I'd like to see . . .

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

. . . these things stop being a part of the WCK community:

  1. To stop using “history” to market or validate what someone is doing. If it works, and works against skilled fighters, they don’t need the history to market it or validate it. If it doesn’t work, paticuarly against skilled fighters, then all the “history” in the world doesn’t make it worth a bucket of warm spit.

  2. To stop using titles like grandmaster, master, sifu, etc. These do not reflect performance (like a black belt in BJJ does, for example) but are purely (cultural in some cases) honorifics that have no real significance except to some in that group. And it’s just more marketing. If they can make what they do work, especially against skilled fighter, then they don’t need titles. A person doesn’t need to call himself “giant killer” if he has really killed giants. “Rickson” says it all, without a title.

  3. Stop “demonstrating” things. Show them in action, in real fighting, or don’t show it. If a person can’t do it in fighting, then they shouldn’t be demonstrating it in the first place. If they can do it in fighting, why won’t they show it in that context?

  4. Stop the hyperbole. Don’t talk about how good someone’s instructor is, how WCK is a superior art (for a laugh, Google “superior martial art” and see how everyone makes that claim), etc. It just makes us in WCK look like clowns.

  5. Stop with the “theory”. Focus on performance. If it helps performance, then great. Show us (see #3) that performance, and we’ll be interested.

  6. Stop with the “wing chun isn’t for sport” excuse. All that says to any genuine fighter is that “I can’t make my wing chun work.” If someone can fight, they can fight anywhere. If they can’t fight, they can’t fight anywhere.

  7. Stop the role-playing and associated nonsense in WCK. WCK is a fighting method, an approach to fighting and a means to train that approach. If someone wants philosphy, religion, social interaction, mysticism, the “kung fu life”, to be someone’s “disciple”, to be part of a “family”, etc. then by all means do that – just don’t bring it to WCK. None of that will help anyone be a better WCK fighter; it only detracts one from being a better fighter. And it just makes the WCK community look silly.

  8. Stop with talk or concern about “lineage”. See #1, 3, 5, and 7.

All these things are empty, at least in terms of increasing fighting (WCK) performance, and if someone uses them or relies on them, it means what they are saying is empty. And it would be a start toward dealing with those things that are important.

2
  1. Have the balls to test yourself, in spite of the chance you might get whooped. Its easy to be top dog in your own little cloister, if you never venture outside its walls.

(This goes for everyone though, not just WCK in particular.)

3

  1. stop assuming you’re right and everyone else is wrong

  2. stop overtly or covertly denigrating other people just because they don’t agree with your viewpoints

  3. stop assuming the values you have should be shared by everyone else

  4. stop needing to feel superior to everyone else

  5. stop acting as though you have the right to say and do whatever you want while at the same time trying to deny that right to other people

  6. stop putting words into other people’s mouths, and then critisizing them for what you put into their mouths

  7. stop thinking that just because you think respect should be earned, disrepect is freely given

:slight_smile: Just playin’. I actually happen to agree with most of what Terrence listed.

Regards,
Alan

4

So do I.

Terence was right on the money with that post.

5

Zhuge Liang wrote:

  1. stop assuming you’re right and everyone else is wrong

**See #3, 5 of my post: if you’re using your WCK in fighting and making it work for you (this is performance level) then you can at least say you are right – for you. If someone else is fighting, they can say they are right for them. Two high level boxers or BJJists often do things very differently but they can both make their case because they are able to make it work (in fighting). If someone has never made it work, how can they assume that they are right?

  1. stop overtly or covertly denigrating other people just because they don’t agree with your viewpoints

**If we focus on performance, this happens naturally.

  1. stop assuming the values you have should be shared by everyone else

**It depends on what you mean by “values.” If we accept that WCK is first and foremost a fighting method (if we don’t accept that, well then there’s no point even talking about fighting since other things take precedence), then any discussion of skill, how to do things, training, etc. will naturally focus on the values associated with increased performance. If we see WCK as something else, then we will have differing values.

  1. stop needing to feel superior to everyone else

**The interesting thing about fighting is that it puts one’s ego in check (because you will, no matter how skilled you are, get pounded all the time). There will be no illusions or delusions since you actually see for yourself what you can and cannot do. It’s only those that don’t fight as part of their training that begin to feel superior (since they “speculate” about these things).

  1. stop acting as though you have the right to say and do whatever you want while at the same time trying to deny that right to other people

  2. stop putting words into other people’s mouths, and then critisizing them for what you put into their mouths

  3. stop thinking that just because you think respect should be earned, disrepect is freely given

**Everyone has a right to their opinion: I beleive in the 1st Amendment. But opinions, like individuals, in and of themselves, aren’t always to be respected. Some opinions are simply wrong or silly or injurious, etc. Anyone can come onto a forum and post anything – do we respect them for it? Anyone can teach WCK and call themselves “master” or “grandmaster”. If you practice BJJ, who would you listen too – someone that has never rolled or fought but has opinions on how to train, who is good, how to do certain things, etc. or someone that has fought successfully with their BB against skilled fighter, who has proven they can make what they do work, etc.?

**The whole point of my post – which you seem to have missed – is that IMO we in WCK need to focus on performance, our proven ability to use WCK in fighting (where it is meant to be used), and if we do that, the rest will take care of itself. If we focus on anything other than performance (history, titles, hyperbole, marketing, lineage, etc.) as indicators that we know what we are talking about, then it only means we don’t know what we are talking about.

6

**The whole point of my post – which you seem to have missed – is that IMO we in WCK need to focus on performance, our proven ability to use WCK in fighting (where it is meant to be used), and if we do that, the rest will take care of itself. If we focus on anything other than performance (history, titles, hyperbole, marketing, lineage, etc.) as indicators that we know what we are talking about, then it only means we don’t know what we are talking about.

Seems to me you got a book in you Terence based on the above, but then again it may only sell well if you talk about the angle of Taan Sau :slight_smile: :slight_smile: Comprimise and call it “applying the angle of Taan Sau in the urban environment” :wink:

7

Hi Terrence,

LOL, it appears we’ve talked past one another…again. In any case, I did agree with most of the points you made in your original post, as I’ve already said. But I guess even when I agree with you I’m wrong :D. In any case, you listed a bunch of points you’d like wc people to adhere to in an ideal world and I simply added a few more.

Cheers,
Alan

8

According to Marc MacYoung, there are five focuses of martial arts, not just your “fighting” focus.

So, in the spirit of your posts which put forth your theory that your focus alone is the arbiter of what is and is not Ving Tsun, I’m going to ask you to first prove your theory.

Prove to me that Ving Tsun Paai is meant for a focus characterized as “a dead-end” by the aforementioned source. Disprove that it was meant for Tradition/physical art/self-discipline. Show that its focus was not to build the spirit and health. List where it was successfully and consistently used in sport/tournaments geared toward what you consider “real fighting”. Show that it was not geared toward demonstrations in its blueprints.

Unless you can do this, then all you have is your own theory as to what the focus of Ving Tsun is truly for. And, unless you can prove your theory, it remains just a theory - even if you yourself can go around opening cans o’whoopass on any and everyone not armed with a taser or handgun - or a Buick LeSabre.

To focus on performance infers that that a practitioner does not wish to make it about one’s ego or image, not your inference that Ving Tsun is meant to be used for fighting. This is because any and all possible uses of this art has a clear way of focusing on performance and minimizing the intrusion of the ego and its image consciousness.

Fighting does not have the monopoly on performance as a gauge of effectiveness if it is the primary focus for a given Martial Art. And, it certainly does nothing, in and of itself as a distinct focus, to minimize the intrusion of the ego and its image on performance metrics.

9

Wing Chun, like every other martial art, SHOULD be based on performance.

That’s not to say that other things aren’t important, such as what was listed in the article by Mark Mac Young that Tom Kagan referenced.

But I think it’s clear, whether we want to take issue with Terence’s single-minded and myopic view that to demonstrate proof that you can fight (and have fought) with your martial art is the ONE AND ONLY criteria to use when judging a martial art or an individual within the art…

regardless of what one thinks of Terence’s insistence that this is the one and only way to go…

the fact still remains that Wing Chun has within it’s borders a very substantial amount of people who make all kinds of claims about themselves (and their version of the art)…THAT THEY HAVE NEVER BACKED UP…

by demonstrating that they indeed CAN fight using wing chun, and that they can fight WELL.

Too many self proclaimed grandmasters, masters, sifus, experts, legends, champions, fighters of “hundreds” of streetfights that no one has witnessed, and on and on.

Now some can argue that this is the case within every martial art; but in point of fact, I can’t think of even one other art with NUMEROUS people making those kinds of claims…

that doesn’t have some sort of OBJECTIVE venue (ie.- tournaments, transparent ranking systems that includes actually fighting/sparring in order to attain a rank, etc.) to lend some some sort of validation to the fighting “claims” being made.

Sure there are people who may make (and have made) spurious claims about being a “champion” in karate, kickboxing, wrestling, jiu jitsu, judo, TKD, etc…

but at least there are records kept and events recorded within these other arts.

Just one case in point: anybody remember Jean Claude Van Dam’s claim at one time to being THE FORMER “European kickboxing champion” ?

Well…it was researched.

And it was found that Jean Claude Van Varenberg (his real name) participated in exactly ONE low level karate/kickboxing tournament in Belgium, back in the day. A tournament that had no real ranking (or recognition) within the European martial arts community at that time. Certainly not a “championship status” type event.

So he was exposed as being much less than what he claimed to be.

How do you do that if there are NO VENUES WHATSOEVER within a given martial art (ie.- wing chun).

Now my point is this: I’m NOT saying that there aren’t some very skilled wing chun FIGHTERS - even though they never fought in an organized event - because I know such people do exist (and have existed).

But there’s just way too much smoke and mirrors being used by numerous people involved in this art.

And because of that, I think the spirit of what Terence has been saying, if not the “letter of it”…is correct.

10

Who gives a sh1t what Marc “The Animal” MacYoung – someone who has never proven he could do anything besides write funny books – says? He’s not a martial artist, he’s not a fighter . . . he’s a role-player who sells books about role-playing to folks that want to role-play. So, it’s not surprising that he advocates role-playing as part of martial arts.

The focus of martial arts is fighting – you can get all those “other things” outside of martial arts but you can’t get the fighting from those “other things.”

11

Evasive manuver. :smiley: You’ve become a top notch troll, T. Gotta hand you that much! :stuck_out_tongue:

12

LOL. Using the basis of your theory to launch an an ad-hominem attack on the citation so that you can come full circle back to the conclusion of your theory, then restating your theory, is not proof.

You can get the fighting outside of martial arts, too - and probably a lot better and quicker depending on where one lives and what’s their demeanor.

So why fight? What is its purpose? Can you come up with a reason to fight where not only is martial arts useful in such a scenario, but that another avenue of study wouldn’t be better equipped to provide the tools to achieve that end (beyond Marc MacYoung’s five, that is)? And if what you say is true, that there are better ways to achieve the ends of each of even the “five focuses”, then the conclusion must be that there is absolutely no reason for fighting within the context of what your focus of martial arts defines as fighting (one-on-one, hand-to-hand, face-to-face, fair-and-square, with or without rudimentary weapons - or something close).

And, if that is the case, then there actually is no real need for martial arts and there is no real focus whatsoever to martial arts - not even fighting.

…well, other than focusing on art itself. But what is art if not a personal expression of beauty?

:cool:

13

Ultimatewingchun

I am usually just a spectator here and very seldom stick my nose into these types of discussions (as I think I have stated before). Because I feel this is a no win situation, at least in my opinion.

I guess what really gets me a bit, is the fact that people need to feel that is’s their job call people out or to be the Wing Chun police. Why are people so concerned with what claims are made by Joe Blow? Jean Claude Van Dam made some claims! So what??? Did it truly affect you and me? Same goes with any particular Wing Chun instructor. I am of the belief that if someone makes a claim…then great. It isn’t what I would do, or how I teach, and that’s ok!

Too many self proclaimed grandmasters, masters, sifus, experts, legends, champions, fighters of “hundreds” of streetfights that no one has witnessed, and on and on.

And??? many if not all the peopel have never seen any one on this forum in a true street fight. Do I need to see a video tape of Victor Parlati fighting in the streets to believe that he knows what he is doing? No, I take your word for it, whether true or not…it isn’t for me to decide. And if I did see you in a real life conflict and lose (which anyone who has fought enough, has surely lost a few), does this mean Victor sucks, or his Wing Chun sucks? No, you just lost that day!

Remember, you don’t have to believe in something for it to be true or a fact.

But there’s just way too much smoke and mirrors being used by numerous people involved in this art.

Still not sure why this matters or how it affetcs you, me or anyone else?

Wing Chun, like every other martial art, SHOULD be based on performance.

Agreed! But who sets those standards? You? Me? Or the next generation of instructors? There will always be those who feel that it is them, regardless of what you and I think. And on any given day in the street either could prove themselves correct!

Too many self proclaimed grandmasters, masters, sifus, experts, legends, champions, fighters of “hundreds” of streetfights that no one has witnessed, and on and on.

And??? What’s in a title…I know people who wear no title such as these and still make these claims. Again, makes no difference to me and shouldn’t to anyone else if they are confident in their own skills and abilities.

Lastly, I truly try not to worry myself about what others say, I feel it takes too much time and is somewhat school yard to even care. Not to mention, if I went around proving myself to everyone, I would never have time for anything else. And regardless of claims and titles, I try to spend my time learning from what they have to say.

Though these are just my opinions, just as yours are yours…they don’t mean much. :wink:

14

azwingchun:

Why take my word for it? (that I can fight well in the street)

Why assume that I’m REALLY deserving of the title Sifu?

Or that Master John Doe REALLY is a Master?

And if it turns out that all three of the above statements are false…

Doesn’t phoniness bother you? (Obviously it doesn’t).

But it bothers me.

And it’s starting to bother a lot of other people as well.

Otherwise…we wouldn’t be talking to each other about this issue as often as we do.

There’s too much fluff in wing chun.

This is from another current thread, but it fits this one like a glove:

"Right now my right knee is killing me because I refuse to stop training even after severely tearing the LCL. The ring finger on my right hand has been swollen, stiff, and painful for two weeks, but I just tape it up and keep going back to training. My girlfriend is ****ed that I dont spend enough time with her and even when I do spend time with her, my mind is on jiujitsu. Instead of working my ass of at my career, Im following the sport bjj scene to find out who’s on top and how they got there. Basically, for the last 8+ years I have been really obsessed with this grappling/jiujitsu thing and I am thankfully not a black belt yet.

A black belt should mean something. It should mean that, without a doubt, you have proven that you have put in your time and blood to improve yourself. The path to it should be extremely hard and at times very discouraging because none of the necessary skills come easily or quickly. While 4 year olds get their black belts in TKD and everyone and their mothers take up karate, I want to know that the art I train is too tough for most people."

There’s too much fluff in wing chun.

15

One thing I would like to toss out to be devil’s advocate here.

STOP CARING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO!

It does not effect you or your training. Honestly, when it comes to working out with people I give a rats arse about lineage, grand master this, cerfitied this, won this many street fights this, or grand UFC champion. I only care if you can positively effect my training and have a good impact on my kung fu.

So, some of you are fed up with the BS and the politics and you demand to standardize stuff, or you want people to start doing, what YOU think is right.

Terrance,

MA training is not about fighting, fighting is the basics of what you get. You get so much more from MA training. Kung Fu training has changed my life in many positive ways. I work out now hard core at least twice a week, and do light work outs inbetween. I am healthier, and have better posture, and I can now learn to relax my body more. We are not warriors, we do not need to defend our lives at all times. Sure, you may have that occasional conflict with life where it throws some danger in your path and you must fight. Then, only then will the fighting part really matter.

I have been in 4 real fights in the last 3 years. All of them were multiple attackers vs multiple attackers, all of them ended really quick, and all of them involved some drunks.

Now, I will agree to you for some extent, you need to yield skills when training for several or more years of a MA. Otherwise you are probably doing something wrong. I do heavy sparring, even against multiple attackers. Its continous with all strikes allowed and protective gear. We also cover all ranges of combat, and I now, actually have some formal Jiu Jitsu training. So my ground game is not pathetic anymore. I also work out with my ground game and occasionally we do bull in the ring which beats the utter carp outta you no matter who you are.

All in all, I do not care how YKS, HFY, YM, Cho, whatever train, or how they do their system. I don’t care what lineage you come from. If you can teach me new stuff that adds to my game and does not take away you are good in my book.

So, IMO, you should be concetrating on yourself, and your training partners and not what everyone else is doing. Otherwise, we will always be at conflict with everyone, because everyone will always be different.

16

Fresh,

There’s nothing evasive in my response – I just wonder why anyone would use “The Animal” as some authority on martial arts when there is no evidence that he’s ever really practiced any martial art for any significant period of time, hasn’t fought anyone with any skill to demonstrate that he has some (so he’s “worked” bars!), etc. He’s just another role-player making money off of other role-players. There are lots of snake-oil salesmen in the martial arts. They are easy to recognize.

AZwingchun,

It’s about time we start policing ourselves. As it stands now, anyone can claim to be a master or grandmaster, anyone can claim to be an authority on WCK, folks can make up history, etc. WCK is drowning in BS and role-playing, with masters and grandmasters that can’t fight their way out of wet paper bags, with anyone able to be a “sifu” and teach nonsense, etc. You believe we don’t need to police ourselves?

The question of skill isn’t about who has had a “streetfight” – and btw, anyone, ANYONE, who believes “streetfights” are the ultimate expression of fighting skill (like “The Animal”), has by their belief, shown that they are a nonfighting theoretician scrub – it’s about performance level: at what level of skill we can make our WCK work. Performance standards are not “set” by anyone; our performance level is simply what we can do at the moment. The only way to know is to do WCK – fight – and see. Of course, the grandmasters and masters and most of the sifu don’t want to hear this because they can’t perform (fight) at any significant level. Who would want to learn a fighting method from someone that can’t fight well? So they avoid showing what they can, or more appropriately, cannot do, by instead doing demonstrations of their “skills” or by “touching hands” or by using other cooperative situations – anything except fighting skilled fighters and putting it out there for us to judge for ourselves what skills they really have or don’t have. The ricebowl and the egos will take quite the beating if folks begin to focus on performance instead of all the BS and marketing. But, if we in WCK don’t want to drown in a sea of BS – and we’re already swimming in one – we need to change direction and focus on performance instead of the BS.

Tom,

Art is in the expression, in the doing, in performance. Mohammed Ali, Rickson Gracies, etc. are artists. Someone that can’t make their boxing or BJJ work at a high level is not (yet) an artist. WCK is a fighting method. To express WCK is to fight. One is not “doing” WCK or “expressing” WCK without fighitng. Same with BJJ, MT, boxing, wrestling, etc. If someone wants to lead a “kung fu life” or role-play by bai si-ing and becoming an “indoor disciple” or believe that being a Hare Krishna will make your life better – that’s fine. But it has nothing to do with developing skill, e.g., increasing performance, in fighting (using WCK).

17

Ultimatewingchun

Why take my word for it? (that I can fight well in the street)

Maybe you have…who am I to say you haven’t…I wasn’t there. And what if you don’t have any true martial skill, but just won the fight (happens all the time…someone has to win)…does this mean you are a great fighter??? What if you have great skill and won this match but lost the last one? Are you a great fighter or were you just lucky??? My point being a win doesn’t mean someone is good, great or even judged by there experiences.

Again, it has no affect on me and my world whatsoever. Your claims don’t make me personally any better or worse.

Why assume that I’m REALLY deserving of the title Sifu?

Well, this kinda gets into another topic in my opinion. Whether you call yourself Sifu, Master, or even Grandmaster holds no bearing on your experiences. What makes someone a Sifu? Or when should someone be called a Sifu? Hmmmmmn…I guess this lays in the hands of whatever organization you train with. Some people hand out belts like there going out of style, some schools make ya really work for it and then there are those that lay somewhere in between. And whether I like it or think it’s fair or not, still has no affect in my life. And hopefully your Sifu made you work hard and truly earn it…for your sake.

Or that Master John Doe REALLY is a Master?

What’s a Master??? I would personally never use that term as it gives the impression that I have learned it all. But those that use it, that’s fine…if it makes them feel better. :wink:

And if it turns out that all three of the above statements are false…

Again, who does it affect? You or them? Not me.

And it’s starting to bother a lot of other people as well.

Honestly!!! I really and truly don’t know why??? If they aren’t what they claim to be or what their teachers make them believe they are…then possibly someday they will find out the truth and hopefully move on for their sake…not mine.

There’s too much fluff in wing chun.

This may true, but again, doesn’t make me any better or worse.

"Right now my right knee is killing me because I refuse to stop training even after severely tearing the LCL. The ring finger on my right hand has been swollen, stiff, and painful for two weeks, but I just tape it up and keep going back to training. My girlfriend is ****ed that I dont spend enough time with her and even when I do spend time with her, my mind is on jiujitsu. Instead of working my ass of at my career, Im following the sport bjj scene to find out who’s on top and how they got there. Basically, for the last 8+ years I have been really obsessed with this grappling/jiujitsu thing and I am thankfully not a black belt yet.

Forgive me, but I am not quite sure what you are getting at here?!?!? Was it that this guy trains hard even when injured and that shows what a great fighter he is? Honestly, not trying to be funny, just didn’t get your meaning behind this example.

But if that was the point…it doesn’t sound like a very smart fighter. Why not allow yourself to heal, all in the name of being the best!!! A lot of heart yes, but not the smartest thing.

A black belt should mean something. It should mean that, without a doubt, you have proven that you have put in your time and blood to improve yourself.

This is true with any title earned, from a lower level student level ranking to the Master or Sifu rank that’s being given. But when you say proven, this throws me off a bit?!?!? Again, proven to who? Himself and his teacher, you, me or the world?

While 4 year olds get their black belts in TKD and everyone and their mothers take up karate, I want to know that the art I train is too tough for most people."

Agree again, but I am sure you don’t go around thinking about this all day, I hope you have better things to worry or think about. Sure, I will take your side on this…when I see this it bugs me at that moment in time, moreso, that the parents are buying into this…and worse the kid. But it only affects them in the long run.

You know Victor, we can go back and forth about this all day, week or even all year…but in the end, ask yourself what affect does it truly have on you? If I make a claim of add any topic here , and I can’t back it up in real life…it is me that should be worried or bugged out by it…not you my friend. Once again, I hope you have much better things to do then worry about my claims. :wink:

18

You ask why worry about this stuff? Well, if our goal is to (significantly) increase our performance (fighting) ability by practicing WCK, a fighting method, then we need to ask ourselves two fundamental (there are other related ones) questions:

  1. how can I measure my performance (to know whether or not my performance level is increasing and, if so, at what rate?),

and

  1. what do I mean by performance?

Since it is our fighting ability we are trying to increase, it is our fighting performance using our WCK tools (the WCK method) that is our “performance”. Just like the performance of a boxer or BJJ practitioner or MT stylist is their ability to fight with their tools. Our performance level is the skill level of opponents that we can consistently handle or hang with. That’s the same with BJJ or MT or boxing or any other MA. The only way to determine that is by fighting using our WCK.

Moreoever, the only way to to significantly increase that performance level is to include fighting as the focus and as a part of our training, just as does any other fighter.

This is, of course, only important if increased performance is important to you. If other “things” are what motivates you to “practice” WCK, then it may be meaningless to you.

19

I agree with terrance in some respects. If I went off and posted everything I have heard from actual sifus about how some people really are I would start a huge flame war. That is because lots of things are infact embelished.

However, it all doesn’t matter in the end. None of it does. It matters what you get out of it, and if you decide to pass it down yourself to others someday. To learn and gain from the art, not to get into petty internet fights.

To express wing chun by fighting can be seen as a disgrace as well. Injuring your students, your fellow wing chunners, etc, is not the way to express the art. You should express the art in a positive way and as any martial art, it does infact include fighting. However, to have that mindset that, that is the only way to express the art, then you are missing something. Having the brutish mentality of always fighting (too much yang) seems un appealing to me.

I think if you train the art properly with the right mindset and ego then you are indeed expressing what it truly is. Part of that would be fighting, but definately not the only aspect.

20

Terence

It’s about time we start policing ourselves.

You couldn’t have said it better here…policing “OURSELVES”, I don’t have time to police you and the martial arts world.

As it stands now, anyone can claim to be a master or grandmaster, anyone can claim to be an authority on WCK, folks can make up history, etc.

You are absolutely correct! But who’s to say that they aren’t true? Let’s not even get into history proof. LOL!!! And ranking? Well, that is going to vary from school to school, so kind a moot point.

WCK is drowning in BS and role-playing

You may be correct about some schools, but not all.

You believe we don’t need to police ourselves?

Here’s a question for you. How do you police every Wing Chun school that is now available in the world today? How about policing our own schools, and feeling great that you, me or whoever has a school, knows that they taught their group very well and to the best of “their” ability? If you ask me, trying to police everyone is a huge responsibility

ANYONE, who believes “streetfights” are the ultimate expression of fighting skill (like “The Animal”), has by their belief, shown that they are a nonfighting theoretician scrub – it’s about performance level: at what level of skill we can make our WCK work. Performance standards are not “set” by anyone; our performance level is simply what we can do at the moment.

Why don’t street fights fall into the “MOMENT” as you put it? I don’t know about the rest of you, but if you call performance lasting 30 minutes in the UFC against Randy Cotoure, then we don’t agree. But if you talk about being able to defend yourself in the streets against the average everyday attacker or street thug…then I agree. This is what I train for, and for you and I to be up front with each other, I place a high degree of difference between the two.

we need to change direction and focus on performance instead of the BS.

I can agree here, as long as we agree as mentioned above in my last statement. But at the same time we study Wing Chun, and there is nothing wrong about discussing Wing Chun…whether that be histories, angles, looking within our systems for answers or what have you. Performance is just one side of it, and there is nothing wrong with that, Wing Chun has many sides…not just chi sao (hopefully). :wink: