# Master Wong - Legit?



## Mr. President

This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw. 

Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?


----------



## grumpywolfman

Master Wong is fun to watch, and if given the opportunity, I think he could single-handedly bring back Kung Fu Theater to mainstream television


----------



## Cyriacus

The size of your following doesnt mean very much.


----------



## grumpywolfman

Cyriacus said:


> The size of your following doesnt mean very much.



*LOL*! You watch her too?! Katlynn's got the best moves!


----------



## Argus

What he does is not even close. It might look kind of like Wing Chun on the surface, but that's about as deep as the resemblance goes. Basically, it's his own system consisting of what he thinks Wing Chun should be, without ever having learned Wing Chun himself. 

There's "different" and then there's just "bad." Master Wrong falls into the second category.

If you would really like to get an idea of what Wing Chun is about, Jin Young (chinaboxer) has some excellent material on youtube that you can check out.

Also, if you want to see the real "Master Wong", you can type in "Wong Shun Leung." You'll learn a lot more from listening to him teach in Cantonese than you will from Master Wrong in funny English -- though, he might not be quite as entertaining.


----------



## Tames D

Master Wong is the baddest mother****er on the planet. Just ask him.


----------



## Xue Sheng

There has been a lot of discussion here about him, use the search and you shall see


----------



## Xue Sheng

Tames D said:


> Master Wong is the baddest mother****er on the planet. Just ask him.



You see this cat Master Wong is a bad mother-- (Shut your mouth) But I'm talkin' about Master Wong


----------



## Tames D

Xue Sheng said:


> You see this cat Master Wong is a bad mother-- (Shut your mouth) But I'm talkin' about Master Wong



Dude, you crack me up. Sometimes I think we are brothers from another mother.


----------



## mook jong man

Well he won't reveal who taught him.
Which is always a bit of a worry.


----------



## WingChunIan

Simply compare what is shown to other material of individuals such as Wong Shun Leung, Tsui Shong Tin,William Cheung, Ip Chun, Ip Ching etc etc etc It's pretty easy to make your mind up after that.


----------



## mograph

The weirdest thing ... that video, here and on YouTube, will only play if I wiggle the scroll wheel on my mouse up and down, keeping the window moving. I haven't seen this with any other video.

Weird.

But yes, the video is fun to watch. Such enthusiasm!

(edit: oh sure. Now it works fine.)


----------



## Flying Crane

Mr. President said:


> The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.



I won't speak to his legitimacy or not.  But I would definitely NOT use a Wikipedia entry, or lack thereof, as ANY basis on which to make a judgement.

Just because you can find it on the internet doesn't mean it's any good.

Just because you cannot find it on the internet doesn't mean it's no good.


----------



## WingChunIan

I always raise an eyebrow when anyone gives themself the title of master.............


----------



## StormShadow

Sooooo Do we have any challengers to spar with Master Wong??? lol


----------



## Vajramusti

Mr. President said:


> This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.
> 
> Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking athletic and copying some motions does not make it wing chun. Sorry!!


----------



## futsaowingchun

when ever I need a laugh Master Wong is as funny as a stand up comedian. He should be in show business. He could be the next Rock of Wing Chun


----------



## yak sao

He does wear a nice track suit


----------



## Wingsingh

I can tell you first hand master Wong is the real deal. 

What does it matter if he doesn't tell people who taught him? Some people seem to earn a living by telling people who taught them. 

I think Master Wong deserves more respect. 

I'd like to know why people think his Wing Chun isn't correct?

BTW, Master Wong had a free training session in the park this last Saturday. He stayed for over 2 and a half hours, answering questions and teaching and giving out free dvd's and t-shirts.


----------



## StormShadow

Personally, I am not so fast to rush to judgement on master wong.  I believe he has pure wing chun vids as well as vids seemingly mixing wing chun with other "stuff". He seems like a cool guy.  I certainly for one, would not want to fight him.  There needs to be evidence where he violates wing chun's principles when performing his wing chun if we are to truly gauge this guy.


----------



## mook jong man

StormShadow said:


> Personally, I am not so fast to rush to judgement on master wong.  I believe he has pure wing chun vids as well as vids seemingly mixing wing chun with other "stuff". He seems like a cool guy.  I certainly for one, would not want to fight him.  There needs to be evidence where he violates wing chun's principles when performing his wing chun if we are to truly gauge this guy.



Yeah , there is that minor little matter that he doesn't stick to the damn centerline , and quite a few other principles that are ignored.
But other than those minor details everything is hunky dory.


----------



## Mr. President

Maybe he developed an "alternate" Wing Chun or something. A system that relies on basic Wing Chun principles but doesn't stick to them religiously in every situation. Just like others have developed things like "combat (name of martial art)", because the traditional version wasn't practical enough or something.

If anyone in this forum is UK based and can do some full contact sparring with him, it would be nice to hear their experience.


----------



## yak sao

Mr. President said:


> Maybe he developed an "alternate" Wing Chun or something. A system that relies on basic Wing Chun principles but doesn't stick to them religiously in every situation. Just like others have developed things like "combat (name of martial art)", because the traditional version wasn't practical enough or something.
> 
> If anyone in this forum is UK based and can do some full contact sparring with him, it would be nice to hear their experience.




The man is probalbly a pretty good fighter, but I have to agree with mook on this.
He not only ignores many of the principles that make up WC, he contradicts them.

Does that mean he can't fight? That he's a despicable human being?
No...it just means he's not doing WC.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Mr. President said:


> Maybe he developed an "alternate" Wing Chun or something. A system that relies on basic Wing Chun principles but doesn't stick to them religiously in every situation. Just like others have developed things like "combat (name of martial art)", because the traditional version wasn't practical enough or something.
> 
> If anyone in this forum is UK based and can do some full contact sparring with him, it would be nice to hear their experience.



Without the principles it is not Wing Chun, you can teach Wing Chun and stick to the principles or you can use some of the principles of Wing Chun and teach somehing else

As for the term "Combat" anything. it is mostly sales and shows that the peron teaching the "combat" whatever is either out for $$$ or does not understand or did not take the time to truly learn the base art.

Combat Macramé anyone?


----------



## Domino

I've seen some of his videos and have heard him refer to the centreline, looks like a decent fighter and I love his chinglish.


----------



## Argus

I have to say that I'm surprised that people go so easy on this guy. I can only assume they haven't watched many of his videos. Before I knew anything about Wing Chun, I came across his videos and watched all of them. They were entertaining, but I did wonder if they were legitimate or not, so I did heavy research on Wing Chun, its history, and different instructors and lineages. I came to the very sound conclusion that Micheal does not line up with any of them - not even in principle, much less technique.

For goodness sake, in the video the OP posted, he's trying knock away punches with his elbows - horizontally. In his iconic stance, he holds up double wu-saus for his guard. He has no regard for his centerline. Much of the time he practices his techniques well outside of proper range, and does funny distance fighting techniques that look like bad JKD. And his forms and chisau are just bad.

It doesn't take a whole lot of experience to notice these things.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Yeah...I've tried REAL hard ever since I saw the title of this post and..well...I can no longer resist....what can I say...I'm weak :EG:


----------



## James Kovacich

Argus said:


> I have to say that I'm surprised that people go so easy on this guy. I can only assume they haven't watched many of his videos. Before I knew anything about Wing Chun, I came across his videos and watched all of them. They were entertaining, but I did wonder if they were legitimate or not, so I did heavy research on Wing Chun, its history, and different instructors and lineages. I came to the very sound conclusion that Micheal does not line up with any of them - not even in principle, much less technique.
> 
> For goodness sake, in the video the OP posted, he's trying knock away punches with his elbows - horizontally. In his iconic stance, he holds up double wu-saus for his guard. He has no regard for his centerline. Much of the time he practices his techniques well outside of proper range, and does funny distance fighting techniques that look like bad JKD. And his forms and chisau are just bad.
> 
> It doesn't take a whole lot of experience to notice these things.



He claims to teach JKD too...

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## StormShadow

James Kovacich said:


> He claims to teach JKD too...
> 
> Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2



besides wing chun I also study jerry poteet's way of jkd... I have to check that out but jkd is different. You can learn bruce lee's way but if you embody that, it's arguably not jkd for you.  Since it was what bruce found good for him. So it's harder to say this or that is not jkd.  Jkd is just a term for a way of fighting. But honestly the more I think about it, without some sort of structure there is chaos so jkd probably should've been defined better. Else it's just street mma pretty much.


----------



## hunt1

Never have watched this guy much before. Love what I see. Very entertaining. Nothing inherently wrong with what he is doing. He comes from Pan Nam line so this wing chun should be different from Yip Man line. Their center line idea's are different so it won't match with Yip Man sensibilities. He is not trying to knock away punches with elbows although it appears that way by his application. What he is doing is usually taught as a covering method he just ad's his own flair and drama.
He looks like he is trying to do a hong kong movie demo tape as well provide his wing chun idea's.  I for one enjoy the over the top B- movie feel.


----------



## wingerjim

yak sao said:


> The man is probalbly a pretty good fighter, but I have to agree with mook on this.
> He not only ignores many of the principles that make up WC, he contradicts them.
> 
> Does that mean he can't fight? That he's a despicable human being?
> No...it just means he's not doing WC.



I couldn't agree more. I too am sure he can fight and his methods, though not conventional Yim Man style, look intersting, but I too have trouble calling what Master Wong teaches "Wing Chun".


----------



## Domino

wingerjim said:


> I couldn't agree more. I too am sure he can fight and his methods, though not conventional Yim Man style, look intersting, but I too have trouble calling what Master Wong teaches "Wing Chun".



You will if it is different from your lineage.
See what you can take from what he says, bet he's an animal.


----------



## Argus

Since we've dug this thread up...



Domino said:


> You will if it is different from your lineage.
> See what you can take from what he says, bet he's an animal.



It's not about differences in lineage. It's about whether or not what he does can be classified as Wing Chun at all. The difference in most lineages is superficial - Wing Chun is built on concepts and principles. Those principles will be the same, whether you're talking about Leung Jan's Wing Chun or my own teacher's Wing Chun, a century and a half later. The thing is, those principles don't seem to be present with Micheal Wong.

Martial Arts is not just about what you want to do or how you express yourself. A martial art is a combative method; a practical skill. Therefore, unlike "Art," there's most certainly a *Wrong *way to do it.

At any rate, I feel a disambiguation is in order:

*Master Wong
*






*Master Wrong*


----------



## SamAbb

Hi All,

I can confirm that Michael Wong practices Pan Nam Wing Chun kuen (I have studied PNWCK also). I have no idea about his Sifu's/Lineage etc.

In addition I can also say that he executes his PNWCK differently than how it is normally practiced within the system. He seems to practice it as more of an external system (you can see this). He will say otherwise, that his system is internal. I don't see this. Loud breathing does not equal internal...

I give a little bit of credit to the fact he wants to stand on his own two feet. You can't argue that what he practices and teaches is distinctly his own expression of the art!


----------



## wingchunguy

Master Wong is definitely legitimate, if you want to learn modified wing chun or JKD, which is not nearly as good as traditional. Traditional wc is a COMPLETE system (Unlike others that have to be supplemented with OTHER MARTIAL ARTS, LIKE THE MMA, which has standup that is supplemented with jiu jitsu) that includes standup, locks and throws, sweeps, anti-takedown and anti-grappling techniques that use the ten concepts, a VERY IMPORTANT PART OF REAL WING CHUN THAT MODIFIED AND JKD DO NOT HAVE!! You are better off with traditional, it is a complete system. Key components of traditional  wing chun were taken out like proper stance, proper footwork (circle inside a triangle)proper way to close the distance, and, of course, the ten concepts, which dictate the proper application of wing chun in a fight or self defense scenario, which makes modified wc and JKD stiff and inflexible and a lot less effective and efficient. Traditional wing chun is the ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART ON THE PLANET. Others say they use concepts, but not ten of them and they DO not dictate application. In technique-based mas (like boxing or any boxing derivative such as muay thai or karate, even bjj), the technique dictates the response making it, like I said stiff and rigid. The ten concepts are just guidelines used to determine the proper application of the technique. This allows the traditional wc user to tailor his wing chun to his own personality, abilities and disabilities, and that of his opponent (something you CANNOT DO WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MAS!).


----------



## blindsage




----------



## Xue Sheng

wingchunguy said:


> . Traditional wing chun is the ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART ON THE PLANET.








And


----------



## StormShadow

I am of grandmaster william cheung's lineage and I would not say other versions of wing chun are incomplete just different. It really doesn't matter how complete or incorrect someone thinks a system is, chances are there is someone in that system who can break you. Everything will always be on individual ability and what you are able to personally accomplish in yourself and how you can adapt to situations.


----------



## geezer

wingchunguy said:


> ...if you want to learn modified wing chun or JKD, which is not nearly as good as traditional. Traditional wc is a COMPLETE system... Traditional wing chun is the ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART ON THE PLANET.



I call BS on this! Declaring your system the "best" and everybody else inferior won't fly around here.  I've run across some good practitioners in different WC/VT/WC lineages including "TWC" --Phil Redmond always impressed me, for example. But your breast-beating proclamations of superiority are better suited to a religious revival meeting than a forum like this. Go back and re-read what _Storm Shadow_ said.


----------



## wingchunguy

Yes, chinaboxer has one of the best tutorials on you tube and is highly recommend if you want to learn REAL WING CHUN.


----------



## wingchunguy

I LOVE THESE IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW TRADITIONAL WING CHUN. YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.


----------



## wingchunguy

Really?? I never said in this blog it was the best. Do you see "best" ANYWHERE in this comment, moron? Some may be good, but if they ever fought a real experienced fighter,  they would get their *** KICKED in minutes. Modified wc and JKD are incomplete, THAT'S why it has to be supplemented with an inferior stance (standing sideways makes it easy to sweep the leg, get around you because you have a narrow profile as opposed to being square, as in REAL TRADITIONAL WING CHUN, and only allows you to use ONE LEG AND ONE ARM as opposed to two in traditional wing chun). Plus, it has to be supplemented with grappling. Traditional wing chun is complete, with standup, locks and throws, and anti-takedown and anti-takedown techniques that others JUST DON'T HAVE!


----------



## wingchunguy

Yes they are. You, being from William Cheung's lineage should know that. He did not learn the complete Chum kiu or Bil Jee forms. THAT'S why they are different than Ip Man's version. He does modified traditional, which means he does use traditional footwork, unlike modified or JKD, but does not use the stance and he does NOT maintain the triangle, which, if you REALLY ARE A TRADITIONALIST, LIKE YOU SAY (AND I DOUBT THAT!), IS one of the TEN CONCEPTS (It's called the "triangle concept", look it up!). I bet you don't even know or even heard of the ten concepts, have you?


----------



## wingchunguy

Yeah? And if you train an incomplete system. You will miss out on crucial sections of wing chun, that make it COMPLETE!-ME!!


----------



## wingchunguy

That's very possible that you are right. Pan Nam wing chun IS similar to Ip Man's and any other master does not have a problem saying who his teacher was.


----------



## blindsage

wingchunguy said:


> YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.


You are wrong.  There are other conceptual arts.  You should do MORE research like many of us have.  You should stop being a troll.


----------



## blindsage

wingchunguy said:


> Really?? I never said in this blog it was the best. Do you see "best" ANYWHERE in this comment, moron? Some may be good, but if they ever fought a real experienced fighter,  they would get their *** KICKED in minutes. Modified wc and JKD are incomplete, THAT'S why it has to be supplemented with an inferior stance (standing sideways makes it easy to sweep the leg, get around you because you have a narrow profile as opposed to being square, as in REAL TRADITIONAL WING CHUN, and only allows you to use ONE LEG AND ONE ARM as opposed to two in traditional wing chun). Plus, it has to be supplemented with grappling. Traditional wing chun is complete, with standup, locks and throws, and anti-takedown and anti-takedown techniques that others JUST DON'T HAVE!



I just attended a seminar with multiple representatives from different parts of Bruce Lee's lineage.  There were Jesse Glover students, Jim Demile students, Taky Kimura students and Danny Inosanto students.  Many of them real fighters with real life conflicts under their belts.  You can talk concepts and theory, but they are the experienced fighters you're talking about, and all of them say the same thing: a fight should be over in seconds, while you're talking minutes.  Good luck with all that _talk._


----------



## punisher73

wingchunguy said:


> I LOVE THESE IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW TRADITIONAL WING CHUN. YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.




Since you are newer on the boards.  When responding to a specific post/person you can hit the "reply with quote" button at the bottom right of their post.  It will put their post in quotes so people can see the context.

Next, before a moderator makes a warning try to tone down the name calling.  We can all disagree and still be respectful about misunderstandings.

But, I would disagree with the statement that WC is the ONLY fully conceptual martial art.  Aikido is all about it's principles of harmony/blending and the techniques you see are just the physical expression of those.  I'm sure there are others as well (Systema maybe), but that popped into my head first.


----------



## StormShadow

First, why are you yelling in capital letters?... Secondly, it doesn't matter if you doubt me, I don't doubt me. And actually, I train at the north american headquarters for traditional wing chun world wing chun kung fu association. I've studied boxing, jkd and now wing chun and have been in multiple street fights. I doubt you have. Skill is internal. Don't doubt others, you already place yourself at a disadvantage.

I could actually care less what you perceive GM did or did not learn. I know what I've learned so far works. That's really all I care about. The rest of the BS is for the birds.


----------



## Xue Sheng

wingchunguy said:


> I LOVE THESE IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW TRADITIONAL WING CHUN. YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.



You don't know anything about any of this do you

Because generally when people start making outrageous clams and yelling about it (all caps is considered yelling on a web forum) they are trying to cover up for a lack of knowledge on the subject


----------



## Cyriacus

wingchunguy said:


> I LOVE THESE IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW TRADITIONAL WING CHUN. YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.



Senshido.


----------



## wtxs

wingchunguy said:


> I LOVE THESE IDIOTS WHO DON'T KNOW TRADITIONAL WING CHUN. YES, IT IS THE ONLY FULLY CONCEPTUAL MARTIAL ART. OTHERS MAY USE SOME CONCEPTS, BUT THEY MIX IT WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MA'S THAT ARE STIFF AND RIGID(LIKE MODIFIED WC OR jkd). Some may use a couple of concepts, but not TEN and they DO not dictate it's proper application in a self defense or fight scenario. You idiots should do research like I have.



Please enlighten us idiots of those 10 concepts you keep spoken of.




wingchunguy said:


> Others say they use concepts, but not ten of them and they DO not dictate application. In technique-based mas (like boxing or any boxing derivative such as muay thai or karate, even bjj), the technique dictates the response making it, like I said stiff and rigid. The ten concepts are just guidelines used to determine the proper application of the technique. *This allows the traditional wc user to tailor his wing chun to his own personality, abilities and disabilities, and that of his opponent *(something you CANNOT DO WITH TECHNIQUE-BASED MAS!).



Would "to tailor" implies to change or modify?  What does this effect the so call "traditional" nature of you WC?


----------



## jks9199

Ladies and gentlemen,

MartialTalk prides itself on being a friendly place for civil discourse.  Name calling and insults are not the order of the day here.  Dial back the heat, and keep the discussion on a useful basis.


----------



## almost a ghost

My money is on this wingchunguy is a very strong anti-Cheung dude who is just posing as an overzealous TWC student in an attempt bring grief Cheung's students.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

wingchunguy said:


> Traditional wc is a COMPLETE system ...



Just wonder how many MA systems that you have trained so far. I will never say that WC is a complete system. No system is.


----------



## wingchunguy

Yes, it is. And Master Wong certainly is capable of kicking *** also. He is one of the tutorials I recommend to teach the application side of wing chun. But first, I recommend doing tutorials from Chinaboxer. He is also excellent, and teaches the technical side, which should be learned FIRST. Also, let's not forget some of the other teachers (sifus and masters) that also have excellent tutorials.


----------



## wingchunguy

Yeah, good luck with that! Trying to get incumbents out of Congress is like trying to get a tick out of your arm that buried deep inside the skin. Very tough to do!


----------



## wingchunguy

No, I am not! Wing chun is the ONLY TRULY CONCEPTUAL  martial art that uses TEN CONCEPTS as THEIR GUIDELINE TO IT'S PROPER APPLICATION IN A FIGHT OR SELF DEFENSE SCENARIO. Others may use a couple of concepts, but those also use TECHNIQUE-BASED martial arts which means, the TECHNIQUE dictates the response, NOT the ten concepts, which make it rigid and inflexible. By using the ten concepts, ALL OF THEM AT ONCE, EVERY TIME YOU USE YOUR WING CHUN, then it becomes flexible and you can tailor it to your abilities or disabilities, your personality, and most importantly, THAT OF YOU OPPONENT! I THINK YOU BETTER DO SOME MORE RESEARCH.


----------



## wingchunguy

Really? Well then that proves my point, doesn't it? You are NOT learning traditional, but modified. Ok, if you are using traditional, then name the ten concepts? Do you know how to use them appropriately in a fight? I bet YOU DON'T! If you have to supplement it with any other style, then  it is NOT traditional! Yes skill is internal, but in the case of wing chun, it is also external. It is both! See, you DON'T know as much as you think you do, now do you? I doubt others because people like YOU make me laugh, thinking you have it figured out, when you don't. Do you know the proper stance(toes slightly pigeon-toed, knees pulled in, hips pulled in to maintain the triangle, legs adducted to strengthen the link?), proper footwork (circle inside a triangle. The circle protects the groin and the triangle puts you at the correct 45 degree angle to the  OUTSIDE of your opponent's defenses?), proper way to close the distance (This is done through initial contact. When the punch or kick is thrown, contact is made through a soft block and a forward ANGLED step,  using your arm as a gage to distance. This is done several times until you are close enough (2 to 4 feet, depending on your height and arm length) until one last contact is made. At this point, you make contact, entering in on an angle one more time, trapping the arm and countering. If your opponent retracts his arm, then you FOLLOW HIS CENTER OF MASS IN without hesitation (THAT is from Master Wong Shun Leung, considered on of the best fighters in the 20th century), stepping again at an angle, trapping the arm and countering. Do you follow this? If not, you are NOT doing traditional. If you leave out any one of these, then you are taking out a vital portion of wing chun that makes it work properly. And FINALLY,  and MOST IMPORTANTLY, learning and using the ten concepts, which, like I said before, is the guideline to wing chun's proper application in a fight or self defense scenario. THIS IS CRUCIAL IN WING CHUN to maintain it's flexibility and with this, you can tailor your wing chun to your abilities or disabilities, your personality, and  to that of your opponent, which, again, is CRUCIAL to it's proper application. Get all that? Now, you were saying? Just because you learn wing chun doesn't necessarily mean you are learning wing chun. Not the whole system, anyway. And this is very important to know to make sure you wing chun works right when you need it most, in a fight or self defense situation.


----------



## wingchunguy

What?? That is ridiculous!! How did you come up with that theory? I trained with Grandmaster Cheung's top students, and let me tell you, WILLIAM CHEUNG IS NO JOKE! Every see his 54 minute tutorial on application? It is FANTASTIC and I would recommend it to EVERYBODY! This man has been doing wing chun (modified traditional, as I call it, because he did not learn the entire 2nd and 3rd form, but he knows the essence of wing chun and that has not changed. He even uses TRADITIONAL FOOTWORK, which is important in wing chun) for well over *50 years*, and i think, in that time, he knows what he is doing. Just because of the incident between him and that upstart Boztepe, who basically jumped him when his back was turned, has soured many to his ways. Well don't be fooled, people. I wouldn't give you a NICKEL to learn ANYTHING from Leung Ting or Boztepe, but I would definitely pay to learn from Grandmaster William Cheung!


----------



## wingchunguy

I trained several, including Shaolin, and tai chi. Traditional wing chun IS complete. It has stand up, locks and throws, weapons, and anti-takedown and anti-grappling techniques that use the ten concepts, which are very effective. To ME, that is a complete system!


----------



## wingchunguy

I have trained several, including Shaolin and Tai Chi. Traditional wing chun IS a complete system that includes stand up, locks and throws, weapons training, and anti-takedown and anti-grappling techniques (those are ground techniques for those of you who don't know) that use the ten concepts and are very effective. To me, that makes it a COMPLETE SYSTEM!


----------



## wingchunguy

That's because Master Wong does Pan Nam wing chun, a vietnamese version of wing chun, which is similar to the Ip Man version, but has some differences. Master Wong has very good tutorials to learn the APPLICATION SIDE of wing chun, but like I said before, be forewarned. He also does JKD and modified wc. Use the ten concepts as your guideline. If it falls within the edicts of the ten concepts, then use it. If not, like Bruce Lee said, discard it, it is NOT wing chun.


----------



## wingchunguy

Yes, he is very good, but does PAN NAM wing chun, the vietnamese version of wing chun. It is similar to Ip Man's version, but there are distinct differences. But be forewarned. He also does JKD (A second-rate system in my book), Kali and modified wc. Use the ten concepts as your guideline. If it falls in the edicts of the ten concepts, then use it. If not, then discard it, it is of no use to you. I would learn the Ip man version because there is a lot more information on it than the pan nam version, so you will learn it more completely (As long as it's TRADITIONAL, then it's complete). There are a lot more tutorials to learn from (See chinaboxer's tutorials, they are the BEST for a beginner to learn the basics,  or TECHNICAL SIDE of wing chun.), and other teachers that have tutorials. I would recommend Master Wong only AFTER learning the basics, then you can go to his website and learn the APPLICATION side of wing chun. I again would also recommend  other tutorials from people like Master James Sinclair, Master Allan Gibson, Phillip Redmond, and even Master Watts and Sifu Wayne Benonha of the Moy Yat lineage. They both have fine tutorials, especially Sifu Benonha, whose techniques are sublime (You may need some coffee, though, because his voice is so soothing, you may drop off to sleep.LOL) just disregard that crappy 70/30 stance they use, it is not traditional.


----------



## wingchunguy

Ok. I've had a request to explain the ten concepts. I will give you the explanation from the piece I wrote after only 8 months of doing wing chun. Ready?

*Wing Chun's Ten Basic Concepts and their use*

The ten concepts are the guideline for wing chun kung fu. They dictate how wing chun is properly used in a self defense situation. It is, if you will pardon the expression, the "bible of wing chun". Wing chun is the only concept-based martial art. All others are commonly known as a technique-based martial arts. That means that the techniques dictate the response instead of the situation making the response rigid and unflexible. This will cause a problem if the situation is unfamiliar to the person because he will not know how to respond, causing him to have to consciously THINK about it, severely slowing down response time. This slowdown may cause a breakdown in your defenses because the attacker may overwhelm you and you might not have the time to counter. 
In wing chun, we use ten concepts that not only dictate proper procedure, but also give us the basic principles that fill in flaws seen in other styles. For instance, in karate, boxing, muay thai, or any derivative that uses some kind of a boxing stance, there are flaws like not keeping the hands in the center, not protecting the centerline, standing sideways in their stance compromising balance and power, they expend loads of energy (The opposite of wing chun's economy of motion concept) by doing inefficient things like bobbing and weaving, and bouncing on their toes. These are all flaws that have been fixed by the ten concepts. If done properly, wing chun should HAVE no such flaws in it (except, of course, the human flaws added). The object in wing chun is to close the distance by controlling the opponents distance and timing through initial contact and footwork. This is done when first contact is made through a defensive move done to your opponents first attack (usually a punch, but it can also be a kick, high or low, it doesn't matter.) and you redirect it with a technique that either breaks through the center, causes your opponents hand to move outside of HIS center, causing an opening, or by you rotating and stepping into the now open area that was made when you first redirected his shot. You have to also control his rhythm and make his rhythm, yours. Again, this is done by contact and forward stepping after every contact, closing the distance until you are in a close enough range (close combat range, about 2 to 4 feet from your opponent, preferably to his outside gate or blindside and facing him squarely.) to counter with ease and safety (this is also VERY IMPORTANT!). You want to be able to counter and not worry about him being able to hit you. You do this when you step in on a 45 degree angle and rotate your body. You avoid his punch by your movement, but you also avoid his COUNTER that way, too. This is also how you would counter against someone who is a kicker. You don't even have to bother to block. Just enter with your hands up, like I said before, at a 45 degree angle, rotating your body. The fact that you are coming in will make his kick ineffectual because he needs that distance to produce power. Or you can kick his leg or jam his kick with your foot if it is a low kick. You are jamming him so he will not be able to produce that power. Plus, you are rushing in, and if he kicks you in the thigh, you will push him backwards, off balance (Because he is standing on one leg) because you are moving forward (Another wing chun concept). You will be facing him squarely (Also a wing chun concept) and he will looking forward (think of it as a "T" with YOU as the top of the "T", and HIM as the bottom of the "T"). This will allow you to control one hand, positioning your foot next to his (to sense if he is about to kick, knee or move) and counter strike with rapid-fire punches (THIS is the appropriate way to chain punch) and/or kick or sweep the opponent to the ground, again maintaining control of the arm (You ALWAYS try to control one arm) and pummeling him to unconsciousness.
THAT is the correct way to do wing chun! Now, here are the ten concepts with a small explanation of each one. You should learn them, and follow them, using it as your guideline as you begin to spar, then fight.

The ten concepts are as follows:
1. Economy of motion- This concepts dictates that the wing chun practitioner use as little energy as possible when doing the techniques. This means taking out any extraneous (unnecessary) movements to make the technique as streamlined and efficient as possible. This will increase your speed and power. It also dictates that you should try to end a confrontation as quickly as possible.
2. Centerline concept-This concept dictates that all major organs lie along the center of the body. This area is the most vital area on the body. So these vital organs should be protected from attack and attacked on your opponent. By attacking these vital points, you are also incorporating other concepts, making your attack more effective. This is why you must use all ten concepts together.
3. Triangle concept- The triangle is the strongest structure known to man. Energy flows down the tip evenly along the sides to the base. It is also the most efficient structure. We use this concept to maximize power through the use of concentrated energy, which gathers at the apex of the tip. (Where the three points meet). You can only generate so much power when using muscle contractions. This allows the body to align itself so the maximum amount of power can be generated. In wing chun, YOU MUST NEVER BREAK THE TRIANGLE!! THIS IS CRUCIAL IN WING CHUN! If you break the triangle, then other muscles that shouldn't be brought into play come into play and slow down your response (called antagonist muscles, like the bicep). So you must keep the triangle in your stance (Which means the pushing in of the hips and knees.) This will help you get a better push off also because now you are using the WHOLE foot to push instead of just your heel and part of the outside foot. Always push the hips forward, maintaining that position when static or moving. This will make a complete connection making your stance extremely strong against attacks, even grapplers) and NEVER, EVER break the triangle when you punch. This will cause you to overextend your position and unbalance you, causing you to be possibly pulled or pushed down, and consequently open up your center for counter attack. Even our footwork is a circle inside of a triangle. Always maintain it and you will maintain the integrity of your stance and increase your power base because now you have a better push off with your legs.
4. Simultaneous attack and defense-This concept dictates that, in accordance with other concepts like economy of motion, and others, like trapping hand and straight line attack, that each move should have both elements in it. This means that instead of just blocking and THEN attacking, we, in wing chun, do BOTH, AT THE SAME TIME! This has the effect on the opponent of having him go into a defensive mode, causing him to use physical strength and an ineffective counter attack (It's hard to counter when you are getting pummeled by 6 to 8 punches or more a second) that will cause him to make an opening in one area to cover the hole in another. This is the time that dictates in wing chun that you ATTACK that opening just created and continue until the opponent is no longer a threat. 
There is a saying in wing chun by Gigung Wong Shun Leung, and it goes like this:                        
Loi Lau Hoi Sung, Lat Sau Jik. This translates to the following edict:
Loi Lau- This means to "engage the enemy, stay with them and form a bridge with the attack, intercepting the path it takes."
Hoi Sung- This means to "take advantage of their errors, following their mass of center when they withdraw, attacking the opponent without worries."
Lat Sau Jik- This means when the hands are released, ATTACK DIRECTLY WITHOUT HESITATION! (Very important!). All this information is in the book by Master Allen Gibson called Beginning Wing Chun.
5. Bridge Hand Concept-The concept of using sensitivity through contact to sense your opponents intentions even without looking. This helps free you for other things like strategy. It is used in medium range to close the gap to close combat range or in close to stop an attack when there is contact made. This sensitivity is honed by doing Chi sau for your hands (known as sticky hands) and Chi gerk for your legs (also known as sticky legs), which uses the same concept of detecting attempted movement in your opponent's legs.
6. Straight line Attack Concept- This concept dictates that all strikes will be either directly down the center or central line (45 degrees off the center line) when either your hand or your opponents is pushed or pulled off center, causing an opening in his position. Again, going along with several other concepts that work in unison with this one (economy of motion, centerline concept, triangle concept, face to face concept, trapping hand concept, and simultaneous attack and defense concept, bridging the gap, and immoveable elbow. All ten concepts are used here.), the straight line attack concept also dictates that if one hand is pushed out of center, the other hand comes to the center to take its' place, protecting the centerline. It also states that if a punch is redirected or blocked off center, the elbow continues through the center (turning into a bong sau, effectively trapping the arm, which is jut saoed (Grabbing block) with the back hand or wu sau hand, then the elbow (bong sau) is turned up into a fist and continues along the centerline. If the ELBOW is stopped, then the shoulder can be used to get distance between the two participants and then you can reset your stance.)
7. Immoveable Elbow Concept- This concept dictates that the elbow remain immoveable behind the arm. It can move up and back in front of the body, but NOT side to side. This sideways movement causes the body to use the muscles of the body, causing tension to the muscles and fatigue, instead of body alignment and body movement, which causes the techniques to weaken and fold under pressure which will cause a collapse of your defenses. It also lines up the three sticks (the arm, forearm and wrist, which is VERTICAL, instead of horizontal), with the body and allows you to produce amazing amounts of power in a short distance (3 to 6 inches or LESS).
8. Trapping Hand Concept- This concept dictates that, in order to control your opponent, you must trap one or both of his hands, preferably with just ONE of yours, using the other hand to strike and/or kick or sweep. This gives you the ability to safely control your opponent and attack simultaneously (also uses concept of simultaneous attack and defense, centerline theory, economy of motion, bridge hand concept, straight line attack, immoveable elbow, and the face to face concept).
9. The Four Corners Concept- This concept is the determining factor when it comes to the area protected by each hand. It separates the body into four sections, left and right upper gate, which protects the face, neck and upper torso, and the left and right lower gate, which protects the middle portion of the body, the ribs, stomach, and even the groin. It is also the determining factor to the boundaries our hands must stay within to be able to protect the center. We do not go past these gates, whose outside borders are the end of the shoulders.
10. Face to Face Concept- This concept is crucial in wing chun also. It dictates that a wing chun practitioner must always stay SQUARE TO HIS OPPONENT, facing him forward directly. This gives the wing chun person an advantage. When you stand square, you are protecting your groin from a kick (the turned in knees help also) and from a leg sweep, which you are vulnerable to when you stand sideways. It also gives you the advantage of being able to use both hands and legs when you are in the neutral position, and both hands and one leg when you are in the side stance. This is better than all others, that use only one hand and leg when standing in the side stance. You also have better balance, more stability, and there is less chance of someone getting around behind you when standing square. You are also more grounded which gives you more power in your techniques. This allows you to use all the other concepts more efficiently and effectively. This is why I say you must use ALL TEN CONCEPTS, ALL THE TIME! As you can see, they all rely on each other, like a machine. It's like having an engine with missing pieces after you put it back together. Without all the pieces, it won't work well or at all.


----------



## wingchunguy

For all of you out there that question Master Wong, let me clarify something. He was taught PAN NAM wing chun, which is a vietnamese version of wing chun. For those of you out there, there are literally one dozen different styles of wing chun, ranging from Ip Man's version, to Pan Nam, to all the FLAG wing chuns (white, black green, red,yellow) that isn't even REAL WING CHUN because it uses the five animal system as opposed to the crane and snake in Ip Man's version. So I can understand your confusion. But Master Wong also does modified wc, JKD, and Kali, so when you use his tutorials, make sure to use the ten concepts of TRADITIONAL wing chun as your guideline (IF you are learning Ip Man's version). If it falls under the edicts of the ten concepts, then use it. If not, then discard it, it is not TRADITIONAL wing chun.


----------



## jks9199

Wingchunguy...

Perhaps you'd consider making use of the "Reply With Quote" option?  (It's at the bottom right of each post, and looks kind of like a cartoon speech balloon with quotation marks in it)  It's really hard to understand what you're replying to in each post since they're not necessarily displayed right in a row.


----------



## geezer

_Wingchunguy --_please take note of the previous post by _jks9199_ (post #67). Your failure to reference exactly to whom or what you were responding made reading over your recent posts not only confusing but also about as annoying as listening to somebody shouting into their cell phone without hearing a word of what the other person is saying.  Hearing half a conversation just doesn't contribute much.

Now about your wall of text on the "Ten Concepts"... it is actually all very familiar. You might be surprised to learn that those ideas are not the exclusive property of TWC. I understand that you are devoted to your instructor and lineage. So are many others here, but we come to this forum to share and learn, not just to preach!


----------



## yak sao

geezer said:


> .....we come to this forum to share and learn, not just to preach!




Amen brother!..........sorry couldn't resist


----------



## blindsage

"traditional",  such a funny word.


----------



## almost a ghost

blindsage said:


> "traditional",  such a funny word.



And a very loaded one.


----------



## wtxs

blindsage said:


> "traditional",  such a funny word.





almost a ghost said:


> And a very *loaded* one.



Would it be an stretch to interpret it as "full of it"? :wink1:


----------



## Marnetmar

I do believe that the fact he's skilled in wing chun is undeniable, though the title of "master" seems a bit suspicious.

I actually talked with my sifu about him and he brought up the video in the OP, mentioning that once a boxer sees an elbow he will change his strategy so as to avoid damaging his hand.


----------



## geezer

Marnetmar said:


> I do believe that the fact he's skilled in wing chun is undeniable, though the title of "master" seems a bit suspicious.



Are you talking about William Cheung? Heck I'd go along with the term "master". Now "grandmaster" is pushing it, but what the heck, these days even "Grandmasters" are a dime a dozen.

Similarly, my old sifu adopted the titles "professor, doctor, grandmaster",  as well as "master of almightyness" LOL. Don't these guys realize how absolutely ridiculous this sounds?  

His kung fu was actually quite exceptional, but by assuming such absurd titles, he sure lost a lot of credibility.


----------



## Xue Sheng

geezer said:


> Are you talking about William Cheung? Heck I'd go along with the term "master". Now "grandmaster" is pushing it, but what the heck, these days even "Grandmasters" are a dime a dozen.
> 
> Similarly, my old sifu adopted the titles "professor, doctor, grandmaster",  as well as "master of almightyness" LOL. Don't these guys realize how absolutely ridiculous this sounds?
> 
> His kung fu was actually quite exceptional, but by assuming such absurd titles, he sure lost a lot of credibility.





Well speaking as his highness the lord high omnipotent royal grand imperial boobah ultimate high level grand master and evil wizard of Xuefu.I agree completely :mst: :uhyeah:


----------



## Marnetmar

geezer said:


> Are you talking about William Cheung? Heck I'd go along with the term "master". Now "grandmaster" is pushing it, but what the heck, these days even "Grandmasters" are a dime a dozen.
> 
> Similarly, my old sifu adopted the titles "professor, doctor, grandmaster",  as well as "master of almightyness" LOL. Don't these guys realize how absolutely ridiculous this sounds?
> 
> His kung fu was actually quite exceptional, but by assuming such absurd titles, he sure lost a lot of credibility.



No, I'm referring to Master Wong in this case, I didn't realize that there was a discussion about Cheung in the posts above, my apologies for any confusion :asian:


----------



## mickymorton

Mr. President said:


> This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.
> 
> Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?


you can find  master wong  in Wikipedia  he isn't fake  there are stories about him
he is a real martial artist  but  his name is  Michael wong  that's why you can't find him  yes he does teach martial arts in the u.k   he also practiced studied close combat and wing chung that's how I found him ?


----------



## jks9199

mickymorton said:


> you can find  master wong  in Wikipedia  he isn't fake  there are stories about him
> he is a real martial artist  but  his name is  Michael wong  that's why you can't find him  yes he does teach martial arts in the u.k   he also practiced studied close combat and wing chung that's how I found him ?


Not exactly reliable. Wikipedia has been notoriously wrong on several occasions, since the content has little review.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## JowGaWolf

Mr. President said:


> This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.
> 
> Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?


ha ha ha.. too funny.. I don't want to break your hands.  then you can't grab any more....


----------



## paitingman

I actually love master wong. Reasons being:
-he's a fit man who obviously trains very hard and loves martial arts and exercise.
-he wont talk crap on other styles or as he says "when you dont know (about) something, it's best to keep your gob shut" with a few expletives in there aha
-he's just a wacky character. 
his martial arts view/techniques and just persona may not be up some peoples alley but I find he's just a very enthusiastic, hard training individual who likes to share a lot of videos which is a okay in my book


----------



## Vajramusti

wingchunguy said:


> I have trained several, including Shaolin and Tai Chi. Traditional wing chun IS a complete system that includes stand up, locks and throws, weapons training, and anti-takedown and anti-grappling techniques (those are ground techniques for those of you who don't know) that use the ten concepts and are very effective. To me, that makes it a COMPLETE SYSTEM!


----------------------------------------------------
True- wing chun is very natural. Understanding wing chun can be a problem for many.
The vietnamese Wong's wing chun is far removed from good Ip Man wing chun.


----------



## KPM

Vajramusti said:


> ----------------------------------------------------
> True- wing chun is very natural. Understanding wing chun can be a problem for many.
> The vietnamese Wong's wing chun is far removed from good Ip Man wing chun.



First, you are replying to something this is 3 years old.  Second, Pan Nam Wing Chun is NOT Vietnamese Wing Chun.  This "wingchunguy" didn't know what he was talking about in a lot of areas.   ;-)


----------



## Xue Sheng

KPM said:


> First, you are replying to something this is 3 years old.  Second, Pan Nam Wing Chun is NOT Vietnamese Wing Chun.  This "wingchunguy" didn't know what he was talking about in a lot of areas.   ;-)



You are correct sir

Pan Nam Wing Chun


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> Second, Pan Nam Wing Chun is NOT Vietnamese Wing Chun.



He never mentioned Vietnamese Wing Chun. 

He said "the Vietnamese Wong's Wing Chun", i.e. the Wing Chun of Michael Wong who is Vietnamese.


----------



## Marnetmar

KPM said:


> First, you are replying to something this is 3 years old.  Second, Pan Nam Wing Chun is NOT Vietnamese Wing Chun.  This "wingchunguy" didn't know what he was talking about in a lot of areas.   ;-)



I think it is worth bringing up however that Pan Nam's style is pretty far removed from typical WC, even most of the mainland schools.

My sifu told me that when he touched hands with his teacher after he had finished learning the Pan Nam style, his teacher had actually gotten worse instead of better. If he would have went and learned from somebody like Sum Nung, that probably wouldn't have happened.


----------



## geezer

Marnetmar said:


> I think it is worth bringing up however that Pan Nam's style is pretty far removed from typical WC, even most of the mainland schools.
> 
> My sifu told me that when he touched hands with his teacher after he had finished learning the Pan Nam style, his teacher had actually gotten worse instead of better. If he would have went and learned from somebody like Sum Nung, that probably wouldn't have happened.



That would depend on _why_ his skills deteriorated. Sometimes learning something new or different will create conflicting responses and mess up your performance, ...at least for a while. It doesn't mean that the new method is bad in and of itself. Maybe it just messed with what he already knew.

That's why it's _not_ always a great idea to try and learn every system you can.

BTW, was the sifu in question  Eddie Chong?


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> He never mentioned Vietnamese Wing Chun.
> 
> He said "the Vietnamese Wong's Wing Chun", i.e. the Wing Chun of Michael Wong who is Vietnamese.



Actually.....if you care to go back and read through "wingchunguy's" rambling, he said this:

*That's because Master Wong does Pan Nam wing chun, a vietnamese version of wing chun, which is similar to the Ip Man version, but has some differences.
*
That is what I assumed Joy was referring to, because what point would there have been in Joy pointing out Wong's ethnicity???


----------



## LFJ

KPM said:


> That is what I assumed Joy was referring to, because what point would there have been in Joy pointing out Wong's ethnicity???



Because there is more than one "Master Wong" in the Wing Chun world?


----------



## KPM

LFJ said:


> Because there is more than one "Master Wong" in the Wing Chun world?


 
Maybe so!  But it never occurred to me in the context of the thread that making this distinction would be necessary.   Most people refer to "Wong Shun Leung".   When people say "Master Wong"....especially when he was the topic of the OP that started the thread....people usually know the distinction.  And, given that "wingchunguy" had erroneously called Pan Nam WCK "Vietnamese"....well....  But maybe you are right!  I, for one, didn't even know that Michael Wong is Vietnamese.


----------



## LFJ

You're right about Pan Nam anyway. 

I used to suspect Michael Wong might be Thai, from his accent, which I've seen people call Chinglish (including in this thread)... but it's not a Chinese accent, Cantonese or other... despite him having a common Cantonese surname. He also looks Southeast Asian.

His bio online says he came to England at the age of 10 as a refugee from Vietnam. So he may just spell his name like the Cantonese equivalent to the surname in Vietnamese. Better marketing than Master Vuong? Or maybe he's part Chinese. I dunno...


----------



## geezer

LFJ said:


> ... Or maybe he's part Chinese. I dunno...


Wouldn't be surprising. There are a lot of ethnic Chinese in Vietnam.

BTW, It is widely held that GM. Yip and many other Chinese Sifus of the older generation, did not teach non-Chinese, or at least held back some knowledge if they did. But today, do people still feel that the best and most knowledgeable WC practitioners are all Chinese?


----------



## wtxs

geezer said:


> Wouldn't be surprising. There are a lot of ethnic Chinese in Vietnam.
> 
> BTW, It is widely held that GM. Yip and many other Chinese Sifus of the older generation, did not teach non-Chinese, or at least held back some knowledge if they did. But today, do people still feel that the best and most knowledgeable WC practitioners are all Chinese?



Until all of the older generation Chinese masters go meet their maker for eternal session of Dim Sum, taking all their WC "secrets" with them, it stands to reason that the best and most knowledgeable WC practitioners at this time are Chinese.

Ssssssh ... there are no WC secrets, just knowledge withheld.


----------



## Marnetmar

geezer said:


> That would depend on _why_ his skills deteriorated. Sometimes learning something new or different will create conflicting responses and mess up your performance, ...at least for a while. It doesn't mean that the new method is bad in and of itself. Maybe it just messed with what he already knew.
> 
> That's why it's _not_ always a great idea to try and learn every system you can.
> 
> BTW, was the sifu in question  Eddie Chong?



Shhhhhhh.


----------



## LFJ

wtxs said:


> Ssssssh ... there are no WC secrets, just knowledge withheld.



The real secret is they have no knowledge to withhold! 

Honestly, I've lived in China for a long time, traveled and trained all over, and I'm convinced the best practitioners of any TCMA nowadays are Westerners. The Chinese can't fight and they believe their own b.s. like breaking bricks makes one a great fighter. They stopped caring about realism a long time ago. Westerners have taken it, tested it, and made it work again. China is the last place I would go for practical TCMA training, unless a really good foreigner is teaching. (Obviously, I'm not talking about race. It has to do with their culture of blind faith, superstition... gullibility.)


----------



## guy b.

LFJ said:


> The real secret is they have no knowledge to withhold!
> 
> Honestly, I've lived in China for a long time, traveled and trained all over, and I'm convinced the best practitioners of any TCMA nowadays are Westerners. The Chinese can't fight and they believe their own b.s. like breaking bricks makes one a great fighter. They stopped caring about realism a long time ago. Westerners have taken it, tested it, and made it work again. China is the last place I would go for practical TCMA training, unless a really good foreigner is teaching. (Obviously, I'm not talking about race. It has to do with their culture of blind faith, superstition... gullibility.)




I would agree. China is like the 1980s were in US and Europe in terms of evolution of martial arts. Looking for nuggets of goodness there could take a lifetime.


----------



## Swaggy8484

MASTER WONG IS A LEGIT WING CHUN MASTER AND JKD TOO CHECK ON GOOGLE SIFU MICHAEL WONG MY FRIEND


----------



## Isaiah90

Mr. President said:


> This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.
> 
> Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?



I think he's legit. He may not use the traditional Wing Chun approach because he's appealing to a contemporary audience. His teachings are effective and very helpful. I've found alot of things he says agree with Wing Chun principles like kicking no higher than the waistline. Although i can see why people would dislike him. Some teachings are "unfair" like attacking your opponent at their blindspots rather than mirroring their centerline.


----------



## Old Judoka

master wong wing chun training -  Yahoo Video Search Results

Notice in this video how often MW ends a sequence and ends up with nearly all his weight on the back foot. I'm no Wing Chun guy, but I've heard that Leung Ting taught using 100% weight on the back foot. Straighten me out if I'm wrong.


----------



## geezer

Old Judoka said:


> master wong wing chun training -  Yahoo Video Search Results
> 
> Notice in this video how often MW ends a sequence and ends up with nearly all his weight on the back foot. I'm no Wing Chun guy, but I've heard that Leung Ting taught using 100% weight on the back foot. Straighten me out if I'm wrong.




OK. I see that. So what do you make of it? Do you think Master Wong has been watching Leung Ting videos or trained with some LT guys?

More importantly, where did he get those sound-effects? _Hmmm, Hmm, Hmm, HMMMMM?_


----------



## Old Judoka

geezer said:


> OK. I see that. So what do you make of it? Do you think Master Wong has been watching Leung Ting videos or trained with some LT guys?
> 
> More importantly, where did he get those sound-effects? _Hmmm, Hmm, Hmm, HMMMMM?_



Well......he is awfully noisy for a wing chun guy, I've never heard so much grunting and groaning. LOL About the LT question. I don't know enough to be certain that is what is going on. Just an observation. If you watch some of his videos when he is teaching, he seems kind of sloppy compared to other videos I've watched. He also seems to use a lot of physical power in his movements. To paraphrase Dominic Izzo, his wing chun is "all yang, no yin". MW is fast and powerful, in a physical kind of way.


----------



## Th0mas

The thing to remember that there is marketing and then there is reality. The two may bare no relationship with each other. Master Wong is clearly a very talented marketeer which means it is practically impossible to judge the reality from the marketing material.

I suspect first hand experience or second hand experience from sources you trust will be the only way to judge.


----------



## KPM

Th0mas said:


> The thing to remember that there is marketing and then there is reality. The two may bare no relationship with each other. Master Wong is clearly a very talented marketeer which means it is practically impossible to judge the reality from the marketing material.
> 
> I suspect first hand experience or second hand experience from sources you trust will be the only way to judge.



I've conversed with guys that have attended workshops with him in the UK that have said he is a good instructor and does some good stuff.  For what that's worth.


----------



## Transk53

He is based in Ipswich. I did try to find out something about him from someone up in those parts, but had moved sadly.


----------



## Old Judoka

geezer said:


> OK. I see that. So what do you make of it? Do you think Master Wong has been watching Leung Ting videos or trained with some LT guys?
> 
> More importantly, where did he get those sound-effects? _Hmmm, Hmm, Hmm, HMMMMM?_





geezer said:


> OK. I see that. So what do you make of it? Do you think Master Wong has been watching Leung Ting videos or trained with some LT guys?
> 
> More importantly, where did he get those sound-effects? _Hmmm, Hmm, Hmm, HMMMMM?_



Hi Geez, here is an MW demonstration of Tan Sao Fok Sao (sp). I'm kinda liking it until he says Tan Sao can be like this, or this or this. While WC is supposed to be concept based, it seems like it is supposed to adhere to some structure. Thoughts?....................


----------



## Danny T

Old Judoka said:


> Hi Geez, here is an MW demonstration of Tan Sao Fok Sao (sp). I'm kinda liking it until he says Tan Sao can be like this, or this or this. While WC is supposed to be concept based, it seems like it is supposed to adhere to some structure. Thoughts?....................


If anything he is entertaining.


----------



## Mr.J

wingchunguy said:


> For all of you out there that question Master Wong, let me clarify something. He was taught PAN NAM wing chun, which is a vietnamese version of wing chun. For those of you out there, there are literally one dozen different styles of wing chun, ranging from Ip Man's version, to Pan Nam, to all the FLAG wing chuns (white, black green, red,yellow) that isn't even REAL WING CHUN because it uses the five animal system as opposed to the crane and snake in Ip Man's version. So I can understand your confusion. But Master Wong also does modified wc, JKD, and Kali, so when you use his tutorials, make sure to use the ten concepts of TRADITIONAL wing chun as your guideline (IF you are learning Ip Man's version). If it falls under the edicts of the ten concepts, then use it. If not, then discard it, it is not TRADITIONAL wing chun.



I agree and I postulate one step further that like all things wing chun evolves over time the only ones who knew traditional wing chun. Is wing chun her self and those she taught and were taught 20 years after her death. After that it's kinda like the grape vine effect with each person adding or subtracting something over the years. Which is how you get those tenets. There is only one true tenant of wing chun the middle way. All others are an expansion of that concept. i know nothing though. also because there are many master Wongs is this the master Wong you were talking about Home ? When you referred to the pan nam wing chun? And as for his claim to master. True mastery starts with the self. 

"A man who knows himself need not fear the outcome of a thousand battles." (Look it up)


----------



## Mr.J

paitingman said:


> I actually love master wong. Reasons being:
> -he's a fit man who obviously trains very hard and loves martial arts and exercise.
> -he wont talk crap on other styles or as he says "when you dont know (about) something, it's best to keep your gob shut" with a few expletives in there aha
> -he's just a wacky character.
> his martial arts view/techniques and just persona may not be up some peoples alley but I find he's just a very enthusiastic, hard training individual who likes to share a lot of videos which is a okay in my book



I think it's because he doesn't like to be on camera. So he builds a show persona to insulate his true self.


----------



## geezer

Mr.J said:


> I think it's because he doesn't like to be on camera. So he builds a show persona to insulate his true self.



To the contrary, I think he loves to be on camera. The guy's a natural comedian. Very entertaining.

Even people that don't like his WC enjoy his videos.


----------



## Vajramusti

Danny T said:


> If anything he is entertaining.


------------------------------------
and wong.


----------



## Danny T

Vajramusti said:


> ------------------------------------
> and wong.


----------



## Danny T

geezer said:


> To the contrary, I think he loves to be on camera. The guy's a natural comedian. Very entertaining.
> 
> Even people that don't like his WC enjoy his videos.


Entertain...that is his marketability.
And we are helping him by exposing others through talking about him. Am not a fan of his Martial style but he is fun to watch.


----------



## Dylan9d

wingchunguy said:


> What?? That is ridiculous!! How did you come up with that theory? I trained with Grandmaster Cheung's top students, and let me tell you, WILLIAM CHEUNG IS NO JOKE! I wouldn't give you a NICKEL to learn ANYTHING from Leung Ting or Boztepe, but I would definitely pay to learn from Grandmaster William Cheung!



Didn't William Cheung get his *** kicked by Emin Boztepe on a seminar in the past?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Dylan9d said:


> Didn't William Cheung get his *** kicked by Emin Boztepe on a seminar in the past?



William Cheung vs. Emin Boztepe

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?3611-Emin-Boztepe-vs-William-Cheung

In 1986
William Chung was 46 at the time
Emin Boztepe was 24 at the time


----------



## geezer

Xue Sheng said:


> William Cheung vs. Emin Boztepe
> 
> http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?3611-Emin-Boztepe-vs-William-Cheung
> 
> In 1986
> William Chung was 46 at the time
> Emin Boztepe was 24 at the time



Yeah? Well how old was Master Wong???


----------



## Dylan9d

Xue Sheng said:


> William Cheung vs. Emin Boztepe
> 
> http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?3611-Emin-Boztepe-vs-William-Cheung
> 
> In 1986
> William Chung was 46 at the time
> Emin Boztepe was 24 at the time



Is Wing Chun that age bound? Thought REAL TRADITIONAL!!! Wing Chun was a pure principle art or whatever that guy called it........


----------



## KPM

^^^^^ I don't think age had anything to do with it.  Jumping someone during their seminar on a slick gym floor where both people fell to the ground and ended up flailing around was more a factor than anything.   I wouldn't call that exchange a real example of Wing Chun skills comparison.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Dylan9d said:


> Is Wing Chun that age bound? Thought REAL TRADITIONAL!!! Wing Chun was a pure principle art or whatever that guy called it........



Don't really know, just posted the info, that is all


----------



## geezer

KPM said:


> ^^^^^ I don't think age had anything to do with it.  Jumping someone during their seminar* on a slick gym floor *where both people fell to the ground and ended up flailing around was more a factor than anything.   I wouldn't call that exchange a real example of Wing Chun skills comparison.



So one thing I take away from that is that kung fu slippers suck. _Gym shoes _all the way! Hard to see in that old video, but I believe Emin had better shoes!


----------



## Old Judoka

SamAbb said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I can confirm that Michael Wong practices Pan Nam Wing Chun kuen (I have studied PNWCK also). I have no idea about his Sifu's/Lineage etc.
> 
> In addition I can also say that he executes his PNWCK differently than how it is normally practiced within the system. He seems to practice it as more of an external system (you can see this). He will say otherwise, that his system is internal. I don't see this. Loud breathing does not equal internal...
> 
> I give a little bit of credit to the fact he wants to stand on his own two feet. You can't argue that what he practices and teaches is distinctly his own expression of the art!



Here is a video of Pan Nam's version of Biu Jee I believe. It's label Sil Lum Tao, but I don't think that is correct. It was shot in 1993 like two years before he died. Hope the link works.


----------



## Marnetmar

<snip, I got a bit unnecessarily rude>

Here's Pan Nam's version of BJ though if anyone's curious:


----------



## Old Judoka

No, not really, the vid was label siu nim tao, but I caught in the comments that it was biu jee. My mistake, tried to correct it right away and my connection decided to slow down to stone tablet speed. Sorry about the confusion.


----------



## anerlich

geezer said:


> So one thing I take away from that is that kung fu slippers suck. _Gym shoes _all the way! Hard to see in that old video, but I believe Emin had better shoes!



Well, IMO kung fu slippers DO suck for training. They slip on polished floors, get loose to the point of slipping on your feet when you step or flying off when you kick. Never again.

I reckon the old Chinese guys thought of them as another way to say "Here's another way to stick it up these Gwailos while we laugh at them behind their backs."

Wrestling shoes are WAY better footwear for training. Though I usually go barefoot.


----------



## KPM

^^^^ I train in a pair of "barefoot" running shoes from Merrill.  They work great and fit like a glove.  But none of those silly "5 fingers" shoes.


----------



## Old Judoka

My doctor wears 5 finger shoes, I have to strain to keep from laughing every time I go see him (quite often, LOL).


----------



## Tony Dismukes

I actually would love a pair of Vibrams, but I can't justify spending the money on them. Maybe once I get rich and famous through teaching martial arts. I'm sure that's going to happen any day now...


----------



## geezer

Old Judoka said:


> My doctor wears 5 finger shoes, I have to strain to keep from laughing every time I go see him (quite often, LOL).



Yeah, those five-toed shoes strike me as another silly fad cashing in on the "it's more natural" thing. It will pass. Like the original backward canted "Earth Shoe" people raved about back in the 70's. The Earth Shoe brand is still around, but they don't look like _this_ anymore!

http://oldnews.aadl.org/files/aa_sun_19720427_p014-007.jpg


----------



## wckf92

the five toed vibrams come in handy when deadlifting, and doing things like kettlebell work, etc.


----------



## geezer

wckf92 said:


> the five toed vibrams come in handy when deadlifting, and doing things like kettlebell work, etc.



Wow. I can't even imagine lifting kettle-bells with my feet!


----------



## wckf92

Ummm....yeah. hahahahaha
Now that I'm rereading what I typed...I'm such a goofball haha

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## Old Judoka

geezer said:


> Yeah, those five-toed shoes strike me as another silly fad cashing in on the "it's more natural" thing. It will pass. Like the original backward canted "Earth Shoe" people raved about back in the 70's. The Earth Shoe brand is still around, but they don't look like _this_ anymore!
> 
> http://oldnews.aadl.org/files/aa_sun_19720427_p014-007.jpg


Yeah, I was an "Earth Shoe Victim" back in the 70's, Lol! Good times, eh?


----------



## Old Judoka

wckf92 said:


> the five toed vibrams come in handy when deadlifting, and doing things like kettlebell work, etc.



Great for housework too! You can really multi-task with those things on!


----------



## anerlich

I have a pair of Vibrams. These days though I usually get around in $15 lightweight training shoes I got from Aldi, which feel indistinguishable from a pair of  brand name "minimalist" training shoes I paid ten times as much for.


----------



## Marnetmar

Transk53 said:


> He is based in Ipswich. I did try to find out something about him from someone up in those parts, but had moved sadly.



I think he moved to Bolton. Or perhaps that was his brother.


----------



## Pat M

The main thing I like about five toe shoes is that you can dress them up any time you like with thongs.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Do they come in size 14EE


----------



## KPM

The problem I found with the "5 fingers" vibrams was that I have rather short stubby toes, so my pinkie toe wouldn't stay in the shoe's toe piece very well.  So it rubbed and was uncomfortable.  Not everyone has long prehensile toes after all!     Oh...and you have to either have special socks, or go without socks.  I didn't like that.


----------



## kehcorpz

I can't tell how authentic Wong's wing chun is. But when I look at his moves then I feel like he could very well defend himself.

Do you think that a "real" wing chun guy would defeat him simply cause his wing chun is better even if Wong's more muscular?

I also doubt that he taught wing chun to himself. He has videos where he demonstrates forms. I don't think he learned this all by himself.


----------



## wtxs

kehcorpz said:


> I also doubt that he taught wing chun to himself. He has videos where he demonstrates forms. _I don't think he learned this all by himself_.



I sure hope this won't turn into another long and drawn out "can you learn MA from videos" thread ... wifie is hinting all those popcorn and beer are what's popping my pants buttons.


----------



## Treasure

Hi
I have been interested fairly casually in MA since the 70's. I trained for quite a while in Shotokan and then switched for a couple of years to WC under Master Simon Lau in London just after the BBC Way of the Warrior was filmed. I did train under Master Wong in Ipswich for about 6 months a few years ago. I quite enjoyed the training as it was a good workout and I was revisiting WC. His style is quite different from Siman Lau but he seemed very definite on what he was teaching. He did not appear to be 'making it up as he went along' and obviously had some heritage. I did hear him asked who had trained him and he did give a non committed reply. His drills were different from Ip Man style. He did like to dedicate part of the lesson to padded up full contact which was always fun. I did some drills with him and his arms were like metal rods. Really quite painful.He was a colourful character and would swear way too much. Quite shocking sometimes . He also appeared to teach a whole lot of different martial arts and if he was a Master in each then it would be amazing. I went to one of his Tai Chi classes as well and he seemed to know what he was doing but I really couldn't tell. He ran it very much as a business and there was a lot of emphasis on buying kit and becoming a member and he would organise trips to China once a year. Nothing wrong in earning a living. All in all I felt like he was a nice enough man who ran a MA business and did it quite well. As for the purity of his style I wish I knew enough to comment but I would not like to meet him in a dark alley. I left because of the travelling and joined Master James Sinclair (who I may have trained with under Simon Lau but too long ago to remember) and must admit that although the lessons were maybe not as enjoyable I did feel more confident that I was getting the real WC experience. He is a pretty impressive individual. Anyway I thought that I would bring this thread back on track as it had changed to talking about footwear....


----------



## wingerjim

Wingsingh said:


> I can tell you first hand master Wong is the real deal.
> 
> What does it matter if he doesn't tell people who taught him? Some people seem to earn a living by telling people who taught them.
> 
> I think Master Wong deserves more respect.
> 
> I'd like to know why people think his Wing Chun isn't correct?
> 
> BTW, Master Wong had a free training session in the park this last Saturday. He stayed for over 2 and a half hours, answering questions and teaching and giving out free dvd's and t-shirts.


I cannot say that his WC is not correct, but it certainly is not traditional WC. He does not get respect because he so far has not said who taught him, thus we do not know who gave him the title of Master, thus without knowing this, people just are not going to respect him...basic Chinese culture. I am proud to say I attend a school that is of the Leung Sheung lineage. Why does Master Wong not state this? Makes those of us who carry on Ip Man and Leung Sheung's legacy suspicious.


----------



## jazzman3121

I just found Master Wong on youtube and watched quite a few of his vids (I watch many different vids from many different styles). I've studied a few martial arts styles although haven't dedicated myself in a way to become a master of anything or even competent in anything but I've noticed that when any individual comes to the surface in any style there is always the bullshido challenge. My question though is what is relevant? What is the purpose of one's martial arts training, the art, self-defense, prestige? My motivation for training has been for self-defense and I think most people at least have that as one their top reasons for training and although the interest for me started with a 'style' what it came down to is 'do I think this stuff would be effective if I needed it in a struggle for life?' We've seen the rise of the sport of MMA which while is still a sport, it's pretty close to what a street fight brings, little rules, bring what you have and survive yet, we haven't seen strict Wing Chun practitioners become top fighters (neither have we seen strict Karate, Shaolin Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do, etc.) What we have seen is fighters who may have started with some form, i.e. Judo, BJJ, kickboxing, but they seem to be more effective with a tool bag of technique in addition to their training. I understand one's search for 'legitimate' martial arts but in the event you can't find a practitioner who can trace his martial arts lineage to someone you revere or you can't afford their cost, then what is your next step? Are those 'legitimate' and perfect Wing Chun stances and punching drills going to equip you for survival in a street conflict, robbery attempt or murder attempt?Would we know who Ip Man was if it had not been for Bruce Lee? And speaking of Bruce Lee, is there a movement of people who denounce him for not teaching legitimate Wing Chun? From what I can see, Lee is considered one of the greatest martial artists who has ever lived but what he became more famous for was the mindset of martial arts and the philosophy of fighting and training to win... The thing that is very telling to me is having seen a few of Master Wong's seminars video and in those situations where I can recognize ranking martial arts practitioners (Shotokan Karate Black Belts that is), while they hold black belts which is supposed to represent many years of training and the ability to 'master technique', they seemed to me to be very tentative and uncoordinated practicing Wong's techniques of self defense (and his stuff seems very straight forward and simple), they almost look like they've never even trained before in anything. From what I've seen in an interview someone did with Wong, he said that he was Vietnamese and studied Kung Fu. So according to the tradition, wouldn't the fact that Wong is not Chinese preclude him from being recognized by the Chinese masters, no matter how 'legit' his Wing Chun is? From what I can gather about Wong, his emphasis is in training with techniques that are simple and effective, he doesn't repeatedly say 'my Wing Chun goes back to blah blah blah...' Anyway, that's my thought on Wong. He doesn't spend any time denouncing other styles, criticizing other styles, he just brings what he has. I'm not saying that Wong is on par with Bruce Lee but his emphasis seems to be in self-defense and street survival from a background of Wing Chun or whatever style he uses that people can recognize. I don't think that Wong's concern is about name-dropping his Wing Chun lineage to gain respect. To me, the techniques he puts forth and instructs on are going to speak for themselves in their effectiveness on the street, not the name of the original master it comes from. Martial arts is as much about the practitioner as it is about origin. Even the most legitimate, sound techniques traced back two thousand years is going to mean nothing if the practitioner is not dedicated to understanding the movement, the human body and the mindset one needs to survive a hostile confrontation. The important things to any system are 'are they effective? can you replicate the movement under stress?' If you can't answer yes to those, then you're just doing something to be doing it and be ready to beg for your life when someone attacks you with a knife, pipe or brick, etc.


----------



## Martial D

Mr. President said:


> This guy in the video is Master Wong. Apparently UK based, he's supposed to be a Wing Chun and JKD expert and has a significant Youtube following crowd. The thing is, I can't find any info on him. No wikipedia profile or any profile of any kind that I saw.
> 
> Is he a respected authority on Wing Chun? Does anyone here know him?



He's a performer that does his own thing. Most of what I've seen from him lately looks more like Keysi than WC.

As for his credentials, seems to be largely autodidactic.


----------



## jazzman3121

Martial D said:


> He's a performer that does his own thing. Most of what I've seen from him lately looks more like Keysi than WC.
> 
> As for his credentials, seems to be largely autodidactic.



Possibly. Wasn't Bruce Lee also self taught in JKD? Was Lee's Wing Chun training background readily recognizable in his JKD techniques?


----------



## Martial D

jazzman3121 said:


> Possibly. Wasn't Bruce Lee also self taught in JKD? Was Lee's Wing Chun training background readily recognizable in his JKD techniques?


Yes, and yes. But I don't know if that's an apt comparison. Wong doesn't actually fight or spar, he is just another in a long line of MA theoreticians..so it's impossible to say if what he does actually works.

But he is entertaining!


----------



## jazzman3121

Martial D said:


> Yes, and yes. But I don't know if that's an apt comparison. Wong doesn't actually fight or spar, he is just another in a long line of MA theoraticians..so it's impossible to say if what he does actually works.
> 
> But he is entertaining!



Yeah I'm not saying Wong is as good as Lee was. The point I'm making is that this thread is basing Wong's technique on his martial arts lineage. Based on my interest in martial arts which is self-defense, I really wouldn't care what the lineage of a style was or a particular artist as long as I can see something that looks effective and I myself can physically replicate the techniques. Effectiveness goes into use, practice and results and no one in their right mind is going to put themselves in a potentially life and death situation to prove their art (as in going out at night into the most dangerous areas hoping to bait an aggressor into trying to kill them). Sparring and even challenge fighting is still not a proof, neither is a struggle for one's life. As far as lineage goes you can look at relatively young arts like BJJ, JKD and Krav Maga. They take older techniques but their systems are very new in comparison to things like Kung Fu or other arts that have been around for a thousand years or more. But does their relative short time in existence automatically eliminate them from being effective? As far as being a 'theoratician', most martial arts is theoretical. The art itself is the theory but the proof is in the artist... Take Mike Tyson as an example. For quite a while he was the most dangerous boxer around but although he obviously had training, his style was not sophisticated, he was just Mike Tyson, lol. Same thing with Lee... I don't think Wing Chun or JKD made Lee phenomenal necessarily, Lee developed phenomenal speed and focus which in my mind, almost made whatever system he practiced immaterial.

Yeah Wong definitely entertains me as well. I have to say though, in my very limited knowledge of martial arts, the various techniques he puts forward as far as self-defense seem to be from a simple, realistic approach. He doesn't spend time trash talking other systems, he doesn't talk himself up as the best thing since the dawn of time... Nor does he name-drop like many others do. Those subtle things are a positive to me.


----------



## Martial D

jazzman3121 said:


> Yeah I'm not saying Wong is as good as Lee was. The point I'm making is that this thread is basing Wong's technique on his martial arts lineage. Based on my interest in martial arts which is self-defense, I really wouldn't care what the lineage of a style was or a particular artist as long as I can see something that looks effective and I myself can physically replicate the techniques. Effectiveness goes into use, practice and results and no one in their right mind is going to put themselves in a potentially life and death situation to prove their art (as in going out at night into the most dangerous areas hoping to bait an aggressor into trying to kill them). Sparring and even challenge fighting is still not a proof, neither is a struggle for one's life. As far as lineage goes you can look at relatively young arts like BJJ, JKD and Krav Maga. They take older techniques but their systems are very new in comparison to things like Kung Fu or other arts that have been around for a thousand years or more. But does their relative short time in existence automatically eliminate them from being effective? As far as being a 'theoratician', most martial arts is theoretical. The art itself is the theory but the proof is in the artist... Take Mike Tyson as an example. For quite a while he was the most dangerous boxer around but although he obviously had training, his style was not sophisticated, he was just Mike Tyson, lol. Same thing with Lee... I don't think Wing Chun or JKD made Lee phenomenal necessarily, Lee developed phenomenal speed and focus which in my mind, almost made whatever system he practiced immaterial.
> 
> Yeah Wong definitely entertains me as well. I have to say though, in my very limited knowledge of martial arts, the various techniques he puts forward as far as self-defense seem to be from a simple, realistic approach. He doesn't spend time trash talking other systems, he doesn't talk himself up as the best thing since the dawn of time... Nor does he name-drop like many others do. Those subtle things are a positive to me.


Wow, you started your reply before I could even edit that spelling mistake, which was immediately, which means it took you 27 minutes to write that. Interesting, but totally beside the point. Anyway...

Im not a guy that thinks MA lineages mean much, I'm far from a traditionalist. So far, in fact, that I write a good portion of so called martial arts off as total bulshido, with the deciding line generally hovering around whether or not the MAist in question actually demonstrates what they do in a pressure testing situation..ie sparring or fighting.

Without that, you are left with what wong does, which is to demonstrate 'techniques' on a human dummy. The problem with that is you can make just about any crap look good if your opponent is co-operating, which is why I say there's no way to tell if Wong is legit or just another theoretician(read-bulshido master)


----------



## geezer

Martial D said:


> Wow, you started your reply *before I could even edit that spelling mistake, which was immediately,* which means it took you 27 minutes to write that. Interesting, but totally beside the point. Anyway...



Hilarious. That (bolded section above) happens to me all the time. It seems like I never see all my typos until after I post. Well, at least we do bother to proof-read and edit. Some don't. I won't mention names ...cough, karateJJ, cough.... 



Martial D said:


> The problem with that is you can make just about any crap look good if your opponent is co-operating, which is why I say there's no way to tell if Wong is legit or just another theoretician(read-bulshido master)



Well said Martial D. Here's a story that kinda relates: My favorite demo partner in my Escrima class is a great guy named Scott. He's old as the hills (same age as me), strong as an ox, and has done martial arts of one kind or another his whole life. Whenever I demo a technique, he instinctively obstructs it. He then apologizes, ...and  then does it again. He can't help himself. Stubborn old bastard! 

So the other day another student in the group saw this happen_ yet again _and asked me why I usually demonstrate on Scott, since we all know he is _such a pain _to work with. I told him that _that's the point_. I'm not trying to look good, I'm trying to be honest. When I can make it work on Scott, you know it really works!


We only begin learning with helpful, _compliant_ partners, then we have to test ourselves with _good_ partners ...who give us honest resistance.


----------



## Bino TWT

Master Wong said he didn't want to have the lineage politics involved in what he does, and his Si-Fu prefers to remain unnamed. I've looked at some of the instructional videos of his course, and his Siu Nim Tao is clearly Pan Nam Wing Chun.  A lot of people "See" Biu Tze at the beginning of the form, and notice that they start right arm first, but that's just how they do things. 












This is Pan Nam Siu Nim Tao





Here's one of the grading videos performed by one of his students of his online course:


----------



## Martial D

Bino TWT said:


> Master Wong said he didn't want to have the lineage politics involved in what he does, and his Si-Fu prefers to remain unnamed. I've looked at some of the instructional videos of his course, and his Siu Nim Tao is clearly Pan Nam Wing Chun.  A lot of people "See" Biu Tze at the beginning of the form, and notice that they start right arm first, but that's just how they do things.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Pan Nam Siu Nim Tao
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's one of the grading videos performed by one of his students of his online course:


Undoubtedly pan nam, you are correct. It's a very distinctive style.

He is very (suspiciously) guarded about how and where he learned it, and has an unusual way of doing some of the motions, which leads me to believe he might be self taught.

Not that that is necessarily a bad thing, many self taught fighters and self made systems are quite good(in fact, every fighting style had to be 'self taught' originally, right?)

What he shows in his videos these days doesn't look much like WC though. His answer to everything is to rush with a keysi pensador up which isn't something I'd ever do that's for sure. Your mileage may vary on that, who knows.


----------



## Bino TWT

Yeah he does have a very... distinct way of his application. Some I agree with, some I don't. But I can't say for certain if that's just him or a Pan Nam thing.


----------



## Martial D

Bino TWT said:


> Yeah he does have a very... distinct way of his application. Some I agree with, some I don't. But I can't say for certain if that's just him or a Pan Nam thing.


Ya, that's hard to say. Especially, as you've probably noticed as a WC sifu, the lineages of WC seem to drift further and further apart as time goes on.


----------



## Bino TWT

Not only that, but I know several high level Sifu's with the same Sifu. They all learned the exact same curriculum and teach the exact same curriculum. But the way they interpret and apply the system is very different. Crossing hands, everyone has their own Chi Sao thumb print. So you look look at the form and say "oh that's (insert lineage here)", but in action it can be quite a bit different to tell. And generally the higher level the practitioner, the more it's "their" Kung Fu in application.


----------



## jazzman3121

Martial D said:


> Wow, you started your reply before I could even edit that spelling mistake, which was immediately, which means it took you 27 minutes to write that. Interesting, but totally beside the point. Anyway...
> 
> Im not a guy that thinks MA lineages mean much, I'm far from a traditionalist. So far, in fact, that I write a good portion of so called martial arts off as total bulshido, with the deciding line generally hovering around whether or not the MAist in question actually demonstrates what they do in a pressure testing situation..ie sparring or fighting.
> 
> Without that, you are left with what wong does, which is to demonstrate 'techniques' on a human dummy. The problem with that is you can make just about any crap look good if your opponent is co-operating, which is why I say there's no way to tell if Wong is legit or just another theoretician(read-bulshido master)



Lol, well as you can tell when I get into an interesting subject I like to converse and discuss 

I'm with you on sparring/fighting to a degree... When I was really into training before life got busy, I used to really enjoy sparring. It does offer the slight added pressure of trying to get to your opponent without giving him or her too much opportunity for what might be 'scored' as a good blow. I viewed sparring as fun, a chance to put what I could do against another but there where other practitioner students who really didn't like sparring at all, they didn't like that pressure. They felt intimidated and feared to hurt another person, thus their techniques wouldn't have hurt a fly because they would not engage (with control) to the extent where at 105% they're dealing pain and incapacitation. For them, they practiced martial arts for the conditioning aspect, learning a skill and maybe some self-defense techniques but they didn't have the same attitude I and just a couple others had, which was this is the **** I may have to use so I need to know how it feels to do it against another person full-speed to connect my mind with my reflexes and when I get hit with a technique I need to feel what it will feel like for my opponent, what hurts and what stops a fight. Ok, you're probably with me on my view of sparring but there is a huge proportion of people who have an interest in martial arts (I would estimate maybe 40%) but they don't understand that in training that activity there can be slight injury, bruises, maybe a slight cut, black eye here and there, bruised or broken nose (when you forget to keep your hands up like I did in a tourney.)  These people have the expectation that they can engage in this activity without going home having to ice something and when they do actually get hurt they quit very soon after. It's not reasonable to me but it is to them. Martial artists promote what they do in order to maintain a business but they have to understand their audience. Ok, this doesn't have much to do with Wong himself, he could spar other artists as in tourney style with relaxed contact rules but in the dojo, a lot of instructors forgo some of the training I went through because they want to keep students and maintain a good amount of dues revenue. So you don't see for the most part Ippon Kumite full blast like I did where a Black Belt is paired up with a white and as a newbie, you gotta block that punch (which you don't have the reflexes yet anyway) or your chest is red and welted. That stuff doesn't fly anymore, for whatever reason, good or bad, that's just not what people expect. So you see a lot of the 'half speed' demo in instruction, it's lame but that's why. 

Ok, now to sparring as in testing your art as an instructor or whatever... Even sparring does not replicate a conflict where a person in whatever context is out to hurt you, to get what you have or because they don't like you and while they may not intend to kill you, they certainly don't care how you end up, brain damage, broken face, whatever. It's like saying that a good boxer in the ring is automatically an expert at self defense. In the ring, sparring or pro or whatever, there has to be rules so that participants have the reasonable expectation that they'll survive the match, without losing an eye, a nut or having their neck broken. Even MMA has rules, otherwise you could see biting, eye gouge, etc... Everything has application in context I believe (expect for the real bullshido crap) but for self defense you have to look at defending against different styles other than your own, how you fight a grappler, shootfighter, kickboxer, etc. Martial arts that I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in would be those who really don't explore countering different styles and years ago when I was doing Shotokan Karate, we didn't get that it was all forms and basic punch, block and kick. If I had made it to a Brown Belt in that, I would have been way underprepared and probably over confident. A senior belt but with no exposure in countering other types of fighters. (I would imagine that now most Karate instruction offers that in their curriculum with the arrival of MMA.)

I get your point and I agree a little on what you've said but my counter is that ANY marital arts that presents what they call self-defense (for protecting your life) techniques is going to be theoretical. That is until you have to use it in real life, then you'll know. I don't think a lot of folks would be willing to test their stuff for real by being dropped off in the worst neighborhood with nothing but their fists to test their rank and expertise, lol. Now some folks will say they've been in fights and they've used this and that but you really still don't know the whole story, if that technique is what allowed their survival or was it just the person was super tough. From my experience, a person under stress is going to do only what they've trained in with MUCH repetition, what is simple for their mind to get their body to do when their adrenaline is up, their fight or flight response is pinging yadda yadda.. You can have the best technical, intricate stuff but in the split second you have to do something you're stuck, trying figure out do you wanna do this strike or the other, this hold or the other, blah blah blah. Or the conflict goes on for more than 20 seconds and you're gassed and your legs and arms feel like lead...

Anyway, I'll admit to ya'll if Wong came to L.A. and the cost wasn't crazy, I'd definitely do a seminar. I think many things can be considered and weighed for possible use. Some styles look amazing and look pretty damn effective but I can't do them, TKD and Hwarang Do special kicks for example. Those kicks can break stuff but I got a 3" inch vertical right now so those won't work, lol. I doubt he'll come to LA anyway and even if he did, the cost would probably be crazy. Not because Wong is necessarily greedy but martial arts instruction in general has become ridiculous in my view... Where I'm at you're easily looking at about 200/mon to train somewhere that has a million students per class, 1 hour session, 2-3 times a week. If you want something where you can actually learn, then it's 100/hour private instruction or even small 3-4 person group.


----------



## jazzman3121

geezer said:


> Hilarious. That (bolded section above) happens to me all the time. It seems like I never see all my typos until after I post. Well, at least we do bother to proof-read and edit. Some don't. I won't mention names ...cough, karateJJ, cough....
> 
> 
> 
> Well said Martial D. Here's a story that kinda relates: My favorite demo partner in my Escrima class is a great guy named Scott. He's old as the hills (same age as me), strong as an ox, and has done martial arts of one kind or another his whole life. Whenever I demo a technique, he instinctively obstructs it. He then apologizes, ...and  then does it again. He can't help himself. Stubborn old bastard!
> 
> So the other day another student in the group saw this happen_ yet again _and asked me why I usually demonstrate on Scott, since we all know he is _such a pain _to work with. I told him that _that's the point_. I'm not trying to look good, I'm trying to be honest. When I can make it work on Scott, you know it really works!
> 
> 
> We only begin learning with helpful, _compliant_ partners, then we have to test ourselves with _good_ partners ...who give us honest resistance.



Yup, I totally agree with that... That's why it's great to switch training partners often as well so you don't get into anticipating each other and just going through the motions. It's a skill being a good drill partner, meaning you don't give away anything and cheat your partner


----------



## wingchun100

In a lot of his videos, he starts out his defense with Bong Sao, which to me is...odd. If someone came at ME with a straight punch, Bong Sao would not be my first technique of choice. I'd rather do Pak Sao or Gum Sao. Still, he can be entertaining.


----------



## KPM

wingchun100 said:


> In a lot of his videos, he starts out his defense with Bong Sao, which to me is...odd. If someone came at ME with a straight punch, Bong Sao would not be my first technique of choice. I'd rather do Pak Sao or Gum Sao. Still, he can be entertaining.



If your hands are low relative to the incoming punch and it is "crossing your bridge", then a Bong Sau is appropriate and makes more sense then swinging your hand out and back in with a Pak Sau.


----------



## wingchun100

KPM said:


> If your hands are low relative to the incoming punch and it is "crossing your bridge", then a Bong Sau is appropriate and makes more sense then swinging your hand out and back in with a Pak Sau.



I guess. In those situations, I would do something more like Biu Sao or Tak Sao.


----------



## Bino TWT

wingchun100 said:


> In a lot of his videos, he starts out his defense with Bong Sao, which to me is...odd. If someone came at ME with a straight punch, Bong Sao would not be my first technique of choice. I'd rather do Pak Sao or Gum Sao. Still, he can be entertaining.



If someone came at me with a straight punch, I would punch... But I agree, my Bong Sao is triggered, not just thrown out there.


----------



## wayfaring

Bino TWT said:


> If someone came at me with a straight punch, I would punch... But I agree, my Bong Sao is triggered, not just thrown out there.


yes triggered as in the shape from dan chi sau.


----------



## wayfaring

jazzman3121 said:


> Lol, well as you can tell when I get into an interesting subject I like to converse and discuss
> 
> I'm with you on sparring/fighting to a degree... When I was really into training before life got busy, I used to really enjoy sparring. It does offer the slight added pressure of trying to get to your opponent without giving him or her too much opportunity for what might be 'scored' as a good blow. I viewed sparring as fun, a chance to put what I could do against another but there where other practitioner students who really didn't like sparring at all, they didn't like that pressure. They felt intimidated and feared to hurt another person, thus their techniques wouldn't have hurt a fly because they would not engage (with control) to the extent where at 105% they're dealing pain and incapacitation. For them, they practiced martial arts for the conditioning aspect, learning a skill and maybe some self-defense techniques but they didn't have the same attitude I and just a couple others had, which was this is the **** I may have to use so I need to know how it feels to do it against another person full-speed to connect my mind with my reflexes and when I get hit with a technique I need to feel what it will feel like for my opponent, what hurts and what stops a fight. Ok, you're probably with me on my view of sparring but there is a huge proportion of people who have an interest in martial arts (I would estimate maybe 40%) but they don't understand that in training that activity there can be slight injury, bruises, maybe a slight cut, black eye here and there, bruised or broken nose (when you forget to keep your hands up like I did in a tourney.)  These people have the expectation that they can engage in this activity without going home having to ice something and when they do actually get hurt they quit very soon after. It's not reasonable to me but it is to them. Martial artists promote what they do in order to maintain a business but they have to understand their audience. Ok, this doesn't have much to do with Wong himself, he could spar other artists as in tourney style with relaxed contact rules but in the dojo, a lot of instructors forgo some of the training I went through because they want to keep students and maintain a good amount of dues revenue. So you don't see for the most part Ippon Kumite full blast like I did where a Black Belt is paired up with a white and as a newbie, you gotta block that punch (which you don't have the reflexes yet anyway) or your chest is red and welted. That stuff doesn't fly anymore, for whatever reason, good or bad, that's just not what people expect. So you see a lot of the 'half speed' demo in instruction, it's lame but that's why.
> 
> Ok, now to sparring as in testing your art as an instructor or whatever... Even sparring does not replicate a conflict where a person in whatever context is out to hurt you, to get what you have or because they don't like you and while they may not intend to kill you, they certainly don't care how you end up, brain damage, broken face, whatever. It's like saying that a good boxer in the ring is automatically an expert at self defense. In the ring, sparring or pro or whatever, there has to be rules so that participants have the reasonable expectation that they'll survive the match, without losing an eye, a nut or having their neck broken. Even MMA has rules, otherwise you could see biting, eye gouge, etc... Everything has application in context I believe (expect for the real bullshido crap) but for self defense you have to look at defending against different styles other than your own, how you fight a grappler, shootfighter, kickboxer, etc. Martial arts that I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in would be those who really don't explore countering different styles and years ago when I was doing Shotokan Karate, we didn't get that it was all forms and basic punch, block and kick. If I had made it to a Brown Belt in that, I would have been way underprepared and probably over confident. A senior belt but with no exposure in countering other types of fighters. (I would imagine that now most Karate instruction offers that in their curriculum with the arrival of MMA.)
> 
> I get your point and I agree a little on what you've said but my counter is that ANY marital arts that presents what they call self-defense (for protecting your life) techniques is going to be theoretical. That is until you have to use it in real life, then you'll know. I don't think a lot of folks would be willing to test their stuff for real by being dropped off in the worst neighborhood with nothing but their fists to test their rank and expertise, lol. Now some folks will say they've been in fights and they've used this and that but you really still don't know the whole story, if that technique is what allowed their survival or was it just the person was super tough. From my experience, a person under stress is going to do only what they've trained in with MUCH repetition, what is simple for their mind to get their body to do when their adrenaline is up, their fight or flight response is pinging yadda yadda.. You can have the best technical, intricate stuff but in the split second you have to do something you're stuck, trying figure out do you wanna do this strike or the other, this hold or the other, blah blah blah. Or the conflict goes on for more than 20 seconds and you're gassed and your legs and arms feel like lead...
> snip.


There's a lot of ways to train.   The less rules you have to deal with the less what you are doing will adapt to deal with said rules.  The history of MMA, besides Bruce we have vale tudo in Brazil - less rules than MMA.  All that keeps it real.  If you never take the time to keep it real you don't have practice runs to scale up under pressure.

Is much of it theory until you're in a self defense situation?  Sure, at least the mental portion of it no matter how realistically you train.  

And people can train a lot of ways.  I like to keep it real somehow as much as I can.


----------

