# 100% _ing _un!



## chinaboxer (Sep 14, 2010)

i know i'll probably get alot of huff and guff from this post, but i wanted to share with everyone my thoughts on _ing _un, because i get so many emails every day on the subject.

almost all arguments on the subject can be traced back to everyone focusing on what's "different" between one method over the other. which ultimately leads to arguments over "my lineage is the right lineage.", "_ing _un is the right way to spell it", arguments over forms, shifting, terminology, training methods, politics, fighting etc..this really makes me shake my head wondering WTF happened to the _ing _un community? when we should be focusing on "what's similar" which are the core concepts.

how can any other martial arts in the world take us seriously when we can't even decide what's right, what's wrong, who's right, who's wrong, let alone what to call it!..so confusing. we have definitely become one of the more laughed at methods because of it all and that is why i've decided to post my thoughts. 

it really does make me mad, because _ing _un is so frigin awesome! and this is coming from someone who has studied non stop in many martial arts methods since age 14, for over 25 years STRAIGHT, no breaks, no time off, always looking for the better, more efficient way. so here goes nothing..

the answer to every single question regarding _ing _un is really the answering of one simple observation.

does "it" adhere to the core concepts that make _ing _un work, ALL THE TIME. (all the time is the key part of the phrase) 

if the answer is "yes" then it has to be 100% correct, because _ing _un is completely concept based and not a "style". but what i often see are folks that use the concepts, only when it fits their needs but not at other times when it doesn't, so they end up contradicting themselves.

this leads me ultimately to another question, "what do you feel are the core concepts of _ing _un?"


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 14, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> i know i'll probably get alot of huff and guff from this post, but i wanted to share with everyone my thoughts on _ing _un, because i get so many emails every day on the subject.
> 
> Almost all arguments on the subject can be traced back to everyone focusing on what's "different" between one method over the other. Which ultimately leads to arguments over "my lineage is the right lineage.", "_ing _un is the right way to spell it", arguments over forms, shifting, terminology, training methods, politics, fighting etc..this really makes me shake my head wondering wtf happened to the _ing _un community? When we should be focusing on "what's similar" which are the core concepts.
> 
> ...


 

simplicity
directness
economy of movement
minimum use of brute strength
practicality


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 14, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> i know i'll probably get alot of huff and guff from this post, but i wanted to share with everyone my thoughts on _ing _un, because i get so many emails every day on the subject.
> 
> almost all arguments on the subject can be traced back to everyone focusing on what's "different" between one method over the other. which ultimately leads to arguments over "my lineage is the right lineage.", "_ing _un is the right way to spell it", arguments over forms, shifting, terminology, training methods, politics, fighting etc..this really makes me shake my head wondering WTF happened to the _ing _un community? when we should be focusing on "what's similar" which are the core concepts.
> 
> ...


 
I love your passion. 

The sad thing is, 
Wing chun has only a few fixed moves. Unlike karate or BJJ, a lot of techniques in wing chun can be performed differently (different energy, different structure). 

This means there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to discussing a lot of wing chun techniques. It comes down to what works for you. 

Ip Man used to teach his students differently from each other which led to the misconception that they were all taught something special

Personally I love and embrace the differences between wing chun schools (different theories, often lead to the student having to think about the moves more). 
If you look at it this way  many arts will teach you a list of moves and make you do them in lines with just one explanation as to why they work. This is okay (and does produce good martial artists). 

However, arts like wing chun, where there are several different ways of doing things, allows students a choice as well as a greater understanding about how wing chun works

Thats my two cents worth anyway. I think most of the bickering has started to die down over the past few years, and a lot of chunners are a lot more open minded


----------



## seasoned (Sep 14, 2010)

Solid principles first, then individuality next within that frame work. should be that way with all MA. Sorry to butt in, but.........

1 Structure   (body alignment)
2 breath       (corresponding with technique)
3 movement  (using the above will produce balance and power)

I always check out the Wing Chun threads and find them interesting.


----------



## l_uk3y (Sep 14, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> simplicity
> directness
> economy of movement
> minimum use of brute strength
> practicality



My answer exactly.


----------



## wkmark (Sep 14, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> simplicity
> directness
> economy of movement
> minimum use of brute strength
> practicality



The above would be my answer as well.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 14, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> i know i'll probably get alot of huff and guff from this post, but i wanted to share with everyone my thoughts on _ing _un, because i get so many emails every day on the subject.
> 
> almost all arguments on the subject can be traced back to everyone focusing on what's "different" between one method over the other. which ultimately leads to arguments over "my lineage is the right lineage.", "_ing _un is the right way to spell it", arguments over forms, shifting, terminology, training methods, politics, fighting etc..this really makes me shake my head wondering WTF happened to the _ing _un community? when we should be focusing on "what's similar" which are the core concepts.
> 
> ...



By focusing on what is common, the differences in each lineage would be much more pronounced.

I've studied/dabbled in a few arts Jin, and I can say that type of mentality is far from being _ing __un exculsive.  Karate has it, TKD/TSD has it, BJJ has it to some degree, and JKD breeds it!!!



Centerline
Economy of Motion
Trapping
Sensitivity
Relaxation
Structure


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 14, 2010)

1. Centerline theory                      
2. Immoveable elbow                    
3. Lin sil die dar theory                
4. Economy of motion concept      
5. Straight line attack
6. Trapping hands
7. Face to face concept
8. The four corners concept
9. Bridge hand concept
10. Triangle concept

Additionally,

Intercepting (jeet).  Cutting.  Natural wedge.

Stickyness (chi).  Stay with what comes, follow through as it retreats, thrust forward as the hand is freed.  Net of energy.  Arrow drawn back in bow.

Flowing like Water.

Timing.  Last second redirection after opponents commitment instead of stopping energy.


----------



## Steve (Sep 14, 2010)

Kamon Guy said:


> I love your passion.
> 
> The sad thing is,
> Wing chun has only a few fixed moves. Unlike karate or BJJ, a lot of techniques in wing chun can be performed differently (different energy, different structure).
> ...


In what way do you think this is different from BJJ (or Karate)?  Can you be more specific?


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 14, 2010)

before this post gets sidetracked..i wanted to clarify something. as many of you know that my website is dedicated to teaching wing chun and BJJ, although i have studied many other arts such as Jun Fan JKD, Shooto, Kali, Aikido, Judo, Okinawa Te, Hsing-I, Tai Chi and Bagua. but i have distilled my martial arts journey to only wing chun and BJJ at this present time.

the reason is because wing chun and BJJ share EXACTLY the same concepts, both wing chun and BJJ are completely concept based martial arts methods that rely on high level sensitivity and changes within the body. people will argue with me about this, but all i can say is "have you studied both EXTENSIVELY for a very very long time?" or are your opinions based on what you see on the UFC and Youtube Videos or the occasional grappling session with your older brother?

it goes back to the post about kali and wing chun, where i said to be very careful what you include into your wing chun or else it will hinder your progress..well, that's what i've done, the research, the homework, that's why i've deliberately simplified my training into wing chun and BJJ, because, at the highest levels, they are exactly the same.


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 14, 2010)

okay..back to the OP's post..oh wait..that's my post!  i'm reading the replies and it's piqued my interest. this may be one of the most important posts regarding the future of _ing _un's future! ugh..i hate calling it that, now you guys realize why i just call it Chinese Boxing, to avoid all the crap.

i'm starting to realize that the core concepts of _ing _un are way too vague, and maybe..just maybe that's one of the reasons that this art gets so wayward. it's open to too much interpretation.

for instance, "economy of movement" is definitely a good concept, but couldn't that apply to ANY martial art? couldn't a boxer who uses a hook to counter a jab say the same thing? can we really call this a _ing _un concept?

in other words, i'm looking for the "CORE concepts", only the ESSENTIAL concepts that are unique to _ing _un. that are described in a detailed manner which makes it very clear of it's meaning, and not described by using "red boats" or "flowery spring" or any prose which can also be interpreted many different ways.

also remember that i am trying to find the core concepts that MUST be applied "at all times" during "all movements" at "every single moment" during a chunner's training.

this is my challenge to all of you and also myself! what are these core concepts unique to chunners and how can they be defined so that they are clear in their meaning? I'm dead serious, let's lock ourselves in a frigin room and not come out until we figure this out. because there is one thing we all agree on, and that is this.._ing _un is a concept based method, so isn't it important to figure this out? this is why in my tutorial, i am always trying to make things "clear", and avoid being vague. by using examples such as "wear the heavy backpack" or "lifting from the back of the shovel and not the front" etc..to help explain sometimes complex concepts.

this has been my number one challenge as a Chinese Boxing instructor and student, to simplify the art, to remove the nonsense, trim the fat and get to the "essence" of it. instead i see the reverse happening to _ing _un today, the curriculum becomes so ridiculously long, forcing students to remember counters to counters to counters. it seems so backwards to me.

i know you guys are getting tired of my ranting so i'll leave you with the words of Yip Man...

"With Kung Fu, the simpler, the better. Grandmaster Leung Jan's last words were, "I spent the whole of my life trying to make Wing Chun simpler, but I was not successful".


----------



## seasoned (Sep 14, 2010)

Something told me I was in the wrong thread but I extended the hand anyways. :shrug:


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 14, 2010)

seasoned said:


> Solid principles (concepts) first, then individuality (differences in feel) next within that frame work. should be that way with all MA. Sorry to butt in, but.........
> 
> 1 Structure   (body alignment)
> 2 breath       (corresponding with technique)
> ...


i don't even think he's a chunner but he's is 100% right! i added the parentheticals in his quote. THAT is exactly why the similarities (concepts) must be sorted out FIRST and then individuality or what we call the "differences" from chunner to chunner comes AFTER. so let's help each other out by figuring out what these "core concepts" are and define them, this would be the first major step in uniting the _ing _un community! IMO


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 14, 2010)

Before you can go comparing Wing Chun to different arts saying how the concepts are exactly the same one must realise that there are different lineages of Wing Chun.

From what I have gathered from my time on these forums some of these lineages and their ways of doing things for eg stance etc are so different from my own that they might as well be a whole different style altogether .

The issue of stance might not seem that important , but in terms of how the mechanics of the system works and how I can exert pressure on my opponent through that stance make it vitally important

You seem to be making comparisons based on a very American-centric point of view of Wing Chun.

Yes other arts may strive for economy of movement within the context of their own style , but none will take it to the Nth degree as Wing Chun has , because nothing will beat a straight line from my centreline to your centreline. 

Someone mentioned breathing corresponding with technique , in our lineage we are taught to just breathe naturally.

A lot of different arts have sensitivity drills so in that respect Wing Chun and BJJ have common ground but beyond that I don't think there is too much that is similar.

I am no BJJ expert but I have done Wing Chun for quite awhile , it is with the principle of _minimum use of brute strength_ that I see there is a parting of the ways.

In BJJ I see a lot of muscle contracting type movements , thighs clamped around torsos , biceps contracting and elbows squeezing together to cinch up chokes , trying to pull on arms for arm bars etc , whilst they are very efficient in what they do an element of strength is involved.

In contrast Wing Chun apart from when striking , _the optimum angle_ will always be maintained in the arms , if anything there will only be expansion of the angles , Wing Chun mainly depends on the skeletal system itself to support its technques.

When movements are executed the angle of the joint is maintained and the whole mass of the limb does the work not small muscle groups.
At the higher levels of Wing Chun in our lineage this brings us into very esoteric territory where hardly any muscular effort is required at all and the techniques are powered by Nim Lik ( Wing Chun Thought Force ).
For those of us in the TST lineage attaining Nim Lik is the ultimate goal of our training , to be able to generate immense power in attacking and defensive techniques without muscular effort.

This force comes from the brain and is cultivated by proper training in Sil Lum Tao form with the internal contraction Tei Gong , at an elementary level it is the ability to relax muscle groups at will and transfer ones body weight into any part of your attacking or defending limb.
For the attacker it feels once contact is made that he is not just contending with your defending limb but the weight of your whole body.

Now people might dismiss this as some sort of chi ******** , but it is not , it is nothing fanciful it is just the result of years of training in Sil Lum Tao form learning to fully concentrate the mind , fully relaxing the muscles in conjunction with the proper Wing Chun body mechanics and stance.


----------



## BloodMoney (Sep 14, 2010)

Choy Siu Kwong called our branch VC instead of WC because he said WC stood for water closet! Not all reasons for uses of different names are that relevant, many times its just a guy trying to make his school distinguishable from others in the area etc. Here we call "our" line of clubs, ones that originated from Choy Siu Kwong/Greg Tsoi and Kevin Earle, VCK (Ving Chun Kuen) so that everyone thats under the same banner knows they can go to affiliate schools etc. 

I call the art Wing Chun when talking generically, but Ving Tsun or VCK or NZWC or whatever the particular academy/lineage wants to be called individually.



> this leads me ultimately to another question, "what do you feel are the core concepts of _ing _un?"



-Conservation of energy
-Economy of movement
-Simultaneous attack and defense

I see most others as specifics of the more broader terms above really.


----------



## Steve (Sep 14, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> I am no BJJ expert but I have done Wing Chun for quite awhile...


I'm enjoying the thread, but this pretty much says it all.  

Since you are admittedly not a BJJ expert, why don't you stick to talking about what wing chun is and isn't and leave other styles of it?


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 14, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> I'm enjoying the thread, but this pretty much says it all.
> 
> Since you are admittedly not a BJJ expert, why don't you stick to talking about what wing chun is and isn't and leave other styles of it?


 
Oh , Ok so I'm not permitted  to have observations on other martial systems. 

 As a Wing Chun exponent of 20 years and instructor I do  have a little understanding of how power is generated and the strengths and  anatomical weaknesses of the human body.

So with that knowledge I can look at other systems and see how the force is genereated and how it is applied , I may not know the exact ins and outs of the technique but I will have a rough idea.

This is an insight you gain from years of Wing Chun training.


----------



## bully (Sep 15, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> I'm enjoying the thread, but this pretty much says it all.
> 
> *Since you are admittedly not a BJJ expert*, why don't you stick to talking about what wing chun is and isn't and leave other styles of it?


 
You obviously are Steve so why dont you chip in to either back up or dismiss what Jin and MJM have said about BJJ so we get your take on BJJ and WC? Rather than just tell someone to shut up??

There must be something in it as Kevin Chan also pairs them together and he knows his onions.

I dont know enough about the subtleties of WC but I feel it is often over complicated to stop people learning the system too quickly and for financial gain in some individuals systems. When I say learn , I mean learn and not master.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 15, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> Before you can go comparing Wing Chun to different arts saying how the concepts are exactly the same one must realise that there are different lineages of Wing Chun.
> 
> From what I have gathered from my time on these forums some of these lineages and their ways of doing things for eg stance etc are so different from my own that they might as well be a whole different style altogether .
> 
> ...




MJM, not all of the guards in BJJ are the closed guard, which is what you see mostly in the UFC.  It is easier to use and defend at the beginning/MMA levels of BJJ.  If you look at the open guard, butterfly guard, or maybe even others I don't know of, the bottom have of the body is actually doing Chi Gerk and the upper is doing Chi Sau.  BJJ guys are using sensitivity in their legs and body to monitor, feel, and follow their opponent.  Many of their limb attacks begin with off centering/disrupting your opponents base, and body structure must be good or their submissions will not work.  Personally, in my eternally beginner level Wing Chun (under 2 yrs in the art) I see a lot of benefit Wing Chun brings to my grappling, although I cannot call my grappling BJJ so much as JKD or MMA grappling.  Also, the chokes and locks do not take hardly any strength at all whatsoever, rather using arms or legs as levers.  All forms wrestling do, but not the Japanese Jujutsu derived Brazillian Jiujitsu.  Smaller people can use it to overcome larger and stronger opponents on the ground....kind of like that one Chinese style from Southern China popularized by Bruce Lee and Master Ip Man.

These days, I look at the grappling as something fun to do and GREAT exercise.  I enjoy it as much as a great game of chess or FreeCell or Stratego and if I find myself on the ground in a tough spot, I can use it to get back to my feet and biugee the snot outta some dudes throat and eyeballs or stay on the ground and do it! :ultracool


----------



## yak sao (Sep 15, 2010)

I am a product of the LT/EB branch, though no longer affiliated with either.
Much of the de-simplifying of WT has everything to do with money.
I think, what started out as a way of categorizing/ organizing the system, snowballed into an enormous money making pyramid.

In HK, LT originally had 10 levels of acievment.
When it got to Europe, KK added 12 student grades to the forefront. Also added were 2 more instructor grades, for a total of 24 levels. 
Well, with all these new grades, you now need cirriculum to fill.

I now study with a former HK student of LT, and for the last few years it has been my goal to simplify and strip away all these artificial trappings.
No easy task.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 15, 2010)

Those who are good at BJJ do not need ANY strength

Obviously there is a degree of muscle power, but you do not need to train to force this on. 

The best personal example is when I train with Kevin Chan - the guy is probably a third of my size and uses no strength at all when he rolls with me (if he did I would crush him!!)

A lot of the BJJ moulds VERY well into the wing chun (so much so, that often you cannot distinguish what is wing chun and what is BJJ). If you look at good BJJ based cagefighters like Georges St Pierre, they use very little energy to slip guards etc

Strength can help BJJ, but it is definately not essential. 

The leverage (joint locking etc) often comes from the body as opposed to muscles. There is a great clip on youtube of Mauricio teaching a triangle choke and he explains how it is leverage (rather than you trying to crush your opponent with muscles in your legs)

Mook Jong does know his stuff in wing chun, but it is always worth having a look around at other arts (rather than solely watch a youtube clip)


----------



## Steve (Sep 15, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> Oh , Ok so I'm not permitted to have observations on other martial systems.
> 
> As a Wing Chun exponent of 20 years and instructor I do have a little understanding of how power is generated and the strengths and anatomical weaknesses of the human body.
> 
> ...


The only point I'm making is that you're admitting that you don't know much about BJJ, but then go on to draw some pretty detailed conclusions on the style that I believe are wrong.  I didn't go into details only because I didn't want to derail an otherwise very interesting thread.





			
				bully said:
			
		

> You obviously are Steve so why dont you chip in to either back up or dismiss what Jin and MJM have said about BJJ so we get your take on BJJ and WC? Rather than just tell someone to shut up??
> 
> There must be something in it as Kevin Chan also pairs them together and he knows his onions.
> 
> I dont know enough about the subtleties of WC but I feel it is often over complicated to stop people learning the system too quickly and for financial gain in some individuals systems. When I say learn , I mean learn and not master.


See above.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 15, 2010)

I am not saying that the two cannot work well together , what I am saying is that you must remain cognisant of the fact that you are either doing one or the other .

The same as I can recognise the fact that I when I am doing Chi Sau most of the opponents force is supported by my skeletal system and absorbed down into my stance.
I am aware that my muscles are relaxed , and I am not using strength.

Once I leave the Chi Sau range and choose to enter into close range vertical grappling the angles of my arms must close to accomodate the proximity of the opponent as we tie up and no doubt my posture will change as well from being upright to more of a leaning posture.

So right away I have lost the optimum angles in my arms , the structure is gone because my back is no longer straight and my vertebrae is no longer  stacked on top of each other , and I am supporting a lot of the opponents weight with the muscles of my lower back.

On the ground there will be other issues to contend with as my pivoting is now pretty much rendered useless , Wing Chun is meant to work with the body vertical , two feet planted on the ground , pidgeon toed , spine straight and the thighs acting as shock absorbers , the triangular structure of the legs and the arms focusing force to a point on the centreline approximately the distance of your out stretched arm.

The mechanics of the two systems are different and the ways of using leverage are different there maybe attributes that overlap , but don't kid yourself that you are doing Wing Chun on the ground.

You are doing Wing Chun when you are standing up and in your stance and your arms are in the correct angles , when you are on the ground you are using Bjj.
There is nothing wrong with training in both , but realise you are changing gears when going from one to the other. 

 Generating and overcoming force in Wing Chun is predicated on the fact that we have both feet on the ground and we are in our stance.


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 15, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> I am not saying that the two cannot work well together , what I am saying is that you must remain cognisant of the fact that you are either doing one or the other .
> 
> The same as I can recognise the fact that I when I am doing Chi Sau most of the opponents force is supported by my skeletal system and absorbed down into my stance.
> I am aware that my muscles are relaxed , and I am not using strength.
> ...


no no no no no...you are 100% wrong, the EXACT same structure is used standing up or on the ground. The EXACT same shifting, hip movement, body alignment, developing "body structure", spine straight, maintaining space, eating space, elbows in, knees in etc...are used in both standing and on the ground. Wing Chun and BJJ are EXACTLY the same, why? because they are both "concept" based martial arts and follow the EXACT concepts. they both develop "body structure" and gain power from that structure through the elbows, i know this for a fact because i do both and have done both for a very long time.

now with that said, yes, there are MANY grapplers who muscle and speed their way, there are many grapplers who focus on technique rather than structure and concepts. but can't that be said for wing chun practitioners as well? the ONLY way i would be able to convince you is for us to train together, other than that, i know it will be hard to convince you otherwise.


----------



## Poor Uke (Sep 15, 2010)

> the EXACT same structure is used standing up or on the ground.


 
Nope, first off the way legs and hips are used in BJJ are both structurally and dynamically different to WC. There are some conceptual similarities granted and I kinda agree with what Kamon said but the two are certainly not EXACTLY the same.

chinaboxer have you ever done any BJJ?


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 15, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> no no no no no...you are 100% wrong, the EXACT same structure is used standing up or on the ground. The EXACT same shifting, hip movement, body alignment, developing "body structure", spine straight, maintaining space, eating space, elbows in, knees in etc...are used in both standing and on the ground. Wing Chun and BJJ are EXACTLY the same, why? because they are both "concept" based martial arts and follow the EXACT concepts. they both develop "body structure" and gain power from that structure through the elbows, i know this for a fact because i do both and have done both for a very long time.
> 
> now with that said, yes, there are MANY grapplers who muscle and speed their way, there are many grapplers who focus on technique rather than structure and concepts. but can't that be said for wing chun practitioners as well? the ONLY way i would be able to convince you is for us to train together, other than that, i know it will be hard to convince you otherwise.


 
We will have to agree to disagree on this issue Chinaboxer I'm afraid , how can it be exactly the same .

The posture might be the same , but the way gravity is now acting on your structure from the  vertical to the  horizontal is now different , same as if I was submerged in water or in zero gravity.  Not to mention the joints are in different positions and angles.

The same optimum angles of the arms that are great when standing up will probably get you arm barred when on the ground and somebody is on top of you.

Another thing is , Wing Chun being a rather practical style don't you think we would  have in addition to the other empty hand forms  a _*ground form*_ if everything translated perfectly down to the ground .

We have a form for structure (Sil Lum Tao) a form for movement (Chum Kiu) a form for gaining extra power from the upper body (Bil Gee).

Why not a form designed for the ground , my theory is that the Abbess Ng Mei ( if you believe in that legend and I do ) being a very smart woman realised that the power in Wing Chun is generated from the stance , and in a vertical position with the feet planted firmly on terra firma.

Being a small woman that could not depend on physical mass and strength I imagine she would have done everything in her powers to avoid being grappled and  stay on her feet and mobile.

  In fact the way Wing Chun generates power in close range with rapid multiple strikes down the centreline seems to be designed to guard against grappling and keeping in that range where we can use our forearms to leverage down on the opponents arms.

The elbows and the arms in general in Wing Chun are only conduits to channel force from the stance and to absorb force from the opponent down into the stance , but once the stance is off the ground and not in that vertical position anymore then it cannot work in the same way.

Superficially on the surface , some things might look the same but as human beings it is in our nature to try and see patterns and connections between things whether they exist or not.


----------



## yak sao (Sep 15, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> We will have to agree to disagree on this issue Chinaboxer I'm afraid , how can it be exactly the same .
> 
> The posture might be the same , but the way gravity is now acting on your structure from the vertical to the horizontal is now different , same as if I was submerged in water or in zero gravity. Not to mention the joints are in different positions and angles.
> 
> ...


 

I think that may be one of the best explanations of Wing Chun I've ever read.


----------



## izeqb (Sep 16, 2010)

Yes... This is a very interesting thread...

IMO some of THE most important concepts of Wing Chun is:


Taking / keeping control over the centerline
Dominating the balance (yours and his)
Keeping a forward preassure at all times
Being relaxed (both in mind and body)


----------



## Domino (Sep 16, 2010)

I too enjoy these threads, lets stick to discussion though. Both styles relate by being calm, relaxed, turning your power on / off and the use of sensitivity.
As I have said before, would love to have seen the result of Master Kwok and Carlson Gracies work together with regards Wing Chun and BJJ hybrid.

"where i said to be very careful what you include into your wing chun or else it will hinder your progress"

Just wanted you to ellaborate please CB.


----------



## matsu (Sep 16, 2010)

* think that may be one of the best explanations of Wing Chun I've ever read.* 

i was about to write almost the very same thing.
my sifu encourages us to try bjj. we have 4 sifus who are working their way thru the system for the very reason that if you are on the ground you cannot utilise the skills you have when you are doing your wing chun standing up so IF you are stuck on the ground then you need to know what to do to get back to your feet to continue using the wing chun. 
the fact that it follows similar principles/leverages angles and sensitivites means that it works so well in conjunction.sifu has often said bjj will improve your wing chun.

this is going to be on of them discussions that will never be resolved because its about applying basic skills and conceptual moves and we all do them differently in deiiferent scenarios. they are not all wrong or right(hang on a min, that was my thread earlier lol)
as long as they follow the concept of wing chun and it works, then its wing chun. it does not matter that we dont agree as long as we have a valid technical explanation for why we do something...and that explanation adheres to wing chun principles....oh ,and it works.

i cant say karate doesnt work because its not wing chun cohesive but it does! that doesnt make karate wrong, it just makes it different.

thanks mook... i,m copy/pasting that and printing it off!
matsu


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 16, 2010)

matsu said:


> * think that may be one of the best explanations of Wing Chun I've ever read.*
> 
> i was about to write almost the very same thing.
> my sifu encourages us to try bjj. we have 4 sifus who are working their way thru the system for the very reason that if you are on the ground you cannot utilise the skills you have when you are doing your wing chun standing up so IF you are stuck on the ground then you need to know what to do to get back to your feet to continue using the wing chun.
> ...


 
Matsu you can still use your close range striking , its just not going to pack the same wallop as if you were standing up straight and sunk down in your stance.

To compensate for that lack of power that would normally be provided by your body mass moving forward as one integrated unit when standing ,  on the ground you would have to use upper body torque as in the Bil Gee.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 16, 2010)

Chinaboxer, youve said Wing Chun and BJJ use the same concepts (I tend agree to some extent), but what are they?  

And since you've asked it of us, I haven't seen your response to the question.  What do you think are the core concepts essentially unique to Wing Chun?  What is your your list of concepts?

I think the problem is everyone may have a different idea on what the core concepts that are unique to Wing Chun are?  Doesnt look like we can agree on what those are either.

I think many arts have some of the same concepts as WC, ie, simple, straight line attack, simultaneous block and strike, centerline, building strong structure, body behind the force of a strike.  Those concepts (and maybe a couple more) are not unique to Wing Chun.  WC just does it differently than the other arts.  

Western boxing is a good example.  Their punches like jab and cross are pretty simple.  They punch straight (as they see it), from where their hands are to your chin.  But they execute their punches differently than WC.  But it's still effective.  Anyone hit by a good jab or a cross will tell you.  Boxing pretty much has some of the same concepts as WC does, just executed a different way.  And many other arts do the same, identical concepts just done in a different way.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 16, 2010)

matsu said:


> * think that may be one of the best explanations of Wing Chun I've ever read.*
> 
> i was about to write almost the very same thing.
> my sifu encourages us to try bjj. we have 4 sifus who are working their way thru the system for the very reason that if you are on the ground you cannot utilise the skills you have when you are doing your wing chun standing up so IF you are stuck on the ground then you need to know what to do to get back to your feet to continue using the wing chun.
> ...



Matsu, if standing up/hold escapes are what you want, also look into wrestling.  Greco Roman or Freestyle.  The standup portion and takedowns will not mesh (IMVHO) with Wing Chun, but the escaping from the ground will.  Wrestling as a whole tends to use more power and relies on strength, with balance at the core, so balance would be the only similar concept.

I know that BJJ teaches patience, leverage, relaxation, but their goal is more for a ground attack....kind of like a crocodile does once he drags ya in the water.

Last night on Spike TV here in the USA, they had a really good documentary on Royce Gracie and showed some footage of the older Gracie's fighting in challenge matches as well as the open door challenge for $10,000 at all Gracie Family dojo's which is still in effect.  Cool stuff, and you can get a small glimpse at how their stuff is different than other lineages of BJJ.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 16, 2010)

dungeonworks said:


> *Matsu, if standing up/hold escapes are what you want, also look into wrestling. Greco Roman or Freestyle. The standup portion and takedowns will not mesh (IMVHO) with Wing Chun, but the escaping from the ground will. Wrestling as a whole tends to use more power and relies on strength, with balance at the core, so balance would be the only similar concept.*
> 
> I know that BJJ teaches patience, leverage, relaxation, but their goal is more for a ground attack....kind of like a crocodile does once he drags ya in the water.
> 
> Last night on Spike TV here in the USA, they had a really good documentary on Royce Gracie and showed some footage of the older Gracie's fighting in challenge matches as well as the open door challenge for $10,000 at all Gracie Family dojo's which is still in effect. Cool stuff, and you can get a small glimpse at how their stuff is different than other lineages of BJJ.


 
Actually I'm quite partial to Mark Hatmaker's material , that old time wrestling had some very nasty stuff in it .
I like the philosophy of just grab something and crank the **** out of it.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 16, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> Actually I'm quite partial to Mark Hatmaker's material , that old time wrestling had some very nasty stuff in it .
> I like the philosophy of just grab something and crank the **** out of it.



I have never seen his stuff but a fellow student in my JKD class loves his stuff.  There is stuff that can get a release of hold that is just nasty and not of any particular style that I know of.  Things I have used in the past prior to martial arts such as fingers in eyes, grab and pull on ears, and one time I got a guy to release a MEAN headlock with a thumb to the...well, umm....."back door" if you will...through jeans, but man he let go out of reaction like a piece of toast shooting out of a toaster! ROTFLMAO!!!  I would have surely been unconscious had he not let it go as the world was getting fuzzy.


----------



## izeqb (Sep 16, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> Western boxing is a good example.  Their punches like jab and cross are pretty simple.  They punch straight (as they see it), from where their hands are to your chin.  But they execute their punches differently than WC.  But it's still effective.  Anyone hit by a good jab or a cross will tell you.  Boxing pretty much has some of the same concepts as WC does, just executed a different way.  And many other arts do the same, identical concepts just done in a different way.



You nailed it zepedawingchun...


----------



## wtxs (Sep 16, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> I think the problem is everyone may have a different idea on what the core concepts that are unique to Wing Chun are?  Doesnt look like we can agree on what those are either.
> 
> I think many arts have some of the same concepts as WC, ie, simple, straight line attack, simultaneous block and strike, centerline, building strong structure, body behind the force of a strike.  Those concepts (and maybe a couple more) are not unique to Wing Chun.  WC just does it differently than the other arts.
> 
> Western boxing is a good example.  Their punches like jab and cross are pretty simple.  They punch straight (as they see it), from where their hands are to your chin.  But they execute their punches differently than WC.  But it's still effective.  Anyone hit by a good jab or a cross will tell you.  Boxing pretty much has some of the same concepts as WC does, just executed a different way.  And many other arts do the same, identical concepts just done in a different way.



Thanks Zepe, it's hard to pick out an clear voice of reasoning amongst that giant wall of noise some times.

All martial art and fighting methods operates on the same basic concept or principle, that is to effect an favorable outcome from an bad situation, and able to go home to the ones you love.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 16, 2010)

Domino said:


> I too enjoy these threads, lets stick to discussion though. Both styles relate by being calm, relaxed, turning your power on / off and the use of sensitivity.
> As I have said before, would love to have seen the result of Master Kwok and Carlson Gracies work together with regards Wing Chun and BJJ hybrid.
> 
> "where i said to be very careful what you include into your wing chun or else it will hinder your progress"
> ...



What I gathered from Master Gracie and Master Kwok's comments of their time together is that they were looking more at adapting eachother's 
"adaptable similarities" moreso than creating a hybrid style.  I have heard many higher level Wing Chunner's state that a good understanding of Wing Chun will make all other arts trained that much better.  Heck, I will further my own statement by saying it has improved my posture and economy of motion at work on an automotive assembly line....and I am still a beginner in my own right as I have not a complete understanding of Sil Lim Tao, and I am not hurrying that either (Long story but i am still "Un-Karate'ing and Un-Kickboxing" myself).  To a small degree, I even use some Wing Chun principles in hunting deer as well when it comes to movement and economizing my motions and staying rooted in my archery.  

I am sure I typed that a bit generally as I am unsure how to articulately describe what I am intending to convey with my post, but hopefully that makes sense on some level. LOL


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 16, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> Chinaboxer, you&#8217;ve said Wing Chun and BJJ use the same concepts (I tend agree to some extent), but what are they?
> 
> And since you've asked it of us, I haven't seen your response to the question.  What do you think are the core concepts essentially unique to Wing Chun?  What is your your list of concepts?


i definitely have my own opinions, and i haven't kept them a secret at all, my entire website is dedicated to explaining the concepts of wing chun. i will chime in to this discussion because i feel it is such an important subject. but i wanted to get other people's perspectives and opinions first.

i also wanted chunners to think about that fundamental question, "what are the core concepts of wing chun, defined in a very specific manner, that must be adhered to at all times during every movement?" you'd think that it would be simple to answer, from a martial arts method that prides itself on it's simplicity, but as we're seeing, it's not the case.

i also think people here are confusing "techniques" from "concepts", for instance, BJJ and wing chun use many different "techniques", but share exactly the same concepts.

and the comparison of boxing using straight punches (technique), while true, the delivery method is not straight, because the body, shoulders, feet must rotate. so in this instance, we as chunners must DEFINE this concept further. such as "the body structure must always face your opponent's centerline during the delivery of a centerline vertical punch." this is not defined enough, but hopefully you get my point. even using this concept in it's rough state, it already can no longer be compared with traditional boxing or any style that rotates or torques to gain power, it also eliminates any style that does not use a centerline vertical punch (all the time) such as karate or tae kwon do. it's now become more and more unique to _ing _un.

we also have to stop using single descriptive words such as "relaxation" to explain _ing _un concepts, it's too vague! it has to be defined to the point that every chunner "get's it". heck..when people sleep, they are as relaxed as they are going to get, but does that mean everyone can do _ing _un? hopefully everyone understands why i created my website in the first place, to help "define" what _ing _un is, by defining it's core concepts. i think that's probably why the _ing _un community has been largely positive in support of my website, because i take the time every week to "define" the concepts, so that chunners "get it". it's easy to say "don't use your shoulders" to a student, but it's another matter to "show" them how NOT to turn them on in the first place, in detail.

what i'm about to say is going to make some people mad, but i think it's imperative that i say it, remember that this is only MY OPINION. you either know in thorough detail the concepts and adhere to them all the time or you don't. instructor's either "get" the concepts in such a deep manner that they can share them to students, or they can't, so they have to rely on teaching you technique after technique, counter after counter. but then it goes back to what every chunner knows to be true, and that is _ing _un is NOT a style, it is completely and soley a "concept" based art. there is no such thing as "pure" wing chun or "traditional" wing chun or "modified" wing chun...there is ONLY _ing _un concepts that you completely adhere to ALL THE TIME or you don't..that's it. you cannot adhere to a few techniques here and there and adhere to some concepts here and there while contradicting those same concepts at other times, and say you do _ing _un, or say you do "modified" _ing _un. it's an illusion, you're fooling yourself. and that's why i called this post 100% _ing _un...cause i really mean it! you can know every technique, every form, every term, every drill and still not know _ing _un!

this is the point i'm trying to make with this post, as a _ing _un community, to get together to "iron out" these concepts, while defining them in a precise manner to avoid any confusion from other martial arts methods. this IMO is the most important thing for us as a community to do, because the art is "concept" based! so let's roll up our sleeves and figure this out! for now, let's set aside the whole BJJ and _ing _un comparison..let's focus on possibly doing what some of the greatest chunner's failed to do..and that's to simply this wonderful martial art by defining it's deep meaning concepts.


----------



## matsu (Sep 16, 2010)

dungeonworks said:


> Matsu, if standing up/hold escapes are what you want, also look into wrestling. Greco Roman or Freestyle. The standup portion and takedowns will not mesh (IMVHO) with Wing Chun, but the escaping from the ground will. Wrestling as a whole tends to use more power and relies on strength, with balance at the core, so balance would be the only similar concept.
> 
> I know that BJJ teaches patience, leverage, relaxation, but their goal is more for a ground attack....kind of like a crocodile does once he drags ya in the water.
> 
> Last night on Spike TV here in the USA, they had a really good documentary on Royce Gracie and showed some footage of the older Gracie's fighting in challenge matches as well as the open door challenge for $10,000 at all Gracie Family dojo's which is still in effect.* Cool stuff, and you can get a small glimpse at how their stuff is different than other lineages of BJJ.*




thanks mate....isnt the bit in bold exactly what we are talking about here?
differences yet again within lineage.
i think sifu wants us to know takedaown defence actual groundwork so we can use our skill whilst on the ground ala mooks post top of this page and to escape if we need to.
as always the continuous advice on here is always so good and very helpful
matsu


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 16, 2010)

and before this post gets sidetracked, what lineage you come from should not matter at all. why? because _ing _un concepts are based on specific concepts backed by solid physics! 1+1=2 no matter what lineage you come from it will always be the same.

now if you're talking about "techniques", then yes, lineage can matter, some shift more, some less, some put more weight in the front, some even, some back etc..but as i've said time and time again, _ing _un is concept based and not technique based. that means, as long as it follows the "detailed, well defined concepts at all times, that make _ing _un, so amazing, then it doesn't matter what technique you do. because it will ALWAYS be right.

the concepts of _ing _un, though cannot be compromised, they must be adhered to, just like physics, E = MC2, but if you fudge with any part of that equation, the whole thing doesn't work. that's exactly like _ing _un, you can't fudge with the precise concepts, you can't change them, or try to ADD to them. and that's why i'm trying to get to the "heart" of this discussion. what are the core concepts of _ing _un, that must be adhered to all the time in a well defined, well detailed manner, so that it's meaning is clear and concise to everyone from any lineage.

are you scared yet? i am! why? because i'm basically saying, forget the techniques, forget the forms, forget the drills and get to what is fundamentally THE most important thing in _ing _un, and that's the concepts, the "stuff" that makes the tan, fuk, bong, chun chui, chi sau etc...work, it's the stuff "behind" the movements, the stuff "supporting" the movements, the stuff that makes all that wonderful movement work.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 16, 2010)

Chinaboxer .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .  I'm waiting.  You didn't answer the question.  You asked us to list the core concepts of Wing Chun.  And some of us did.  On  the first page, I listed what I perceive are the core concepts of my Wing Chun.  Then I asked you what you thought were the core concepts of Wing Chun.  You babble on as to how to differentiate between a concept and a technique, staying true to the Wing Chun by following the concepts.  But, where is your list, what do YOU consider are the core concepts of Wing Chun?


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 16, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> Chinaboxer .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .  I'm waiting.  You didn't answer the question.  You asked us to list the core concepts of Wing Chun.  And some of us did.  On  the first page, I listed what I perceive are the core concepts of my Wing Chun.  Then I asked you what you thought were the core concepts of Wing Chun.  You babble on as to how to differentiate between a concept and a technique, staying true to the Wing Chun by following the concepts.  But, where is your list, what do YOU consider are the core concepts of Wing Chun?


firstly, this isn't a contest, this is something that i think the _ing _un community needs to work on together. i also thought i made myself clear, i wanted to first get a sense of other chunner's perspectives and opinions on the concepts first. i also said to avoid being vague and try to define and refine your concepts so that they are not open to interpretation.

and i have spent the last year, every single week, video taping and posting for free, what i feel are the concepts of wing chun. i even have a large video category called "wing chun concepts" for you and everyone to see my perspective on the subject. over 100 videos on the subject some of them close to an hour long and i haven't even begun to scratch the surface. so please excuse my ignorance when you post a list of 10 concepts in a paragraph and then babble to me about you "waiting for my answer".


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 16, 2010)

zepedawingchun said:


> 1. Centerline theory
> 2. Immoveable elbow
> 3. Lin sil die dar theory
> 4. Economy of motion concept
> ...


you wanted me to get to your list, and i think it's a great list! but do you see how it's not defined enough and how it can be taken in many different directions by beginning chunners? "immovable elbow", is that literally? does that mean don't ever move your elbow? and if so, then where should the elbow be? if it's immovable, how would you punch? i'm just using that as an example, as to the need to be clear, concise and defined for any beginner chunner.

let's start with your first one because it's a good one..
1. centerline theory

i like that because it's the very first concept taught in the form. so it's a great place for all of us to start with...so let's work together to help define the concept..hmm..

what is centerline theory? first thing to come to my mind is the imaginary vertical line or axis from your anus to the top of your head that separates your body into two halves and how that centerline relates to your partners centerline. so there's two centerlines. here's something that many chunner's don't think about, because we usually teach it by drawing the line on the outside of the front of our bodies, but is this right? is the centerline actually "inside" our bodies? this is something that needs to be figured out IMO. i could be wrong or right but it's a good place to start. now we should continue to discuss just this "centerline theory" to help define it, of course, everyone is encouraged to chime in and babble...

so what does "centerline theory" mean to you? let's set aside our differences and discuss it!


----------



## wtxs (Sep 16, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> what is centerline theory? first thing to come to my mind is the imaginary vertical line or axis from your anus to the top of your head that separates your body into two halves and how that centerline relates to your partners centerline. so there's two centerlines. here's something that many chunner's don't think about, *because we usually teach it by drawing the line on the outside of the front of our bodies*, but is this right? is the centerline actually "inside" our bodies? this is something that needs to be figured out IMO. i could be wrong or right but it's a good place to start. now we should continue to discuss just this "centerline theory" to help define it, of course, everyone is encouraged to chime in and babble...
> 
> so what does "centerline theory" mean to you? let's set aside our differences and discuss it!



The WC"s center line had always been the way you had outlined. People teaching and pass on the center line theory like the above statement in bold print is not doing us any favors, wondering where they learn that concept from and where their teacher learn it from.


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 16, 2010)

matsu said:


> [/b]
> 
> thanks mate....isnt the bit in bold exactly what we are talking about here?
> differences yet again within lineage.
> ...



Yes actually it is what the intent of the thread is....finding the rock solid universal conceptual foundation related to ALL _ing __un lineages.  It would be easier and neater when spotting the differences but I am afraid i am not qualified to say one way or another on common threads that bind us together as Ip family is all I have trained in Wing Chun wise.  I just know that in my past travels, grappling still interests me both for exercise and because I have been taken down from my blind side several times at bars, parties, and other places I should not have been.  Being of a striking background, I would rather be on my feet in sport or self defense and have found that even limited wrestling can be great for that...especially since I am quite limited in Wing Chun skills and still reliant on what I already know.

.....I'm jonesing for the future day when typing is obsolete and that virtual reality stuff gets to the point we could be working some Chun instead of pecking a keyboard!!!  Just think of how valuable this forum could be with such technology!


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 17, 2010)

dungeonworks said:


> .....I'm jonesing for the future day when typing is obsolete and that virtual reality stuff gets to the point we could be working some Chun instead of pecking a keyboard!!!  Just think of how valuable this forum could be with such technology!


omg..that would roxxx..my head just exploded!


----------



## chinaboxer (Sep 17, 2010)

wtxs said:


> The WC"s center line had always been the way you had outlined. People teaching and pass on the center line theory like the above statement in bold print is not doing us any favors, wondering where they learn that concept from and where their teacher learn it from.


good question, it probably has alot to do with how martial knowledge was passed down during those ancient times. we also have to understand that most students were not formally "educated". so much of the passed down material was through songs, symbols and simple analogies.

but this is "now", we can all read and write, we are all educated, we have access to the internet 24/7, we have access to every chunner in the world practically! so we should take advantage of this and use our intelligence to continue to improve the teachings of _ing _un, by focusing and defining the core concepts for "today's chunner".

i really want to try and keep this post on track though..so it's back to the "centerline theory" and what that means to chunners and how the concept can be explained in a concise, detailed manner so that even a person just starting _ing _un can understand it.

so far we have...

centerline theory - "the centerline is the imaginary vertical line or axis that runs from the tailbone to the top of the head" is this right or wrong? how can it be defined even more? etc..let's figure this one out!


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 17, 2010)

Settle in people , go and grab a beer or a cup of tea this is going to be a long one .
These are the things I think that are very important.

SINK YOUR WEIGHT

You must lower your center of gravity , bending the knees until they are just over your toes.
This is an approximation , it will vary slightly due to differences in individual physiology , different limb lengths, proportions etc.

Standing up too high in the stance results in loss of force in attack and defence and lessens stability.
You might as well be fighting while wearing roller skates.

STAY UPRIGHT

Keeps the body mass centered and able to move in any direction whilst staying balanced and non committed.
Maintains structure , for example once the head starts to lean forward the integrity of the structure is compromised and you could be dragged down into a knee strike for instance.

FACE THE DIRECTION YOU ARE STRIKING

Facing the direction you are striking enables you to put your full body mass behind the strike.
Think of pushing a heavy object like a car , you stand behind it and push it with your body square on , not sideways or twisted.

TILT THE PELVIS UP AND FORWARD

But not to the point where your quads tense up and the cheeks of your **** clench.
This helps to curl under your tail bone and straighten your spine , it also stops the hips unlocking and unites upper and lower body.
Any unlocking between lower and upper body will result in a decrease of your power.

RELAXATION

This is a hard one to describe because to a great extent it is based on your own feeling , and depending on your time in Wing Chun there are varying degrees of relaxation.

To me it means a letting go of muscular effort and tension , just letting the limb rotate from the joint without any friction , and a calm state of mind focusing on the task at hand.

The limbs are approaching the state of being like a _dead weight _but imbued with a _forward intent._
So if you can try to execute all your Wing Chun movements with this _dead weight_ feeling in your limbs then you will definitely be on the right track.

Apart from Chi Sau and Sil Lum Tao there are specific exercises to help develop this relaxation , such as the _chicken wing_ exercise which is basically just rotating the elbows in circles etc thats for the shoulders , and_ leg raising_ for relaxing the muscles around the hip joint.

The other ways to develop relaxation are by actually touching the muscle group with your other hand whilst performing Sil Lum Tao or while you are performing the movement under load from your partner.

Feel the muscles of your pectorals , biceps , and shoulders  when your partner is pressing down on your Tan Sau , will them to soften and relax.

Do the same thing when someone is leaning on your Bong Sau , physically touch your muscles with your other hand and will them to soften and relax , use the absolute bare minimum of muscular effort to maintain the angles in your arm.

If he is using too much and you are tensing up , tell him to back off on the force until you can relax again , as your skill increases you will be able to resist more and more pressure while staying relaxed.
There are many other ways to work on relaxation these are just some of them.

Continuing on with the relaxation theme , if you are getting thrown around in Chi Sau that can be an indicator of either being too high in your stance , in that case _sink down._

Or more often than not it is a relaxation issue , instead of your arms and shoulders being like shock absorbers or being a bit springy and yielding like bamboo , they are more like iron bars bolted on to a big block of wood.

You are giving the opponent levers to effect your posture and stance , you might as well superglue big bloody handles on to your chest and say  " _Here grab these and throw me around "._

ULTIMATE OR OPTIMUM ANGLE

Theoretically speaking , this is the best angle of the arms for attack and defence.
Due to physiology this also varies slightly from person to person , one of the purposes of the Sil Lum Tao form , in particular the Tan Sau extention and the Fook Sau / Wu Sau sequence is to help us find our own individual optimum angle that is correct for our body.

But generally in our lineage it is considered to be approximately two fists distance from the body .

This is where the angles of the arms will have the most resistance to an outside force , whilst requiring the least amount of muscular force to maintain but still being able to generate force in attack.

In attacking motions such as punching the angle will expand , execute the strike , relax , and then the arm returns back to the optimum angle again.
Same thing with the legs when kicking.

CENTERLINE THEORY

This is something that people really over complicate , what with the mother lines , original centerlines , everything but the damn clothes line.
 The opening sequence of the Sil Lum Tao form going down into the double Chit Sau's and up to the double Dai Sau's , where the wrists cross that defines your centerline.

Now , whether you think of the center line going through the person you are attacking or projected on the front of him is irrelevant in my opinion.

Just imagine a center line running down the front and center of your body and *GUARD IT.*
Now imagine a vertical line running down the center of your opponents body , project that line on to him , doesn't matter if he is standing side on to you or even if he has his back to you or pirouettes like a ballerina , the line doesn't move.

*Now step forward and hit the bastard on that line.*
Any strike originating from you off your center line will not serve the double purpose of guarding you and attacking at the same time.
You will also not be making the most of your force by having your body mass behind your strike.

Now there will be some motions in Wing Chun where you have pivoted , and your hands are off your center line but focused at your opponents center line such as using your Tan Sau to counterpierce your opponents straight punch , as well as some motions where you have pivoted and your hands are still on your center as projected out in front of you from square on , such as the Garn Sau or redirecting force to the side with a Seung Bong .

If your strike is aimed somewhere other than the opponents center line , your opponent will not absorb the full force of the blow , some of your force will be wasted as the opponents body will slightly rotate on its axis in effect going with the strike instead of it penetrating and going through his body.

Similar to the way a hanging heavy bag will rotate if it is not hit in the center by your Wing Chun center line punch.
Or another analogy would be the way it is easier for a Wing Chun practitioner to pivot when a force is coming at him but directed off his center line.

NON TELEGRAPHIC STRIKING

This sort of ties in directly  with _economy of movement_ and the _center line._
There are *no pre movements* in Wing Chun , no chambering or drawing back of the strike prior to execution.
From the stance and the guard strikes originate from the center line and travel in a straight line to the opponents center line with no wasted motion.

With the guard up the lead hand is already in the best angle for attack and defence and only short sharp economical movements are needed to attack and defend.

Similarly with the legs , when sunk down in your stance the legs are bent and in effect they are already chambered and ready for action.
Same as the arms , the angle of the legs will provide maximum resistance for the least muscular effort.

Consider the example of a very large man rushing at me from just out of kicking range , if I were to attempt to raise my leg and chamber the kick first by closing the angle of my leg , in an attempt to get more power in a one -two motion , then there is a very good chance he will close in first and crush the angle of my kicking leg back into my body and throw me off my stance.

By contrast raising my leg to kick with the leg in the optimum angle already is economical and fast with no telegraphic movement and has  a lot of resistance against the incoming force.

As long as I have a good stance and get my timing right as to when to thrust my heel into him , the effect for him is rather like running into the end of a metal pole stuck out horizontally from a brick wall.

There was one more thing I was going to talk about concerning infusing your techniques with mental force , forward force etc but I think I will leave it as my brain is starting to hurt and I need a cup of tea and a good lie down.


----------



## Domino (Sep 17, 2010)

dungeonworks said:


> What I gathered from Master Gracie and Master Kwok's comments of their time together is that they were looking more at adapting eachother's
> "adaptable similarities" moreso than creating a hybrid style.  I have heard many higher level Wing Chunner's state that a good understanding of Wing Chun will make all other arts trained that much better.  Heck, I will further my own statement by saying it has improved my posture and economy of motion at work on an automotive assembly line....and I am still a beginner in my own right as I have not a complete understanding of Sil Lim Tao, and I am not hurrying that either (Long story but i am still "Un-Karate'ing and Un-Kickboxing" myself).  To a small degree, I even use some Wing Chun principles in hunting deer as well when it comes to movement and economizing my motions and staying rooted in my archery.
> 
> I am sure I typed that a bit generally as I am unsure how to articulately describe what I am intending to convey with my post, but hopefully that makes sense on some level. LOL



Yes definately makes sense, we sound like we are in a similar place with our learning. 
Yeah maybe wasn't for creating a hybrid, but for instance training against techniques like someone trying to shoot, as we were doing last night in class


----------



## zepedawingchun (Sep 17, 2010)

chinaboxer said:


> firstly, this isn't a contest, this is something that i think the _ing _un community needs to work on together. i also thought i made myself clear, i wanted to first get a sense of other chunner's perspectives and opinions on the concepts first. i also said to avoid being vague and try to define and refine your concepts so that they are not open to interpretation.


 
Oh, I see how it is.  We give you ours but you wont give us yours, we have to go search for it. 




chinaboxer said:


> and i have spent the last year, every single week, video taping and posting for free, what i feel are the concepts of wing chun. i even have a large video category called "wing chun concepts" for you and everyone to see my perspective on the subject. over 100 videos on the subject some of them close to an hour long and i haven't even begun to scratch the surface. so please excuse my ignorance when you post a list of 10 concepts in a paragraph and then babble to me about you "waiting for my answer".


 
Over 100 videos, are you saying you have over 100 concepts?  I didnt ask to see your videos, with titles like Brandons Journey, Passing the Basketball, Pinning the Shoulder, Wing Chun and Boxing Comparison.  I ask to see an idea of what you thought the WC concepts were in black and white, like the rest of us did.




chinaboxer said:


> you wanted me to get to your list, and i think it's a great list! but do you see how it's not defined enough and how it can be taken in many different directions by beginning chunners? "immovable elbow", is that literally? does that mean don't ever move your elbow? and if so, then where should the elbow be? if it's immovable, how would you punch? i'm just using that as an example, as to the need to be clear, concise and defined for any beginner chunner. !


 
I didnt ask you to get to my list, I said I gave you my list.  I asked you to list yours.  So instead of listing yours, you list mine.  No wonder the WC community cant agree on anything.




chinaboxer said:


> let's start with your first one because it's a good one..





chinaboxer said:


> centerline theory. . . . . . . . so what does "centerline theory" mean to you?




I think my definition of the centerline is a bit different than yours.  Its an imaginary line starting at the top of your head, in the middle or center, running down thru the body, *to the floor* (because I own the space I stand on.  Also when facing an opponent directly, they can enter from that space between the legs, so I must protect it too).  Projecting outward in two directions, forward and backward, from that line is a flat plane, much like a plane of glass, which divides the body in two halves, left and right.


----------



## Dantian (Sep 17, 2010)

To me _ing __un is simply all about one word.... *EFFICIENCY*. But how we achieve this effiecncy is a deep question.

Let's look from a scientific viewpoint. Everybody must grasp and learn the 3 universally unescapable laws of physics that Isaac Newton explained. If you exsist in this universerse you must obey these 3 laws. All 3 are crucial, but to us in a combat context, the 2nd and 3rd Law can help exlplain some things we do.

*Newtons Second Law of Physics*


Force = Mass x Accelleration
- This is the definition of force

- The faster a mass is accelerating in a direction the greater the force is to start it moving or to stop it from moving.

- The bigger the mass, the greater the force is required to start movement of it.

*Newtons Third Law of Physics*


For every force one body exerts on to a second body, the second body exerts an equal force in the oppostite direction.
*What does this have to do with us __unners?* 


In short EVERYTHING! This is where our concepts can be drawn from. 

Whether it was intended or not by our ancient masters, _ing __un strives to manipulate and make use of our, physiology anatomy and body mechanics (more than any other fighting style or system) to make use of Newtons laws resulting in a devastating combat system. This is what seperates us from the others.

Here's the body mechanics we use: 




Centreline Theory​ 
In a nutshell, this is how to.​ 
- Move a force (newtons 2nd law) from your body (fist, heel, elbow or knife etc) from point A to point B the quickest.​ 
- Impart the most force (newtons 2nd law) into an opponent i.e inflict the most damage. If you land a strike into an opposing centreline; that person's body will absorb more of that force resulting in more damge or effect.​ 
The bi products of the centrline theory are efficiency, economy of moment.​ 
Relaxed and turned off muscles​ 

Yes it's a technique, but it's a crucial one. This what most are striving to achieve and have the most trouble with in training.

If you punch somebody while you are tensed up, the wave of rebounding force on impact will be sent back through your body, thus making your strike less effective. This the 3rd law or Newton in action.

But, if you relax and turn off the joints and mucles, you povide less of a vessle for that wave of force to come back into. All your energy is sent into them to absorb and very minimal rebounding force is sent back into you.

Relaxing also conserves energy and prevents muscle fatigue.


Striking as one body not just the fist or foot​ 

This is where Sil Lim Tao structure come in. Hitting the opponent with your body mass behind your strike. Alligning the joints and the body structure.

This is making use of Newtons second law, because what the Sil Lim Tao structure is training us to do is to get our body mass behind whatever it is we are throwing or accelerating towards our opponent (foot, fist, elbow, knives etc). More mass moving results in more force. More force hitting an opponent is what the whole aim is, especially in our quest for efficiency right?


Build Sensitivity to redirect and opponets force​ 
We should be all trained to know that when defending meeting force directly with force is bad. If you can imagine 2 cars driving head on at each other and how 2 forces meeting maxinises the force energy relased on impact. 

We don't want that. This why our defensive moves shear, angle and deflect off an opposing strike. We don't want to absorb the full energy force into our structure. We angle and redierct the force of their attack. Whist simultaneously attacking.




In summary my point is that all that unites common ground among all lineages of _ing __un is effieciency (as broad as that is). 

But we do this because every single form in _ing _un is about maximising and refining the laws of physics, by using our body mechanics to effectively use in combat situations to efficiently end your opponent. Thats all.


----------



## Poor Uke (Sep 18, 2010)

Dantian said:


> Whether it was intended or not by our ancient masters, _ing __un strives to manipulate and make use of our, physiology anatomy and body mechanics (more than any other fighting style or system) to make use of Newtons laws resulting in a devastating combat system. This is what seperates us from the others.
> .........
> Relaxing also conserves energy and prevents muscle fatigue.
> 
> ...



Non of this is unique to Wing Chun.

Many styles incorportate efficiency of movement, relaxation, deflection, sensitivity, striking using the whole body......

It is a conceit by many _unners that only there style contains these elements. It is a dellusion.

All movements (at non relativistic speeds) obey Newton's laws of motion, _ing _un is no different because it does!!!!!

You need to get out more.......


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 18, 2010)

Poor Uke said:


> Non of this is unique to Wing Chun.
> 
> Many styles incorportate efficiency of movement, relaxation, deflection, sensitivity, striking using the whole body......
> 
> ...


 
They may not be unique to Wing Chun , and from the point of view of other styles , as far as they are concerned what they are doing in the context of their system might be considered efficiency of movement , relaxed , using deflection , sensitivity , and striking using the whole body.

But from a Wing Chun perspective they may not be adhering to these principles as we would use them within the frame work of Wing Chun.

Efficiency of movement to a TKD person might be a jumping side kick to the face , but to me it is a low heel kick to the knee with my leg maintaining the angle from the floor to the target .

For example boxers are relaxed , lots of martial arts people are relaxed , but in Wing Chun it mainly  means relaxing your muscles , keeping the arms at a fixed angle , and just rotating them from one joint until they are needed to strike and then back to the fixed angle again.

The same with the rest of the things , what one person may consider to be a deflection in their style we in Wing Chun might still consider it to be a hard block by our terms of reference.


----------



## HonoluluDan (Sep 18, 2010)

Aloha everyone, I am enjoying this post! Let's see where we are the same, instead of finding discrepancies in our art. 
I might be wrong, but I don't believe anyone has mentioned the concept of "forward energy". i.e. in chi sao, if I am not projecting enough forward energy, I will be run over. In sparring, if I meet an attack with anything but forward energy, i.e pushing directly down, directly to the side, and my opponent is using forward energy, his attack will merely come back around or over or through, and it's lights out. Now I am not saying to use excessive force, but as long as you feel that my energy is a direct threat to you, it must be addresed and dealt with.
 And now I am off to go train.........Aloha!


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 18, 2010)

HonoluluDan said:


> Aloha everyone, I am enjoying this post! Let's see where we are the same, instead of finding discrepancies in our art.
> I might be wrong, but I don't believe anyone has mentioned the concept of "forward energy". i.e. in chi sao, if I am not projecting enough forward energy, I will be run over. In sparring, if I meet an attack with anything but forward energy, i.e pushing directly down, directly to the side, and my opponent is using forward energy, his attack will merely come back around or over or through, and it's lights out. Now I am not saying to use excessive force, but as long as you feel that my energy is a direct threat to you, it must be addresed and dealt with.
> And now I am off to go train.........Aloha!


 
Well this is another thing that can be quite confusing for people.
Forward force or forward intent ? , they are not the same thing.
 Exactly how much force to use ?

_Forward force is springy force_ , mentally and physically located in the elbow and driven from the triceps against the attacking limb.
In the case of centreline attacks our forward force and forward intent will combine to focus at the same point , the opponents center line.

In the case of circular attacks where we have pivoted to intercept the attacking limb coming from the side , our _forward force_ will be directed at the limb , putting our hand technique and our body mass in the proper position in relation to the direction of his force in order to offer the strongest structure.

This means we will be directing our _forward force_ not at his center line but at the direction his force is coming from , once we make contact if the opponent were to suddenly disengage his arm from ours then our arm will automatically take the shortest path back to attacking his center line , that is projecting mental focus or _forward intent_.

With the amount of force to use , ideally it would be just enough to equalise the opponents force with out your angles collapsing.
Sigung Tsui Seung Tin's top female student told me it was about the same sort of force you use as when you are leaning your elbow on a table top.


----------



## wtxs (Sep 18, 2010)

HonoluluDan said:


> Aloha everyone, I am enjoying this post! Let's see where we are the same, instead of finding discrepancies in our art.
> I might be wrong, *but I don't believe anyone has mentioned the concept of "forward energy"*. i.e. in chi sao, if I am not projecting enough forward energy, I will be run over. In sparring, if I meet an attack with anything but forward energy, i.e pushing directly down, directly to the side, and my opponent is using forward energy, his attack will merely come back around or over or through, and it's lights out. Now I am not saying to use excessive force, but as long as you feel that my energy is a direct threat to you, it must be addresed and dealt with.
> And now I am off to go train.........Aloha!



That would be the Newton's 2nd law my man.  Since we all have different take on various WC concepts, would you mind share your interpretation of "forward energy" and perhaps some examples in application? Thanks.


----------



## cwk (Sep 19, 2010)

not re-chambering before every strike and just striking from the position we are in has to be one of the key concepts in my book. Directly tied to this is short range force which I don't think any other art emphasizes to the extent that wing chun does.


----------



## izeqb (Sep 19, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> Sigung Tsui Seung Tin's top female student told me it was about the same sort of force you use as when you are leaning your elbow on a table top.



Could you please elaborate this?


----------



## HonoluluDan (Sep 19, 2010)

wtxs said:


> That would be the Newton's 2nd law my man.  Since we all have different take on various WC concepts, would you mind share your interpretation of "forward energy" and perhaps some examples in application? Thanks.


Forward energy/intent, if we were to chi sao, I should be putting up enough physical force for you to feel resistance, but not enough for you to spring off of my energy. Now if you were to suddenly drop your hands, my forward intent would shoot my hands out towards you.

I apologize if I am not eloquent enough to describe what I am thinking, for it has been a long, hot day and I have been cooling off with some inebriating beverages.........:ultracool
And thank you Mr Mook, I believe what I am referring to is forward intent.
Aloha!


----------



## dungeonworks (Sep 19, 2010)

HonoluluDan said:


> Forward energy/intent, if we were to chi sao, I should be putting up enough physical force for you to feel resistance, but not enough for you to spring off of my energy. Now if you were to suddenly drop your hands, my forward intent would shoot my hands out towards you.
> 
> I apologize if I am not eloquent enough to describe what I am thinking, for it has been a long, hot day and I have been cooling off with some inebriating beverages.........:ultracool
> And thank you Mr Mook, I believe what I am referring to is forward intent.
> Aloha!



That is how we intend to apply forward energy as well and work chain punching drills on focus mitts where the mitt holder deceptively moves back.  It's so easy for guys like myself to get heavy on the lead leg or lean towards the target.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 19, 2010)

izeqb said:


> Could you please elaborate this?


 
She visited our academy and  I got her to check my Sil Lum Tao form and then we did some Chi Sau sparring where I got absolutely mauled.

 I then asked her much actual force you put into your forward force , we had a raised stage from where instructors would conduct the warm ups , form etc for the class.

She layed down on the stage propped up on one elbow and said you use about this much force , the same amount of strength you use when you are leaning your elbow on a table or benchtop.

Another instructor told me about the same amount of force you would use to press your  forefinger into someones chest.

But as far as I'm concerned if your using the minimum amount of effort to maintain your angles against your opponents force , using just enough to equalise and not let them collapse ,  your musculature is still staying relatively soft and relaxed , and your hands fly forward when there is no counterforce.
Then you are doing well and on the right track in my opinion


----------



## geezer (Sep 19, 2010)

cwk said:


> not re-chambering before every strike and just striking from the position we are in has to be one of the key concepts in my book. Directly tied to this is short range force which I don't think any other art emphasizes to the extent that wing chun does.



Well I've been down with a nasty fever for the last week, and have been reduced to lurking on this thread. And, fascinating as the topic is, the different branches of our our art will never agree beyond a fairly rudimentary level even on such a broad topic as "the concepts". And, as others have said, some of the concepts we hold so dear are well known and widely used by other styles as well.

Now regarding the quote above, I have noticed the same emphasis on _"not re-chambering... and just striking from the position we are in"_ in the Latosa Escrima System. Also forward pressure/intent, economy of motion and repeated linear, or more accurately, "elliptical" forward hitting with an energy a little bit like chain-punching. ...And then there's a whole lot of stuff that's quite different from WC/WT/VT. 

On the whole, I find myself pretty much agreeing with what "Mook's" been saying, but I still think that "Dantien" summed it up in one word: _Efficiency._ But that really needs to be qualified. In other words, what do we really mean? Efficency usually means _achieving your objective while expending the absolute minimum_. But the minimum of what? ...of energy? ...of time? ...of distance? 

In WC/VT/WT I think we generally mean _all of the above_. And if the _objective_ is to "neutralize a threat" or "defeat an opponent", we typically mean to do so standing up and using empty handed, percussive methods such as punches, kicks, elbows and so on. And we don't mind repeating them. At least this is the assumption most of us begin with. It's important to consider these underlying assumptions before we start slinging around grand terms like "efficiency". On the other hand, considered in this more specific context, there is no "concept" more fundamental to what we do. All our movements and energies are tied back to the attempt to achieve the most beautifully "efficient" solution possible to each situation we are presented with.

On another note, if you change your "objective" even a bit, what is "efficient" changes a great deal. Then add a few other factors, such as _reliability and dependability_. What if the most perfect and "efficient" solution is not as reliable in the chaos of actual combat as it is in the kwoon? This brings up the concept of "efficacy" or "practicality. If pure efficiency takes decades to master before it is at all efficacious outside of the kwoon, is it really practical? This is an area where we 'chunners catch a lot of flack, and some of it rightly so. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## LoneSamurai (Sep 22, 2010)

i pretty much have to agree with chinaboxer in many things his says and thinks, i have praticed Krav maga and wing chun for 15 years now, both of them complement each other quite well, and the concepts of wing chun help the lesser eficiency of Krav in its postures and techniques. Ive been doing bjj for the last 4 years and im really impressed how little force you have to use to subdue or counter bigger people, my sensei weighs about 120 kg and im barely 78kgs and i can wrestled with ease and we go all out, thats what Jin meant about WC and BJJ having the same concepts or principles.


Aussie-Chilean Martial Artist.
" Power comes from where you stand "


----------



## geezer (Sep 23, 2010)

LoneSamurai said:


> Aussie-Chilean Martial Artist.
> " Power comes from where you stand "


 
Aussie-Chilean? Thats a new one. Welcome aboard! What kinda 'chun do you do?


----------



## LoneSamurai (Sep 25, 2010)

geezer said:


> Aussie-Chilean? Thats a new one. Welcome aboard! What kinda 'chun do you do?



hehe,thanks yeah im chilean-Australian, i do Yip Man´s chun and Krav/Bjj.


----------



## BloodMoney (Sep 25, 2010)

mook jong man said:


> The mechanics of the two systems are different and the ways of using leverage are different there maybe attributes that overlap , but don't kid yourself that you are doing Wing Chun on the ground.
> 
> You are doing Wing Chun when you are standing up and in your stance and your arms are in the correct angles , when you are on the ground you are using Bjj.
> There is nothing wrong with training in both , but realise you are changing gears when going from one to the other.



Agreed. I study both, love both, but they are different. Does this mean I cant use my experience from Chun to help my BJJ? Or my BJJ to help takedown defense when im using Chun? Of course not. In fact I had a Chun instructor (who got me hooked on BJJ) say "Chun doesnt help your BJJ at all". Then we rolled, and he used Bong Sau/immovable elbow to counter a straight arm bar from side control. I looked at him and said "you just used Chun then" he laughed and kinda looked humbled and said "yeah okay maybe theres a bit"...

The two can (and do) work very well together, and there is some similarity. But generally they are quite different.


----------



## geezer (Sep 26, 2010)

LoneSamurai said:


> hehe,thanks yeah im chilean-Australian, i do Yip Man´s chun *and Krav/Bjj.*



WC and Krav/BJJ... then you know what I mean about balancing pure, theoretical _efficiency_ with street/self defense _efficacy,_ or reliability and practicality. Some WC techniques are so refined and efficient that there isn't much of a margin for error. From what little I've seen of Krav, there is less concern for pure efficiency and a whole lot of emphasis on what will get the job done. It's kind of like comparing a highly refined sports car (WC) to my old 4 x 4 pick-up (arts like Krav). On a really rough road, you probably want the pick-up. And to be fair, even within WC, you have a range of options, some more like the sports car, others more like the truck.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 26, 2010)

BloodMoney said:


> Agreed. I study both, love both, but they are different. Does this mean I cant use my experience from Chun to help my BJJ? Or my BJJ to help takedown defense when im using Chun? Of course not. In fact I had a Chun instructor (who got me hooked on BJJ) say "Chun doesnt help your BJJ at all". Then we rolled, and he used Bong Sau/immovable elbow to counter a straight arm bar from side control. I looked at him and said "you just used Chun then" he laughed and kinda looked humbled and said "yeah okay maybe theres a bit"...
> 
> The two can (and do) work very well together, and there is some similarity. But generally they are quite different.


 
I imagine Wing Chun's hand speed and fluidity would help quite a bit in fending off attempts to grab your gi or your wrists.


----------



## LoneSamurai (Sep 26, 2010)

geezer said:


> WC and Krav/BJJ... then you know what I mean about balancing pure, theoretical _efficiency_ with street/self defense _efficacy,_ or reliability and practicality. Some WC techniques are so refined and efficient that there isn't much of a margin for error. From what little I've seen of Krav, there is less concern for pure efficiency and a whole lot of emphasis on what will get the job done. It's kind of like comparing a highly refined sports car (WC) to my old 4 x 4 pick-up (arts like Krav). On a really rough road, you probably want the pick-up. And to be fair, even within WC, you have a range of options, some more like the sports car, others more like the truck.



Yes extactly, unfortunatly ive had a few street fights, and wing chuns structure and principles have really helped me be more efficient in movement, force, speed, etc, You really have to be careful where and when you move because in a street fight there is no room for mistakes or simpathy.

Kravs similar, the intention is intercept and finish quickly but with brutal movments WC is more sophisticated and/or elegant, much more focused, thats why i like the combination of both of them.

Aussie-Chilean Martial Artist

Martial Arts isnt Self defence its self recognition


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 26, 2010)

LoneSamurai said:


> Yes extactly, unfortunatly ive had a few street fights, and wing chuns structure and principles have really helped me be more efficient in movement, force, speed, etc, You really have to be careful where and when you move because in a street fight there is no room for mistakes or simpathy.
> 
> Kravs similar, the intention is intercept and finish quickly but with brutal movments WC is more sophisticated and/or *elegant*, much more focused, thats why i like the combination of both of them.
> 
> ...


 
You made me remember something from a long time ago , one of our senior instructors said to us " _Wing Chun is an elegant art , try and look elegant when you do it "_


----------



## MacPedro (Apr 20, 2011)

Hi People,
Sorry for re-animating this old thread but Im quite fascinated by this idea. Could the next couple of posts get the Noob bashing out of the way and try to stay on topic in the interests of education and love, no ones on trial here its just a discussion J

Im not professing knowledge on any of this and in case my grammar lets me down please treat the tone of my whole post as questioning.

I was always meditating (while I did whatever it is that cant possibly be called Siu Lim Tao because ive not had a teacher) on the statement Attack the centre. 
Is Attack the centre too general to be classed as a concept. It conveys forward intent and perhaps energy also. Like SLT I believe that much of the elements in WC teach us different things at the same time. It certainly relates to centreline theory but it isnt a fixed point in time and space and its much more likely for a teacher to say to an aspiring and time deficient anti-Manchurian rebel. This is simple isnt it, thus ticking one of the WC boxes.

You have to believe the weak can overcome the strong. This is a bit Chun.

Theres another concept completely aside from WC called E-prime which is almost the same as the English language but the word is is not used. I think some of the old Wing Chun knowledge has been twisted in some way due to translation and we interpret what were originally supposed to be verbs as nouns. This is perhaps robbing us of some of their nature. A dimension of their meaning we now are without.

Elaboration of this would come from someone with as much understanding of Chinese languages and English as Sifu David Peterson. I read Sun Tsu and found the work to be too nebulous. I know there is a lot of wisdom in 'the art of war' but I am too slow/impatient/western to be able to figure it out. Musashi on the other hand, while passing on a lot of the same knowledge was a much easier read _for me._ I believe it may be due to my inability to identify with the context in which it is written. Like the Star Trek Next Generation Episode Darmok. 

If we can perhaps work through the Kuen Kuit in detail I believe we may get an answer to what Jin was asking. We all have our interpretation of what they mean. 
http://www.wcarchive.com/articles/maxims-kuen-kuit.htm

These phrases were so important to Ip Man that he had Moy Yat manufacture expensive stone chops. Or have I picked that up completely wrong. Did Ip Man have the money to throw around like that. Or did he not want money? Was this a whim or do they hold significant importance. Either way I see a lot of signatures here that have taken them to heart. 

We could have an individual post on each one of these Maxims. In finding out how they are interpreted by the most experienced here an answer would be forthcoming surely.
"Eternal Spring" I like this as a concept relating to the arm angle, keeping in reserve to bloom/boing up into some ones chin once occupying the inner gate.

"Siu Lim Tau mainly trains internal power" All martial arts are great for confidence. To truely give 100% requires the banishment of fear. Fear causes a tension and the release of all manner of panic enducing chemicals which is counter productive to combat unless experienced. One way to avert this freeze/fight/flight response is to meditate out. A kind of self hypnosis which doesn't interfere with the training. Sartori, the void, the zone etc
"It is important to remain nuetral" Ip Man 2 Donnie yen/Ip Man.

The punch is like a kosh, a totally "elastic collision" all of the kinetic energy transferred.

Apologies the long post, not a simple question and a simpleton trying to answer.

Pedro


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 21, 2011)

MacPedro said:


> . . . . .If we can perhaps work through the Kuen Kuit in detail I believe we may get an answer to what Jin was asking. We all have our interpretation of what they mean.
> http://www.wcarchive.com/articles/maxims-kuen-kuit.htm
> 
> These phrases were so important to Ip Man that he had Moy Yat manufacture expensive stone chops. Or have I picked that up completely wrong. Did Ip Man have the money to throw around like that. Or did he not want money? Was this a whim or do they hold significant importance. Either way I see a lot of signatures here that have taken them to heart.


 
My first sifu was a disciple of Moy Yat Sifu.  It is my understanding that Moy Yat was not so much a fighter, but the school scribe.  He trained as the others, but was responsible for history and documetation within the Yip Man school.  The Kuen Kuits were something he took upon himself to do, so that the maxims would not be lost.  They were told to him by Yip Man and he felt they were important.  And Moy Yat was somewhat of an artist too.  So it must have seemed natural for him to create such pieces, for history's sake.  Of course, Benny Meng Sifu may know more about this since he had them in his posession at one time.  Not sure who owns them now since I heard Moy Yat requested they be returned before he died.  Anyone know?

As for the maxims, I think they speak for themselves.  Any student of Wing Chun with some time under their belt should understand them with relative ease.  And MacPedro, that may be your problem.  Since you haven't studied Wing Chun with a sifu, you have not been enlightened into their meaning and use.  Some of them are pretty straight forward and some of them takes some time training to understand.


----------



## zepedawingchun (Apr 21, 2011)

MacPedro said:


> Is &#8220;Attack the centre&#8221; too general to be classed as a concept. It conveys forward intent and perhaps energy also. Like SLT I believe that much of the elements in WC teach us different things &#8216;at the same time&#8217;. It certainly relates to centreline theory but it isn&#8217;t a fixed point in time and space and it&#8217;s much more likely for a teacher to say to an aspiring and time deficient anti-Manchurian rebel. This is simple isn&#8217;t it, thus ticking one of the WC boxes.



Yes, attacking the center is a concept. Attack the center does not only apply to just the centerline, but also with use to the central line. Central line is when you are not face to face, in say a diagonal stance, or sideways to your opponent, or from the side, or behind, just something that is not face to face straight on. You create a straight line from your chin to theirs, and that is the central line. And you follow that line for attack for it is now the center. 





MacPedro said:


> We could have an individual post on each one of these Maxims. In finding out how they are interpreted by the most experienced here an answer would be forthcoming surely.



I think that would just bring up a lot of debate and bickering between the members on the forum. But, you are more than welcome to start it. List the maxims which you feel need to be addressed and see.




MacPedro said:


> "Eternal Spring" I like this as a concept relating to the arm angle, keeping in reserve to bloom/boing up into some ones chin once occupying the inner gate.


 
Eternal Spring (Eternal Springtime) is not a concept, but a name, a meaning. Using or maintaining springy energy throughout can be classified as a concept. Always allowing your hands, arms, legs, whole body to be like a spring always under tension, waiting to be released is how we should be (springy energy).





MacPedro said:


> . . . To truely give 100% requires the banishment of fear. Fear causes a tension and the release of all manner of panic enducing chemicals which is counter productive to combat unless experienced. One way to avert this freeze/fight/flight response is to meditate out. A kind of self hypnosis which doesn't interfere with the training. . . . . ..


 
I'm not sure about mediating fear out, but constant practice makes one confident in their abilities and skills. Once you are confident in your abilities, it is much easier to take tension out (fear) and relax to perform at one's best , be it in training or in combat.


----------



## WC_lun (Apr 21, 2011)

I believe a lot of the differences in the Wing Chun community comes from perspective.  We share many of the same concepts and training drills.  However the importance of certain concepts and how they are applied change from teacher to teacher, lineage to lineage.  This struck me heavily when watching a TV program on Wing Chun.  The lineage was from Yip Man.  The instructor was telling the student to step into the center of his opponent.  I unerstand why he was saying this, it was to upset the attackers balance and make him move into recovery mode.  Something we can all appreciate.  However, for me this was something almost alien to my training, even though we are both Wing Chun people.  For us, stepping into a persons center like he was is very dangerous.  Collapsing knees, kicks, or a good grappler would make that type of thing not advisable.  As a side note I train with ranked grapplers, so that is always a consideration.  It wasn't that the instructor's method was wrong, particularly for him and his students, but that the experiences are different so certain things get focused on diferently.

There are things that as Wing Chun people we can all agree on.  I think it would be better to focus on these commonalities than focus on the diffrences.  Once the things we share can be noted and appreciated, then those things that are different can be appreciated.  Then we all progress further.


----------



## wtxs (Apr 21, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> There are things that as Wing Chun people we can all agree on.  I think it would be better to focus on these commonalities than focus on the diffrences.  Once the things we share can be noted and appreciated, then those things that are different can be appreciated.  Then we all progress further.



... what he saz.  I vote to make this an WC motto.


----------



## yak sao (Apr 21, 2011)

[ 


> There are things that as Wing Chun people we can all agree on. I think it would be better to focus on these commonalities than focus on the diffrences. Once the things we share can be noted and appreciated, then those things that are different can be appreciated. Then we all progress further.


[/QUOTE] 

Excellent idea for a thread....I'll do that right now


----------



## chain punch (Apr 22, 2011)

zepedawingchun said:


> Yes, attacking the center is a concept. Attack the center does not only apply to just the centerline, but also with use to the central line. Central line is when you are not face to face, in say a diagonal stance, or sideways to your opponent, or from the side, or behind, just something that is not face to face straight on. You create a straight line from your chin to theirs, and that is the central line. And you follow that line for attack for it is now the center.
> 
> 
> I think that would just bring up a lot of debate and bickering between the members on the forum. But, you are more than welcome to start it. List the maxims which you feel need to be addressed and see.
> ...



I agree about meditating away fear.  It is my hope that fear is present in your training and must be an integral part of your training.  If we are to be training in wing chun, we must distinguish between what we are doing and be clear.  Are we studying a martial art, self defence or match fighting.  Each are very different and must not be confused as another.  If you get comfortable with your skills it is time to get your biggest training partner glove up, headguard on an attack you in the style of the Saturday night masters.  With tons of speed and aggression, especially verbal as this will get those adrenal glands working.

You need to learn how to work with fear.  Not all of the time as this is going to be counter productive.  We use it in our class as a tool of self development.  It is also very humbling to realise the 'art' crumbles into chaos and survival.  So be honest in your training.  

In addition, you could look to apply one or two maxims under pressure and develop training that way.

How many of our teachers have had to test their art and themselves in the horror that is violence?  And are we reaping the benefits of their experience through our study of wing chun?


----------

