Wing chun master class demo

[k gledhill]

Originally Posted by JPinAZ

Forget the techniques. I only watched the opening of the clip and the first thing he advocates is to turn off line before he has even engaged the attack or any energy on a bridge, which is giving up Centerline. No Centerline - no WCK.

I shut it off after that.

Agree with you there, as soon as he turns away from the guy with a bong....

[Buddha_Fist]

My teacher told me a while back "A lot of B.S. seems plausible once you remove speed and intent out of the equation!". I see this again and again with what many so called "Masters" teach.

Sad...

[YouKnowWho]

Originally Posted by thedreamer7

"When he comes in, I turn"

I don't like to train, "How should I react to my opponent when he punches at me". I like to train, "How should I react to my opponent when I punch at him and he reacts to it". In the 1st case, my opponent leads the fight. In the 2nd case, I'll lead the fight.

[imperialtaichi]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

I don't like to train, "How should I react to my opponent when he punches at me". I like to train, "How should I react to my opponent when I punch at him and he reacts to it". In the 1st case, my opponent leads the fight. In the 2nd case, I'll lead the fight.

Haha, absolutely. Don't deal with the opponent, make the opponent deal with you.

My Motto: "I don't simultaneous defense and attack; ATTACK is my defense."
and: "Attack the opponent's attack."

[kinggaruda]

Originally Posted by LoneTiger108

I see his U.S student is based in NYC so maybe some of you guys have met him already?

While working in NYC I went to his class. His style is very different to most schools, he is not commercial and tends to not hold back on knowledge. He only had a small number of students, however considering their experience, they were very advanced. It was more like going to a boxing class and that probably reflects his background.

Being Leo Au Yeung's student he did have a great deal of knowledge on the Hong Kong scene, which was interesting.

[LoneTiger108]

Originally Posted by kinggaruda

While working in NYC I went to his class. His style is very different to most schools, he is not commercial and tends to not hold back on knowledge. He only had a small number of students, however considering their experience, they were very advanced. It was more like going to a boxing class and that probably reflects his background.

Being Leo Au Yeung's student he did have a great deal of knowledge on the Hong Kong scene, which was interesting.

Thanks for the info on the NYC hall.

I also know he is very knowledgeable, wouldn't you be if you were trained by Ip Chun in his mother tongue? I also know Ip Chun and Ip Ching are very knowledgeable too. But this doesn't stop them having 'so-so' reputations as Martial Artists. Sifu Leo is an allrounder, being a traditional CMA guy too but you heard it here first...

Originally Posted by JPinAZ

Forget the techniques. I only watched the opening of the clip and the first thing he advocates is to turn off line before he has even engaged the attack or any energy on a bridge, which is giving up Centerline. No Centerline - no WCK.

I find statements like this quite funny but that's just me. Take the clip for what it is, sharing ideas with newcomers. Ideas should never be fixed at the beginning because we are not slaves to the art of Wing Chun. Didn't someone famous say that?

[YouKnowWho]

Originally Posted by thedreamer7

Thoughts on the techniques here?

http://www.wingchuntaoist.com/2012/0...lass-demo.html

Old Chinese saying said, "Fight for the top (gravity advantage), don't fight for the below. Fight for the inside (short distance advantage), don't fight for the outside".

At 1.20, A's arm is on top B's arm (A had gravity advantage). A's elbow joint has passed B's forearm. A could drop his elbow and moved his arm under B's left shoulder and achieved a perfect "under hook". IMO, A had more advantage than B at that moment.

[wingchunIan]

Originally Posted by LoneTiger108

I also know he is very knowledgeable, wouldn't you be if you were trained by Ip Chun in his mother tongue? I also know Ip Chun and Ip Ching are very knowledgeable too. But this doesn't stop them having 'so-so' reputations as Martial Artists. :

The only place that the Ip brothers have a reputation as "so-so" martial artists is amongst 3rd, 4th, 5th etc generation sheep and those that take gossip and mischeif making as fact. Having met and trained with both, their skill is way above most of what I witness from other alledged masters, and it makes me sad that in HK and southern China there is a mutual respect amongst the senior teachers that unfortunately is not mirrored in the West where the tendancy to marking grand claims and derrision of others to hide one's own failings are the norm.

[imperialtaichi]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

At 1.20, A's arm is on top B's arm (A had gravity advantage). A's elbow joint has passed B's forearm. A could drop his elbow and moved his arm under B's left shoulder and achieved a perfect "under hook". IMO, A had more advantage than B at that moment.

That's the bit I was referring to, that we can test with weights.

[wingchunIan]

Originally Posted by JPinAZ

Forget the techniques. I only watched the opening of the clip and the first thing he advocates is to turn off line before he has even engaged the attack or any energy on a bridge, which is giving up Centerline. No Centerline - no WCK.

I shut it off after that.

Lol, because getting out of the way is always such a bad idea!
FWIW he changes the centreline by turning (others call it shifting) he doesn't give up the centreline at any point, he actually takes control of it. Draw a line connecting the jic seen of them both and then play the clip through following that line and look again to see who has control of it

[LoneTiger108]

Originally Posted by wingchunIan

The only place that the Ip brothers have a reputation as "so-so" martial artists is amongst 3rd, 4th, 5th etc generation sheep and those that take gossip and mischeif making as fact.

I am with you on that one Ian...

[Hendrik]

Originally Posted by YouKnowWho

Old Chinese saying said, "Fight for the top (gravity advantage), don't fight for the below. Fight for the inside (short distance advantage), don't fight for the outside".

At 1.20, A's arm is on top B's arm (A had gravity advantage). A's elbow joint has passed B's forearm. A could drop his elbow and moved his arm under B's left shoulder and achieved a perfect "under hook". IMO, A had more advantage than B at that moment.

YouknowWho,


This is where real life and theory seperated.


1, old chinese saying said " fight for the top, dont fight for the below."

but Wing Chun Kuen Kuit also says " he comes on top capture his below."

So, what applied here in the situation in this demo?
and what is the assumption the old chinese saying has and what is the Wing Chun Kuen Kuit refer to?



2, " A had more advantage then B at that moment " will that even happen?
or it is too close but too far in this case as in the demo situation?



So, John, since you are the one who publicly address I am not a figher.....ect.

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...&postcount=185



I would love you to share your wisdom in real combat on the above case as in the demo situation.


I hope you can give me, a person who doesnt have the fighting experience according to you, and the WCK public a great lesson here, in real life situation details. not some fuzzy, just do it generalization. instead of What Why When How. details which is expected from the real pro.


however, if you cannot, perhaps it is the time you take back your words or cliam as some one proven in the combat world such as in the above Alan's thread, and not trying to be an expert in WCK where you are not.

That is because you dont even have real life experience as a theory guy like me. hahaha

[Hendrik]

Originally Posted by LoneTiger108

I find statements like this quite funny but that's just me. Take the clip for what it is, sharing ideas with newcomers. Ideas should never be fixed at the beginning because we are not slaves to the art of Wing Chun. Didn't someone famous say that?

I totally agree with you, Spencer.

Wing Chun Kuen kuit says, " comes accept Goes return, let go thrust forward. "

the Kuen kuit never says

" the first thing he advocates is to turn off line before he has even engaged the attack or any energy on a bridge, which is giving up Centerline.
No Centerline - no WCK."

[k gledhill]

Originally Posted by Hendrik

I totally agree with you, Spencer.

Wing Chun Kuen kuit says, " comes accept Goes return, let go thrust forward. "

the Kuen kuit never says

" the first thing he advocates is to turn off line before he has even engaged the attack or any energy on a bridge, which is giving up Centerline.
No Centerline - no WCK."

Turning is a contentious issue in VT.

[Hendrik]

Originally Posted by k gledhill

Turning is a contentious issue in VT.

it is not contentious because Turning has its place.

it is contentious only if one doesnt know when to turn when not to turn.

and that get into the " What, When, Why, How " details. If that is clear.
WCK says only " come accept, goes return, let go trust forward." it doesnt limit one to a certain way.

in fact, lots of today's so called center line facing concept is more SPM, BM, White CRane then WCK. Some WCK has evolved toward that direction.
and this evolution changes the body structure of certain lineages because the strategy or tacting needs the physical to implement.



in contrast to the old WCK of "come accept, goes return, let go trust forward" as describe in the following and become a head on SPM BM type of strategy.


-------------------

她採取道家「避實撃虛」後發先至。之陰柔路線。而不是少林「一力伏十會」力大 打力小快勝慢 。之陽剛路線。
WCK using the daoist's "avoid the strong point attack the weak spot start later but arrive first" , soft liner principle. Instead of the shaolin's " strong power subdue every technics. Stronger and faster win", hard liner principle.


所謂「避實擊虛」就是如常山之蛇。撃其頭則尾應。撃尾則頭應。撃腹則頭尾應。也因為如此。註定 了詠春拳「借 力打力。近身貼纒。善發寸勁」。
Avoid strong point attack weak spot can be analogy as the snake . When it was attacked on the head, it avoids the head attack and counter with its tail. When it was attacked on the tail. It avoids the tail attact and counter with its tail. When it was attacked on the stomach. It avoids the stomach and counter with both the head and tail. WCK is using "borrow force to destroy force, close body stick reeling, inch power" to realize the principle of avoid strong point attack weak spot.
------------------------------



And to implement , Avoid Strong point attack weak spot, snake stratergy, turning is in avoidable.



IMHO,

Real life depend on ----- relative Force Handling, momentum handling, dependable strategy. and Force Handling, momentum handling depend on physical body development.

there is no one rule fit all and mastering means know the basic skills needed and knows when to use what.