I meet martial artists from many disciplines and when I say I do Wing Chun they either say that WC has a bad name and/or they ask why WC people hate each other. I’ve only been doing WC since 1970 and have only studied with 8 Sifus (four of whom were students of Yip Man), so I don’t know much. I’ve noticed that many of the students of YM have different approaches to WC. Does that mean on is right and another is wrong? IMO we all have fragments of WC since no one alive today nor their Sifus were around when WC was developed. We could be a viable entity in the martial arts world if we worked together without the lineage ego that permeates our style.
Just a thought.
Well there is an old Hermetic saying: “As Above, So Below”
And applying that to your questions, I suppose we can say that it’s the same reasons why, at an individual level, some people find it necessary to bash the guy next to him, or talk behind his back while smiling in his face, or perhaps being an overly competitive and nasty jerk whether he’s in front of the other guy or not.
FALSE PRIDE, JEALOUSY, INSECURITY, GREED, LUST FOR POWER AND STATUS.
(Take your pick, or all of the above).
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1066243]
I meet martial artists from many disciplines and when I say I do Wing Chun they either say that WC has a bad name and/or they ask why WC people hate each other.
[/quote]
This is certainly not unique to VT… I also did karate and have spent enough time on those boards to tell you there is just as much if not more “debate” conducted elsewhere.
The reality as I see it is that discussion is good… Debate is healthy and those who would rather all sit around the campfire singing kumbaya are missing the point that through debate and disagreement comes learning.. (assuming one’s cup is not foaming over with spiked Kool-Aid, ego or status–which is common in TMA)
[QUOTE=Phil Redmond;1066243]
I’ve noticed that many of the students of YM have different approaches to WC. Does that mean one is right and another is wrong?
[/QUOTE]
If one has the exact opposite view tactically than the other then they can’t both be correct; they can’t both be the same thing. :)
“If one has the exact opposite view tactically than the other then they can’t both be correct; they can’t both be the same thing.” :)
***THAT’S A GOOD POINT.
There are varying degrees of efficiency amoungst arts, including what goes on within one single style , ie.- wing chun.
But I guess the point is, even if one particular approach has more answers to combat than another - this doesn’t justify being an A-hole. :o
Which of course is even worse if one acts that way when in fact one’s approach is the inferior one. 
You know why you guys are always bashing each other?
WC is about fighting and you guys don’t do enough of it.
On a serious note, there is some element of truth to this.
If WC people focused on what THEY can do and not what the believe they can do or someone decades ago MAY have done, they and their art would be for better off.
Which is why, after coming on this forum in February, 2002, and seeing what goes on here - I was posting about trying to get a Wing Chun Fight League going - starting with the Sparring Get Together Event I organized in May, 2003…which Carl DeChiara in Cleveland was gracious enough to host and participate in, along with some of his students.
The turnout was small, although there was lots of bickering around here in the preceding months about what kind of sparring should it be, could you come if you didn’t want to participate in sparring, how many people from one particular lineage should be allowed to come - so as not to “pack” the house with one’s own group, etc.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1066291]You know why you guys are always bashing each other?
WC is about fighting and you guys don’t do enough of it.
On a serious note, there is some element of truth to this.
If WC people focused on what THEY can do and not what the believe they can do or someone decades ago MAY have done, they and their art would be for better off.[/QUOTE]
Quoted for truth.
YungChun: If one has the exact opposite view tactically than the other then they can’t both be correct; they can’t both be the same thing.
I have to disagree here. At the strategic level there has to be commonality but not necessarily at the tactical level. For example the BJJ strategy is quite simple. Close the distance, achieve the clinch, takedown to nullify his strengths, get the dominate position, finish the fight.
Tactically the approaches are wide and varied from old school clinch and hip throw, wrestling based takedowns and a more judo based grip fight and throw approach. All are still BJJ. On the ground some people like to be on their backs and play a guard game or the Eddie Bravo half guard game. Some prefer to be on top. Some are fast and explosive and use the tactics that go with that. Others prefer a slower control game and will use different moves and tactics. Still all is BJJ. Get rid of the Gi and the game changes even more.
But all follow the basic strategy of BJJ.
Maybe someplace like here can define the basic strategy of what WC should be and let the tactics evolve as they may as each lineage and person develops their personal game and tactics within that strategy.
Just a thought.
[QUOTE=m1k3;1066297]
Maybe someplace like here can define the basic strategy of what WC should be and let the tactics evolve as they may as each lineage and person develops their personal game and tactics within that strategy.
[/QUOTE]
The faat mun (dap, jeet, chum, biu, chi) is the basic WCK game plan or strategy for WCK fighting, and comes to us from the ancestors (and is taught explicitly in YKS, Gu Lao, etc.). Essentially, it boils down to getting in, closing the opponent’s offense down, breaking his structure, delivering our weapons, and sticking to him like gum in his hair.
I would have to agree. You are so right!
WC guys should have sparring in their schools every class as well take time out to visit other schools to spar or enlist into competitions to spar. This what should happen. I like to see more Real Wing Chun being use in competition an less glorified kick boxing VT guys.
But differences of each WC school is the cause for animosity. My School WC is focus on power and speed. Your school focuses on Raw Strength and Ging. Your school focuses on Softness and Flow. My school is better than yours because My lineage is more authenic. I learn directly from my sigung disciple so i am closer to source. My linege is this your lineage is this…
At the end of the day the only one who can truly prove who WC is better is through a friendly challege. Either full contact or chi sau. If your chi sau game is better than the next. all that proves is that your good at chi sau. If you win at sparring then your good at fighting!
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1066291]You know why you guys are always bashing each other?
WC is about fighting and you guys don’t do enough of it.
On a serious note, there is some element of truth to this.
If WC people focused on what THEY can do and not what the believe they can do or someone decades ago MAY have done, they and their art would be for better off.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=m1k3;1066297]I have to disagree here. At the strategic level there has to be commonality but not necessarily at the tactical level. For example the BJJ strategy is quite simple. Close the distance, achieve the clinch, takedown to nullify his strengths, get the dominate position, finish the fight.
… Maybe someplace like here can define the basic strategy of what WC should be and let the tactics evolve as they may as each lineage and person develops their personal game and tactics within that strategy.[/QUOTE]
I just knew that this post would draw out T…
[QUOTE=t_neihoff;1066297]The faat mun (dap, jeet, chum, biu, chi) is the basic WCK game plan or strategy for WCK fighting, and comes to us from the ancestors (and is taught explicitly in YKS, Gu Lao, etc.). Essentially, it boils down to getting in, closing the opponent’s offense down, breaking his structure, delivering our weapons, and sticking to him like gum in his hair.[/QUOTE]
dap, jeet, chum, biu, chi
Interesting that these terms come grouped in five don’t you think?
Unfortunately, again, these terms may not be familiar to everyone and some will have more (even T!) so I guess this is where the problem is? Funny that these basic terms are taught ‘explicitly’ in YKS, Gu Lao etc
Part of the lineage ‘misunderstandings’ right there imho and we wonder WHY we all bash eachother??
[QUOTE=Utimatewingchun;1066297]FALSE PRIDE, JEALOUSY, INSECURITY, GREED, LUST FOR POWER AND STATUS[/QUOTE]
Hit. Nail. Head.
My take is that all martial arts are not about learning a “style”; you are going through a “system” and a “curriculum” to learn about yourself and develop your own “style” or “game”. And many have different “teaching methodologies” - some of which others have not experienced yet. Martial arts is limitless and although we may be good at one aspect, it is impossible to be good at all aspects, so we project what we are good at to others’ and try to make that the realm in which we judge others.
In making assumptions, not having experience, feeling insecure, or feeling that others’ training somehow invalidates yours is a main reason people bash each other. Its all about defending an ego (which is a made up entity) to justify itself. But there are also other reasons like outright lies, making up histories, distortion of facts, which can be debated.
What I see is mostly people working through a lot of issues psychologically and socially and we have gotten a lot of inherited cross cultural baggage from those who came before us.
When I see threats or internet challenges, I see ignorance and anger popping up; actually in the USA, people have a right to say what they please, no matter how vulgar or unappealing it is. Its a fact. If there is escalation into violence, it becomes an issue of assault and battery, and probably aggravated assault. Also, there are liabilities like libel and defamation of character which you can be tried for. Attorneys will benefit from this, and both sides will be paying a lot.
T’s example is a good example for many who would want to disagree “more strongly in the physical sense” - that is the price for living in civilization. You don’t go about taking things personally and want to duel people - its illegal.
So I guess the bottom line is ignorance and anger, and perhaps greed for money, market share, and more students.
A response to Phil’s thread starter
The KFO wing chun chat list is the worst among wing chun chat lists that I know of. Yet it often draws more people that the other KFO forums and it draws more anonymous folks, folks who don’t do wing chun , trolls, net addicts, folks who need to project their frustrations and a lack of moderation when threads go south or when the discussions are personal. I for one have basically given up on the forum and post only occasionally these days.
But- one can get a false and distorted picture of the wing chun world if one depends too greatly on this forum as a sample of wing chun .Most major figures in wing chun are not on this list and in general there is greater civility or atleast politeness outside of the forum than in it.
For a start folks can ignore same old same old posts by frequent posters rather than being drawn into replying to outrageous posts-which is what happens. But there are different degrees of addiction.
With so many variations and new ones emerging-the core has become quite vague and obscure.
Apart from personality problems-you can take almost issue— stance, how to make a fist, on the position of feet, the footwork, the punch, angles, lines, directions, strategy, tactics, how to deal with other styles,curriculum, training—there is -often from the same few posters- just repetitive noise.
Best to do your own wing chun if that is what interests you and forget the addictions to this list.
joy chaudhuri
I have not seen any Longfist, Mantis, Baji, Zimen, XingYi, … guys argue among themselves. You express your opinion and I express mine. Your opinion carry as much weight as mine. If we agree, that will be great. If we don’t, that will be fine too. The argument start when you try to prove the other person is wrong. In CMA, there is no right and wrong but “trade off”.
Why do you want to spend your effort if you know no matter how hard that you have tried, your opponent will never change his mind?
[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1066367]I for one have basically given up on the forum and post only occasionally these days.
joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]
I actually come to the forum for folks like you - the ones who don’t post often…because when those folks who don’t post often say something, it’s worth listening to.
I also have another take on the whole fighting vs. theory crap that seems to happen a lot. I think we could all agree that many people who are on this chat board are in Wing Chun for different reasons.
To take the sport model, that gets everyone very heated, as an example: There are people in the gym who want to fight at a professional level, people who want to fight at an amateur level, people who just want to spar in the gym, folks who are coming to regular class, folks coming to just the fitness classes…
…isn’t it the same about all martial arts classes? If I were wanting to run a profitable martial arts business, I would have to cater to all the above-mentioned groups as does any gym or establishments.
Not everyone wants the same things out of their training. Many people want to learn self-defense without hitting each other…and that’s what is being sold (and BOUGHT) out there.
So perhaps we could zoom out a little and realize that everyone here on the boards is in Wing Chun for different reasons.
Peace,
CTK
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1066342]
dap, jeet, chum, biu, chi
Interesting that these terms come grouped in five don’t you think?
[/QUOTE]
No. In fact, they don’t come “grouped” in fives, but typically come grouped in 12’s!
Unfortunately, again, these terms may not be familiar to everyone and some will have more (even T!) so I guess this is where the problem is?
If someone is not familiar with the “terms”, then they should do some research – much is available on the 'net if you look for it.
You seem stuck on the number of terms. It isn’t an issue of having more or less terms, as different lineages/branches use different terms, different numbers of terms, etc. to DESCRIBE the same method.
Funny that these basic terms are taught ‘explicitly’ in YKS, Gu Lao etc
The different lineages/branches teach the same subject: WCK. How they teach it varies, from having minor differences to major differences. Some lineages are ever explicit in the teachings, while in others much of the same is taught implicitly.
Part of the lineage ‘misunderstandings’ right there imho and we wonder WHY we all bash eachother??
Because many people can’t see past their own little lineage – and are lineage-centric – and cannot see the larger view of what comprises WCK. For me, WCK is WCK. It’s not a specific lineage that is WCK, and no lineage in itself embodies “correct” WCK. The lineages are just some person’s attempt to teach the larger “package.” Gu Lao, Yip Man, YKS, Yik Kam, Pan Nam, etc. all share the same root, the core curriculum. Some add to it, some focus more on different aspects, etc. but that core is the same.
IMO one requirement I have for list participation is that it is active. If nobody discusses much, then why read it as opposed to more thought-through content such as books, articles, blogs?
In more active forums with people that are engaged in martial contact and training, many times you have larger personalities and crashing energies. This site is not an anomaly. Bullshido / mixedmartialarts.com / sherdog - all have similar flavors but those are more to the extreme. I do not personally mind this - also to me in general it is indicative of an “alpha” mentality which I see among talented fighters also (is that also “yang” energy guys?). However it does require a developed skill for navigating this type of content.
The awful truth:
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/19/fanboyism-and-brand-loyalty/
[QUOTE=chusauli;1066351]My take is that all martial arts are not about learning a “style”; you are going through a “system” and a “curriculum” to learn about yourself and develop your own “style” or “game”. And many have different “teaching methodologies” - some of which others have not experienced yet. Martial arts is limitless and although we may be good at one aspect, it is impossible to be good at all aspects, so we project what we are good at to others’ and try to make that the realm in which we judge others.
In making assumptions, not having experience, feeling insecure, or feeling that others’ training somehow invalidates yours is a main reason people bash each other. Its all about defending an ego (which is a made up entity) to justify itself. But there are also other reasons like outright lies, making up histories, distortion of facts, which can be debated.
What I see is mostly people working through a lot of issues psychologically and socially and we have gotten a lot of inherited cross cultural baggage from those who came before us.
When I see threats or internet challenges, I see ignorance and anger popping up; actually in the USA, people have a right to say what they please, no matter how vulgar or unappealing it is. Its a fact. If there is escalation into violence, it becomes an issue of assault and battery, and probably aggravated assault. Also, there are liabilities like libel and defamation of character which you can be tried for. Attorneys will benefit from this, and both sides will be paying a lot.
T’s example is a good example for many who would want to disagree “more strongly in the physical sense” - that is the price for living in civilization. You don’t go about taking things personally and want to duel people - its illegal.
So I guess the bottom line is ignorance and anger, and perhaps greed for money, market share, and more students.[/QUOTE]
Very good I enjoyed your answer…you are so right. I agree with many points of what you said. Some I already knew and other things were inspirational. Thanks for your enlightment!
At any rate…interesting how you bring up Terrence an people issuing real internet challenges. I don’t see people challenging Phil Redmond, MK1, or HW108 or YungChun. Why is it that Terrence is main person who has people around america and europe issuing him challenges? What about Terrence’s disagreement causes people to want to chain punch his face in?
[QUOTE=m1k3;1066297]Quoted for truth.
I have to disagree here. At the strategic level there has to be commonality but not necessarily at the tactical level. For example the BJJ strategy is quite simple. Close the distance, achieve the clinch, takedown to nullify his strengths, get the dominate position, finish the fight.
Tactically the approaches are wide and varied from old school clinch and hip throw, wrestling based takedowns and a more judo based grip fight and throw approach. All are still BJJ. On the ground some people like to be on their backs and play a guard game or the Eddie Bravo half guard game. Some prefer to be on top. Some are fast and explosive and use the tactics that go with that. Others prefer a slower control game and will use different moves and tactics. Still all is BJJ. Get rid of the Gi and the game changes even more.
But all follow the basic strategy of BJJ.
Maybe someplace like here can define the basic strategy of what WC should be and let the tactics evolve as they may as each lineage and person develops their personal game and tactics within that strategy.
Just a thought.[/QUOTE]
***ALL THE MORE REASON in my view why a “Wing Chun Fight League” (or whatever it would be called) would be a good thing for WCK. The more wing chun practitioners get together for competitive sparring in a tournament atmosphere - the more various approaches to the art, as well as the similarities…would become apparent.
And people would start to “crosstrain” within wing chun, so to speak.
Certainly a good model for entry into eventual “all styles are welcome” type events for various wing chun people.
True, some wing chun people are doing that already, but with a Fight League the numbers would grow and overall WCK would get better, imo.
[QUOTE=Yoshiyahu;1066424]Very good I enjoyed your answer…you are so right. I agree with many points of what you said. Some I already knew and other things were inspirational. Thanks for your enlightment!
At any rate…interesting how you bring up Terrence an people issuing real internet challenges. I don’t see people challenging Phil Redmond, MK1, or HW108 or YungChun. Why is it that Terrence is main person who has people around america and europe issuing him challenges? What about Terrence’s disagreement causes people to want to chain punch his face in?[/QUOTE]
You can answer that yourself. Just remember issuing internet challenges are largely hot air and if you are a martial artist (and implied you have skills and weapons) a person can legally defend themselves if you are in their immediate vicinity, have intention to hurt them, and have the ability to do so (and with escalated force).
I am not a lawyer, but this part of law is very applicable and so you know what self defense is really defined as in this country as, “use of necessary and proportionate, non-deadly force in self-defense anytime the victim reasonably believes that unlawful force is about to be used on him.”
So internet fools who lose their tempers and say stupid things might just have their asses hauled to jail if they ever wanted to “punch a guy in the face for mouthing off”. And the funny thing is people are so ignorant about this. Plus the posts will be used as evidence in a court of law. So its really digging a hole. Perhaps an attorney or paralegal can comment.
“Stupid is as stupid does”, as Forrest Gump’s momma said.