For all I know, that Ving Tsun guy may be the most bad a$$ fighter in the world, but that video is a good example of why most non-Ving Tsunners (and some Tsunners as well) talk down on Ving Tsun.
[QUOTE=EternalSpring;1226145]For all I know, that Ving Tsun guy may be the most bad a$$ fighter in the world, but that video is a good example of why most non-Ving Tsunners (and some Tsunners as well) talk down on Ving Tsun.[/QUOTE]
Okay. People are free to train whatever other arts they want :rolleyes:
And in my experience, people from every art talk smack about every other art. Should I care? :D. Like I said, I have used this and it works.
But if you have a clip you prefer… go and watch it. ;)
[QUOTE=EternalSpring;1226145]For all I know, that Ving Tsun guy may be the most bad a$$ fighter in the world, but that video is a good example of why most non-Ving Tsunners (and some Tsunners as well) talk down on Ving Tsun.[/QUOTE]
what he said and what ronin said
Secondly, the deflecting hand is a WT fook-sau. It’s almost like a palm-down tan sau… but in application a bit more extended, and energy is different, due to the fact that the elbow position is different. The TST guys do something similar, but call it dai-sau. I find it much more effective than a tan in this situation.
Hi GG
Yep, TST guys do Dai-Sau, though its not like a “fook”
[QUOTE=poulperadieux;1226139]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER8s4cDMTGc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-umCbT-Iik
fook palm down, for the ones reluctant to work muay boran AND Wing Chun, pretty much the same.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E8Lrm1J3c8
Elbows in boran.[/QUOTE]
Good clips and, if one looks closely, like WC they ARE looking for the bridge.
Well done Poopy!
[QUOTE=GlennR;1226150]Good clips and, if one looks closely, like WC they ARE looking for the bridge.
Well done Poopy![/QUOTE]
You Goat to learn Muay Boran Graham, I Say.
[QUOTE=poulperadieux;1226153]You Goat to learn Muay Boran Graham, I Say.[/QUOTE]
He doesnt need to learm Muay Boran, but wouldnt hurt training with them
[QUOTE=GlennR;1226155]He doesnt need to learm Muay Boran, but wouldnt hurt training with them[/QUOTE]
Why do you talk about yourself at the third person Graham?
[QUOTE=BPWT;1226137]Yes, completely agree Grumblegeezer. 
And I think this is why I am not agreeing with John - without seeing the WT guy’s footwork I think people easily miss that his body is not where it started from and so the punch is largely negated regardless of what the WT guy does with his left hand.
I tried explaining it by mentioning the specific Chum Kiu footwork, but this might also be different lineage to lineage.
Interestingly, I’ve seen the same ideas used in Japanese sword work too, against a cut coming in at the same angle.[/QUOTE]
Sounds like you’re saying he’s disregarding even the most basic of WC centerline principles by stepping/running away from the attack before he’s even made contact or attempted to engage it on the centerline. IMO, No Centerline = No Wing Chun.
That said, And no offnse meant, I’d say this really has little to do with WC at this point and is probably posted in the wrong forum 
[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1226197]Sounds like you’re saying he’s disregarding even the most basic of WC centerline principles by stepping/running away from the attack before he’s even made contact or attempted to engage it on the centerline. IMO, No Centerline = No Wing Chun.
That said, And no offnse meant, I’d say this really has little to do with WC at this point and is probably posted in the wrong forum ;)[/QUOTE]
Not running away, but yeilding to the side as he receives the pressure of the attack. I have had very limited contact with HFY WC, but the one HFY student I met stressed a very solid stance, and did not yield much. The “WT” guys tend to favor much lighter, yielding footwork. They still maintain forward pressure and centerling orientation. Or at least if they’re doing it right, they do!
This is my take on it.
[QUOTE=imperialtaichi;1226239]This is my take on it.
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151625975522053[/QUOTE]
Sound self defense John
[QUOTE=Grumblegeezer;1226212]Not running away, but yeilding to the side as he receives the pressure of the attack. I have had very limited contact with HFY WC, but the one HFY student I met stressed a very solid stance, and did not yield much. The “WT” guys tend to favor much lighter, yielding footwork. They still maintain forward pressure and centerling orientation. Or at least if they’re doing it right, they do! ;)[/QUOTE]
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying what is done in the video won’t work. I just would never advocate giving up or ‘yielding’ your position before contact is made - which is exactly what I see in the video. He does move offline of the original A-to-B centerline to pull of the block, which imo violates WC centerline ideas, as well as putting him more in-line for an attack from the other hand.
While HFY does stress good stance & root to support proper wing chun structure (as I hope all WC does), it doesn’t mean we never move. I’m just guessing here, but maybe the point that was being made at the time you experienced HFY was that we don’t move ‘just because’. If I can stand my ground and deal with the threat with minimal movement or footwork, that is just smart wing chun - if approaching fighting from an idea of economy of motion and maximal efficiency!
And. in HFY, having a set point of reference for your self is key to understanding wing chun A-to-B centerline concepts for engagement. Maybe it’s just we have different ideas and understanding of wing chun centerline?
To help clarify, here’s a quick blog entry on the subject by somoene you may know http://www.hungfablog.com/2013/04/18/blog-post-centerline-wing-chun/
[QUOTE=GlennR;1226249]Sound self defense John[/QUOTE]
Haha, I think like a girl
I tend to use more of a biu sau / high fook sau shape so I can disengage my biceps. Structurally speaking I get my body mass behind it and have found it to be able to withstand big haymakers thrown with full body weight.
As for a ‘proper hook’ thrown tight and and fast, well, that is a different story.
[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1226254]If I can stand my ground and deal with the threat with minimal movement or footwork, that is just smart wing chun - if approaching fighting from an idea of economy of motion and maximal efficiency!
Maybe it’s just we have different ideas and understanding of wing chun centerline?
[/QUOTE]
Good points…and I think these two statements are major parts of disagreements between people from different lineages.
Add to this the variations of their forms which is where we get our ‘alphabet’ from…and finally, throw into this mix the individuals (or their Sifu’s) intrepretations of the tools and methods of WC!
It definitely makes for confusing conversation at times, especially via a forum.
Here’s Michael Casey of EBMAS, another WT branch, demonstrating essentially the same attack and defense as in the clip posted in the OP. I think this one is a little clearer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfCcpyqO4Io
What else can I say, except “Red pants!” 
Same problem but different example. In first vid haymaker is coming from back leg and Leung Ting guy moves right into the lead hand. In a real situation the other hand always comes and he would have surely been hit directly on side of face as he moved in. In second vid haymaker from lead leg but same problem leung ting person moves directly into the back power hand cross and would end up on his ass or worse if this is done in a real situation against anyone with any training at all.
The only reason either example looks good is because the attacker wildly commits with punch and allows their back hand to go dead just dropping out of the way.
The more interesting discussion and if I have time will come back to is the footwork,body positioning and usage.
Wing Chun fist saying’s " receive what comes “, " My opponent moves but I move first”, " Footwork is to be fast, nimble and ever changing". How do we combine all 3? JP goes with sound structure to receive but is critical of the footwork. Geezer seems to go with footwork and critical of the solid structure route. How do we combine both? Can we combine both? How do we receive?
[QUOTE=BPWT;1226147]Okay. People are free to train whatever other arts they want :rolleyes:
And in my experience, people from every art talk smack about every other art. Should I care? :D. Like I said, I have used this and it works.
But if you have a clip you prefer… go and watch it. ;):D[/QUOTE]
Well, to clarify, my comment was more based on the presentation. I know the concept(s) work, but I never really was a big fan of people proving their techniques or concepts by using them against half a$$ed attacks. In a way, it’s almost as if people are training to learn how to fight untrained people.
And I agree that lots of people talk smack. But not all negative sounding comments are talking smack, imo.
[QUOTE=hunt1;1226442]
Wing Chun fist saying’s " receive what comes “, " My opponent moves but I move first”, " Footwork is to be fast, nimble and ever changing". How do we combine all 3? JP goes with sound structure to receive but is critical of the footwork. Geezer seems to go with footwork and critical of the solid structure route. How do we combine both? Can we combine both? How do we receive?[/QUOTE]
I think both can be combined, in fact, they should be combined and that’s probably how it was always intended to be. Imo, it’s no different in Ving Tsun than any other martial art or even any sport. Basketball players have to dribble, catch, throw, shoot all while moving and having people trying to stop them from scoring. Handball players have to move around and plant themselves to hit with accuracy and power and immediately move again. Boxers/Muay Thai Guys/Grapplers all have to move while being rooted while still being able to receive and respond to attacks.
How do we train it? I would say some form of contact sparring where there’s enough intensity to test moving, receiving, attacking, etc. It’ll force people to move naturally without a premade pattern, and this will naturally force the people training to deal with “moving while being rooted and attacking/defending/etc” because while moving naturally, attacks are bound to be made and both people will feel where their structure, movement, or other techniques are compromised. Once they feel this, they’ll be able to work on it and refine it.