different how?
S. Teebas, how are the power generation methods different? I know that there is variation in methods of turning, is this what you are talking about, or stance structure?
Hunt 1, Fujyakumo, Marcelino31
Gents,
From a technical standpoint, Garrett Gee talks about time, space and Hung Fa YI Wing Chun Formula in combat. As a TWC practioner, do you have any thoughts on that? Just curious!
dummy choreography
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=“-1”>quote:</font><HR>tsui shun ting’s wc looks totally different than Grandmaster Cheungs..The same applies to the dummy form. They are not the same!
[/quote]
i didnt say TST’s WC was the same as williams. i said the choreography of the dummy was very similar. the version of TSTs dummy form i saw was very similar.
-Stu, Lifestyle Wing Chun, Melbourne, Australia.
http://www.lifestylewingchun.com
rolling_hand
We live in a 4 dimensional world.(string theory aside)You can apply time space analysis to and WC or martial art for that matter.It is a teaching method.Many teach WC in relation to geometric shaps,triangle’s cones ,circles,sphere’s etc.The goal is all the same,to provide a method for learning WC in a manner that alows you to make Wc reflexive.If using dimensional analysis gets you to do this great.
I have had enough fighting experience to know that simple is key and you must react to motion without thinking about the motion before you.Whatever method achives this result is a good method.
Hunt 1
–Simple is the key
I agree! Can you defind what’s simple is in term of body structure? - RH
hunt1 et al
You ask about something I am not qualified to talk about.I have been told my several in a position to know that the forms etc are 95% the same.I know Rick Spains group has taken to saying its the same WC.
I’m a senior student of Rick Spain. Both Rick Spain and Alf del-Brocco (Rick Spain’s 2IC) seem pretty convinced that there is a link between HFY/Garrett Gee’s stuff and TWC, with William Cheung allegly learning stuff from GG’s teacher during his time in mainland China, while WC was supposedly on the lam in China when things got too hot for him in HK due to his involvement in alleged illegal activities, and the “TWC” stories were promoted instead to disguise the truth.
While this makes for a great swashbuckling story and is somewhat more believable than the “secret teaching from Yip Man”, Leung Bik and “Traditional/Modified” stories, it’s still just another theory. It’s fairly significant IMHO that WC himself has said little about it to either confirm or deny.
The VT Museum folks seem to be pushing the HFY barrow pretty hard, though their conclusions and research methods have been challenged by many.
My Sifu and Sihing may have access to sources and information I don’t, and my interests lie in the present and future of WC rather than its history, but IMHO, despite the significant similarities between HFY and TWC, and their differences from most other WC styles, there is little hard evidence of a link.
A vacuum tube?
William Cheung
It is not odd to first doubt when a question is given or asked? The question given is sibak William Cheung real? In one way, real meaning that they people praticing the art of William Chueng’s wing chun aka traditional wing chun, then yes it is very much real. We can’t argue that and there is evidence which we can check and see for ourselves.
But I am assuming the person is asking is Sibak’s claim that his wing chun is only authentic wing chun of sigung Yip Man, then it is only wise to doubt before believing. My doubts do not discredit the merits of Sibak’s Cheung’s accomplishment or his TWC students. Just as my doubts on the existence of an all loving, all powerful, and all knowing god doesn’t take away the merits of the believers of a god.
I have studied under one TWC instructor in NYC and now I am studying with a nonTWC sifu. Their names aren’t important and my reasoning for leaving TWC are due my own experience with a TWC instructor and not TWC itself.
My knowledge of wing chun isn’t great. I do have the knowledge or the experience of meeting all the senior hong kong students of Sigung Yip Man.
It is my personally thought that unless you met the all the teachers of wing chun, you can not make a fair judgement of wing chun gung fu as a whole. It is like meet a few chinese and making a generalization that meeting a few chinese means to you know chinese culture.
I personally doubt Sibak’s account and my doubt is only due to the fact that the evidence presented by Sibak Cheung is not conclusive enough to build a paradigm for further research
and it is not beyond the shadow of doubt. If it were beyond the shadow of shadow of doubt, then the major of us would all be studying TWC?
You have probably read or heard people arguments for and against TWC. I do want to present arguments here. But ask my fellow brothers and sisters of wing chun as a whole to critical think for themselves and to stop wasting time with doggin others people within the family.
Bao Tran