While thinking about my posting style this weekend 
I realized I hadnt been making myself clear on something, hadnt really expressed it.
While I have talked alot about bad wingchun, sometimes the issue is not bad, but incomplete wingchun. For instance, Two guys here at my school both studied wingchun from another guy for several years. They would never say that thier wingchun is bad, but they do talk about how incomplete it was and about how they had missed some things in thier training that they are gtting now.
This could stem from many different things, bad teaching, bad learning, bad communication in general. A lack of knowledge on the instructors part (whether he realizes it or not.), or misguidance in the instructors past. All of these things can contribute to incomplete learning.
Maybe they were complete and youâre now making them do excessive things?
And maybe compared to someone else, youâre imcomplete, and eventually youâll need to go look elsewhere for an even more-er complete transmission?
And maybe someone from your complete-er school will start trolling?
RR
Trying a Different Approach
Hi Red5Angel,
Iâm not ignoring what you wrote, but I have a suggestion for you and Carl. Why not politely get yourself invited to other schools and politely show them the difference and answer their questions so that they can improve in the ways that your school emphasizes?
You can do this in a friendly comparison of chi sao. If your horse and your structure is so fundamentally better and it improves your Wing Chun, then it should be obvious to other practitioners. If they are confronted by a system that frustrates their own Wing Chun methods, then you have done them a service. If you then show them where they can improve, you have done them even more of a service.
Any thoughts? Am I excited? You bet. 
Regards,
Grendel - this has been done in the past, there is of course no better way then to show up and say hey to the members at a new school.
Generally the differences I have talked about are pointed out by others who see it or even better, feel it.
Originally posted by red5angel
Grendel - this has been done in the past, there is of course no better way then to show up and say hey to the members at a new school.
Generally the differences I have talked about are pointed out by others who see it or even better, feel it.
Your point could be better made if those who experienced it were encouraged to write about their experiences, but even so, if youâd like to fill us in with real details, I might be interested.
Not as excited as before. Any thoughts?
r5a, you seem to have a insecurity factor with your WC. Always bringing your sifuâs name up, flaunting it, indirectly talking down others.
How about this: We understand you, you are perfectly clear. Carls wing chun is complete and he is a god. We learn crap compared to what you learn. We are all poor souls who will not and can not find a sifu such as yours. OK? Now can we stop the madness?
Grendel, I believe the only person who is on this forum who has met Carl is Marshdrifter. he posted on a thread a while back. He told me before he left our school that he learned how important precision was. he said they had been practicing some stuff that looked similar but not with as much precision or attention to detail.
Red5Angel miscounts in a big way
Originally posted by red5angel
Grendel, I believe the only person who is on this forum who has met Carl is Marshdrifter.
There is at least a dozen or more people on this forum who know or have met Carl, including me, many of his kung-fu âbrothersâ and âcousins,â in addition to a slew of his own students. From the sounds of it, a few from other groups have met him at one time or another also.
Regards,
- Kathy Jo
KJ - I must have misunderstood Grendel, I thought he was talking about outside of Kens line. Of course many of the people who learn from Ken have met him at one time or another.
There goes arithmetic- something indeed is missing!
Speaking of Arithmetic Yuanfen, How does fongs stuff differ from most?
Interesting RED5-
First you say you misunderstood Carl-then you change it to misunderstanding Grendel. Which one is it. Both?
You ask about âFongâs stuffâ- I expect more mo duk than that.
Besides as a 7 month student in Minneapolis of someone who is in Cleveland- I dont expect you understand technical answers to vague questions about âstuffâ.
In my Tempe Wing Chun group there is a codeâŚin the section on ethics rule number 1 is
âPride in your kung fu lineage(you belong to a good one) does NOT
include criticism of elders from other Wing Chun lineages. Respect those who have passed on the art.Be sociable to legitimate visitors without endangering yourself or others.Be of good spirit and enjoy yourself.â
Happy to discuss some specifics in a civil way but âstuffâ?
Stuff it!
I meant Grendel because he was the one that KJ referenced, sorry.
As for mo duk, I am not sure what you mean. I asked because someone was mentioning the other day that Fong has made some modifications to some of his forms. Its a popular lineage and I was just wondering if the changes he made are what make it popular? Possibly the changes he has made have made it more efficient or what have you. I never heard specifics, just mostly the differences were in the forms. When I was there I know the first form was a little different but I dont remember it being drastically so. that is why I did not have any specific questions, sorry.
OOPS Red 5- couldnt edit fast enough and may have misunderstood⌠do you mean Francis Fong in Atlanta?
Except for loving the song I havent had Georgia on my Mind.
Could be that Ray Charles may know more about that stuff-
but he is not on the list- or is he?. But in wing chun as in football
(according to Ray madden) you gotta have stuffâŚbut then a linemanâs stuff may be different froma wing chunners stuff⌠one can get excited about all this stuff. I think I will rest a bit so that the excitement passes⌠and may be the stuff as well.
nope, Augustine Fong, not sure who Francis is,sorry. anyway, feel free to talk about it, even if you want to mention some of the more obvious changes. It would be interesting to hear what has come of them. I know hand positions etc have been changed in some lineages for various reasons, better angles, safer angles etcâŚ
Awesome post Rene!
Oh Man. Unfortunately this has turned out to be another unproductive thread. Unless you consider the above productive.
When one approach fails repeatedly, it may be time to look for a new approach. Perhaps less direct. I can understand the feelings of someone who has put the time and effort in to learn something. Thatâs one of the reasons why a certain guardedness exists in the CMA, even among us, we who are not from the Chinese cultural background and who have little knowledge of associated history. You know, Iâm not going to go around showing people everything Iâve learned in WC, even fellow martial artists. I appreciate certain things too much, and of course there are safety considerations. Iâll show some but not much, spread it out over time, and some things Iâll never show/explain unless itâs to another advanced student in my school.
Just remember that when you receive knowledge here, someone is giving it to you so itâs a gift. Hey, you can even trick someone into revealing knowledge, although it is pretty difficult over the internet. But a better tactic would be to sift through whatâs out there, pay close attention to what people say, ask some questions but not too many, relax and it takes time. I get the feeling that Red5 is trying the all-out frontal assault approach, probably not in keeping with the Wing Chun heâs learning.
I am not qualified to comment on A. Fong Sifuâs system, but here goes anyway: from the seminar I attended, it is very much like other major Yip Man systems which vary primarily in emphasis/approach, NOT in content/movement. He emphasized Chi-Sao and sticking to the traditional art, self-defense was the goal and orientation. He mentioned that he had added a double punch to the 3rd section of SLT, but that was just combining another drill which was previously seperate. He of course has his own flavor, which would be difficult to describe except to say that he represents a very high level of skill.
-FJ
red5angel sez:
I know hand positions etc have been changed in some lineages for various reasons, better angles, safer angles etcâŚ
You know so much red5!!! Awesome.
Stuff, Stuff, and Stuff
Originally posted by red5angel
Grendel, I believe the only person who is on this forum who has met Carl is Marshdrifter. he posted on a thread a while back. He told me before he left our school that he learned how important precision was. he said they had been practicing some stuff that looked similar but not with as much precision or attention to detail.
What is with your limited vocabulary? Can you talk about stuff in enough detail so that well-intentioned readers can understand what stuff is and what you mean to do with it? If not, why keep posting?
You cannot assume we have read previous posts by you. You CANNOT assume that you were clear in your previous posts. You cannot assume anything in this medium.
So, tell me again, what was the outcome, the issue, of Carlâs outreach to other schools? Did the students and teachers of the other schools see the virtues of Carlâs approach. If not, why not?
If you canât be silent, be informative, at leastâŚ
fajing sez honorably:
I am not qualified to comment on A. Fong Sifuâs system, but here goes anyway: from the seminar I attended, it is very much like other major Yip Man systems which vary primarily in emphasis/approach, NOT in content/movement. He emphasized Chi-Sao and sticking to the traditional art, self-defense was the goal and orientation. He mentioned that he had added a double punch to the 3rd section of SLT, but that was just combining another drill which was previously seperate. He of course has his own flavor, which would be difficult to describe except to say that he represents a very high level of skill.
Fairly accurate report fajing.Given your civilty ,some comments in the spirit of sharing. Ip Man wing chun is Ip man wing chun- different students just have different impressions of a subject-nothing wrong with that- but the subject remains the same. Since I am not competent in commenting on non Ip Man wing chun I defer to Rene and others on additional perspectives. Southern styles share some common features and principles. But there are differences in families. And southern styles were generally more close chested that many northern styles like Bei Shaolin⌠(most real masters wouldny give red5 the time of the day. )although they also take a long time in learning well. Good kung fu or even uderstanding it a little bit does not mature in 7 months of being occasionally visited by a teacher.Western Boxing is boxing- you can do it Cus DAmato style, Emmanuel Seward style, Angelo Dundee style, Gainford style, Charlie Goldman style,âŚthey all stand and hold their hands a little differently. They have all produced champions. Ultimately there are jabs, upper cuts and hooks and straight rightsâ deceptively simple and all dangerous.. Anyone seriously interested might check out an interview with Fong sifu in the article section on my site<www.azwingchun.com> where he specifically discusses his forms. If you check out
Chao and Weaklands books on wing chun you will see the double punch drill in volume 1 if memory serves.. Ip Man taught Chao that drill. In student days with Ho Kam Ming- Fong did that drill daily lots and lots of times. There are good reasons for that drill. Teaching in the last generation was different- folks did lots of things to get it down just right- not just doing the form once. With adjusting to teaching the present generation- the drill was put into the form⌠as reminder in the main text. Old time practice for masters Ho or Fong was hour after hour every dayâŚmost current people cannot or do not spend that kind of time in developing precision.The form or text has many purposes- it is not just a collection of techniques- but there are concepts and developmental principles built into the forms. Ip Man experimented with the forms for teaching purposes at different times. People looking at a video made just before his death mistakenly assume that they have captured the fixed essence of his form or text. There is more to traditional kung fu teachers than is apparent in a film or video.
red5 characterised in his leading question that Fongâs system was âpopularâ. I dont know what that means. Fong himself has only one school- in Tucson and he has only a handful of instructors that he acknowledges (check his site). And no one speaks for him. Gotta go so I will borrow red5âs spell check for now.