My old sifu told me that Cheung Sifu would laugh at guys while he was fighting them 
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015740]That part where each disciple was taught 1/5 smacks of a Shaw Brothers movie. [/QUOTE]
Naw, more like the Power Rangers. If they could just get together and touch hands, then say âGo Go Power Rangersâ, then they could really kick some @$$.
Captain Planet and the wing chun planeteers. With your powers combined I am Captain Wing Chun
Thanks Victor for posting that.
I almost wanted to vomit when i read that article and didnt want to reply to it out of disgust. What a load of bull****. Its pathetic how the Non - TWC world is trying to exclude GM William Cheung from the history books.
Also, i ran into this argument not a while ago. âWong Shun Leung started WC in 1954, so William Cheung couldnât have started in 1951 and couldnât have been a live in student in 1954â.
If you ever run into this argument, point out the fact that Bruce Lee started in early 1954 so the late Wong Shun Leung had to have started a few years earlier than that.
[QUOTE=Niersun;1015874]Thanks Victor for posting that.
I almost wanted to vomit when i read that article and didnt want to reply to it out of disgust. What a load of bull****. Its pathetic how the Non - TWC world is trying to exclude GM William Cheung from the history books.
Also, i ran into this argument not a while ago. âWong Shun Leung started WC in 1954, so William Cheung couldnât have started in 1951 and couldnât have been a live in student in 1954â.
If you ever run into this argument, point out the fact that Bruce Lee started in early 1954 so the late Wong Shun Leung had to have started a few years earlier than that.[/QUOTE]
We only laugh at cheung because heâs funny. Creating stories to sell merchandise and pass yourself off as something youâre not can only lead to people laughing at you.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015767]Tai chi, hsing I, and ba gua always talk about body structure. I believe that practicioners of these âinternalâ styles were the first to talk about tucking the tailbone and then others borrowed it.
I do not think body structure is bs but I think that spending time training it is utter nonsense. In judo and shuai jiao they do not spend time pushing on each other to see if they can withstand the push in a static stance. They just throw each other! A first year judo man would destroy a frat year wc man.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you (except the tucking the tailbone part) â people who fight while attached develop body structure for doing that. One of the guys I train WCK with was before taking up WCK a Div. 1 wrestler, and he took to WCK body structure like a duck to water.
Robertâs body structure tests are really just a way to get a person unfamiliar with it to experience it (oh, so thatâs what I am trying to do), nothing more. But that doesnât develop the skill/ability to any significant degree. As you point out, it is through using that skill under realistic conditions (like you do in judo or wrestling) that you really develop it.
My name and who I studied with is inimportant as I am not promoting any products/services and do not represent my teachers. My opinion is not any less right or wrong based on my resume.
WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.
I also completely agree. The traditional model of teaching martial arts (forms, unrealsitic drills, etc.) is by todayâs standards extremely poor. I can see retaining those aspects for historical preservation reasons, but there are much more effective ways to teach and train. But it seems that most people who take up traditional arts arenât progressive thinkers â or in many cases, thinkers at all. 
My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the âoccasional gang fight.â. He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights. He actually used bil gee in peoplesâ eyes and throats and groin strikes. He was mainly a striker and used joint locks regularly mixed with striking. I have often wondered why he never utilized body throws.
T and anyone else,
Why would a teacher who obviously knew how to fight teach the same way as everyone else? It has never made sense to me.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015929]My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the âoccasional gang fight.â. He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights. He actually used bil gee in peoplesâ eyes and throats and groin strikes. He was mainly a striker and used joint locks regularly mixed with striking. I have often wondered why he never utilized body throws.
T and anyone else,
Why would a teacher who obviously knew how to fight teach the same way as everyone else? It has never made sense to me.[/QUOTE]
How many quarters did you have to put into him to play?
It is hard to believe but such individuals do exist. These men were born tough and lived in tough environments. When these men see mma fights they look at it and say, âThat is not real fighting. Real fighting is much more violent and a lot less technique based.â. IMO it would make sense that these teachers know the value of sparring and pressure testing. Some though just end up teaching the same tired curriculum. It is a mystery.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015929]My teacher was an actual street fighter and not the kind that had the âoccasional gang fight.â. He fought daily for years and survived many gang fights.[/QUOTE]
How many quarters did you have to put into him to play?
Yeah, it was the first thing that came in mind when I read MysteriousPowerâs post:D
Then again Iâm a huge nerd.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015935]It is hard to believe but such individuals do exist. These men were born tough and lived in tough environments. When these men see mma fights they look at it and say, âThat is not real fighting. Real fighting is much more violent and a lot less technique based.â. IMO it would make sense that these teachers know the value of sparring and pressure testing. Some though just end up teaching the same tired curriculum. It is a mystery.[/QUOTE]
Teachers teach what their students want to learn.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015740]
If we had more video of all those rooftop fights from the Hong Kong Yip Man days I think it would be very telling on how wc was ACTUALLY used in fighting. I have only seen a 5 second clip of Bruce Lee during one a âfight.â. I put fight in quotes because it could have been a gathering of friends. Who knows. But actual footage would be nice. I think it would show wc for what it is: A different flair of kickboxing or kickboxing with extra tricks in it.
Victor, do you have access to any old footage via William Cheung?[/QUOTE]
The roof top fight on youtube was not of Bruce Lee, FYI. It was of Wu Chan Nam after about 3 months of Wing Chun Training with Sifu Wong Shun Leung. Sihing Wu Chan Nam has confirmed this.
There is no footage of William Cheung from those days that I am aware of.
[QUOTE=MysteriousPower;1015767]
I do not think body structure is bs but I think that spending time training it is utter nonsense. In judo and shuai jiao they do not spend time pushing on each other to see if they can withstand the push in a static stance. They just throw each other! A first year judo man would destroy a frat year wc man.
WC spends years doing drills that are fit for toddlers. The curriculum that T speaks of us overused and in many cases outdated.[/QUOTE]
I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.
As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We donât learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.
[QUOTE=wkmark;1015984]I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.
As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We donât learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.[/QUOTE]
The basic drills you are talking about for hockey sound like they are drilled exactly. As they are used. Skating is a good example of this. For wc I feel like the basic drills are practiced one way and then somehow students are expected to spar/ fight with them. The drills are not practiced in a way they can be used.
[QUOTE=wkmark;1015984]I play Ice Hockey and have been for quite some time and every time we had practice we drilled on the most basic and most boring things. Even the most advanced NHL players will do drills which are fit for toddlers, which is Skating, passing the puck and learning to give and take hits. You will not learn anything if all we did was scrimmage and play games without mastering the basics.
As for body structure, it applies to all sports. The body checks/ pushing and power comes from doing drills. We donât learn that just by scrimmaging or just by playing games.[/QUOTE]
The drills for hockey are good. The difference would be if your hockey coach made you do things like stand in a horse stance while someone pushed you, on ice of course. Or stand in a horse stance and shoot or pass the puck. You donât drill that because you donât do that in a game.
It is perfectly legit to isolate game skills and to drill them. It is not legit to drill skills that have no relevance to the game.
The same goes for the fight game also.
[QUOTE=m1k3;1015997]The drills for hockey are good. The difference would be if your hockey coach made you do things like stand in a horse stance while someone pushed you, on ice of course. Or stand in a horse stance and shoot or pass the puck. You donât drill that because you donât do that in a game.
It is perfectly legit to isolate game skills and to drill them. It is not legit to drill skills that have no relevance to the game.
The same goes for the fight game also.[/QUOTE]
Wkmark and m113,
those were excellent posts.
How much of a class I teach structure drills?
If there is a two hour class, perhaps 5-10 minutes of it.
How much of a class is spent drilling usage of structure?
The remainder of the classâŚ
In fact, the WCK I teach is based all upon the usage of the structure - the function. This creates the actual form or how it looks.
[QUOTE=chusauli;1016009]How much of a class I teach structure drills?
If there is a two hour class, perhaps 5-10 minutes of it.
How much of a class is spent drilling usage of structure?
The remainder of the classâŚ
In fact, the WCK I teach is based all upon the usage of the structure - the function. This creates the actual form or how it looks.[/QUOTE]
I gotta ask you this Robert and I have been meaning to for a bit, WHY do you feel you NEED to teach structure in WCK?
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1016011]I gotta ask you this Robert and I have been meaning to for a bit, WHY do you feel you NEED to teach structure in WCK?[/QUOTE]
Paul,
Good question - it has everything to do with feeling the power and root and being connected. It is a neglected aspect of training that must be drilled, because that is WCK, for me.
Without it, WCK is nothing less than poor kickboxing, short hand Karate, or economical movement Kenpo.
WCK is not patty cake, and Chi Sao is not slap fighting. WCK without structure (alignment, body mechanics, etc.) is empty and not worth practicing. It would be like doing lousy Fujian boxing - a semblence of the same moves, but without the core root that makes it go. The body is so big in comparison to the arms. WHy not tap that power?
If I had to change a flat, I would rather use my whole body, than just my arms alone. Much of my early training only involved the arms, or what I could muster, but without the potential of the body, it was a shell.
It would be like having the Batmobile - but a movie version that needs to be pulled, and only gadgets that look good onscreen.
Itâd be like having a woman, but without the sex. :eek:
Hope I made this clear.