Difference between wing chun and boxing is that there is no disagreement about throwing jabs in boxing. Even the most low level coach can show you something. Question is more how far can they take you? Difference between coaches is usually in depth of knowledge and coaching skill. This is not the case in wing chun where people teach contradictory ideas where both can’t be true.
[QUOTE=guy b.;1239300]Any boxing coach can teach you at least something about throwing a jab. Some wing chun teaching is actually counter productive[/QUOTE]
Awesome coach, mediocre coach.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1239262]Being a non practitioner of Wing Chun I can only presume you mean post #49[/QUOTE]
I am a practitioner of wing chun and I do mean post #49.
It is sad that people want to define what is or is not wing chun for everybody else. They must think they are geniuses and the rest of us idiots since only they know.
[QUOTE=guy b.;1239305]Difference between wing chun and boxing is that there is no disagreement about throwing jabs in boxing. Even the most low level coach can show you something. Question is more how far can they take you? Difference between coaches is usually in depth of knowledge and coaching skill. This is not the case in wing chun where people teach contradictory ideas where both can’t be true.[/QUOTE]
There is a lot of disagreement in boxing and some of it is contradictory even about how to throw a good jab. In the end you realize that these are are personal points of view and there is no one right best or correct way there is a range of possibilities that are open to you and that what is important is that you find one that works for you. I think this is also true from my experience in bjj in wrestling and wing chun.
The main difference I see in boxing and wing chun teaching or coaching is that in boxing no one takes the coaching as gospel coming down from high and that only his coach or trainer knows the real boxing and everyone else is just stupid for not seeing that.
[QUOTE=tc101;1239326]There is a lot of disagreement in boxing and some of it is contradictory even about how to throw a good jab. In the end you realize that these are are personal points of view and there is no one right best or correct way there is a range of possibilities that are open to you and that what is important is that you find one that works for you. I think this is also true from my experience in bjj in wrestling and wing chun.
The main difference I see in boxing and wing chun teaching or coaching is that in boxing no one takes the coaching as gospel coming down from high and that only his coach or trainer knows the real boxing and everyone else is just stupid for not seeing that.[/QUOTE]
IN boxing, if someone comes around with a “new way” ( there is nothing new under the sun) or a “better way” of doing this or that, until that way is proven in the ring, it means nothing.
Case in point the “peek a boo” style of Tyson as per D’Amato.
In full contact martial arts what PROVES anything is the results in “the ring”.
IMHO.
In a simple brief, Wing chun kuen is just an art expressing three simple things.
- thrusting forward to the center line to capture the opponent center with coil spring or rattan type of force.
- If the thrusting forward force is block go roundabout and continuous step 1,
- If the thrusting forward force lost its direction, recover and continuous step 1.
That is all.
Why is it that difficult to know what is or not following these above?
As an example,
It is like beetovern music has its style. Not all music is beetovern music, but beetovern music is a type of music.
One can’t call every music the beetovern music, and beetovern music is not all music.
So, does one train in the above three things? If yes, it is Wck, if not it is not. That simple and clear. Didn’t all the three sets, wooden dummy, chi sau, …Wck sparing …ect . Train to develop these three things?
[QUOTE=Hendrik;1239332]IMHO.
In a simple brief, Wing chun kuen is just an art expressing three simple things.
- thrusting forward to the center line to capture the opponent center with coil spring or rattan type of force.
- If the thrusting forward force is block go roundabout and continuous step 1,
- If the thrusting forward force lost its direction, recover and continuous step 1.
That is all.
Why is it that difficult to know what is or not following these above?
As an example,
It is like beetovern music has its style. Not all music is beetovern music, but beetovern music is a type of music.
One can’t call every music the beetovern music, and beetovern music is not all music.
So, does one train in the above three things? If yes, it is Wck, if not it is not. That simple and clear. Didn’t all the three sets, wooden dummy, chi sau, …Wck sparing …ect . Train to develop these three things?[/QUOTE]
Please tell us all what makes you the expert on what is or is not wing chun? You have no skill you do not even know what the most important skill is in wing chun or sparring. We know you are a fraud.
Anyone who is not blind and stupid could see these three basic in the Wck three sets.
Wing chun kuen is just an art expressing three simple things.
Snt :
- thrusting forward to the center line to capture the opponent center with coil spring or rattan type of force.
Ck:
2. If the thrusting forward force is block go roundabout and continuous step 1,
Bj:
3. If the thrusting forward force lost its direction, recover and continuous step 1.
Got nothing to do with anyone’s skill or anything personal.
Btw. My skill go nothing whatever to do with Wck core. I don’t create them, and all proper Wck lineages practice them. If you don’t know , too bad. Free free to post your opinion on me. That doesn’t cover up your ignorance and blindness.
[QUOTE=tc101;1239335]Please tell us all what makes you the expert on what is or is not wing chun? You have no skill you do not even know what the most important skill is in wing chun or sparring. We know you are a fraud.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1239329]IN boxing, if someone comes around with a “new way” ( there is nothing new under the sun) or a “better way” of doing this or that, until that way is proven in the ring, it means nothing.
Case in point the “peek a boo” style of Tyson as per D’Amato.
In full contact martial arts what PROVES anything is the results in “the ring”.[/QUOTE]
Nobody comes up with a new way of throwing a jab. Some people work it more and make it more dangerous. Some people use it more effectively in terms of strategy. Some people don’t get good at it and tend to avoid it or throw it poorly. Nobody changes the fundamental body mechanic of it.
The thing about boxing is that it is available for everyone to watch and discuss. I have had even local boxing coaches of low level talking about the way jabs used to be thrown vertical in the early days, how the russian amateurs sometimes turn it over, and the pros and cons of these unusual ways vs standard jab. It is all there for anyone to see.
I think this is one of the good things about youtube. As time goes on what the different wing chun approaches do and don’t do the same as each other will become more clear. More and better clips will emerge of realistic usage. People will be able to make a more informed choice.
[QUOTE=guy b.;1239347]Nobody comes up with a new way of throwing a jab. Some people work it more and make it more dangerous. Some people use it more effectively in terms of strategy. Some people don’t get good at it and tend to avoid it or throw it poorly. Nobody changes the fundamental body mechanic of it.
The thing about boxing is that it is available for everyone to watch and discuss. I have had even local boxing coaches of low level talking about the way jabs used to be thrown vertical in the early days, how the russian amateurs sometimes turn it over, and the pros and cons of these unusual ways vs standard jab. It is all there for anyone to see.
I think this is one of the good things about youtube. As time goes on what the different wing chun approaches do and don’t do the same as each other will become more clear. More and better clips will emerge of realistic usage. People will be able to make a more informed choice.[/QUOTE]
I agree about youtube and i hope you are right.
[QUOTE=Hendrik;1239338]Anyone who is not blind and stupid could see these three basic in the Wck three sets.
[/QUOTE]
Then we do not need you to tell us.
Wing chun kuen is just an art expressing three simple things.
Snt :
- thrusting forward to the center line to capture the opponent center with coil spring or rattan type of force.
Ck:
2. If the thrusting forward force is block go roundabout and continuous step 1,
Bj:
3. If the thrusting forward force lost its direction, recover and continuous step 1.
Wrong. I guess this means you are blind and stupid. You should really go learn wing chun.
Got nothing to do with anyone’s skill or anything personal.
Btw. My skill go nothing whatever to do with Wck core. I don’t create them, and all proper Wck lineages practice them. If you don’t know , too bad. Free free to post your opinion on me. That doesn’t cover up your ignorance and blindness.
It is a good thing that your skill has nothing to do with the wing chun core since if it did we would all be in trouble.
“Who has the right to say what is and what isn’t Wing Chun?”
I have the definitive answer - the only one that can put an end to this thread. I don’t know how none of you could figure this out. It’s child’s play.
Leung Ting. He is the Master of Almightiness.
[QUOTE=BPWT;1239383]“Who has the right to say what is and what isn’t Wing Chun?”
I have the definitive answer - the only one that can put an end to this thread. I don’t know how none of you could figure this out. It’s child’s play.
Leung Ting. He is the Master of Almightiness.
;)[/QUOTE]
****! You’re right…Where were you earlier! 
[QUOTE=T_Ray;1239386]****! You’re right…Where were you earlier! :D[/QUOTE]
Oh, you know - thinking about rattan canes. Actually, I am going to ask you a Q regarding this in the other thread. 
Bpwt has a diamond, ask " O’ Great One. " !
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1239388]Bpwt has a diamond, ask " O’ Great One. " ![/QUOTE]
The irony, of course, is that if we did ask him… he would indeed have the answer. Yay!
[QUOTE=BPWT;1239392]The irony, of course, is that if we did ask him… he would indeed have the answer. Yay!
:)[/QUOTE]
Hah ! Joke over : /
[QUOTE=BPWT;1239383]“Who has the right to say what is and what isn’t Wing Chun?”
I have the definitive answer - the only one that can put an end to this thread. I don’t know how none of you could figure this out. It’s child’s play.
Leung Ting. He is the Master of Almightiness. ;)[/QUOTE]
Well when I studied with LT he was only a mere “10th Level Master of Comprehension”. Humility was never his strong point. But for all that, he didn’t go around defining what was genuine WC. He simply named what he taught as “WT” and didn’t worry about the rest …unless they tried to mess with his business interests, like William Cheung did in Germany.
[QUOTE=Grumblegeezer;1239448]Well when I studied with LT he was only a mere “10th Level Master of Comprehension”. Humility was never his strong point. But for all that, he didn’t go around defining what was genuine WC. He simply named what he taught as “WT” and didn’t worry about the rest …unless they tried to mess with his business interests, like William Cheung did in Germany.[/QUOTE]
Leung Ting was a great popularizer of wing chun throughout the world. He produced many very good wing chun practitioners. Yes he has his comical side but we can also say that about many many others. He is a ruthless businessman. He is like the Don King of wing chun.
[QUOTE=tc101;1239461]Leung Ting was a great popularizer of wing chun throughout the world. He produced many very good wing chun practitioners. Yes he has his comical side but we can also say that about many many others. He is a ruthless businessman. He is like the Don King of wing chun.[/QUOTE]
That sums it up pretty accurately.