Come On t_niehoff
Someone Calling Themselves t_niehoff Wrote>
Rene, don’t feed the trolls
Don’t you mean “TROLL” Singular not Plural;)
Once Again Someone Calling Themselves “Geezer” Wrote This:D
Sheldon
Originally posted by t_niehoff
[B]
‘Without him, most of us would not be doing WCK.’ TN
…Certainly there are folks - including me! - that didn’t begin practicing WCK because of BL, but there is no denying that his fame (and skill) led to the world-wide explosion of WCK. TN
[/b]
I wasn’t denying that. But that’s not what you were saying with the first statement. I think I’m fairly safe in saying that none of my teachers were influenced more than the slightest amount by BL. Nor have I been. And nor, it seems, were you.
[b]and no offense… i’ve never trained with mr glover, but a friend of mine who has tells me the main thing he’s got from wc is a very strong centreline punch… (Mat)
So? TN
[/b]
So that can very effective. Doesn’t mean I’m going to take second-hand reported advice from/about him about the whole system without having met/trained with the guy.
[b]this thread is, as so many others from the blessed wc forum… is pish. (Mat)
And thank you for all that you’ve contributed to it. 
Isn’t it amusing that it is always the folks that have contributed nothing of substance that complain most loudly about how others contribute so little. TN
Terence [/B]
I don’t think that was loudly. Check my posting history on this forum, and see how few statements I’ve made about other peoples’ lineage, teachers I don’t know and have never met, or general speculative bullshit. Then came back with patronising comments. BTW, I usually like your posts, even if I don’t agree with them: you don’t know me, and haven’t seen me post here for a while, because it’s mostly garbage and I choose not to waste my time with it. So don’t make assumptions. If I want to talk trash, I’ll do it on the main forum.
I knew it was a mistake to quit lurking on this forum.
(Much) later, amigos.
Rant over.
Why shutting down and shooting down contributors so soon Terence? Except for the noise its getting quiet.
jesse + blinkered
i have experienced numerous wing chun users who can fight street/ring, adapt to all attackers and generally be the bees f’ing knees!
i live in the UK, and their are some very competant players who cross train, but still keep wc as their core. plus their fight skills are awesome. i.e. james sinclair, milan prosenica (euro-full fight champ, heavyweight 5 yrs), nick smart, tom lamont ( world vale tudo champ ex-wt), kevin chan, + various unknown full-contact comp entrants who train with most of all the UK wing chun community.
we the above feel jesse needs to show us his belt and his trophy, rather than trying to lead with his mouth full of his arse.
My System Takes a Lifetime to Learn
Originally posted by yuanfen
I think that there are some definitional issues involved here-
the meaning of learning. meaning of a system etc. There are other muddling issues, such as—differences in deliberately drawing out of tuition paying time versus legitimate journey of
discovery or quality time spent with a master craftsman or teacher. Without getting into lineage flames-duration of quality time spent in a teaching/learning relationship can be often seen by discerning eyes in the results.
joy chaudhuri
Hi Joy,
You make good points. I admit to being confused when someone says they “learned the whole system.” A beginner’s tan sau doesn’t compare to a five year student, who in turn, doesn’t compare to the same student’s hands in 20 years. What is learning? What is the system? Others who assert their time frames need to proffer or provide the definition so we can attempt to fathom their points of view.
If someone tells me that they have finished their lineage’s system, and their hands still are no good, then what is to blame: the individual, his teacher, or the system? There is too much that passes as Wing Chun in the world for this lack of clear definition to be presented as communication and not merely argument.
As is often pointed out (by me) :D, even bad or incomplete Wing Chun is better than no Wing Chun, so the claimed ability to fight successfully against some other fighters is not a consistent criteria for measurement.
Regards,
Jesse Glover Article Was Old
Originally posted by Big Vern
we the above feel jesse needs to show us his belt and his trophy, rather than trying to lead with his mouth full of his arse.
The Jesse Glover article was old, and as David Petersen pointed out, it is unfair and wrong to get overly critical of the messenger. Glover made some good points and after all, it’s just his opinion.
Regards,
Jesse Glover Article Was Old
Originally posted by Big Vern
we the above feel jesse needs to show us his belt and his trophy, rather than trying to lead with his mouth full of his arse.
The Jesse Glover article was old, and as David Petersen pointed out, it is unfair and wrong to get overly critical of the messenger. Glover made some good points and after all, it’s just his opinion.
Regards,
For whatever it’s worth some may find this interesting:
I wrote these guys an email:
With all due respect to Mr. Glover and his organization, I and others find this article to be presumptuous and wholly inappropriate. I believe that this article’s content is flawed and insulting to the Wing Chun community at large. It speaks as if Mr. Glover via Bruce had/has a uniquely qualified and accurate understanding of the system, which of course implies that the rest of the WCK community has been lacking all through the years. Ironic when you consider that Bruce was a very, very junior student in the system. While it may be true that some WCK schools are lacking, the notion that Glover, via Bruce alone ‘get it’ while everyone else doesn’t is absurd and offensive.
In the article Mr.Glover states that Wing Chun techniques are designed to deal with Wing Chun techniques. This is patently false. Wing Chun concepts are designed to deal with zones and energy - the kinds of energy that exists in combat - not for a particular attack. This is common knowledge among educated Wing Chun people and thus makes one question the understanding Mr. Glover has for the topic on which he wrote. To make such a statement is to insult the intelligence of the system and it’s followers. Glover goes on to say or imply that Bruce came up with the idea of forward energy in Chi-Sao and that this added dimension, revealed by him and Glover can bring the system to life - how arrogant. The dimensions he speaks of is Wing Chun. While I appreciate Mr. Glover addressing the importance of forward energy it is absolutely ludicrous to assert that he/they evolved the idea. IMO this should be withdrawn. Masters of the system who came to this country in the 60s and 70s have been teaching the importance of using forward spring energy along with accurate transmission of the whole system for more than 30 years in this country. This article insults this legacy and the people who made it happen. Many of these people include Bruce’s sifu, si hing, si dai, etc so I have to wonder what Bruce would say if he saw this article.
I must ask: What is the purpose of writing such an article and posting it on the web? If I didn’t know better I would say it is a marketing tactic designed to make prospective students think that Mr. Glover has the corner on WCK concepts, which again is not the case. I would suggest that posting more accurate and palatable content would yield greater respect and less animosity toward Mr. Glover’s group.
Chris responded:
I havn’t read the article you describe as Jesse having written, BUT I would like to say both he and I are sensitive to your perceptions. I have a lot of friends in and out
of Wing-Chun, whom I like very much..BUT what we do is drastically different than
Wing-Chun that I have come across, in a wide variety of ways. This is a little like my Ju-Jitsu friends, who, after working out with me for several years, asked what I thought of their art. I told them that they seemed to me to have about half a dozen underlying principles, and they ought to take those things and work them against the very different types of individuals available, hand to hand, adding the problem of force. My reason for the “force” statement was that, when have you ever seen a real conflict that didn’t involve force? If that is so, why “practice” without it? Now, there
are very few of Jesse’s students who have enough of the foundation he offers to come to that conclusion, BUT they all practice hand to hand, with force. Force puts a practitioner “on”…establishing structure, etc., along with complete “relationship” to the opponent. “Sensing arts”, those more involved internally than punch and kick arts, are all about relationship. What I told my Ju-Jitsu friends is that after those few
VERY effective techniques, everything was a counter to a counter, etc., and so on…
similar to what Jesse has apparently said. In other words, as you said, they are only really meant to work against a prior move from the same style. I hope you can appreciate the truth in this…and aren’t offended, as I have no intent to offend people…I like people a lot. Let it roll around in your mind for a bit, and see what your inner eye tells you, about truth…and stop by and train with me and my students sometime, if you get up this way…you are always welcome.
best of training,
chris sutton
Confused I wrote back:
Hello and thanks for responding.
I don’t know if we are understanding each other or not.
On issue one -
Are you really asserting that the use of force or energy is new in WC? In Wing Chun we take the line if we can and if not we change.
In sparring or in advanced Chi-Sao there is plenty of ‘force’ to go around. Wing Chun concepts aside if you are talking about working with uncooperative partners using lots of energy to stop you or using tons of energy to attack you then I can assure you that there is no shortage of this kind of ‘force’ in the system that I studied and this has not changed since when my Sifu came to this country in the early 70s.
On issue two -
Are you really asserting that WC techniques only apply against WC?
Yes, a given technique in the system can counter another Wing Chun technique. But this does not mean that a given Wing Chun technique ONLY works against another Wing Chun technique. Wing Chun techniques are, as I am sure you are aware, concept driven. WC techniques close universal lines or zones and deal with various kinds of energy or FORCE. I am sure you are aware that given the human body and physics any attack can be defined in terms of its energy, direction and angle, etc. If WC techniques only worked against WC techniques then I wouldn’t have naturally used them against people from other systems with no WC, and I seriously doubt the system’s founders would have seen fit to include them in the system.
His last reply:
I have worked out hand to hand with a wide variety of Wing-Chun and the like arts, including several of Bruce Lee’s old students, and the systems are quite different. We go to jointlocks, throws of various sorts, do a lot of letting force go, and utilizing force in ways I know you havn’t seen. That’s why I was thoughtful enough to invite you up. I include some of the very best Wing-Chun like arts when I say this. I am only saying that what we do is quite different, in many ways. I am happy to hear that someone actually utilizes force, in the classical context. I havn’t seen that anywhere, but don’t doubt it. Let me give you an idea how different this can be; Jesse’s brother Mike invented a two man set, similar to chi-sau, out of the forms…never seen anywhere else. He also ran 20-30 miles per day,. could do endless dips, bench pressed over 500, so I am not saying this is his only reason for success…just that he is quite different than anything you have seen. He surpassed Bruce Lee in ways, and can be seen in Jesse’s second book, along with Wong Shun Leong. Of course he is a fanatic, and I don’t reccomend that approach.
best of training,
chris sutton
www.brucelee-nonclassical.com
So he offered to personally demonstrate the virtue of his training method, presumably in a friendly manner…what more could you possibly ask for?
“You have offended my family, and you have offended the Shaolin Temple…” Now who is the Bruce Lee wannabe? 
Yeah its an opinion my Sifu (gary Payne) always teaches us the reality aspect of wing chun he nevers misses any techs out but always points out the weak side of them aswell as this when we do team techs we always defend again punches are kicks which are in my opinion always used in street fights so how could anyoen even think that wing chun cant be used on non wing chun attacks i cant be too sure since im a first form student but that sounds pretty silly to me