# Thinking outside the box **URL:** \ **Category:** Wing Chun\ **Created:** [May 28, 2005, 3:59pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455 "2005-05-28T15:59:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![unkokusai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ac91a4/32.png) [@unkokusai](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/unkokusai)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 6:25am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/121 "2005-06-14T06:25:56Z")
> [@Ultimatewingchun](#): > > And as for the amount of students I currently have attending my classes (it’s 10 - not 6)…I HAVE IT THAT WAY ON PURPOSE. You have conveniently forgotten to take into account that I’ve been teaching for 20.5 years (and that for 17 of those years the attendance in my school had always been between 25 and 40 students)…but 3.5 years ago is when I decided to take CROSSTRAINING so seriously that I don’t want many students anymore - since there are so many bases I want to cover at the classes I teach. (You can’t do that with LOTS of students in attendance). And as for my “alleged” non-understanding and interest in a higher philosophy and a spiritual approach to life (and martial arts)…you should know that I was a member of the United Lodge Of Theosophists here in NYC for 19 years - and regularly gave 30 minute lectures and answered questions from audiences for 15 of those years on all kinds of subjects that included Taoism, Mahayana Buddhism, esoteric Christianity (Gnosticism), the Hindu scripture known as The Bhagavad Gita, (the dialogue bewteem Krishna and his disciple, Arjuna, that makes up the highest teachings in Hinduism), Zen, meditation, karma and reincarnation, the philosophy of Plato, the Hermetic teachings from ancient Egypt, what happens after the death, the true meaning of the terms Spirit, Soul, Mind (and the rest of the sevenfold nature of man), etc. (and the attendance at those Sunday night lectures and question & answer periods in Manhattan was sometimes as much as 100 people). So that’s it, James. You’ve spent 16 years in Wing Chun and I’ve spent 30. Your threads go nowhere, and quite a few of mine get literally thousands upon thousands of views (hits)…and some of them wind up with 200-300 actual posts from numerous people.. Soooooooooooooo…you kind of sounded like an @sshole there, champ. ---
**Author:** ![Ultimatewingchun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Ultimatewingchun](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Ultimatewingchun)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 12:47am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/122 "2005-06-15T00:47:47Z")
unkokusai: No comment. ---
**Author:** ![unkokusai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ac91a4/32.png) [@unkokusai](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/unkokusai)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 3:53am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/123 "2005-06-15T03:53:21Z")
> [@Ultimatewingchun](#): > > unkokusai: > > No comment. Good idea. ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/124 "2005-06-15T04:27:57Z")
unkokusai: Well for someone who is mostly interested in wrestling, you certainly like to spend time in a WC forum-not adding anything of interest or value, just talkin 5hit to everyone. What is your problem anyway? ---
**Author:** ![unkokusai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ac91a4/32.png) [@unkokusai](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/unkokusai)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 4:47pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/125 "2005-06-15T16:47:51Z")
> [@Airdrawndagger](#): > > unkokusai: > > Well for someone who is mostly interested in wrestling, you certainly like to spend time in a WC forum-not adding anything of interest or value, just talkin 5hit to everyone. > What is your problem anyway? I’m sorry, do I need a special decoder ring to be allowed in? You talk about WC like a brainwashed dope talks about his cult. I’m merely pointing out that obvious truth. Other people here have already been nice enough to try to be reasonable in explaining the very understandable notion that since WC doesn’t do everything well, a bit of cross training is a good idea. Instead of saying “well, I’m happy enough with what WC has thanks” you said “No! WC has everything! EVERYTHING! I don’t need anything else because all the truth in the universe in contained in the almighty WC!” ---
**Author:** ![Merryprankster](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/merryprankster/32/102_2.png) [@Merryprankster](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Merryprankster)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:19pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/126 "2005-06-15T17:19:40Z")
> A man shoots for your lead leg, and wraps his arms around it, but before he can pull it up and keep on driving forward to unbalance you - and take you to the ground - you push your weight completely forward (100%) to the front leg that he’s grabbing…while bending over him and wrapping both your arms around his torso. This is the move that William Cheung taught that Anerlich was alluding to. I would just like to say that the person shooting doesn’t lift and keep driving. He drives, THEN lifts/while lifting. The purpose of this is to put your weight on your back leg, if only briefly, so that your front leg becomes light and easy to lift. This is why momentum must be broken at impact, hence the sprawl, which redirects the momentum into the mat. I would also like to say that bending over a person and wrapping both arms around the torso in a position like this is lunacy. It will get you lifted clean off the ground on a decent shooter. It places your center of gravity squarely over their shoulder, which is one of the easiest ways to lift somebody. In fact, I teach a drill designed precisely with this purpose in mind. Even if you don’t wind up lifted, by placing your arms around their waist, you have created a situation where the shooter can work his way underneath you, THEN lift. Why? Because there is nothing preventing the shooter from getting underneath you in a strong lifting position - your arms are no longer defending that. Placing 100% percent of your weight on the front leg also “posts” that leg. The shooter will then turn the corner on you, switching to a high crotch lift or possibly a waist clinch from the back, followed quickly with a back arch throw or even a mere trip. This is precisely why wrestlers use the sprawl with a crossface or underhook. 100 percent of your weight is on your opponent, the arms prevent the person from getting underneath you for a lift, and your legs are low and back to stretch their arms out, making them biomechanically weaker, or keeping them out of reach if you were lucky enough to get your legs back. Provided momentum is broken, and posture is broken, you can attempt this throw, which may be what was in mind: [http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/tawaragaeshi.htm](http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/tawaragaeshi.htm) Note that the thrower has the opponent bent over ALREADY, and is stepping UNDERNEATH his opponent’s center before executing the throw. But, be aware that Judoka and Wrestlers tend to shoot for the legs differently, and a wrestlers shot usually does not place them in the above position if it fails. However, using an over the back waist clinch to try and stop a shot is just a plain bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![Edmund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/439d5e/32.png) [@Edmund](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Edmund)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 3:07am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/127 "2005-06-16T03:07:05Z")
> [@Merryprankster](#): > > Provided momentum is broken, and posture is broken, you can attempt this throw, which may be what was in mind: > > [http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/tawaragaeshi.htm](http://judoinfo.com/images/animations/blue/tawaragaeshi.htm) Another possible idea could be a basic hip tilt once they’re broken down. [http://www.championshipproductions.com/streams/WRV-02281.MPG](http://www.championshipproductions.com/streams/WRV-02281.MPG) (hope link works) ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 12:02pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/128 "2005-06-16T12:02:13Z")
> [@unkokusai](#): > > I’m sorry, do I need a special decoder ring to be allowed in? > > You talk about WC like a brainwashed dope talks about his cult. I’m merely pointing out that obvious truth. Other people here have already been nice enough to try to be reasonable in explaining the very understandable notion that since WC doesn’t do everything well, a bit of cross training is a good idea. Instead of saying “well, I’m happy enough with what WC has thanks” you said “No! WC has everything! EVERYTHING! I don’t need anything else because all the truth in the universe in contained in the almighty WC!” Yeah, you could make that point but it will fall on deaf ears. You see that is the problem with kung fu these days. Not to many people look into the spiritual side of kung fu which happens to play a big role in the development of kung fu You have to believe in what you do otherwise you will never be happy with what you have done. Wing Chun does cover everything if you open your eyes and your mind. Everybody goes down different paths and just becase we do not reach the same conclusion, that doesnt mean one is more right than the other. Of course I really dont care what you say because by the way you respond in your post you seem to be a very confused, jealous, want a be martial artist who just doesnt have a clue about what he is talking about and follows what ever seems to be “in vogue” at the present time. So, Im no longer going to respond to your pompous grunts of ignorant waste of time posts anymore. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![unkokusai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ac91a4/32.png) [@unkokusai](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/unkokusai)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 12:48pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/129 "2005-06-16T12:48:25Z")
> [@Airdrawndagger](#): > > [Wing Chun does cover everything if you open your eyes and your mind. How’s that koolaide taste, champ? ---
**Author:** ![Merryprankster](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/merryprankster/32/102_2.png) [@Merryprankster](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Merryprankster)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 1:10pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/130 "2005-06-16T13:10:21Z")
> You have to believe in what you do otherwise you will never be happy with what you have done. _BUZZER_ Wrong answer ADD! Tell the man what he’s won…" You have to BELIEVE in yourself. You need to empirically test your methods. Edmund - I was assuming that both people were on their feet, but on the ground, that will work fine. There are other things I would rather do, but it will get their base broken for sure. ---
**Author:** ![sihing](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/sihing/32/521_2.png) [@sihing](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/sihing)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/131 "2005-06-16T15:55:30Z")
> [@unkokusai](#): > > How’s that koolaide taste, champ? Hey Unkokusai, When someone says Wing Chun is complete, IMO this does not mean it possesses all Martial Arts techniques and concepts known to man. It means that it is very capable to handle each and all attacks or situation in the realm of combat. Whether you opponent is a stand up fighter or a grappler or a mixture of both, a high quality Wing Chun practitioner can handle it, not meaning that they will always overcome each and every situation, that is the responsibility of the practitioner themselves and has no reflection on the system’s effectiveness. James ---
**Author:** ![anerlich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@anerlich](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/anerlich)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2005, 10:53pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/132 "2005-06-16T22:53:45Z")
> Not to many people look into the spiritual side of kung fu which happens to play a big role in the development of kung fu You could just as easily argue that this is what is WRONG with Kung Fu. It’s not just a system of fighting, it claims to be a spiritual system, a set of traditions to be preserved, a system of physical culture, a social program, etc. etc. It tries to be all things to all men and, unsurprisingly, does none of them particularly well. It’s arguable that competitive sports, or for that matter any physical challenge, has spiritual aspects every bit as profound as TMA. And also that TMA has the same potential traps and negative aspects related to ego, elitism and narrowmindedness as any other activity or aspect of life. Developing skill in a TMA does NOT bring with it automatic increases in morality or expanded consciousness. There are plenty of real world examples that prove this point. Becoming a “better” or more spiritual person, requires you work on yourself in areas not touched on, or touched on only peripherally, by MA training. > Of course I really dont care what you say because by the way you respond in your post you seem to be a very confused, jealous, want a be martial artist who just doesnt have a clue about what he is talking about and follows what ever seems to be “in vogue” at the present time. So, Im no longer going to respond to your pompous grunts of ignorant waste of time posts anymore. I like a man who reacts well to criticism :o ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2005, 4:50pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/133 "2005-06-17T16:50:40Z")
> [@anerlich](#): > > You could just as easily argue that this is what is WRONG with Kung Fu. It’s not just a system of fighting, it claims to be a spiritual system, a set of traditions to be preserved, a system of physical culture, a social program, etc. etc. It tries to be all things to all men and, unsurprisingly, does none of them particularly well. > > Really? How can being more spiritual be WRONG? Being spiritual means to be more in touch with your spirit and yourself. How can that be a bad thing? Ive never heard anyone say “Well we would have won but we are just to darn spritual”. LOL “It” doesn’t try to anything because it is not alive. > > It’s arguable that competitive sports, or for that matter any physical challenge, has spiritual aspects every bit as profound as TMA. And also that TMA has the same potential traps and negative aspects related to ego, elitism and narrowmindedness as any other activity or aspect of life. > > Spiritualism has to do with the individual, not a sport, MA, or any other type of activity. There are activities that help develop spiritualism but what are you developing-YOUR spirit. Ego, elitism, and narrowmindedness are all individual personality traits or habits that can be picked up doing anything at any given time, even doing (dare I say it) the coveted MMA- Ohhhhh! :eek: > > Developing skill in a TMA does NOT bring with it automatic increases in morality or expanded consciousness. There are plenty of real world examples that prove this point. Becoming a “better” or more spiritual person, requires you work on yourself in areas not touched on, or touched on only peripherally, by MA training. > > Right, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE INDIVIDUAL NOT THE MARTIAL ART. That being said there is so much more personal acountability that plays a larger role with the devolopment of a TMA, than the style which he chooses to develop. > > I like a man who reacts well to criticism :o Well to each his own but I like women 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Merryprankster](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forum.kungfumagazine.com/merryprankster/32/102_2.png) [@Merryprankster](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Merryprankster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2005, 9:59pm UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/134 "2005-06-17T21:59:49Z")
> Right, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE INDIVIDUAL NOT THE MARTIAL ART. That being said there is so much more personal acountability that plays a larger role with the devolopment of a TMA, than the style which he chooses to develop. Why? Because you said so? I don’t think that’s a very good case for anything. Here is my experience, which I suspect you will discard, based on your attitude in previous posts. MMA, and other sportive styles have this fantastic component of one-on-one competition. You win and it’s all on you. But when you lose, it’s all on you. When you win, it’s about your physical state of readiness, your technical state of readiness and your mental (spiritual, if you prefer) state of readiness. If any one of those things are off, you cannot compete at your top cability. There are people around you that can help you develop all of these traits, but the onus is on you. YOU are the one who has to push till you feel like puking and your muscles don’t work. YOU are the one that has to practice your game plan with precision, ad nauseum, until it’s finely tuned, rep after rep, hour by hour, day after day. YOU are the one that has to have the mental discipline and focus to do the appropriate visualization exercises, the drive to not break down and quit working hard even when you can barely stand or function, and stick to the schedule and prepare. So, winning and losing is largely up to you. And people talk about competition all being about ego. Well, the guys with the biggest egos - 1. Rarely compete, 2. Never work out with anybody that can kick their ass, 3. Make excuses for losing. 1. They don’t last long because there is always somebody that can beat you. There are the rare phsyically/athletically gifted specimens who don’t have to work that hard, and still wax everybody, but most of the people who got to the top have a modicum of talent and a bottomless pit of heart and drive. They call that spiritual and mental strength. And its development or possession is a pre-requisite for consistent success. So saying it’s a smaller part is flat out wrong. ---
**Author:** ![anerlich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@anerlich](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/anerlich)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 12:01am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/135 "2005-06-18T00:01:54Z")
> How can being more spiritual be WRONG? An encyclopaedia could be written on this, but doing a google or Amazon search for a book called “Enlightenment Blues”. > “It” doesn’t try to anything because it is not alive. Crude semantic hair splitting and you know it. The people who advertise Wing Chun in such terms, like yourself, are usually alive … though perhaps there’s an argument that you are dead from the neck up. Of course I would never stoop so low as to say that. > even doing (dare I say it) the coveted MMA- Ohhhhh! No \*\*\*\*, Sherlock. You seem to be trying to make the point that TMA are “superior” because they have a “spiritual” side. Crap. Plenty of boxers have faiths of one kind or another. MT has many “spiritual” rituals. Not all MMA’ers are crude brawlers. Read up on Genki Sudo sometime. > Ive never heard anyone say “Well we would have won but we are just to darn spritual” I’ve heard many variations on the theme “We don’t compete or fight because we concentrate on the spiritual side of Kung Fu, and are too pure to sully our style by fighting with the less spiritual than ourselves.” > Well to each his own but I like women You also like wearing tights by your own admission, so forgive my confusion. ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 1:54am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/136 "2005-06-18T01:54:15Z")
> [@Merryprankster](#): > > Why? Because you said so? I don’t think that’s a very good case for anything. > > Here is my experience, which I suspect you will discard, based on your attitude in previous posts. > > MMA, and other sportive styles have this fantastic component of one-on-one competition. > > You win and it’s all on you. But when you lose, it’s all on you. > > When you win, it’s about your physical state of readiness, your technical state of readiness and your mental (spiritual, if you prefer) state of readiness. If any one of those things are off, you cannot compete at your top cability. There are people around you that can help you develop all of these traits, but the onus is on you. YOU are the one who has to push till you feel like puking and your muscles don’t work. YOU are the one that has to practice your game plan with precision, ad nauseum, until it’s finely tuned, rep after rep, hour by hour, day after day. YOU are the one that has to have the mental discipline and focus to do the appropriate visualization exercises, the drive to not break down and quit working hard even when you can barely stand or function, and stick to the schedule and prepare. > > So, winning and losing is largely up to you. And people talk about competition all being about ego. Well, the guys with the biggest egos - 1. Rarely compete, 2. Never work out with anybody that can kick their ass, 3. Make excuses for losing. > > 1. They don’t last long because there is always somebody that can beat you. > > There are the rare phsyically/athletically gifted specimens who don’t have to work that hard, and still wax everybody, but most of the people who got to the top have a modicum of talent and a bottomless pit of heart and drive. > > They call that spiritual and mental strength. And its development or possession is a pre-requisite for consistent success. > > So saying it’s a smaller part is flat out wrong. What does that have to do with what you have quoted above? Your preaching to the quire. ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 2:13am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/137 "2005-06-18T02:13:17Z")
> [@anerlich](#): > > An encyclopaedia could be written on this, but doing a google or Amazon search for a book called “Enlightenment Blues”. > > Well that settles it then, theres a book on “Enlightenment Blues”— It must be right. > > Crude semantic hair splitting and you know it. The people who advertise Wing Chun in such terms, like yourself, are usually alive … though perhaps there’s an argument that you are dead from the neck up. Of course I would never stoop so low as to say that. > > Im feeding you the same crap you keep trying to feed me, entertaining no? > > No \*\*\*\*, Sherlock. You seem to be trying to make the point that TMA are “superior” because they have a “spiritual” side. Crap. Plenty of boxers have faiths of one kind or another. MT has many “spiritual” rituals. Not all MMA’ers are crude brawlers. Read up on Genki Sudo sometime. > > When did the word “superior” ever get thrown into the mix? You assume to much. You are trying to make a point that some how being spiritual is “wrong” in regards to kung fu, not TMA is “superior”. > > I’ve heard many variations on the theme “We don’t compete or fight because we concentrate on the spiritual side of Kung Fu, and are too pure to sully our style by fighting with the less spiritual than ourselves.” > > Yes, these types of points do seem to come up in regards to WC, but that is another subject all together. I have been and will always be an advocater of sparring and competitiion with WC dispite the fact that you are not allowed to use certain weapons due to rules and regulations. If you can perform well under “rules” than you can perform better without them. > > You also like wearing tights by your own admission, so forgive my confusion. WRONG AGAIN, I sarcasticly said we (WC community) need to trade in our sashes for a pair of tights. So are you confused about liking men or wearing tights? Somehow they seem to go together quite well… ---
**Author:** ![anerlich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@anerlich](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/anerlich)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 3:08am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/138 "2005-06-18T03:08:37Z")
> Im feeding you the same crap you keep trying to feed me, entertaining no? Moderately, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![anerlich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@anerlich](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/anerlich)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 5:16am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/139 "2005-06-18T05:16:52Z")
Did canglong ever get a reply back from GM Cheung about his take on the completeness of TWC? ---
**Author:** ![Airdrawndagger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/cab0a1/32.png) [@Airdrawndagger](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/u/Airdrawndagger)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2005, 11:43am UTC](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455/140 "2005-06-18T11:43:07Z")
> [@anerlich](#): > > Moderately, I suppose. – LOL – [Previous page](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455.md?page=6) [Next page](https://forum.kungfumagazine.com/t/thinking-outside-the-box/32455.md?page=8)