I was searching on the internet and found this page. Two of these techniqes have explanations - what do you ma veterans think of this approach?
dunno, dont take wing chun
you might want to put that in the wing chun board.
Want the non wc players pov
Hey Nobody,
Thanks for your reply. However, I deliberately posted this outside the wing chun forum because (IMO) an overwhelming number of wc practicioners are not objective.
I feel that I can get better answers in this forum.
So, if you have a moment, please let me know what you think. I have no stake either way; you may agree or you may disagree - I’m simply interested in your reasonings either way.
Thanks again,
Dan
This was in fact posted in the wing chun forum some times ago (it is now way back in the archives)If you take a look,you will see that not everybody in wing chun is in agreement with this school approach (at least on the superficial).
They have their own approach.If they feel it is good for them,it is O.K.with me! 
You don’t want to see my critial points!..
Thank you Old Jong
Hi OJ,
Thanks for your verdict I went through the archives and got lost in the argument of what is or isn’t Wing Chun
Honestly, that is not important to me. In fact, I’m more interested in learning why things do or do not work. I mean no disrespect to the instructor nor the school that is in question. I am simply asking my question to a group of individuals who wouldn’t care what is or isn’t Wing Chun.
And, in regards to your critical points - Please share, for I AM interested.
I look forward to reading them.
Dan
Hey Dan.
That thing about my “critial points” is just my “signature” for the time being!..You can have one by adding it to your profile.
My signature is about a very long story on the forum.
BTW,you are welcome in the forum! I hope to “hear” more by you! 
You don’t want to see my critial points!..
i will attack your critical points ver well.
============================================================================
“What you wan’ cry fo? You know that my hammer is heavy and it got kick like tae kwon do, now you gwarn die slow… I’ma show you how to stretch a m0therfucker if you wanna watch tae bo”
critical wing chun
clip 1
the guys footwork is appalin and his rear foot is seen to be raised at the end which is a bbig no no in any wing chun guys book,stance being your strength .
clip 2 a lot of the time the guy was looking down at what i dont know but he wasnt looking at his attacker or where his attacks were going
clip3 again poor footwork and then guard ,his wu hand is placed by himself i might add flat against his own stomch this equals no fixed elbow position no guard no wing chun
clip4he was defending against an attack that wasnt going to hit him therefore why bother ???but then when he did he was leaning over at the waist which is very poor form
clip 5 again unbelievabley poor footwork and using tan to a high kick the way he did is slightly suspect
just my opinion
you also don’t step back in wing chun.
============================================================================
“What you wan’ cry fo? You know that my hammer is heavy and it got kick like tae kwon do, now you gwarn die slow… I’ma show you how to stretch a m0therfucker if you wanna watch tae bo”
Thanks Chi Sau
Hi Chi Sau,
Thanks for your feedback. I noticed that on clip one and three there is an explanation from the Sifu as to what is being trained. Do you consider it is applicable? or worthwhile to train?
Clip-1
I was normally of the opinion that a WC guy doesn’t raise his leg like that (clip one) but then after reading the Sifu’s explanation - I doubt my reasoning. (AFTER I did the experiment he suggisted)
Clip-3
Again I agreed with you, but after considering the explanation, I’m again doubtinig my original reasonings.
These doubts are why I posted this in a non-wc forum. I am hoping that some people w/ no expections of what Wing Chun looks like can point out whether or not this stuff makes sense.
I’m questioning things like - WC never steps back. WC only kicks with the front leg. A pak sau is only ‘this’. A kwan sau is supposed to be ‘so’, etc. I personaly feel these technical labeling points are clouding my judgement.
thanks again for contributing,
Dan (the confused)
i dont know what you do ,what style you practice but a bastardised form of anything is never a good thing to train i wouldnt practice clip 3 the way they did ever because of the reason stated in my earlier post bad footwork and bad guard the guy might as well have shut his eyes as well!!!
the hand movements in 1 are basically solid wing chun moves but in that context i would have used something else but i would say unless you are into traing poor quality fighting skills leave the whole thing alone buddy
I don’t know that much about wing chun, but I heard that one of the basic principles was that it never utilised kicks above the waist.
cxxx:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity
Hello Chi Sau,
I am asking some very open questions about Wing Chun. Specifically about things I didn’t understand after viewing the techniques on this website. Furthermore I was challenged by the instructor’s explanation of the techniques’ purpose.
I did not speak about my ‘bastardised form’ and I did not mention ‘poor quality fighting skills’. I am not here to criticize other people, but simply to have an open discussion about drills that I came across.
Did you read the instructor’s explanation of why? I’m a WC practicioner who doesn’t practice in this manner, however the way he explained the techniques, I cannot argue his points. I may dislike him or I may respect him, but I cannot say ‘poor quality fighting skills’ because those techniques (according to him) are not fighting - but drills with a purpose. Drills that do not exist in my school.
I am trying to do my research with an open mind.
ABandit:
Thanks for your input. Did you know that in one public fight Grandmaster Yip Man kicked someone in the chest and the person died.
In a fight, why limit yourself. A well positioned kick, at the right moment, after the right setup could kick ass (above the waist, that is).
I’d love to hear your opinion after you’ve seen the clips and read the explanations for 1 and 3. In fact, I look forward to it.
Thanks again,
Dan
[This message was edited by DanM on 09-03-01 at 02:51 PM.]
chi sau on clip 2
He may be using a tactic that I use often when he looks away. I stare off next to the guy I’m fighting at the floor to distance myself from combat and avoid flinching from a strike. It just helps me to keep from blinking. I can still see everything fine, just out of the corner of my eye. not many people fight like that, but it does work.
DanM
As I said, I don’t really know much about Wing Chun (everything I know is what I have gleaned from books/mags or from stories told by friends who have tried the art, or from what I have seen in demos).
I personally agree that you should not limit yourself - if the opening is there then you should use the most appropriate technique.
cxxx:::::::::::>
What we do in life echoes in Eternity
ABandit
Hi ABandit,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. I think your lack of experience in Wing Chun is an asset to this discussion. I feel that many WC practicioners (myself included) are too concerned with how Wing Chun looks rather than what works.
Unfortunately most of us (again myself very much included) are caught up convincing ourselves that we’re learning something worthwhile when in our hearts we harbor doubts.
Instead of being caught up in ‘What is Wing Chun’ in the Wing Chun forum, I’ve come to this forum to ask other travellers their objective opinion and advice. After a martial art is a martial art. Martial Artist can recognize truth in any Fighting form. There are common criteria - does it make sense? can it work? Is the approach reasonable?
So, because you don’t practice WC - you can look at these animations and say ,“damn that won’t work because of x y z” or you may conjecture, “there is some substance to these techniques because of u v w”
I hope you understand my objective and don’t feel I’m trying to criticize. I look forward to all objective dialog.
sincerely,
Dan
[This message was edited by DanM on 09-04-01 at 08:15 AM.]
ok dan u asked me were those techniques worth while training .Re-read my reasons and ask your self that question. should you practice something done badly ???
you also asked for critical replies .
that is what i gave you
Not having read the other repsonses…
As a whole these guys don’t know how to step back (aka tactical retreat) and look afraid of getting hit, and that’s a red flag. What’s with the turning away and turtleing BS they’re doing? Very weak, very bad footwork, very bad habits and very dangerous. Yeah, I know WC doesn’t retreat. Fine then at least get used to taking a few shots as you move in.
The guy doing the side kick and the flowery “Kung Fu” cr@p should spend more time sparring with TKD people to get his kicking down instead of looking pretty. I mean c’mon, landing with your groin exposed and your hands out like that?
The guy trying to do a roundhouse also should study some Muay Thai or TKD, here’s a hint open the hips.
From the videos I’d say this school should spend more time sparring and less time doing making these demos and explaining them. Once again unimpressive, even for a demo.
[i]
Rogue, you’re an @ss!! Watchman
Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour
BTW, did I mention that Rogue was an @ss? Watchman[/i]
[This message was edited by rogue on 09-04-01 at 06:47 PM.]
a few thoughts
I personally don’t retreat - if someone initiates I attack before they’ve got anywhere
If I had to retreat it wouldn’t be straight backwards - I would step to the side to try and narrow down their options. In all cases retreat is the poor cousin of evasion - step forwards and to the side and you gain the dominant position. Retreat changes nothing.
The kick defenses are poor - you’d be on the deck trying those techniques against someone who can kick.
Stances were bad - there was no rooting in evidence. Everyone in the background can’t stand still when watching, so when they are sparring it is even worse. It wasn’t Stillness in the heart of motion.
The movements I saw had too much thought - it looked like people who trained specific combinations for that situation. You must train combinations, but not in response to a situation - you train the fluidity of movement.
Too much concern with distancing - those techniques are only useful once you’ve closed the distance to the opponent. So why ‘buy’ space when your techniques require you to close the gap anyway.
More specifically:
Clip 1 - rear leg kick -
option a - I’d take his lead leg out with a kick, then I don’t worry about his hands. Game over.
option b - since I’ve thrown a right straight punch, my left should have been arriving already
Clip 2 - I’d have stuck to the punch since it was in an over-extended stance. Or I’d have kicked the front leg out as he stepped in (standard way of dealing with a puncher)
Clip 3 - It’s a straight arm hook (no power) or something - the punch wouldn’t have landed anyway so I’d kick him square in the nuts for being crap. If it was going to hit me I’d attack the unguarded centre yada yada. Not worth discussing tbh
Clip 4 - It’s a bad kick that wouldn’t have landed, if it was going to hit you couldn’t stop it with a straight block.
I do like the flow of the guy once he attacks. However, he doesn’t use his feet on the way in - each step should contain a low line kick to the guys legs
Clip 5 - I’m not sure why they want to beat a donkey up but it’s a good example of how not to kick. Guy steps in for an entry kick ffs! Say hello to a busted knee. Even if you wait for the kick, once the kick is taken why wasn’t the knee taken out? Why plant the foot and move to hand techniques when it should be over already?
To me the movements afterwards are Wing Chun for the sake of Wing Chun.
Across the board there is no understanding of low-line kicking and how it should incorporate into every step you make.
Essay over - hope noone gets too offended.
“If ignorance is bliss, why aren’t more people happy?”
I just wanted to comment on this statement made before:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=“-1”>quote:</font><HR>I feel that many WC practicioners (myself included) are too concerned with how Wing Chun looks rather than what works.[/quote]
Form follows function. Function determines form. Something looks WC because it follows the principles and functions set by WC. If it doesn’t look like WC, then it might be a new application or it might not be WC.
In the case of the videos, I think they are effective for the situations presented, but I agree with the others that they could be improved.
And I think the nitpicking is pretty much superficial. Sure his hand, stance, etc. might not be in the ideal WC position, but in a real fight, rarely will you be concerned with 100% correct WC form but rather the correct application.