# jigsaw poker with wing chun



## Poppity (Feb 6, 2018)

So i am going to post my own observations which people are more than welcome to disagree with.

Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.

With regard the similarities, most accept that they are wing chun. With regard the differences there is contention.

From what i have learnt, i am able to recognise across a number of lineages some differences which are in my own art... But that is what i can see from my part of the jigsaw, not all just some.

There seems to be two approaches, those who say that the pieces of the jigsaw they have are the entire art, and those say they have some of the pieces but that there is more out there. 

Of the latter group some seem to look outside wing chun to fill the gaps and others embark on a game of jigsaw poker, unwilling to reveal what they have but wanting to know what the others do.

i fall into this last category.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 6, 2018)

Snark said:


> So i am going to post my own observations which people are more than welcome to disagree with.
> 
> Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.
> 
> ...



- the human body can only move in certain ways no matter what system is being practiced

-one cannot pass on what one does not have.

-we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.

-no one has all the answers nor all the questions.

-applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from.


----------



## Poppity (Feb 6, 2018)

- the human body can only move in certain ways no matter what system is being practiced

I agree, and yet a boxer can distinguish his style from Hung Gar. The fundamentals underlying any fighting system are different, which makes them separate systems.

-one cannot pass on what one does not have.

I agree, completely.

-we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.

I agree, but I would add from what we are taught as well.  For example (and sorry for the mansplaining).... I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253 (2+3 =5 etc.) but I would not have taught him how to multiply by 11 or even what multiplying by 11 means, and more importantly this way does not always work without being altered. Should that person only rely on what I have taught him and say he knows how to multiply by 11?

-no one has all the answers nor all the questions.

I agree, completely.

-applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from

I am going to disagree here... mainly because there are fundamental principals underlying wing chun. A person should be able to see a technique from any system and understand how it would apply in a variety of ways in wing chun.

The technique should change to fit the fighting system, the system should not change to fit a technique.

Edit. And when you do change the technique you will nearly always find it was already in the system.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 6, 2018)

Snark said:


> I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253


Am I the only one who has never seen this? That's super cool, thanks!

Regarding OP:
I have always maintained that what I've learned in WC doesn't cover all defense scenarios (such as the rather absurd example I once gave of running across an open field 200 yards from a scout sniper).

As such I am always open to new ideas from other lineages, styles and modalities.

However, I must be able to reconcile this new idea with certain principles that I have been training daily for many years otherwise it will simply be of no use to me. For example if a technique requires me to lift and flex my shoulder, it will never happen under duress. I have been training myself for too long to do the opposite and I cannot respond in two opposite ways to the same stimulus.

I can acknowledge that a concept involving opposite principles may work (perhaps much better than what I know), It just wont work for me. I'm too old and crotchety at this point 

An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.


----------



## yak sao (Feb 6, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.



well said


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 6, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.


The WC system and the XingYi system are both

- linear, and 
- punch from the center of the body.

What do you think to add

- footwork coordinate with punch, and
- compress and release power generation method,

into each and every WC punch?

Here is an example,

- His punch coordinated with his foot work.
- 1/2 of his move is used for compress (leading leg step in, arm circle, hands move next to the waist, move back leg next to leading leg). 1/2 of his move is used for release (leading leg step in, block, punch, back leg slide in).

Do you think these 2 ideas can be merged into the WC system, or do you think it may contradict with WC?


----------



## Poppity (Feb 6, 2018)

Cephalopod,

I agree with everything you wrote.
Not that you need my validation, just saying.


----------



## Danny T (Feb 6, 2018)

Snark said:


> -we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.
> 
> I agree, but I would add from what we are taught as well.  For example (and sorry for the mansplaining).... I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253 (2+3 =5 etc.) but I would not have taught him how to multiply by 11 or even what multiplying by 11 means, and more importantly this way does not always work without being altered. Should that person only rely on what I have taught him and say he knows how to multiply by 11?


Sure and that is why one would want to be taught...to have more or greater perspective.



Snark said:


> -applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from
> 
> I am going to disagree here... mainly because there are fundamental principals underlying wing chun. A person should be able to see a technique from any system and understand how it would apply in a variety of ways in wing chun.
> 
> ...


Certainly, but it one has no perspective of WC or how to look for applications one will do something but not necessarily what we consider wc. And, this is also why training with different people we gain new applications of techniques gaining more perspectives.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 6, 2018)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - footwork coordinate with punch, and
> - compress and release power generation method...
> 
> ...Do you think these 2 ideas can be merged into the WC system, or do you think it may contradict with WC?



I'd be happy to merge them but they're already there.

The punch you've seen in SLT is a method of training the elbow and fist to move with respect to the body.
The real power in a WC punch comes from subtle but explosive movements of the core and footwork driving the whole body.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 6, 2018)

Snark said:


> Cephalopod,
> 
> I agree with everything you wrote.
> Not that you need my validation, just saying.



Au contraire, validation _always_ feels good!


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 6, 2018)

Snark said:


> Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.



Even differences within the same lineage!!!


----------



## Martial D (Feb 6, 2018)

wckf92 said:


> Even differences within the same lineage!!!


I've literally never met two sifus' that teach the exact same Wing Chun, just as my Wing Chun varies in more than a couple ways from MY sifus' Wing Chun.


----------



## Poppity (Feb 7, 2018)

Hi Danny T,

I agree it is important to get taught, but I would say what is as equally as important is to recognise the limitations of the teaching and teacher... for example there will be some instances where in the "11 x" example, a guy I show that method to, will go off and teach others "11 x" and say that is how its done, and when you have a chain (as in lineages) it only takes one link to adopt that approach..., equally there will be guys I show that method to, who will go off analyse it, work out the fundamentals and then create their own theorems...  I think thats part of the attraction and danger of wing chun and why its more important to learn and understand the underlying principles.... I mean that sort of approach worked for Srinivasa Ramanujan.

I agree with your last comment.

Thankyou for the response though


----------



## Poppity (Feb 7, 2018)

Hi Martial D and Wckf92,

when you see differences in your own lineage, I bet you can recognise them and understand where they came from and why they are the way they are... like in the YKS lineage some attribute particular "Sum Nung branch" techniques as coming from Cheung Bo because of his build and longer arms.

My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms, which is why Ip Man's version appears like a skeleton form when compared to many mainland forms... its straight forward and direct...but its also why you never see the private forms of the mainland practitioners, just the public forms... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 7, 2018)

Snark said:


> Hi Martial D and Wckf92,
> 
> when you see differences in your own lineage, I bet you can recognise them and understand where they came from and why they are the way they are... like in the YKS lineage some attribute particular "Sum Nung branch" techniques as coming from Cheung Bo because of his build and longer arms.
> 
> My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms, which is why Ip Man's version appears like a skeleton form when compared to many mainland forms... its straight forward and direct...but its also why you never see the private forms of the mainland practitioners, just the public forms... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.



I think it's mostly just sifus who put their personal signature or stamp inside their forms.


----------



## Poppity (Feb 7, 2018)

definitely, nearly all of the differences within a lineage come from which techniques a particular sifu prefers or specialises in...but I reckon they still work within the framework of what they have been taught... unless they have not been taught much and are a bit of a carpet bagger.

With regard to personal signatures too... that is definitely the case and you can see it in the forms, like where Ip Man's form starts with the crossing arms, whereas most mainland forms have a pre-signature (which look similar across lineages) before the point where Ip-Man's form starts.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 7, 2018)

Snark said:


> My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms...
> ... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.



This is true to a certain degree. You can indeed learn some principles which are emphasized by a WC practitioner by examining subtleties in his/her form.

But the really juicy principles are much harder to discern by visual observation.

In my club we talk about 3 layers of skill superimposed, from basic to advanced: Structure, tension and timing.

Structure, the actual physical positioning of body and limbs, is obviously very apparent in the forms.

Tension is somewhat apparent but the tension you hold on your own is quite simple. The tension with which you respond to an opponents movement and force is a much more complex animal.

Timing, the ability to follow (or get ahead of or get behind) on/off changes in your opponents movement and force, doesn't even come up in the forms.

I'd say that many of the defining principles of our style as we practice it fall in the second 2 catagories. They cannot be observed, let alone taught, by form alone. Not even verbally in fact.

I'm a strong believer that many WC skills can only be passed down kinesthetically, by touching hands chisao gorsao etc., from teacher to student.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 7, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> I'd say that many of the defining principles of our style as we practice it fall in the second 2 catagories. They cannot be observed, let alone taught, by form alone. Not even verbally in fact.
> 
> I'm a strong believer that many WC skills can only be passed down kinesthetically, by touching hands chisao gorsao etc., from teacher to student.



Dang skippy! Well said sir.


----------



## Juany118 (Feb 8, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> I'd be happy to merge them but they're already there.
> 
> The punch you've seen in SLT is a method of training the elbow and fist to move with respect to the body.
> The real power in a WC punch comes from subtle but explosive movements of the core and footwork driving the whole body.



As is explained here, in part.


----------



## Poppity (Feb 8, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> This is true to a certain degree. You can indeed learn some principles which are emphasized by a WC practitioner by examining subtleties in his/her form.
> 
> But the really juicy principles are much harder to discern by visual observation.
> 
> ...



Hi again,

For sure, when you apply the techniques with another person in the very close arena of wing chun tension and timing all come in, and they are crucially important.

... Its just my view but I would say tension and timing are all about application (and fair do, without application wing chun is useless so I fully acknowledge these are important principles) but before we even get to the application, I would say there are base principles at play... like if you see a guy doing shadow boxing, or shadow muay thai or shadow wing chun, you can recognise the style from the principles which separates that fighting system from others.

Your point on structures is great, because across lineages, structures are generally similar and great reference points in a different lineage's forms, its what movements surround the structure, I find interesting... because in the mainland forms which we never see, and are never talked about, the movements surrounding a structure hint at the applications which follow that structure.... and just occasionally a practitioner will forget they are doing the public form and a couple of clues about their wider applications of a structure will slip in to their form.

... that said its why Ip Man's forms are so popular, they are effectively "choose your own application" forms. (again my view, and from what I have been taught, so feel free to disagree here).

Edit: read what I wrote, and it made no sense... this is a better version (honest)
.


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 8, 2018)

Snark said:


> Hi again,
> 
> For sure, when you apply the techniques with another person in the very close arena of wing chun tension and timing all come in, and they are crucially important.
> 
> ...



Hi Snark!

I completely agree that the principles of structure are the most definitive. They kinda form the base of the pyramid, without which nothing else can function.

Now I should clarify that I am abusing the word 'structure' to include all the movements of the body and limbs, or at least instantaneous snapshots thereof.

And yet when I roll with practitioners from other lineages, the differences that I usually feel between us are those of tension and timing. However...(caveat)...differences in tension, for example, are often necessitated by differences in structure. For example, the positioning of his elbow in bong sao may require him to flex his shoulder unduly to ward off a sudden attack.

I do like your point about how you can sometimes pick up on some subtle clues that the dude practicing the form might not have intended to display. An example of this might be little vibrations caused by flexion of muscles.

So yeah, you can tell a great deal about a chunner's principles by watching his forms but I would still want to touch hands with him before I draw any conclusions about the efficacy of his style. Helps to reduce my diet of humble pie.


----------



## Poppity (Feb 8, 2018)

Cephalopod said:


> Hi Snark!
> 
> I completely agree that the principles of structure are the most definitive. They kinda form the base of the pyramid, without which nothing else can function.
> 
> ...




I happily concede... forms won't tell you everything and the real detail and skill of a practitioner will only become apparent from touching hands or sparring.

I am (just to stick in my own prejudices) a little wary about Chi Sau on its own though, as although again it is a very important aspect, it seems to have become almost a separate beast to the wing chun menagerie as opposed to just a transitionary stage during interaction.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 8, 2018)

Snark said:


> because in the mainland forms which we never see, and are never talked about, the movements surrounding a structure hint at the applications which follow that structure.... and just occasionally a practitioner will forget they are doing the public form and a couple of clues about their wider applications of a structure will slip in to their form.



@Snark  is this public vs private form stuff still in use today on the mainland? Why do they do that?


----------



## Poppity (Feb 8, 2018)

I don't know... it's a secret and I haven't been told. 

maybe its because knowledge is only valuable to the majority when its held by the minority....

but what do I know (I can't find a shrugging emoticon so "shrugging emoticon goes here")


----------



## Cephalopod (Feb 8, 2018)

Snark said:


> I happily concede... forms won't tell you everything and the real detail and skill of a practitioner will only become apparent from touching hands or sparring.
> 
> I am (just to stick in my own prejudices) a little wary about Chi Sau on its own though, as although again it is a very important aspect, it seems to have become almost a separate beast to the wing chun menagerie as opposed to just a transitionary stage during interaction.



Chisao, as I see it, is a lousy _quantitative_ measure of ones fighting ability. It is however an excellent _qualitative_ test of ones skill.

(Here, i'm referring to the sort of chisao that happens between practitioners from 2 different clubs which invariably heats up to a degree and involves footwork, separation and re-bridging, the occasional random strikes from add angles etc.)

As I get older, I find myself a little less preoccupied with the former. I can spend a lot of energy trying to work out whether I, or my opponent, would survive the fictitious 'stairwell encounter' but the fact remains that there are many, many variables in survival combat only some of which have anything to do with martial art skill.

The latter, on the other hand, I find endlessly intriguing. If my opponent finds a way to out position, unbalance, or overwhelm me...now that gives me something to work on, a pathway to improvement.

Now of course, I never want to lose track of the fact that WC is a fighting art, not some arcane dance. Everything within needs to be considered in terms of harsh reality and tested accordingly. But for me, I have found over the years that focusing more on the latter has actually developed my ability quite satisfactorily in the former. Without all that fetishizing violence stuff.  

I realize this might not actually address the points on your post, but you gave me an opening to launch my little tirade on the value of chisao. So...hey, thanks!


----------

