# Master Wong's latest Wing Chun video



## Wingsingh (Mar 14, 2013)




----------



## mook jong man (Mar 14, 2013)

All he had to do was sink his elbow , cutting down through the weakest part of the grip , which is the thumb.
At the same time do a centreline punch with his free hand and a low heel kick to the closest knee.

Three simultaneous movements , that take half a second.
Doesn't require any risky turning of the body.
Direct , minimal use of brute strength , economy of movement.
Real Wing Chun.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 14, 2013)

Mook, why wasn't that 'real Wing Chun' in your opinion?


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 14, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> Mook, why wasn't that 'real Wing Chun' in your opinion?


I dont need to know WC to know that he answers that question in his post when he explains his alternative.

EDIT: Not to imply i see anything wrong with that video from a non-WC perspective.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 14, 2013)

Am a Wing Chun novice but I see Wing Chun principles in the video, that's all am saying.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 14, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> Mook, why wasn't that 'real Wing Chun' in your opinion?



Because it ignores basic Wing Chun principles and core concepts for one thing.

Let's look at the obvious things first , these will probably be apparent  even to the non Wing Chun people.

Stance - there was no stance
Guard -  there was no guard
Correct center line punch - not even close 
Optimum angle - no the angle of the arm was already in a collapsed position by the time he was grabbed (see incorrect punch and no guard)

The  Wing Chun system uses very short , sharp and compact movements that are extremely direct and to the *centerline.*
The technique in the video more closely resembled Krav Maga in my opinion.

No decent Wing Chun practitioner would ever turn their body completely side on to an attacker and expose their back to get out of an arm grab.
The most you would pivot is 45 degrees , or another alternative is to step in , *but always focused towards the centerline*

The technique with the elbow was just wrong with too much wasted movement.
Two options properly using the elbow , he could have just clamped his free hand over Wong's gripping hand (I wont call him master) brought his elbow over on to the *centerline *with minimal movement , then folded his elbow down , breaking Wong's wrist , can be used with pivot or step.
The main point here is that the elbow is pointed to the* centerline *, which is totally disregarded in the video.

Another option is to fold the elbow over on to the* centerline *, placing pressure on the wrist and breaking the grip , then stepping forward with your guarding hand up protecting your face and ramming the point of your elbow into the attackers sternum.
Why bother trying to elbow strike an attacker in the face when it is more direct to go straight to the sternum.

In my lineage we use these 5 principles to evaluate the quality of Wing Chun.
Simplicity
Directness
Practicality
Economy of movement
Minimum use of brute strength

I think what was exhibited in the video fails most of that criteria.

But good luck to him , he's probably laughing all the way to the bank making a truck load of cash out of people who don't know any better.


----------



## wtxs (Mar 14, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> Mook, why wasn't that 'real Wing Chun' in your opinion?



As Mook had said ...



mook jong man said:


> All he had to do was sink his elbow , cutting down through the weakest part of the grip , which is the thumb.
> At the same time do a centreline punch with his free hand and a low heel kick to the closest knee.
> 
> *Three simultaneous movements* , that take half a second.
> ...



WC concept, therefore "real WC" ... other wise you are just playing "chasing the hand" game.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 14, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> Because it ignores basic Wing Chun principles and core concepts for one thing.
> 
> Let's look at the obvious things first , these will probably be apparent  even to the non Wing Chun people.
> 
> ...



But otherwise it was fine........


----------



## Nabakatsu (Mar 14, 2013)

yak sao said:


> But otherwise it was fine........



Hah..


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 14, 2013)

From watching a few of his videos, its worth mentioning that he fully acknowledges that what hes doing aint WC. Hes doing his own thing with a WC base.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 14, 2013)

I think even saying that he is using a Wing Chun base is being extremely generous.
A base would imply  that you would be using something as intrinsic as centerline theory , but that doesn't seem to be the case , as evidenced by the defender turning their body completely side on to the attacker.

In my opinion you do not get to pick and choose which important Wing Chun principles you choose to adhere to and still be able to call it Wing Chun.
It's a bit like being pregnant , you can't be half pregnant.
You are either pregnant or you are not.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 14, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> I think even saying that he is using a Wing Chun base is being extremely generous.
> A base would imply  that you would be using something as intrinsic as centerline theory , but that doesn't seem to be the case , as evidenced by the defender turning their body completely side on to the attacker.



He has a whole video about why he personally doesnt use the centerline. He isnt doing Wing Chun, thats already been established. Hes doing his own thing which he made out of Wing Chun.


----------



## geezer (Mar 14, 2013)

OK guys I'm confused, please explain this clip to me. Wong has a student demonstrate a defensive move which he easily counters, and then chokes the student. And the student's movement is supposed to be _correct? _Regardless of whether it's WC or not, I have never seen a teacher promote a self defense move by showing how easily it can be countered.&#8203;Seems like an odd way to promote your system.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 14, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> He has a whole video about why he personally doesnt use the centerline. He isnt doing Wing Chun, thats already been established. Hes doing his own thing which he made out of Wing Chun.



For someone that says that he's not doing Wing Chun , he sure likes trading on the name.
I'm just saying , what with a video titled Wing Chun - how to overcome an arm grab and the words Wing Chun master tv superimposed over the video.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

I have watched some of this man's videos. It looks like it can be effective, but it's obviously not traditional WC.

So, from an outsider's perspective ( take it for what it's worth ) I have no problem with some of the stuff he teaches. HOWEVER while I've heard him say it isn't classic Wing Chun, it doesn't stop him from plastering WC all over his videos and such. I have a major problem with that.
Why would he do this? Because Wing Chun is seeing a huge rise in popularity. Same thing as Krav Maga in the past few years. As a Krav Maga practitioner I get so annoyed when someone markets some BS as Krav Maga, and it only uses concepts of the system... and I say concepts in the most loose definition of the term. I can't expect a WC practitioner to feel any different about this guy.

So can his system work? Sure, I've seen some decent stuff and somewhat decent advice. But don't call it Wing Chun. If you put bunny ears on a dog and teach it to hop around, it doesn't make it a friggin rabbit. So don't claim something that it isn't. If your system is worth using, it will grow based on its own merit. But it's unethical to dress it up in a disguise to make it more appealing to people that have no way of knowing any better.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 15, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> For someone that says that he's not doing Wing Chun , he sure likes trading on the name.
> I'm just saying , what with a video titled Wing Chun - how to overcome an arm grab and the words Wing Chun master tv superimposed over the video.



*shrugs* - Its just advertising.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> *shrugs* - Its just advertising.



Yeah it is, but it's kind of advertising of the false variety unfortunately. I might have more respect for this guy and his system if it wasn't advertised as something it wasn't.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> *shrugs* - Its just advertising.



Yep , false advertising.

Beat me to it Drasken.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 15, 2013)

geezer said:


> OK guys I'm confused, please explain this clip to me. Wong has a student demonstrate a defensive move which he easily counters, and then chokes the student. And the student's movement is supposed to be _correct? _Regardless of whether it's WC or not, I have never seen a teacher promote a self defense move by showing how easily it can be countered.&#8203;Seems like an odd way to promote your system.



I was thinking that myself Geezer , he gets his student to do an incorrect over committed movement placing himself in a perilous position.
Then takes advantage of it by putting his student in a choke hold.

Bizarre.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 15, 2013)

Drasken said:


> Yeah it is, but it's kind of advertising of the false variety unfortunately. I might have more respect for this guy and his system if it wasn't advertised as something it wasn't.





mook jong man said:


> Yep , false advertising.
> 
> Beat me to it Drasken.



Yes, it is. But how many people have found it as a result?

Mind you, im not saying its a good thing. I was originally just saying. Its advertising.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Yes, it is. But how many people have found it as a result?
> 
> Mind you, im not saying its a good thing. I was originally just saying. Its advertising.



Yeah, but it's wrong. It can also confuse people that don't know the difference. Not only that, it can give a style a lot of bad rep. It's like Krav Maga. So many people claim to teach it, and they don't teach anything CLOSE to it. So eventually people get the wrong idea about the style and it hurts the business of true Krav schools.
But these posers don't care. When they smear a style's rep, they will just find the new fad style and move on. These people are leeches.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 15, 2013)

Drasken said:


> Yeah, but it's wrong. It can also confuse people that don't know the difference. Not only that, it can give a style a lot of bad rep. It's like Krav Maga. So many people claim to teach it, and they don't teach anything CLOSE to it. So eventually people get the wrong idea about the style and it hurts the business of true Krav schools.
> But these posers don't care. When they smear a style's rep, they will just find the new fad style and move on. These people are leeches.



Of course. I didnt imply otherwise. Its advertising.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Of course. I didnt imply otherwise. Its advertising.



True. I just wish that these people were subject to the same laws as a company found to be falsely advertising. But unfortunately a judge would likely not see the difference due to ignorance of the subject. ( Some may get it, I'm sure a few judges practice martial arts ) But as it stands now, trying to go after someone advertising a style they don't really teach is fighting an uphill battle. And that is assuming anyone is willing to listen in the first place :/


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 15, 2013)

Drasken said:


> True. I just wish that these people were subject to the same laws as a company found to be falsely advertising. But unfortunately a judge would likely not see the difference due to ignorance of the subject. ( Some may get it, I'm sure a few judges practice martial arts ) But as it stands now, trying to go after someone advertising a style they don't really teach is fighting an uphill battle. And that is assuming anyone is willing to listen in the first place :/



Well, i think the first thing thatd need to happen is that WC (or insert other system here) would need to have a trademarked (thats the wrong word. intellectual property maybe? i forget what non-material things thatre deemed to be property are called) identity. Like the Nike logo and brandname, itd need to be identifiable by its contents (nike cant use a different logo for each of its outlets, or a different brandname, though the range can have a different name). Next, youd be forcing the organisation to change its name and/or logo to adhere to regulation, since even though he may be able to have a different 'range', in order to do so hed need to be a part of the governing entity and he would need to be producing that range on behalf of that entity. While youre at it, you get to deem everything with some level of the original brand a knockoff (invent shoe identical to nike shoe, slap a different logo on it, sell it for less in order to sell it at all). Next, thered be forcing all non-affiliated WC outlets to change their names in order to conform to the same standards. Then things get legally messy.

Im not a lawyer. Im just handballing since my one sentence comment has resulted in conversation, and i may as well join in with it.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Well, i think the first thing thatd need to happen is that WC (or insert other system here) would need to have a trademarked (thats the wrong word. intellectual property maybe? i forget what non-material things thatre deemed to be property are called) identity. Like the Nike logo and brandname, itd need to be identifiable by its contents (nike cant use a different logo for each of its outlets, or a different brandname, though the range can have a different name). Next, youd be forcing the organisation to change its name and/or logo to adhere to regulation, since even though he may be able to have a different 'range', in order to do so hed need to be a part of the governing entity and he would need to be producing that range on behalf of that entity. While youre at it, you get to deem everything with some level of the original brand a knockoff (invent shoe identical to nike shoe, slap a different logo on it, sell it for less in order to sell it at all). Next, thered be forcing all non-affiliated WC outlets to change their names in order to conform to the same standards. Then things get legally messy.
> Im not a lawyer. Im just handballing since my one sentence comment has resulted in conversation, and i may as well join in with it.



Lol you have a point
Still, I go back to my original point before we get too off topic from the OP. I have little respect for him due to his false advertising. Though nothing can really be done about it obviously.
I still say not all of his stuff is bad. It's just too bad he's dishonest.


----------



## Ediaan (Mar 15, 2013)

I would like to see Master Wong in a challenge against a proper Master, like Emin Boztepe or GM Kernspecht or even my Sifu Kevin Stewart. It's a shame that people like that claim to be legitimate martial artists. No martial art can be truly learned from instructional videos, there needs to be physical interaction and practical demonstrations. What he sows he shall reap...


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 15, 2013)

Question: What is that choke he uses called? I know the hold, but ive always just called it a headlock.


----------



## Vajramusti (Mar 15, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


>



-------------------------------------------------------

Another- if this then that-technique oriented demo!!!


----------



## geezer (Mar 15, 2013)

Vajramusti said:


> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Another- if this then that-technique oriented demo!!!



Leave it to Joy to sum it up in one short line. That's really the whole point. If you really move like a WC man, applying core concepts (non-WC folks please refer to Mooks post #6, where he covered this very nicely) then you A. don't expose yourself like this, and, B. have a way to recover by sticking to the concepts. WC isn't a collection of moves and countermoves meant to to be memorized. It's an integrated system that produces a way of moving and, IMO, a way of thinking as well.

Oh, and guys, let's get away from the "fraud-busting". Wong can teach whatever he teaches and call it what he wants. There's no trademark or servicemark on the name. And, there are plenty of others teaching stuff that's even farther away from what I understand to be WC. But there's nothing I can do about it, sooo I _just let it go..._ 

And, on the bright side he really is entertaining!


----------



## Flying Crane (Mar 15, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> In my lineage we use these 5 principles to evaluate the quality of Wing Chun.
> *Simplicity
> *Directness
> Practicality
> ...



In my opinion, this is often the biggest problem in what people are doing, regardless of what system they train: they use a very complex/complicated solution to an encounter that really requires a simple, straight forward solution.  People make it complicated, and complicated has a much lower rate of success.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Mar 15, 2013)

Ediaan said:


> I would like to see Master Wong in a challenge against a proper Master, like Emin Boztepe or GM Kernspecht or even my Sifu Kevin Stewart. It's a shame that people like that claim to be legitimate martial artists. No martial art can be truly learned from instructional videos, there needs to be physical interaction and practical demonstrations. What he sows he shall reap...


Disagree with this for two reasons. The first is that im not a fan of one master vs. another, i know some people suggest it to knock out phonies, but that means that in the end only one master could not be a phony, plus how do you know the master hes challenging is legitimate? 
Second, IMO what master wong is teaching isn't all that bad. I've watched a few of his videos, and while I would never call it Wing Chun, I would say its decent stuff, and thought was put into the technique, and while YT learning isnt good at all, its better than YT learning from someone who is teaching stuff incorrect for ANY style.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 15, 2013)

I think Master Wong deserves a little more respect then some have given him on here. Martial Arts are his life and i can tell you he's dam good. What he shows in his videos are one solution. In a real fight how many people can really use 'real Wing Chun?'

Am pretty shocked at all the politics involved in Wing Chun TBH.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 15, 2013)

There is a lot of crap being passed off as WC out there. While I don't consider his stuff 'good WC",, it's OK for what it is.
Besides, the dude has a bazillion videos on youtube...they can't all be Wong.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Mar 15, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> I think Master Wong deserves a little more respect then some have given him on here. Martial Arts are his life and i can tell you he's dam good. What he shows in his videos are one solution. In a real fight how many people can really use 'real Wing Chun?'
> 
> Am pretty shocked at all the politics involved in Wing Chun TBH.



If you cannot use the MARTIAL art you're studying in a real fight, then your understanding of the principles of that art are, I would say, severely lacking. I would expect our yellow belts to be able to apply what they've been taught in a real fight. I'd expect much more of our black belts. And of a Master...

The ability (or in-) of an individual to apply what the principles of their art has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.


----------



## geezer (Mar 15, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> ...Am* pretty shocked at all the politics* involved in Wing Chun TBH.



Get used to it, and don't let it bother you. The politics of Wing Chun are really over the top. And people are generally nicer here than on the other forums. Really. Surf around the web and see for yourself. I can't even repeat what some folks say about my old sifu. It would look like this ************* **** ****!!! LOL. So, if you like Master Wong, that's fine by me. Youtube would be a lot more boring without him. And if you ever get to train with him, please tell us what its like.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 15, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


> I think Master Wong deserves a little more respect then some have given him on here. Martial Arts are his life and i can tell you he's dam good. What he shows in his videos are one solution. In a real fight how many people can really use 'real Wing Chun?'
> 
> Am pretty shocked at all the politics involved in Wing Chun TBH.



Don't get me wrong. I lack respect for his advertisement and find him slightly unethical. That being said, some of his advice is rather good. And some of the techniques shown seem effective. I give credit where credit is due. But just feel he could be a little more open and honest where his advertising is concerned.


----------



## chinaboxer (Mar 16, 2013)

i think wong is funny and clever. he knows the shapes of wing chun, but what i don't see is his "siu nim tau", i don't see the "little idea" in all his movements. his method of wing chun IMO is wing chun without the understanding of chi sau or structure, it just becomes about how to use the "shapes" of wing chun in applications while relying on your athletic abilities. wing chun done this way is just very poor distancing fighting. also that choke he applies is a complete joke.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 16, 2013)

chinaboxer said:


> also that choke he applies is a complete joke.



Why is that? Its the only part of the video i wanna know more about. From what light experimenting ive done your body presses into the shoulder while your arm pulls into the side of the neck. Id also like to know what its called.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 16, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Why is that? Its the only part of the video i wanna know more about. From what light experimenting ive done your body presses into the shoulder while your arm pulls into the side of the neck. Id also like to know what its called.



That choke is actually effective. You use the opponent's own anatomy and your own arm to cut off the blood flow to and from the brain. It isn'tabout cutting off the air, that is a common misconception about effective choking techniques. Without air some people can stay concious for minutes. With restricted blood flow, you're out in a matter of seconds.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 16, 2013)

Drasken said:


> That choke is actually effective. You use the opponent's own anatomy and your own arm to cut off the blood flow to and from the brain. It isn'tabout cutting off the air, that is a common misconception about effective choking techniques. Without air some people can stay concious for minutes. With restricted blood flow, you're out in a matter of seconds.



And does it have a name? :drinkbeer Other than being a blood choke.


----------



## Drasken (Mar 16, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> And does it have a name? :drinkbeer Other than being a blood choke.



I'm sure it does have at least one name in at least one of the systems that use it. But I don't know it. I have practiced this choke though. Even been choked out once by it. It's not pleasant. However a name I can't help you with unfortunately.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 16, 2013)

Drasken said:


> I'm sure it does have at least one name in at least one of the systems that use it. But I don't know it. I have practiced this choke though. Even been choked out once by it. It's not pleasant. However a name I can't help you with unfortunately.


Similarly, ive learnt it. But the person who showed it to me (thats such a nice way of putting it, isnt it?) just said, and this is an exact quote: "Its like a headlock, but you do it backwards."

So to me its a headlock. But i really wish i knew what it was called.
Oh well


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 16, 2013)




----------



## geezer (Mar 16, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Question: What is that choke he uses called? I know the hold, but ive always just called it a headlock.



I've always thought it was just a variant of the RNC, except you don't have it in as far, so you grab the fist of the choking arm to crank it,  instead of hooking the hand of your choking arm inside your elbow and bracing your other hand on his head. Check this:






Now check variant number 2 below:


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 16, 2013)

geezer said:


> I've always thought it was just a variant of the RNC, except you don't have it in as far, so you grab the fist of the choking arm to crank it,  instead of hooking the hand of your choking arm inside your elbow and bracing your other hand on his head. Check this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Normally id agree, but hes standing to the persons side, not behind them. But, that may be the variation. Its hard to tell.


----------



## StormShadow (Mar 26, 2013)

lol I like master wong... he is funny in his videos.


----------



## StormShadow (Mar 27, 2013)

geezer said:


> Get used to it, and don't let it bother you. The politics of Wing Chun are really over the top. And people are generally nicer here than on the other forums. Really. Surf around the web and see for yourself. I can't even repeat what some folks say about my old sifu. It would look like this ************* **** ****!!! LOL. So, if you like Master Wong, that's fine by me. Youtube would be a lot more boring without him. And if you ever get to train with him, please tell us what its like.



I have to second being shocked with all the politics as well.  Even well known sifus are disparaged.  This lineage of wing chun is better than this other lineage of wing chun.  We have know it all kung fu artist who created the system of wing chun judging everyone on how it should be done. Being new to wing chun, I came in with an open mind, showing everyone respect and will continue to do so.  All the bickering is just wasted energy and does nothing to unify wing chun as an excellent combat system.


----------



## Vajramusti (Mar 27, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


>


------------------------------------
If this then this kind of responses do not demonstrate good wing chun skill.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 28, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> He has a whole video about why he personally doesnt use the centerline. He isnt doing Wing Chun, thats already been established. Hes doing his own thing which he made out of Wing Chun.



That's his own perogative, but I agree with some others that if what he is doing isn't Wing Chun, then he should call it something else.  To advertise it as Wing Chun and call yourself a Wing Chun master and then not say at all who/where your lineage is and then state that what you are _really_ doing isn't WC at all, just seems a bit odd to me.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 28, 2013)




----------



## mook jong man (Mar 28, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


>



Pretty basic leg jamming  in that video.
Having said that , if your kick is jammed properly there will be no counter kick as shown by Mr Wong in the video .

Because if somebody knows what they are doing your shin will quite likely be splintered from the jam leaving you hard pressed to even stand let alone continue to fire off kicks.


----------



## geezer (Mar 28, 2013)

_Mook_, did you notice how the guy in the blue didn't move forward to press the attack after the "jam" kick. Instead he hung back in perfect range for Wong's follow up kicks. Even stranger, Wong also hung back in kicking range like a Thai boxer, but with less power... delivering a series of very un-WC looking snap kicks. 

I was taught to view _every kick as a step_ ...not withdrawing back to a chamber, but stepping straight down, often pinning my opponent's foot, and always pressing forward along the center. Not fancy, but it works for me.

Another odd thing. Did anybody notice that attack Wong demonstrates at around :42 - :45?  Wong says: _"We punch we're here!" _ and throws a very odd attack ending with a wide, off center, almost looping or "long-fist" looking (?) arm strike with his left. The other guy stops it and it looks to me like Wong is set up to receive a nasty palm strike to the face ...except that his demo partner is being very cooperative. What am I missing here?


----------



## Nabakatsu (Mar 28, 2013)

Yeah... he's too used to compliant partners who are intimidated and will let him walk all over him.. I'm sure he'd be a handful to deal with it.. but his "WC" isn't very sound at all from what I can see..


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 29, 2013)

geezer said:


> _Mook_, did you notice how the guy in the blue didn't move forward to press the attack after the "jam" kick. Instead he hung back in perfect range for Wong's follow up kicks. Even stranger, Wong also hung back in kicking range like a Thai boxer, but with less power... delivering a series of very un-WC looking snap kicks.
> 
> I was taught to view _every kick as a step_ ...not withdrawing back to a chamber, but stepping straight down, often pinning my opponent's foot, and always pressing forward along the center. Not fancy, but it works for me.
> 
> Another odd thing. Did anybody notice that attack Wong demonstrates at around :42 - :45?  Wong says: _"We punch we're here!" _ and throws a very odd attack ending with a wide, off center, almost looping or "long-fist" looking (?) arm strike with his left. The other guy stops it and it looks to me like Wong is set up to receive a nasty palm strike to the face ...except that his demo partner is being very cooperative. What am I missing here?



To be honest I find his videos extremely confusing , I find it hard to work out who exactly is supposed to be doing the Wing Chun , is it Wong? , his partner? , or is it a bit of both?
If I find it difficult and I know what I'm looking for , then how hard must it be for people who don't have a clue what Wing Chun is supposed to look like.

In my opinion it is a case of a lot of flash and speed with no real substance to it.
As you alluded to in your post , basic Wing Chun tactics like immediately stepping in after kicking or jamming a kick seem to be completely ignored in Wong's system.

In regards to the other thing you picked up where he potentially could have been nailed with a palm strike , that might have something to do with his apparent dislike of using the centerline.

I think it was Cyriacus that mentioned in an earlier post that Wong has a video out where he explains why he doesn't use the centerline.
But as you so well spotted Geezer , we can see that deviation from the centerline can have potentially dire consequences.
If your hands aren't striking on the centerline , then it also follows that you are not guarding your centerline.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 29, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> I think it was Cyriacus that mentioned in an earlier post that Wong has a video out where he explains why he doesn't use the centerline.
> But as you so well spotted Geezer , we can see that deviation from the centerline can have potentially dire consequences.
> If your hands aren't striking on the centerline , then it also follows that you are not guarding your centerline.



For what its worth, his reasoning is unusual. imo, just saying 'attacking someone from outside their field of vision is effective!' makes sense. But deprioritizing it head on in a system that uses strikes which are 'similar' to WC is just weird to me. He has alot of good information, and some of the stuff is good in and of itself, but the way he then proceeds to train it, and what he does with that information is unusual. I can provide examples if that doesnt make sense.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 29, 2013)

MJM, Master Wong's Wing Chun system does use the centerline. I knew this because I've been training in his system for 8 odd months.

Master Wong's got a few videos were he demonstrates the use of the centerline. I'll try to find them and put them up.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 29, 2013)




----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 29, 2013)




----------



## mook jong man (Mar 29, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


>



I think what it shows is that he has a rather shallow understanding of the mechanics behind simultaneous defence and attack using the centerline.
He doesn't appear to have the tools necessary in order to move forward and  redirect chain punches and penetrate the opponents defence , so he takes the easier option of shifting 45 degrees to the side.

This is a very valid Wing Chun tactic , and one I often use myself under certain circumstances , eg when I have the time and distance at my disposal.
However it cannot be used all the time , at close range you simply won't have the time to shift to the side , and you will be forced to mix it up and go directly down the middle.


----------



## Wingsingh (Mar 29, 2013)




----------



## mook jong man (Mar 30, 2013)

Wingsingh said:


>



This is the problem , indeed.
The problem is , he assumes that Wing Chun people are mindless automatons that will keep chain punching into the point of someones elbow.
The beauty of Wing Chun is that any technique can be interrupted and converted into something else.
Chain punching can also be combined with latching and parrying to necessitate the removal of any obstructions so that our punch can reach it's intended target.

Going all defensive and holding your arms up trying to shield means that you are vulnerable to having  your balance manipulated by having your elbows parried to the side which will move your whole body , not to mention holding your arms up horizontally like that is also asking to get your arm latched down and your shoulder probably wrenched out of it's socket.
Arms are great handles to effect leverage on the opponents body , and genuine Wing Chun makes extensive use of them.


----------



## StormShadow (Mar 30, 2013)

mook jong man said:


> This is the problem , indeed.
> The problem is , he assumes that Wing Chun people are mindless automatons that will keep chain punching into the point of someones elbow.
> The beauty of Wing Chun is that any technique can be interrupted and converted into something else.
> Chain punching can also be combined with latching and parrying to necessitate the removal of any obstructions so that our punch can reach it's intended target.
> ...



I'm only a month into training but even I wouldn't chain punch for 100 yrs when a guy has his elbows covering his face.  In wing chun your looking for openings, ie.e chest and legs in this scenario.. Every point he makes, there is a counter point.  The only "weakness" I see in wing chun is ground fighting.  But, in the street if someone has me in a arm bar, expect to be severely bitten or be missing a pair of nuts.


----------



## mook jong man (Mar 31, 2013)

StormShadow said:


> I'm only a month into training but even I wouldn't chain punch for 100 yrs when a guy has his elbows covering his face.  In wing chun *your looking for openings, ie.e chest and legs in this scenario.*. Every point he makes, there is a counter point.  The only "weakness" I see in wing chun is ground fighting.  But, in the street if someone has me in a arm bar, expect to be severely bitten or be missing a pair of nuts.



Actually you don't even have to do that , you just move the obstruction out of the way and the targets are revealed.
Sometimes if it is more advantageous and efficient for us to go around the obstruction we will do  that , as in the case of the Hook punch from Bil Sze , but usually it's just a matter of moving the barrier slightly to the side or pulling the barrier down in order to get the punch through.


----------

