[QUOTE=trubblman;1235144]Someone wrote that ( I paraphrase ) SLT plus footwork can be effective even if u dont learn CK or BJ. What does that mean? Chum kiu and biu gee contain the footwork. What footwork would one be learning if not chum kiu or biu gee? So to me the answer is no. Its not VT without CK or BG. Maybe u would be learning to fight but it would be a wholly different style from VT.[/QUOTE]
I agree on the whole but what footwork are you referring to in BG?
There is no footwork in SLT only the exercise. In fact SLT with footwork is CK
Basic VT footwork is learnt in CK and the MYJ. In BG the thinking is different.
[QUOTE=trubblman;1235144]Someone wrote that ( I paraphrase ) SLT plus footwork can be effective even if u dont learn CK or BJ. What does that mean? [/QUOTE]
Why wouldn’t it be possible to learn footwork drills outside the forms?
[QUOTE=Kellen Bassette;1235148]Why wouldn’t it be possible to learn footwork drills outside the forms?[/QUOTE]
By forms I am assuming u meant just SLT plus footwork drills. SLT plus footwork may be some martial art but it most assuredly is not Yip Man Wing Chun.
[QUOTE=trubblman;1235144]Someone wrote that ( I paraphrase ) SLT plus footwork can be effective even if u dont learn CK or BJ. What does that mean? Chum kiu and biu gee contain the footwork. What footwork would one be learning if not chum kiu or biu gee? So to me the answer is no. Its not VT without CK or BG…
…SLT plus footwork may be some martial art but it most assuredly is not Yip Man Wing Chun. [/QUOTE]
Oh dear :o
I can see that this debate may just go on forever if your view on Wing Chun, and dare I say even Ip Mans style, is as narrow minded as this.
I can see that this debate may just go on forever if your view on Wing Chun, and dare I say even Ip Mans style, is as narrow minded as this.[/QUOTE]
Only if u misapprehend what I say. My point is only to say that there is no Wing Chun without Chum Kiu and Biu Gee - Its all a whole. Even if u do footwork drills and SLT thats not Yip Man Wing Chun without CK and BG. Its a wholly different martial art. I dont think that VT prescribes any particular footwork but I do think it consists of all three forms chi sao and the dummy. I dont know how this is a narrow minded POV. But I ll be happy to hear about Wing Chun practitioners who only learned SLT and did footwork drills.
so if SLT is useless by itself, if someone were uber dedicated, how long would it take before anything he learned in WC would be useful or practical for self defense?
[QUOTE=trubblman;1235160]Only if u misapprehend what I say. My point is only to say that there is no Wing Chun without Chum Kiu and Biu Gee - Its all a whole. [/QUOTE]
FYI
I believe this is
“BY IP MAN HONG KONG FIRST STUDENT MASTER LEUNG SIONG:
SLT, Cham Kui, Bill Jee these three forms original is from one 108 SLT form, the reason of separate it to three different forms is for more easier on teaching syllabus purpose.”
[QUOTE=KungFubar;1235153]is it the same as goat stance?[/QUOTE]
1-Yes aka HOLDING ; ) a goat for er clipping.
2-aka crane stance , pre-fight side stance aka fighting crane ( love that one and the image of a ****ed of crane ; ) )
3-aka basic training stance
4-aka triangle adduction stance
5-aka character two ( Cantonese ) stance
6-aka pigeon toe stance
The purpose is simply to condition your toes to turn inwards to help stabilize the hips.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1235176]1-Yes aka HOLDING ; ) a goat for er clipping.
2-aka crane stance , pre-fight side stance aka fighting crane ( love that one and the image of a ****ed of crane ; ) )
3-aka basic training stance
4-aka triangle adduction stance
5-aka character two ( Cantonese ) stance
6-aka pigeon toe stance
The purpose is simply to condition your toes to turn inwards to help stabilize the hips.[/QUOTE]
Yes, stabilizing the hips - in terms of adduction this happens with the thighs in relation to the hips. So in our line, stabilizing the hips is part of it, but the adduction itself (and its inward rotation) is to also create the necessary kim sut. So once you’re in YJKYM you should be rotating in, sinking down, with energy forward.
[QUOTE=BPWT;1235183]Yes, stabilizing the hips - in terms of adduction this happens with the thighs in relation to the hips. So in our line, stabilizing the hips is part of it, but the adduction itself (and its inward rotation) is to also create the necessary kim sut. So once you’re in YJKYM you should be rotating in, sinking down, with energy forward.[/QUOTE]
Only a basic static posture many try to " waddle fight " in like the clown Leung Ting. More advanced fighting dynamics involving varying force vectors in unison with balance and fast shifting angling and pivoting to generate force to coincide with facing.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1235193]Only a basic static posture many try to " waddle fight " in like the clown Leung Ting. More advanced fighting dynamics involving varying force vectors in unison with balance and fast shifting angling and pivoting to generate force to coincide with facing.[/QUOTE]
It might be that some of that clown’s students could wipe the floor with you as some of them are very good at waddle fighting perhaps even better than you are with your advanced fighting dynamics. You do not need to insult and belittle others to express how you see things differently. For example some of us do not see the yee gee kim yeung ma as a basic static posture like you but have learned that it is the basis for learning how to receive and generate power and is a very important part of wing chun yet I don’t belittle you for not knowing this basic level wing chun. I just look at it as a different viewpoint.
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1235193]Only a basic static posture many try to " waddle fight " in like the clown Leung Ting.[/QUOTE]
You, like Graham, continue to show that you really have little to no idea and no manners either. You are a credit to your teacher, Kevin. (but while you’re stinging folks for $200 one-day seminars, who cares, eh?)
[QUOTE=k gledhill;1235193]Only a basic static posture many try to " waddle fight " in like the clown Leung Ting. [/QUOTE]
Kevin, you must be thinking of a different “clown Leung Ting” than the guy I trained with years ago. He didn’t “waddle-fight” in YGKYM. He favored an explosive “advancing step” to close on his opponents. Then depending on the situation and force received, he applied pretty much what you stated below: [QUOTE=k gledhill;1235193] …More advanced fighting dynamics involving varying force vectors in unison with balance and fast shifting angling and pivoting to generate force to coincide with facing.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I have seen other WC groups who do favor fighting out of YGKYM, such as the TST lineage, but I am not nearly arrogant enough to dismiss what they do as “waddling”, …even if I don’t agree with it. Well, at least not on a public forum.
[QUOTE=Grumblegeezer;1235241]I am not nearly arrogant enough to dismiss what they do as “waddling”, …even if I don’t agree with it. Well, at least not on a public forum.[/QUOTE]
Arrogant enough..maybe you just aren’t honest enough?
Touched a nerve have we ? : )
I have had several LT students, one asked me to kick her in the groin so she could show me how the LT school taught her to pinch her knees as a block of my kick … She then waddled forwards asking me to kick her , I declined ; ) but to this day share the experience.
Another LT student leant so much sideways in stances it was easy to control balance by not letting them lean back
: )
I also assisted in seminars for clandestine ex LT group in Germany with 100’s of students in a huge gym all doing the similar stuff !!! They couldn’t even reach the target to hit as they leaned away blocking at the same time …
