Being tough or technical? (For beginners)

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

What would you say is the most practical and logical approach in teaching/learning Wing Chun?..
Beginning with a no-nonsense,hard-core,technicaly simple to master set of motions,hard punching and kicking or…
Getting right on with the finesse things,spending lots of times on little details and striving for perfection.

I know that both ways can produce good results in the end but I tend to favor the first for my students in order to give them something usable in the beginnings.I want them to be able to punch hard and fast and be able to deflect a truck with their bong or tan even if their technique could be better.They will then be able to take the times needed to learn about the forms and advanced principles knowing that they can at least use some of it in a real confrontation.I always feed them little corrections anyway so their progression is O.K.
What do you think?..

2

Old Jong, I think training them that way just makes more work for you and the student later on and doesnt do anything but feed greediness when it comes to learning. If you are patient and work at the important things, not worrying about what I can do NOW, or if it works NOW, it will eventually start to fall in place and I think as a martial artist you will be a better person for it.

3

Hm

A thing to keep in my is that some people come there for self defence, in that way I think the first method would be most beneficial to your students (Giving them something they can use right away / or in the not too distant future) good qustions though I’m looking forward to some more views on this.

4

Red5A

I knew I was going to get that exact answer from you!..No problem because I have nothing against the ‘‘long’’ way!..But…

I see this as a normal Kung Fu experience were you have to drill something hard for rapid results. If you do Kung Fu, you are not phylosophising in front of your computer about perfection,you are training in a martial art in order to be able to defend yourself.I hope you get my idea right.Why somebody could get so effective in BJJ or whatever in a couple of months, and us in the most practical system of Kung Fu be forced to be ‘‘perfect’’ and spend long years of practice before being able to use our style?..We all someday get to the point where we use energy better and are more technical,like virtuosi on their instruments but fighting is hard and dangerous and being too focussed on perfection can let anybody beaten if not worse.

We get to the more suttle things soon enough anyway and there is no problems like you anticipe.

BTW…What is that ‘‘better person’’ thing?..Do you know me or can produce an opinion about who I am?..Let’s discuss ideas not persons.

5

It’s not saying much, but

I’m with Old Jong, from his beginning post. Give the student something first- you never know if they’ll stay the course. Why not be generous? Why be lazy and withhold anything useful? Sure, you may have to correct something later- so? Hopefully, your ‘perfection’ (whatever it’s form) won’t have taken them too far off course.

But whatever, I’m drinking koff syrup rite now so jes lak nevah mind…

6

I would agree with WTinfo that it depends on what your students are looking for. I think that both ways will have aspects of training that will be carried forward in their training (therfore it wont be “OK forget what I have have been teaching you for the last six months, now we are going to learn about power/softness”). For me personally, I wanted to learn the art not neccesarily just to kick a**. I’m 41 years old and haven’t come close to getting in a fight for more than 10 years, so the odds of me getting in a fight now is unlikely. But if I was in my younger days I would want to learn to hit hard and fast and then hit the bars. :smiley:

I’m assumming that by training them to hit hard and fast you are talking about teaching them to use structure, body mass, rooting, etc.. (no need to answer that, I already know your answer). :wink:

7

A couple of things I meant to add.

Have them fill out a questionaire, when starting WC, that includes a question on why they want to take Wing Chun? a. for self defense; b. for health benefit; c. I always wanted to learn a martial art; etc.. You could also weight the answers, instead of multiple choice, so they give you the most reason to the least reason why they want to learn Wing Chun. And then shape the class to fit the majority.

If you teach more than one set of students, you may be able to put the students into the class that most fits their needs and wants. One that learns first to hit hard and fast, and one that learns first to be precise and soft. It would also be an interesting experiment to compaire how their development progresses over the years.

Sorry for the long post.
David

8

Old Jong

I think the latter is the best way, but students seem to want something more up front, “just in case”. Since you say logical and practical, give 'em both.

9

The basic things in Wing Chun can be effective in a relatively short time.It does’nt mean that they have to be sloppy!..I get my students to perform effective tan sau,bong sau,biu sau etc…I have them punch with good elbow power and structure.It does’nt take internal power to do this correctly.All you need is proper body alingment and some coatching to learn fast and good.I do not neglect the stance training,Siu Lim Tao,dan chi sau and all the usual things but they have some kind of jump start in using defensive and offensive motions in case.

10

Old Jong…

I like to learn to defend myself right from the start. There is plenty of time to practise perfect technique. But I train so that I can defend myself today, now! Not next year or three years down the track. I imagine it would be most disheartening (and bad for student retention!) if a student was to have the absolutely perfect tan sao and be presented with a situation where it was useless, and then recieve the ass kicking of a lifetime.

I’d prefer to be able to fight and maybe not have perfect form but win than have a perfect structure and go down looking good.

Each to their own…

11

I see no one else taking the bait, so I’ll volunteer as devil’s advocate. Or victim, as the case may be. :wink:

Originally posted by old jong
What would you say is the most practical and logical approach in teaching/learning Wing Chun?..

Is there one right answer?

Beginning with a no-nonsense,hard-core,technicaly simple to master set of motions,hard punching and kicking or…

That is the largest focus of what I see offered in mainstream adult martial arts training. At least in my neighborhood. My personal endeavor costs me so much and in so many ways, I’d hate to be virtually redundant. :wink:

If immediate application, sudden confidence, or instant gratification is the primary concern for an individual, I propose it doesn’t really matter if it’s via Wing Chun or not. Actually, if being an overnight kicka$$ was my goal, I’d probably indulge in other pursuits outside of Wing Chun for it. Call me a heretic, I dare ya, LOL.

Getting right on with the finesse things,spending lots of times on little details and striving for perfection.

If the interest is more in long term results why put it off - times a-wasting. [Note: I wrote “more” and not “exclusively” … I doubt most of us perceive immediacy and quality as mutually exclusive characteristics, but rather as degrees on a continuum.] If the majority of schools are indeed focused more on immediate street defense, it seems to me a very good thing for at least a few to remain highly focused on core skill building with emphasis on the kind of gung fu that grows with effort over time.

FWIW, my ideas and opinions are heavily colored by my own personal experience, and not just theory. I started off with street-defense focused training, and now focus heavily on core skill building. I recognize all too well the opportunity costs associated with emphasis on either.

[Aside: Wouldn’t it be cool if everyone could admit their biases? :D]

One of my very favorite things is having alternatives and choices. And sometimes helping to provide them.

So this is where I’m at. For people interested to share what I’m doing - terrific! I work like heck trying to build up my Wing Chun and to give it away, and happy as a pig in poop to do so. I like to feel we offer something of value, and something that isn’t easily found on every other street in town. I also realize our anal retentiveness and attention to detail isn’t for everybody. I am delighted when we can help folks find what’s best suited to them, even if it’s elsewhere. If folks like what we do, great! If not, good luck to them and very sincerely so.

Not trying to be all things to all people helps keep the training well focused; something I highly value in my effort to make up for lost time. Like most others, I’m racing. Just happen to be racing for the long term rather than the short, LOL.

In the end, it all comes down to balance, IMHO. The key is to understand that the right balance for each and all of us may not be the same.

I know that both ways can produce good results in the end but I tend to favor the first for my students in order to give them something usable in the beginnings.I want them to be able to punch hard and fast and be able to deflect a truck with their bong or tan even if their technique could be better.They will then be able to take the times needed to learn about the forms and advanced principles knowing that they can at least use some of it in a real confrontation.I always feed them little corrections anyway so their progression is O.K.
What do you think?..

Diversity’s cool. :cool:

Regards,

  • Kathy Jo
12

Tough and technical is how I prefer to go.

Personally, I think beginners respond best to a focused 3 hrs, starting with 1/2 hr to 45min form, 1/2 hr to 45 minutes very clean technical application with frequent reference back to form- building a set of options based on a situations (double wrist grab to say, either sucker punch, straight or hook, groin kick, orheadbutt), followed by fairly rough free application of the technical exercises, concluded by about 10 minutes of hard explosive cardio training. 2x a week of this sort of thing for a few months gives a decent foundation.

Beyond that, look at the individual- rough application is unnecessary and counter-productive in people who are already fighters, all you’ll do is trigger the reflexes which are already present (which they’re trying to detrain). On the other side, non-fighters need some confidence and physical understanding of combat to get a grasp on fundamentals upon which a martial art is based- they need to get in some water before being taught the butterfly, as it were.

In general it seems better to proceed from gross motor skill to finer technical detail, working in cycles of heavy application and various other emphaseses- i.e. from application, to power, to cardio, to very technical work on body mechanics and sensitivity, etc., always bringing it back to application eventually.

My take,

Andrew

13

I tend to agree with alot of what KJ said.

However; on a side note id add that before doing WC, if self-defence is the issue then take another art first for maybe 2 years (maybe boxing or kick boxing). Then take on WC. This way you have somthign to fall back on.

The beauty of WC is in HOW it works. Why confuse new students by saying: “do it this way.” …Then… “Now forget everything i have taught you and now do it this way.”
I came from a school who did it like this it dorve me nuts that everything i had learnt was wrong! And when im trying to adapt to the more internal way, half the instructors couldnt be bothered putting in the hard work to do it right so were still teaching the external method. (hmmm… i wonder why theres so many interpretions of WC ):rolleyes: Needless to say i moved on.

I say teach WC 100% correct (and honest!) from day one. If i go to a WC calss i expect to learn WC, not the instructors ‘quick self defence course’.

Mind that i already leant how to fight before WC, and learning to take hits and getting used to the adrenelin that you will experience in a real fight is extremely necessary if you want to be effective (no matter what you learn).

14

Death to the infidel!

Some seem to understand that I don’t teach ‘‘Wing Chun’’ to my beginners!..:frowning: Maybe I did’nt or could not express my ideas clear enough!
I teach them real Wing Chun as it should be.I ask for good alignment,stance ,structure,elbow line,punching power,steps and turns,lots of two man exercices,dan chi sau and Siu lim Tao…The only thing is; Can they stop a real punch?..Can they give one back?..I can answer yes to both these questions and they don’t have to wait for some connection to the planet earth or be able to perform some tai-chi parlor tricks to do it.
And in the meantimes…They are getting deeper in the art!..

(I remember,I started a thread a long time ago.The title was: Are we a bunch of intellectuals!..:wink:

15

Re: Death to the infidel!

Originally posted by old jong
Some seem to understand that I don’t teach ‘‘Wing Chun’’ to my beginners!..:frowning: Maybe I did’nt or could not express my ideas clear enough!
I teach them real Wing Chun as it should be.I ask for good alignment,stance ,structure,elbow line,punching power,steps and turns,lots of two man exercices,dan chi sau and Siu lim Tao…

How long does it take to really understand those things? Is any development required, or is it just a matter of explaining and then anyone can perform on the spot?


The only thing is; Can they stop a real punch?..

Who’s punch?

Can they give one back?..

Who is it they are giving it back to?

I can answer yes to both these questions and they don’t have to wait for some connection to the planet earth or be able to perform some tai-chi parlor tricks to do it.

Ummmm … do I detect some inferences or assumptions here? Should some of us take it personally? :stuck_out_tongue:

Earlier I wrote “I doubt most of us perceive immediacy and quality as mutually exclusive characteristics, but rather as degrees on a continuum.” Do we live in a world of absolutes? How about Andrew’s assertion? On balance, what’s your take on this?

And in the meantimes…They are getting deeper in the art!..

Maybe so. I maintain that is not always the case.

I propose there are lots of considerations. Among them, not only different teaching approaches and philosophies, but also vastly different learning styles, goals and values. I’m not a big fan of one-size-fits-all, though I do maintain the importance of careful discernment.

As I alluded, and similar to S. Teebas experience, I was first taught by people who emphasized immediate street defense, not exclusively to, but more so than fundamental core skills. I spent 2 year building those skills. Not that they were much, but they were well ingrained enough that it took my body, sadly, another 2 years to unlearn most of them, and get on the track I hoped to be on all along.

(I remember,I started a thread a long time ago.The title was: Are we a bunch of intellectuals!..:wink:

I ask again:

a) Is there only one right answer to the question of" tough or technical?"

b) Are those qualities mutually exclusive? You seem to have answered “no” for yourself. Do you assert them to be mutually exclusive for others, and if so how broadly and on what basis?

As always, thanks for the exchange, Old Jong. A conversation such as this is, IMHO, necessarily too general to be much other than philosophical debate. I do consider it an exercise in generosity, sharing, exploration, and provoking of thought - all things I value.

On this account, you may be more intellectual than you may wish to admit. :wink: Likewise, if you think I don’t value “toughness” you haven’t heard my Cobra Kai rally yet. :smiley:

Regards,

  • Kathy Jo
16

Not an easy subject to discuss!

Yes!..And I fell like a cat on the lab’s dissection table with all these ‘‘quotes’’!..As for the Cobra Kai reference!:eek: I am surely not that type but…I would prefer to be the cobra than the rat!:wink:
So let’s get back to our usual programming!

17

I think it depends on the student.

Some will want to learn by the details, others will want to learn by jumping in and getting knocked around.

The trick is to teach each INDIVIDUAL.

18

Re: Not an easy subject to discuss!

Originally posted by old jong
Yes!..And I fell like a cat on the lab’s dissection table with all these ‘‘quotes’’!..As for the Cobra Kai reference!:eek: I am surely not that type but…I would prefer to be the cobra than the rat!:wink:
So let’s get back to our usual programming!

ROFLOL. Thanks, Old Jong - always a pleasure.

  • kj

P.S. Do things sometimes disappear into the ether around here, or what??

19

Kathy Jo!

You know I’m an human being!..[SIZE=4]I’m not an animal!..[/SIZE] You know I would’nt dare to make my students pass by the deep side of Wing Chun!..Eh?:wink: :wink: :smiley:

20

Re: Being tough or technical? (For beginners)

Originally posted by old jong
Beginning with a no-nonsense,hard-core,technicaly simple to master set of motions,hard punching and kicking or…
Getting right on with the finesse things,spending lots of times on little details and striving for perfection.
What is finesse but the refinement of the basics. Without a strong foundation, the rest is weak. Why move quickly onto details when the fundamentals are not understood?

Matrix