# Gate theory & Wing Chun



## Tensei85 (Sep 27, 2009)

Sei Mun - Luk Mun 

I'm curious (sorry I'm having an extrospective day) but at what point do you feel it is important to teach the Student the Gate theory as applied in Wing Chun training methodology?

From the get go?, through verbal conceptualization?
Through training the form for more of a body identity realization?
Through drilling with more realistic environments?

And how do you divide the body into quadrants? Is it based on Sei Mun (4 gates) or Luk Mun (6 gates) or neither, or both?

I've also seen some lineages divide the body based on half's 1 is "Death Gate" & the other is "Life Gate" I've seen this in Tong Long Kuen as well.

Or just any opinions are great & well respected, thanks in advance.


----------



## geezer (Sep 27, 2009)

Tensei85 said:


> Sei Mun - Luk Mun
> 
> I'm curious (sorry I'm having an extrospective day) but at what point do you feel it is important to teach the Student the Gate theory as applied in Wing Chun training methodology?
> 
> ...


 
Hey Tensei, Did you see that thread I started about _pragmatists_ vs. _theoreticians?_ Well this thread just got me wondering...

Anyway, if I understand you, the question is basically: "Four gates, six gates, or fogeddaboutit and hit the guy?"

We basically break it down into inside gate and outside gate, high, middle and low. _Is that six?_ Or, since the lowest shots are defended by the legs, for normal chi-sau with the hands, we are concerned with the inside and outside gates of the upper two levels... _so I guess that makes four_... unless you count right and left inside and outside separately then you'd have _eight,_ or including the lower (leg) zone, in which case you'd get _twelve_... 

_Hell, fogeddaboutit and just hit the guy._


----------



## Tensei85 (Sep 27, 2009)

geezer said:


> Hey Tensei, Did you see that thread I started about _pragmatists_ vs. _theoreticians?_ Well this thread just got me wondering...
> 
> Anyway, if I understand you, the question is basically: "Four gates, six gates, or fogeddaboutit and hit the guy?"
> 
> ...


 
Haha! Yea, I'm guilty as charged. I would have to say unfortunately I fall into the latter of the two categories you mentioned. Maybe I have an intrinsic mind or just lack of knocking people around, not quite sure... however I thought your points were well stated and a lot of validity to what you said, so thanks.

Personally not to side track the thread but I would say that it's acceptable to have tendencies towards both a pragmatist & a theoretician, even though by nature a person tends to fall into 1 of the 2 categories. As long as a theoretician you don't lose sight of the whole point of training! And get lost in all the endless conceptual mumbo jumbo, & political jargon that tends to go with it. 

"I guess it all just depends on what your goals are, and what one intends to do with there training in the 1st place"


----------

