back to Wing Chun forms as a Codification of that... yet without the prior knowledge of that perspective, which though experience and EXTENSIVE study and knowledge of the human body can be obtained, the movements CANNOT be appropriately and optimally trained.

Here is what I mean.

There is so much I have learned that many of my instructors do not know, execute nor mention, that makes my movements, and that of my students so much more efficient, effective and just plain better!

And it is not any fancy strategy or tactic.

The secret is to execute the fundamentals and basics powerfully and optimally. That is what the forms CAN teach. It depends on the instructor.

The strategies, Destructive Sequences, drills, etc. depend again, on the individual instructor.

Thus I believe that in one time, when Wing Chun forms were designed, someone should've had the knowledge, yet it was somehow lost. Now several instructors are gaining it again, yet not all have all the pieces. Fortunately, some are exploring and learning and working to improve as much as possible, so with more sharing of these knowledge, the faster the process becomes of making the Science more prevalent in Wing Chun.

Wing Chun forms are not based on concepts or ideas or strategies. They are based on how the body moves optimally and how to do so, depending on where and how the force is needed for martial application.

Wing Chun training curricula are varied, yet the forms should teach and codify basic movements, the basic drills should develop other attributes, Chi Sao develops timing and other attributes depending on the specific use of the exercise, sparring and scenario training develops resistance applications, etc.

My "evolution" is to recodify and return most of this Martial Science to my Wing Chun training curriculum. The fun thing is that the differences, if I don't point them out meticulously, will NOT be noticed.

They will however, be felt on both the receiving end of a technique and by the practitioner.

I hope to have the opportunity to show this for anyone that is interested.

Sincerely,

Juan Mercado-Robles
Academia de Artes Marciales de Carolina
Wing Chun Kuen Fat SiFu

 

[zepedawingchun]

I have to say I don’t believe Wing Chun reached its pinnacle moment in the past with people like Chan Wah Shun, Yip Man, Jiu Wan, and others. I believe our sifu (Danny T and mine) proves that. He’s been training in WC for over 40 years and still claims to be a student, professing you always have more to learn. And every time I see him he only gets better. I don’t want to sound like I'm bragging, but I must say, his understanding of the system is so great and his skill level is so high, I find it hard to believe there has been anyone in the past who would have been better. He also professes that anyone is capable of attaining this level of skill and understanding, if they free their minds to be creative of the theories, principles, and concepts of the system, and not limit themselves to what the forms (and system) have to offer.

Seeking to train with a modern master who has maintained the purest and most complete body of this ancient wisdom is a good idea. But I think you’d have to search out a non-traditional WC sifu with great skills. A traditional sifu (or master) would be limited because he/she may lack the experience of interaction (training) with other martial arts systems. A traditional sifu would most likely believe that they don’t need to cross train and that they have no use for it. Cross training in other arts gives you a better understanding of how other arts work and help to better apply your WC when faced with a Muay Thai kickboxer, BJJ grappler, MMA fighter, or whatever. With cross training, then WC can and will grow and adapt to modern times.

Also, a traditional sifu might be slow to pass on the system to students, holding back stuff and limiting who gets what of the system. Teaching only a select few everything they know or have learned, as a lot of really traditional sifus do.

I’m with Danny T, if the best has come and gone, why do I continue to teach and train if I’m never going to reach the level of my sifu, Jiu Wan, Yip Man, or other Wing Chun greats?

 

[wushuguy]

If we only practice wing chun against wing chun, then it's very limiting. limiting our selves from fully understanding the principles of the theories. When we have wing chun as our foundation and test it against other arts, or learn from other arts, actually we will find more clearly how the principles of wing chun fighting fit better. In my opinion the creator of wing chun, and those who reach high levels, even past wing chun figures, all of them had experience not just studying wing chun, but testing wing chun system and theory against other arts, then the principles were refined. if we never practice against other arts, using our principles to deal with them, we will lose this great training tool that the previous "gao shou" fighters had.

 

[chisauking]

When something is no longer used, the chance of it 'evolving' is next to nil.

Do you see the manual can opener evolving?

Do you see horse carridges evolving?

Do you think you can use the flintlock better now than when it was needed \ used the most?

Do you think the ancients can use the rice frail better than the people now?


To me, wing chun will never reach the level it once did. The reason is quite simple: there are much easier & efficient methods of killing.

 

[profesormental]

Agreed, that there are more efficient ways of killing. Yet Wing Chun and many other Martial sciences are not killing methods per se.

They are methods to control a physical situation effectively, without resorting to lethal weaponry.

This is VERY much needed and used by Law Enforcement Officers and Peacekeeping Officers whose purpose is not to kill, but to control situations with the least amount of people getting significantly hurt.

I know officers that have rarely if at all, had to use the nonlethal toys they are given to control situations. One of them is working in prison and has gotten commendations because if you just use your hands and cuff them without having to spray them or tase them, no one gets really hurt.

He's not a big dude, either. He is really skilled, after years of training.

So there is a real need for Martial Science and optimal methods of self defense, arrest and control. And they have evolved and improved over the years.

Unfortunately, standard training procedures for most Law Enforcement/Peacekeeping Officers are truly outdated and also, skill requires practice and training that they don't usually get on their job, so they have to go to outside sources on their own dime and time.

In other words, I think we can reach the level of the Old Masters, and probably surpass it! Yet it will take a LOT of work, effort and intelligent training methods. Thus I think many here are on the right path.

Juan Mercado-Robles

 

[chisauking]

I can't speak for other MA systems, but as far as wing chun is concerned, it's conceived for one thing and one thing only: fighting. To inflict as much damage as possible, using any means in the shortest time.

It's funny, but people don't even understand why wing chun is called a 'keun faat'. Why do you think there are fun-fau, bil-aan, stomp kick, kwai-garn, etc., etc., in the system? Tools designed purely to inflict damage.

Anyone who thinks wing chun is a self defence method should take the time to read what WSL had said.

Again, if one is not using the tools as it was meant to be used, how can they evolve those tools? If one only wave a magnum or ak47 around, and never really use it at moving targets that may be shooting back, how can one reach a high level of proficiency, let alone 'evolve' to a higher level?

If anyone thinks that they have 'evolved' the art of wing chun to a higher level than Leung Jan, Yip Man, WSL, etc', etc., come and show us. Show us in action how you have evolved the system. In what way, precisely, have you improved the system.

Anybody can talk loudly. It's the doing part that most find difficult. For example, there are more 'self proclaimed' masters of wing chun than you can shake a stick at. So, you can see the talking is easy. Demonstrating why they called themselves master is the hard part. So it's the same with people that claim they have 'evolved' wing chun. They say it, but they can't show how they have 'evolved' wing chun.

 

[profesormental]

Greetings.

While I agree with many of your points, on some I don't.

Going around and training to destroy completely as a first reaction without thinking of the legal ramifications is not being very responsible.

While controlling a situation might mean KOing someone, or even seriously hurting them, it should be justified. Some people are in jail for that.

Actually, Kuen Fat (i.e. Quan Fa in mandarin), implies a fighting method taught with the buhddist method of teaching. Thus it has the underpinnings and ethics that Ip Man and Ip Chun talk about.

My past teachers adapted their Wing Chun for the streets of New York. So they practiced against the attacks that they faced there and how to survive them and counter effectively.

My personal contribution to my training that I rarely see taught if at all has to do with the execution of basics/fundamental movements, and how to ingrain them to actual applications. And I'm still learning about it and have a long way to go.

I prove it by testing the difference in power, stability and energy transmission (result of the former) between practitioners using different methods of execution, with and without the changes. Also, they are tested against resistance and then implemented to the Chi Sao or scenario drills.

The results are immediate and convincing in most if not all cases. If it doesn't work, then we figure out why and make things better.

And this happens continuously. Just this last friday, I stumbled upon a clear improvement in the stability of the Tan sao following the Bong Sao in Sil Lum Tao, that has to do with HOW you move from the Bong to the Tan. Also, how finger placement affect the stability of a Tan Sao.

Some teachers stress this kind of attention to detail, others don't. That is ok. There are other areas of improvement that others will stress, so I will learn from their contributions and make my Wing Chun better.

It seems to me that the Masters that invented Wing Chun must've known about a lot of this, yet now we know more about WHY the physiological phenomena that they witenssed and used works. This has the advantage of helping us improve upon what we now know.

Thus development occurs. Refining the system to teach better skills.

Again, I must stress that this is highly dependent on the individual teachers, and not on the system. The system, without the knowledge of the Instructor, is an empty shell.

Juan Mercado-Robles

 

[qwksilver61]

My take or personal view; GGM Ting merely modernized the art,brought about structure and organization,he also helped to spread the art to the four corners of the earth.
To me....Sifu Emin gave it a more streetable approach without having to wait umpteen years (all the while adhering to the grass root principles ie;geometry
and physics which make this art so fantastic) to make it effective for even the beginner who doesn't have ton's of money or a lifetime to wait for immediate results.....epilogue......don't fix what isn't broken
simple art....... end the fight quickly..with the fewest strokes..unless you encounter an opponent like yourself....then you could be in for trouble...
two cents...

 

[geezer]

My take or personal view; GGM Ting merely modernized the art,brought about structure and organization,he also helped to spread the art...
To me....Sifu Emin gave it a more streetable approach without having to wait umpteen years...

Yep. And, although I've never met the man myself, I would add Grandmaster Kernspecht to your list. My current instructor studied closely with him and his senior students (as did Emin, of course). Besides spreading the art throughout Western Europe, GM Kernspecht has brought that famous German logic and order to our art, and proved that you don't have to be Chinese, nor a mystic to reach the highest levels. Some day when I win the lottery, I will go to Hong Kong, then to Fatshan, and then to Schloss Langenzell near Heidelberg as well... the three epicenters of our lineage. And, if my own instructor is any example, I expect I would learn the most at the last location!

 

[Nabakatsu]

As a lineage battle side note, I find it interesting my sifu isn't too fond of kernsphect, thinks that their universal solution is silly (arrow punch, with front kick) seems fairly effective against most unsuspecting attackers, but I think he's much more interested in responding to energy as it happens.

 

[geezer]

As a lineage battle side note, I find it interesting my sifu isn't too fond of kernsphect...

It seems that there is very little love lost between most of the high level practitoners of WC/WT. It's a shame too, since like I said, "if I won the lottery" I'd love to train with all of them! What really bugs me is that when these political divisions occur, we are often cut off from each other. In my town there are at least five branches of WC, three of which were once in the same WT family... and nobody is supposed to even talk to the other groups. Hell, I even get slapped down from time to time just for posting on this forum. Apparently, an open mind can make you very unpopular in our art.

 

[Nabakatsu]

Aye, I've presented ideas outside of the box from other lineages and he's been very respectful about shutting it down, but still it's shut down, I can't imagine being in a situation where 3 diff WT groups have split like that! what a great waste.

 

[profesormental]

Yep.

It is a real shame when the people that can most contribute to increase each others' knowledge don't do share and innovate together.

That is why I'm shying away from the traditional transmission/disciple kind of training and into academic style training. This also helps to take Wing Chun and Martial Sciences in general into the realm of Academics, which was the dream of pioneers like Ed Parker and many others.

That way, more sharing and contribution is encouraged, research and development and actual rigorous study is employed. That way the focus is on continual refinement and improvement of skills, training and sophistication.

This makes training sessions fun! At least for me...

I find it interesting that I share a lot in my Academy with a Ninjustsu teacher, a JuDo teacher, a Kempo Justsu/Chinese Goju Senior teacher, and me, a Wing Chun/American Kenpo teacher. We like each other, train hard, hang out, do seminar style classes, help each other out, etc.

I consider myself really lucky to be around good peoples like that, willing to explore, learn and have fun!

I only wish the same for you all here. And I'm in the best of disposition to share and have fun with anyone that asks here.

Sincerely,

Juan Mercado-Robles

 

[geezer]

That is why I'm shying away from the traditional transmission/disciple kind of training and into academic style training. This also helps to take Wing Chun and Martial Sciences in general into the realm of Academics...

Profe, could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by "academic style training" versus the "traditional transmission"?

 

[Nabakatsu]

That, Geezer, is a good question, I too am quite curious to hear Prof's thoughts on this matter.

 

[geezer]

That, Geezer, is a good question, I too am quite curious to hear Prof's thoughts on this matter.

Now I'm just guessing, but the term "academic" implies approaching the transmission of knowledge using an approach more like you'd find in an institution of higher education than in the traditional kung-fu "family" model. In many respects, I think this would be a good thing, since it would reduce the cultish aspect that has held a lot of arts back.

Even in the organization I belong to now, we are considering moving in this direction. For example we've talked about replacing our old method of acknowledging rank and time spent training, etc. with an academic style "transcript" that would record the courses of instruction completed and ranks or degrees earned. But to really approach teaching like a "university" would require a very large and established group. We are still pretty small and our senior members are still kung-fu family. And I like that too.

 

[coffeerox]

I think Wing Chun is devolving and that is due to the business taking over the martial art itself. Not all of them are even good businessmen which makes it even worse. How can you market a product if you don't know how?

I'm not really a pro of Wing Chun or anything, in fact I'm Master-less but I feel I've gathered a lot of information and put it to practice all without a teacher (due to already being a good teacher myself) and because I'm without a master, all sources of information are game to me, no bad master is stopping me from trying to gain outside information b/c it's not within his "system".

When it comes time to transmit what I know, it will be done in traditional fashion, through family members or very close friends, and free. It's a shame that I can't share information, when I try, the business takes over and it's not about martial arts anymore. In fact, this extends to other things as well, not just martial arts. Everyone seems to have their own way of doing things and if it's not their way, it's the highway. I have the mindset that is free, and open to anything and everything, as long as it's useful.