# Moy Yat Ving Tsun



## Spartan (Aug 29, 2007)

Could someone tell me about the characteristics of this brand of wing chun compared to others?

Thanks,
Spartan


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Aug 30, 2007)

http://www.moyyat.com/

Wikipedia has a load of info as well

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moy_Yat

The system looks like the standard wing chun system, but what lets it down is the many quotes stating that his is a true version of wing chun and taken directly from Yip Man

It is these kind of statements that don't benefit the wing chun world at all

If you join up, please let us know of your experiences


----------



## Spartan (Aug 30, 2007)

What would you say the average time frame was for a student of this style to become an instructor? 

I talked w/ a guy in my area who's starting up a club and apparently has only had a couple of years training. I then checked his instructor's website and it seemed that this was average timeline for student to instructor progression.

It freaked me out a little because w/ such a small time constraint, that school would seem to fall into the "McDojo" category. How could I evaluate whether this is a quality wing chun school?

Spartan


----------



## brocklee (Aug 30, 2007)

Spartan said:


> What would you say the average time frame was for a student of this style to become an instructor?
> 
> I talked w/ a guy in my area who's starting up a club and apparently has only had a couple of years training. I then checked his instructor's website and it seemed that this was average timeline for student to instructor progression.
> 
> ...



A great sifu will tell you that there is not any definite timeline.  If you are focused on a goal in the big picture, you won't reach it.  As in, if becoming a master is your main goal to WC, you will never do so.  To progress with WC is to focus on the little picture.  Only think about what you have learned and what you may practice tonight.  

I have to agree with you on the McDojo comment.  I know that my school only has the sifu and the number 1 student.  This works well.


----------



## CheukMo (Aug 30, 2007)

I agree with Brocklee. It is highly unlikely that one could become a good sifu within two years. Bruce Lee didn't come close to it and he studied for a little more than three. Find a good school and focus on whatever they teach you. If it's just the (horse) stance, study that until they teach you something else. A good sifu will know when you are ready for the next step.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Aug 31, 2007)

My Cuong Nhu Sensei was cross training in Moy Yat. It took him four years to get to Bil Jee, not learn it, but get to it.

Also, Kamon Guy mentioned that Moy Yat claims to be the "true Wing Chun", but don't most Yip Man lines claim that?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 2, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> My Cuong Nhu Sensei was cross training in Moy Yat. It took him four years to get to Bil Jee, not learn it, but get to it.
> 
> Also, Kamon Guy mentioned that Moy Yat claims to be the "true Wing Chun", but don't most Yip Man lines claim that?



Yes.  Both claim to be the true WC.  Most styles of WC claim to be the true one.  They are all correct too!  All of them are true WC, with different ideas and different masters.  WC is just a tool that is taught to a wielder.  It's how the wielder uses that tool to over come the opponent that matters.  

Everyone seems to love arguing over which WC is the true one.  That's because of big ego.


----------



## Danny T (Sep 2, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Yes. Both claim to be the true WC. Most styles of WC claim to be the true one. They are all correct too! All of them are true WC, with different ideas and different masters. WC is just a tool that is taught to a wielder. It's how the wielder uses that tool to over come the opponent that matters.
> 
> Everyone seems to love arguing over which WC is the true one. That's because of big ego.


 
Excellent Brocklee!!

Wing Chun is a "Training System" not a fighting style! The training system builds the attributes of the individual to what is best for that individual. If a one arm person wanted to training WC could he not be trained? Certainly but his training and style would be different than someone with two arms. His style would most certainly be different yet he would still be true wing chun.

The style is the individual and anyone training to fight like someone else is doing themselves a disservice. It is well known that Yip Man trained his students differently in specific areas. Their basics are all the same and each was then trained in a manner reflective on the individual's ability and attributes. The individual using their abilities in the most direct and efficient manner at any one particular point in time and space utilizing the principles of the WC system is their true Wing Chun. The system doesn't do the fighting nor does the style. It is the individual utilizing what they have learn within the system based upon that individual's abilities that does the fighting.

The rest is either Ego, Politics, or Marketing.

Danny T


----------



## Spartan (Sep 3, 2007)

I ran across this martial arts website where the instructor has a video of himself working with a wooden dummy. If you go to www.tabermartialarts.com you can see it under the staff section.

What do you think? Does this guy have good form? I ask as one who's never studied Wing Chun.

Spartan


----------



## brocklee (Sep 4, 2007)

I can't see the vid for some reason but from reading the link, its just him freestyling on the dummy.  When it comes to how someones form looks...it is going to look different from person to person depending on their height, build and ability to move freely.  The only things that you want to look for when someone is pretty much just practicing moves (this guy calls it freestyling ) is structure, whether or not the shoulders dip, and if the heads bobbing or not.  Other then that, as long as hes doing some sort of strike, block or kick...hes going to be doing it right.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 4, 2007)

Ouch.....

There is no true wing chun - that is a bad bad statement. How do you judge what is true and what is not? Some schools suggest that Yip Man was not doing true wing chun. Indeed, he learnt wing chun under different instructors in his time before adding bits to the system. 

As for length of time training, it depends on what you are aiming for. I started teaching after four years. This was every day for four years. I have known people who are worse fighters who have trained longer and better fighters who have trained less!

I do think two years is a bit quick though - you need a bit of time for muscle memory to set in.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 4, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Ouch.....
> 
> There is no true wing chun - that is a bad bad statement. How do you judge what is true and what is not? Some schools suggest that Yip Man was not doing true wing chun. Indeed, he learnt wing chun under different instructors in his time before adding bits to the system.
> 
> ...



Well, this is a good example of whether the glass is half full or half empty.  Once again, it comes down to ego.  Everyone claims they are the correct way, and of course they do.  How would you make money if you said, "My style is the incorrect way.  If getting your butt kicked is what you yearn for, then please....sign here " lol  Sure, someone will say "It's not about the money" but honestly it is.  Ip Man didn't enjoy teach classes, from what was passed to me, but he needed to in order to survive.  

So really, all wing chun is the correct wing chun.  As long as it follows the guidelines the grandmaster created.  WT is a different story   lol that was a joke


----------



## Danny T (Sep 4, 2007)

> Ouch.....
> 
> There is no true wing chun - that is a bad bad statement. How do you judge what is true and what is not? Some schools suggest that Yip Man was not doing true wing chun. Indeed, he learnt wing chun under different instructors in his time before adding bits to the system...


 
So is it ok to add or even subtract? Will it still be Wing Chun?

Over the years a of number elements were added to the Wing Chun system. When that happened was it no longer true Wing Chun?

Danny T


----------



## Spartan (Sep 4, 2007)

I have to say that from everything I've read and heard said, WC is the most theoretically advanced system I've ever come across.

It seems only natural that the theories and teachings of Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do would have spawned from a system like Wing Chun Gung Fu.

Spartan


----------



## brocklee (Sep 4, 2007)

It's very advanced, but simple.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 7, 2007)

Danny T said:


> So is it ok to add or even subtract? Will it still be Wing Chun?
> 
> Over the years a of number elements were added to the Wing Chun system. When that happened was it no longer true Wing Chun?
> 
> Danny T


That's what I mean - there is no 'true' wing chun. I bet that you would never find two federations that were completely identical

It doesn't make wing chun bad and there are certainly some schools that teach nunchakus or escrima as part of the syllabus, despite being from other arts. I don't feel that you could add elements from other arts and still call it wing chun. 

In Kamon we train BJJ and boxing, but that is a separate entity. We don't tan sao and then throw in a right hook for example. 

I disagree with you Brocklee on your statement that no instructor will say their school isn't the best. I am most certainly not the best wing chunner by any means. Even my sifu Kevin Chan would never claim to be the best. That is for other people to decide. I would certainly say that he is one of the most forward thinking martial artist I have seen. 

When I train BJJ I get taught by blue belts rather than black belts because blue belts can be far better teachers

I would feel very sad if I heard any wing chunner claiming to be the best. 
Every wing chun school has something to offer. Even WT> I have heard a lot of bad things about them, but if they give pleasure and enjoyment to  a young man or woman, then does it matter? 

I think if people have a claim, they should stand by the claim. I once said that I was an okay fighter, so one of my MT friends enlisted me in a MMA tournament. I came third. The next time, I won. If people come down asking how good I am, I tell them that that is what I have done so far and I still hope to keep going. 
Yet even then, I am not the best fighter by a long shot and would never tell people that. 

Brocklee - please name and shame those people who claim that as they shouldn't be getting away with it


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 7, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> In Kamon we train BJJ and boxing, but that is a separate entity. We don't tan sao and then throw in a right hook for example.


 
Why not?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 9, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> That's what I mean - there is no 'true' wing chun. I bet that you would never find two federations that were completely identical
> 
> It doesn't make wing chun bad and there are certainly some schools that teach nunchakus or escrima as part of the syllabus, despite being from other arts. I don't feel that you could add elements from other arts and still call it wing chun.



You can add elements from other arts as long as they stay withing the boundries of WC.  You wouldn't add a move if you knew that it would either break the rules of structure, cause you to forfeit your line, or require you to dip your shoulders.  There are other guidelines but I just wanted to list a few.


Kamon Guy said:


> In Kamon we train BJJ and boxing, but that is a separate entity. We don't tan sao and then throw in a right hook for example.



I don't understand why not also?  We have hooks, and they're pretty effective because they come from below the opponent's viewing path and very sneaky because the shoulder doesn't dip.


Kamon Guy said:


> I disagree with you Brocklee on your statement that no instructor will say their school isn't the best. I am most certainly not the best wing chunner by any means. Even my sifu Kevin Chan would never claim to be the best. That is for other people to decide. I would certainly say that he is one of the most forward thinking martial artist I have seen.


Thats good, it's your right to disagree and I appreciate your honesty.  One thing however, pay more attention to the text I'm posting.  You added context by saying "school isnt the best.".  I never said anything about not being the best.  I stated it as knowing the incorrect way  So I guess your reply to that is pointless. <---not trying to make you mad Kamon, I enjoy your posts.

When I train BJJ I get taught by blue belts rather than black belts because blue belts can be far better teachers



Kamon Guy said:


> I would feel very sad if I heard any wing chunner claiming to be the best.
> Every wing chun school has something to offer. Even WT> I have heard a lot of bad things about them, but if they give pleasure and enjoyment to  a young man or woman, then does it matter?



I wouldn't care if someone thought they we're the best.  It wouldn't be very WC of them though because a WC fighter should be a humble fighter, expecting to lose and fighting to win.  This is why we grasp onto staying relaxed and watching everything as it happens.  Like the crane.

I agree with you on every school has something to offer.  Good or bad, it has something to offer.



Kamon Guy said:


> I think if people have a claim, they should stand by the claim. I once said that I was an okay fighter, so one of my MT friends enlisted me in a MMA tournament. I came third. The next time, I won. If people come down asking how good I am, I tell them that that is what I have done so far and I still hope to keep going.
> Yet even then, I am not the best fighter by a long shot and would never tell people that.
> 
> Brocklee - please name and shame those people who claim that as they shouldn't be getting away with it



Yeah, I don't have a clue what your getting at or asking or stating but good job on the win.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 10, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> That's what I mean - there is no 'true' wing chun. I bet that you would never find two federations that were completely identical


 
I think that there is a true Wing Chun and a false Wing Chun. Whilst there maybe many variations on the forms and technique, the "Trueness" of the Wing Chun science lies not in these variations, but in the proper energy development. If a practicioner of Wing Chun develops the proper energy coupled with the proper understanding of the principles that have a comanality in most schools of Wing Chun, then he is studying true Wing Chun, if however they are simply taking the hands of Wing chun without the proper development of energy then they are not studying true Wing Chun. The heart of Wing Chun is not technique, it is energy, and the application of that energy.

Respectfully 

Mark


----------



## brocklee (Sep 10, 2007)

bcbernam777 said:


> I think that there is a true Wing Chun and a false Wing Chun. Whilst there maybe many variations on the forms and technique, the "Trueness" of the Wing Chun science lies not in these variations, but in the proper energy development. If a practicioner of Wing Chun develops the proper energy coupled with the proper understanding of the principles that have a comanality in most schools of Wing Chun, then he is studying true Wing Chun, if however they are simply taking the hands of Wing chun without the proper development of energy then they are not studying true Wing Chun. The heart of Wing Chun is not technique, it is energy, and the application of that energy.
> 
> Respectfully
> 
> Mark



Nicely put


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 10, 2007)

bcbernam777 said:


> I think that there is a true Wing Chun and a false Wing Chun. Whilst there maybe many variations on the forms and technique, the "Trueness" of the Wing Chun science lies not in these variations, but in the proper energy development. If a practicioner of Wing Chun develops the proper energy coupled with the proper understanding of the principles that have a comanality in most schools of Wing Chun, then he is studying true Wing Chun, if however they are simply taking the hands of Wing chun without the proper development of energy then they are not studying true Wing Chun. The heart of Wing Chun is not technique, it is energy, and the application of that energy.
> 
> Respectfully
> 
> Mark


 
Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'. 
Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 10, 2007)

brocklee said:


> You can add elements from other arts as long as they stay withing the boundries of WC. You wouldn't add a move if you knew that it would either break the rules of structure, cause you to forfeit your line, or require you to dip your shoulders. There are other guidelines but I just wanted to list a few..


I don't agree with that. It is one of the reasons why a lot of people laugh at wing chunners, because we say that we can fight in a cage etc and then start choking people out!!!
A choke, a sidekick, a headbutt are not wing chun moves but I have seen Sifu's incorperate them and claim that they are wing chun moves!!

In Kamon we do BJJ and we do use chokes but the point is that we acknowledge where the moves originate from



brocklee said:


> I don't understand why not also? We have hooks, and they're pretty effective because they come from below the opponent's viewing path and very sneaky because the shoulder doesn't dip...


A hook goes against economy of motion. It also has no structure behind it. They are most definately powerful (hence why boxers can knock people out), but they are a force that is derived outside wing chun principles
You have to lift your elbow to perform the move and once that happens, you are using muscle more than bodyweight behind the hit
I don't like mixing moves - that would make me a MMA fighter rather than a wing chunner, and whilst I train other arts, I prefer to give more credit to wing chun. 



brocklee said:


> Thats good, it's your right to disagree and I appreciate your honesty. One thing however, pay more attention to the text I'm posting. You added context by saying "school isnt the best.". I never said anything about not being the best. I stated it as knowing the incorrect way  So I guess your reply to that is pointless. <---not trying to make you mad Kamon, I enjoy your posts..


Your post said 'Everyone claims they are the correct way' which I took to mean the best, as it sounded as though those instructors were inferring other schools were not correct etc
I am not offended by your comments in the slightest - misinterperetations happen and I apologise for my dumbness. 
To reiterate though, I still wouldn't call myself 'the correct way' as even Yip Man didn't do it the correct way (ie he changed a lot of stuff when he was training it and trained under different instructors)



brocklee said:


> I wouldn't care if someone thought they we're the best. It wouldn't be very WC of them though because a WC fighter should be a humble fighter, expecting to lose and fighting to win. This is why we grasp onto staying relaxed and watching everything as it happens. Like the crane..


A wing chun fighter should be humble - but I have met sso many who aren't (including me, hehe). I come form training where you must have confidence to win a fight or else you will lose and lose badly. I understand that you mustn't go round thinking you can beat anyone up, but if someone does fight you, you should have the confidence to think that you can take that person. 
The worsst thing is going into a fight expecting to lose. 



brocklee said:


> Yeah, I don't have a clue what your getting at or asking or stating but good job on the win.


Sorry I was talking about those schools claiming to know the correct way


----------



## brocklee (Sep 10, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I don't agree with that. It is one of the reasons why a lot of people laugh at wing chunners, because we say that we can fight in a cage etc and then start choking people out!!!
> A choke, a sidekick, a headbutt are not wing chun moves but I have seen Sifu's incorperate them and claim that they are wing chun moves!!
> 
> In Kamon we do BJJ and we do use chokes but the point is that we acknowledge where the moves originate from
> ...



like bcbernam777 said.  It doesn't matter what the move looks like or the actual move is, as long as the energy is behind it.  My sifu taught me that walking directly into a person is WC.  He even taught us how to angle our head incase we ever happen to be in that situation.  He states that what makes it wing chun is that it is more efficient than if he were to have thrown a punch from that certain angle or distance.  

The WC hook, just like most our moves, isn't like a boxer's hook.  It's very efficient because the arm barely moves, it's the torque that's created from the body rotation that does the damage.

I believe you will learn it later down the road.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 10, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'.
> Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist


 
May be thats what he meant?

Also, there is a way to do a hook and make it Wing Chun effective. 

Also, Wing Chun teaches chokes, just indirectly.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 10, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> May be thats what he meant?
> 
> Also, there is a way to do a hook and make it Wing Chun effective.
> 
> Also, Wing Chun teaches chokes, just indirectly.



Yeah, the hook is similar to the back palm from the beginning of the second form.  The arm and elbow move very little but the impact from the strike is great.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 10, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Yeah, the hook is similar to the back palm from the beginning of the second form. The arm and elbow move very little but the impact from the strike is great.


 
No, I meant a Boxing hook. Same with chokes being in Wing Chun.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 11, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> No, I meant a Boxing hook. Same with chokes being in Wing Chun.



A boxing hook consists of lowering the body, turning the hips and then dipping the throwing shoulder.  If you can do it without those unnecessary motions, then yes I...I understand what you're saying.  

The hook I was describing comes out similar to a bong sao, without the twist though.  As the fist moves away from the body, still down the centerline, the elbow starts to raise until the the fist and elbow are at equal distances from the ground. Instead of extending the fist all the way out, it stays within about 2 feet of the chest (I know, western ideology...but that's the distance on me, when I look down).  Once the fist is nearing the target, you begin the torquing process at the feet and continue until you get your desired result.  lol The elbow, will be pointing away from the body, horizontally, and should only move a tiny bit.  Like 2-3 inches, what ever is optimum for your build.  There really is no swing or shoot to it...just torquing the joints and the rotation of the structure.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 11, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'.
> Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist


 

The proper energy is the foundational energy that is developed through the proper execution and devoted practice of the Sui Lum Tao. The Yee Jeee Kim Yeung Ma is positioned (and so named) for a good reason. The energy is hard to explain, and I am only a mere infant in its fullness, it is something that you taste only after many painful hours in the SLT. It is concerned both with proper body alignment, proper weight distribution, relaxation and the ability to utilise the natural leverage of the weight ratio on the balls of the foot, and the final mix in this energy is Chi. Now before we get all mystical and starry eyed, what is Chi? It is breath, and its importance cannot be overated or underated, it has a place in the natural order ofthe body, and so deserves particular importance. In essence with these combinations, the Wing Chunner learns to utilise gravity, and use it as its freind rather than his foe. 

I am aware that this post may appear slightly cryptic, but that is the nature of the Wing Chun energy. Some boil it down to simple bio mechanics, or a principal of central alighnment, but it is more than this.

The only way to develop this energy is through the proper execution of the Sui Lum TAo, and this energy must be tasted rather than theoretically explained.

I apologise if this answer is insufficient, if you have any questions I would be happy to expound.

Thanks

Mark


----------



## Danny T (Sep 11, 2007)

No Side kick, Chokes, or Hooks in Wing Chun? 

Remember WC is a system of training not a particular style stay true to the principles, the underlying rules by which we move and it is WC. In Bil Jee there are hooks & chokes. In Chum Kiu there are side kicks, locks, chokes and many other usages of the movements and positions. There are also many takedowns, throws, sweeps, locks, breaks and much more all within the movements and they are very much a part of Wing Chun. As to changing or using different movements lets look a the pole and swords. Footwork is different, structure in the pole is different. Weight distribution is different based upon what is needed. Stay true to the principles within the movement and positions and it is wing chun. For example, based upon need and positional relationship the bong sao movement can be defensive, Ie. a deflection as most express it. It can also be an elbow strike, an arm break, used from the inside of the opponent&#8217;s guard, under the arm and with the turning action from Chum Kiu is a throw or takedown. These same movements and usages are also in other systems yet is still WC if utilized within the principles of WC.

Danny T


----------



## brocklee (Sep 11, 2007)

Danny T said:


> No Side kick, Chokes, or Hooks in Wing Chun?
> 
> Remember WC is a system of training not a particular style stay true to the principles, the underlying rules by which we move and it is WC. In Bil Jee there are hooks & chokes. In Chum Kiu there are side kicks, locks, chokes and many other usages of the movements and positions. There are also many takedowns, throws, sweeps, locks, breaks and much more all within the movements and they are very much a part of Wing Chun. As to changing or using different movements lets look a the pole and swords. Footwork is different, structure in the pole is different. Weight distribution is different based upon what is needed. Stay true to the principles within the movement and positions and it is wing chun. For example, based upon need and positional relationship the bong sao movement can be defensive, Ie. a deflection as most express it. It can also be an elbow strike, an arm break, used from the inside of the opponents guard, under the arm and with the turning action from Chum Kiu is a throw or takedown. These same movements and usages are also in other systems yet is still WC if utilized within the principles of WC.
> 
> Danny T



This is exactly my point.  The few moves that we have, have many other abilities that seem to go unrecognized.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 11, 2007)

brocklee said:


> A boxing hook consists of lowering the body, turning the hips and then dipping the throwing shoulder. If you can do it without those unnecessary motions, then yes I...I understand what you're saying.


 
There is a very good way. All it requires is a Tan Sao and a small amount of footwork. Your left hand perfroms a Tan Sao, and you shift your weight so that you go off line with your opponent (similar to in Chum Kyu), or step off line, and throw a hook with your right hand to your opponents ribs/side of head. I have done this a few times in Chi Sao and several times in full sparring (more karate like). When I do it in Chi Sao, my Sensei/Sifu starts to laugh and comment on my good training.

Which brings me to point number 2, to comment on something Kamon said. If you are training in two styles, both will come out. If you are doing Boxing while you do Wing Chun, expect to do a Boxing strike in Chi Sao. And expect to throw a Wing Chun technique in Boxing sparring/fight. If you are training well, it will develop into you muscle memory, and you wont have any choice but to put it into play.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 12, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> There is a very good way. All it requires is a Tan Sao and a small amount of footwork. Your left hand perfroms a Tan Sao, and you shift your weight so that you go off line with your opponent (similar to in Chum Kyu), or step off line, and throw a hook with your right hand to your opponents ribs/side of head. I have done this a few times in Chi Sao and several times in full sparring (more karate like). When I do it in Chi Sao, my Sensei/Sifu starts to laugh and comment on my good training.


I know what you are saying here. First off, your opponent should not be giving you opportunity to do this! Secondly, in that position you could strike with any move - wing chun punch, palm, elbow etc. Why you are using a hook during a wing chun class, I have no idea. 
It would be like me going into TKD and start using grappling.



CuongNhuka said:


> Which brings me to point number 2, to comment on something Kamon said. If you are training in two styles, both will come out. If you are doing Boxing while you do Wing Chun, expect to do a Boxing strike in Chi Sao. And expect to throw a Wing Chun technique in Boxing sparring/fight. If you are training well, it will develop into you muscle memory, and you wont have any choice but to put it into play.


I train boxing and TKD whilst still teaching/training wing chun, and have never done a boxing move in chi sao!
In chi sao, you should be playing under a set format (ie wing chun movements). I cannot see how you would ssuddenly throw a hook into the equation when it is more efficent to strike using wing chun 

Similarly, I have never thrown a wing chun move into a spar. 

Despite muscle memory, the opportunity for wing chun should not arise in sparring at long range 

Similarly, in movements like chi sao, hooks should not occur. 

I understand that certain aspects from other styles might arise by mistake during wing chun training, but its bad and disrespectful to encourage it in a class. If I went to a BJJ and started to hit someone whilst I was grappling with them, I would expect to be chucked out. If a grappler came down to my class, joined up and started trying to grapple my students during certain drills I would chuck them out.

Fair enough if people want to do MMA, or during a free spar where anything goes, but during chi sao or in a boxing spar is a bit rude 

Going back to hooks - I think peoples definition of hooks varies. I am talking about a swing, which breaks the guidelines of wing chun (economy of motion).

Some people are probably thinking of uppercutts (which are often known as hooks), which do appear in chum kil and bil gee. 

At the end of the day, if you are fighting someone for real, you do what works, but my original point is that if you are learning an art based in class, you don't just make stuff up or take things from another art


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I know what you are saying here. First off, your opponent should not be giving you opportunity to do this! Secondly, in that position you could strike with any move - wing chun punch, palm, elbow etc. Why you are using a hook during a wing chun class, I have no idea.
> It would be like me going into TKD and start using grappling.
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, but WC isn't really an art.  It's creation was mainly for straight up fighting.  Also, its difficult to add anything to WC because the moves are already there.  Earlier in the training process these are taught as simple blocks.  As you learn to move around with WC you begin to feel that if you use one of these blocks in conjunction with a certain type of advancing step or side step, it doesn't matter, it ends up creating a strike.  Or it may set u up with an arm lock or any other type of move you can think of.

Take the tan sao....combine that with a swift lunge forward and it's now a way to either gouge the opponents adam's apple or even stab under the jaw.  

I'm not sure what stage of training you're on but WC is taught so that the first two forms are very square and the fundamental rules are strict.  With a certain posture and certain stance.  And when you do this, this has to be like that.  Maintain your mother line and centerline.  This is purely for training purposes and once that is drilled in your head and you can move around freely with a WC manner...you begin the 3rd form.  The 3rd form should give a better understanding of the rules of WC and lets you know that they can be bent.  It's for situations that hinder your WC abilities.  Like if someone were to hug your feet tight and you're fighting someone else and needed more power.  Mo' Powah!! lol You can't start the chain by moving your feet left or right because of the gentleman hugging your feet.  Up to the first 2 forms that leaves you screwed on power.  

After the 3rd form that's no problem at all.  You just start the rotation of the joints in the knees instead of the ankles, or you bend your motherline and start the rotation at the hips.  This looks very un WC, but take a look at the moves in the 3rd form.  

Also, I don't think WC should be sparred.  It puts an unfair advantage on us because of rules and not having the ability to fully attack.

Like someone said prior in this thread (I don't want to research, but the statement was very true).  The most WC move of all is bringing a gun to the fight.  It's very true.  Sure theres no honor in it, but hey...you win   I'd rather fight so I would never use that tactic.  But it is the most efficient and very direct.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 12, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Yes, but WC isn't really an art. It's creation was mainly for straight up fighting. Also, its difficult to add anything to WC because the moves are already there. Earlier in the training process these are taught as simple blocks. As you learn to move around with WC you begin to feel that if you use one of these blocks in conjunction with a certain type of advancing step or side step, it doesn't matter, it ends up creating a strike. Or it may set u up with an arm lock or any other type of move you can think of.
> 
> Take the tan sao....combine that with a swift lunge forward and it's now a way to either gouge the opponents adam's apple or even stab under the jaw.
> 
> ...


Very good post. I am an instructor of wing chun but still train. I have trained all forms, but I am very rusty on the dummy. I'm okay at the knife form but its not my favourite. Pole is my favourite. 

Not sure what you mean by the gun thing. Do you mean an actual gun? I'm in the UK where guns are rare, and do you mean that the person who has the gun wins, because its the best weapon? Or is it just a metaphor?

I know what you mean by the movement incorperated into wing chun and this is what we do in Kamon. What I was trying to say is that a hook is one of those motions that is not really part of wing chun. 

I do think wing chun is an art. It is very tetchy to say that certain martial arts are not arts - you could say that about BJJ or TKD. Technically they are sports. I agree that wing chun is more of a concept, but I still believe it is an art form


----------



## brocklee (Sep 12, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Very good post. I am an instructor of wing chun but still train. I have trained all forms, but I am very rusty on the dummy. I'm okay at the knife form but its not my favourite. Pole is my favourite.
> 
> Not sure what you mean by the gun thing. Do you mean an actual gun? I'm in the UK where guns are rare, and do you mean that the person who has the gun wins, because its the best weapon? Or is it just a metaphor?
> 
> ...



Well, we practice two different lineages of WC.  We have hooks in the one I train and they're dope.  Lots of torque created for the hook.

And yes...I meant bring a gun, tank or bomb to the fight and its more WC then if you were to throw a punch.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 13, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Well, we practice two different lineages of WC. We have hooks in the one I train and they're dope. Lots of torque created for the hook.
> 
> And yes...I meant bring a gun, tank or bomb to the fight and its more WC then if you were to throw a punch.


 
Hmmm..... Yes and no. Its wing chun in a way that a gun is the most efficient/economical. But wing chun is a set system with set weapons.

As I said, a hook is extremely powerful, but is not wing chun. In order to create the torque, do you for instance go on tip toes? 
Does the hook travel in a straight line from A to B? 

A hook is not wing chun


----------



## brocklee (Sep 13, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Hmmm..... Yes and no. Its wing chun in a way that a gun is the most efficient/economical. But wing chun is a set system with set weapons.
> 
> As I said, a hook is extremely powerful, but is not wing chun. In order to create the torque, do you for instance go on tip toes?
> Does the hook travel in a straight line from A to B?
> ...



Well, i'll make sure to write that down.  

lol  WC is not set on a system of weapons.  What ever is in your hands at the time is your weapon.  If you dont have anything in your hands, then your hands are the weapons.  If you don't have hands, you better hope you have good structure, cause that is now your new weapon.  And so on and so on.  You work with what you got.

I think you are well beyond me having to describe how torque is created  to you.  Right?  You do know about bone joint power don't you?  Have you done the 2nd form yet?  Because you create these arguments that describe
the lack of knowledge.  You can eliminate these discussions by being more open minded and less stuck on..."This is what I was taught, this is how it is".

It's nice to see you sticking to your guns on what you're taught and that's how it should be.  There's alot more to it though and your doors seem closed.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 14, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Like someone said prior in this thread (I don't want to research, but the statement was very true). The most WC move of all is bringing a gun to the fight. It's very true. Sure theres no honor in it, but hey...you win  I'd rather fight so I would never use that tactic. But it is the most efficient and very direct.


 
Good pont, this is why Wing Chun is not this move or that move, this hand or that hand, or this utilisation of this principle in that situation. If there was one founding principle that I would say is essentially wing chunI would have to say the principle o effeciency, i.e. Achieving the most with the least effort. The problem with many arguments about Martial Arts, IMO, is that people are always saying "no in this situation, you would use this move, or you would do this" "no, no you wouldn't do that, you would do this or use this" and back and forth it goes, with no resolution. It reminds me of the story about Wong Shun Lueng who wasas in a restaurant and was being pestered by the owner of the restaurant, who was saying to him, "If i did this what would you do, or If I did this what would you do" finally Wong man said to him, "I dont know, why dont we go outside and find out".

The point is this, if you need a hook use it, if you need a Tan sao use it, use whatever is at your disposal, it is important that you find freedom from the art, and do not become a prisoner to its form and structure, this is of course the art of artlessness, and was the key reason why Bruce wrote the Tao Of JKD. 

Whilst I appreciate the structural differences between a boxers hook and a "Wing Chun Hook" and the contrasting principals that come into play, there is a need to understand that all Martial arts are not and end to themeselves, but are a means of enlightenment, of understanding, yourself and those around you.

That is why when talking about who has the best style, is it Moy Yat or Choi Sheung Ting, or Derek Fung, is to a large degree irrelevant, because their style may be the best for you at that time whilst you are on the journey, then as you being to think and grow you being to spread your wings, trying out other styles, other ways of understanding the martial arts and ultimately understanding yourself in the process. perhaps from there you will come full circle and begin again with Wing Chun that is an individual choice.

The only thing further I will add to the current disscusion is this, muscle memory is a very keen animal, and once it is engrained it can be very hard to unlearn what you have learnt. In some cases, with particular martial arts, you will find that it is a requirement to unlearn what you have learnt, otherwise you will impede automatic timing and learning. An example of this is when I started Traingin under Sifu Fung, I was so deeply ingrained with JKD that I automatically fell into the fundamental concept of "blading" instead of the squarre on stance of Wing Chun, this was an element that I had to unlearn what I had learnt. (By the way, there is a form of blading in Wing Chun, but it comes from a totally different premise as that Of Wing Chun.)

Whatever you do, and whatever art you choose, make sure that you absorb it, understand it, apply it, learn from it, and contiinue to grow and expand within it.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 14, 2007)

So if you guys saw a guy doing a roundhouse kick, you would accept that it could be wing chun? 

I think this is the problem with wing chun. There are lots of videos that get posted in response to people asking why wing chun doesn't enter the UFC (wing chunners doing trying to do cage fighting etc) and most of the time they are using moves like rear naked chokes or a side knee strike but still claim it is wing chun

It destroys the wing chun reputation.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 14, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> So if you guys saw a guy doing a roundhouse kick, you would accept that it could be wing chun?
> 
> I think this is the problem with wing chun. There are lots of videos that get posted in response to people asking why wing chun doesn't enter the UFC (wing chunners doing trying to do cage fighting etc) and most of the time they are using moves like rear naked chokes or a side knee strike but still claim it is wing chun
> 
> It destroys the wing chun reputation.


 
Round house kick can be applied as a Wing Chun technique. And there are chokes taught in Wing Chun, they just aren't obvious. Besides, knee strikes are very Wing Chun, just like a straight punch.


----------



## Spartan (Sep 15, 2007)

Guys, this is pretty off the subject, but I have a question regarding wing chun's methods for dealing w/ a downed opponents - I've noticed that when a practitioner is performing one of this systems series of chain punches and their opponent goes to the ground the follow through seems to be to stoop over and continue punching the grounded foe.

Other systems (Tracy's Kenpo) would seem to work more on kicking techniques for grounded opponents. To me, this seems to make more sense seeing that you would be more flexible to face multiple attackers.

Could you give me some info on this matter? I'm sure there are alot more techniques that I don't know about.

Spartan


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Spartan said:


> Guys, this is pretty off the subject, but I have a question regarding wing chun's methods for dealing w/ a downed opponents - I've noticed that when a practitioner is performing one of this systems series of chain punches and their opponent goes to the ground the follow through seems to be to stoop over and continue punching the grounded foe.
> 
> Other systems (Tracy's Kenpo) would seem to work more on kicking techniques for grounded opponents. To me, this seems to make more sense seeing that you would be more flexible to face multiple attackers.
> 
> ...



That call comes down to what type of person you are, I guess.  If a person's down and doesn't want to get back up and pretty much submits right away, I would say just remain defensive.  If they appear to try and get up again, and it feels like a threatening manner, just break their structure down and keep advance forward until they give up.  Some people might say, "sit on their shoulders and chain punch their nose"   Its all a call of character.

My use of WC isn't to beat the snot outta people, that just tends to be the end result.  Its simply to get the opponent to submit.  To me, anything beyond that isn't very rewarding and goes beyond the principle of efficiency.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 15, 2007)

The chat about hooks and chokes is interesting, but can we bring it back to Moy Yat VT?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 15, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> The chat about hooks and chokes is interesting, but can we bring it back to Moy Yat VT?



Hi there again.  The originating member that started this thread asked an additional question :

Guys, this is pretty off the subject, but I have a question regarding wing chun's methods for dealing w/ a downed opponents - I've noticed that when a practitioner is performing one of this systems series of chain punches and their opponent goes to the ground the follow through seems to be to stoop over and continue punching the grounded foe.

Other systems (Tracy's Kenpo) would seem to work more on kicking techniques for grounded opponents. To me, this seems to make more sense seeing that you would be more flexible to face multiple attackers.

Could you give me some info on this matter? I'm sure there are alot more techniques that I don't know about.

HAHA


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 17, 2007)

Hmmm, I'm going to concede as I am really really too ill to argue much. I know that there are definatley knee strijes in wing chun - they are efficient and don't seem to break any wing chun theories 
As for everything else, I am willing to be open minded taht there are wing chun chokes etc. All I would say is, please be careful on other forums. A guy was on Martial Arts Planet talkig about this kind of stuff and got destroyed by non-wing chunners

As for the whole 'when your opponent is on the ground thing', brocklee was bang on the money. Kevin Chan often employs a knee on the chest and controlled chain paunching which makes it hard for the guy to counter. I personally love to use stamping, but this can be countered if the opponent is switched on (because your opponent is not pinned down)

Some people outside of wing chun like to use arm bars, but as it has already been suggested you want to keep mobile for any other attackers

The other alternative is to run away!! I am certainly not fit enough to outrun most people, so I'd rather control them.


----------



## brocklee (Sep 17, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Hmmm, I'm going to concede as I am really really too ill to argue much. I know that there are definatley knee strijes in wing chun - they are efficient and don't seem to break any wing chun theories
> As for everything else, I am willing to be open minded taht there are wing chun chokes etc. All I would say is, please be careful on other forums. A guy was on Martial Arts Planet talkig about this kind of stuff and got destroyed by non-wing chunners


 
Who cares if e-thugs hop around and attempt to bash.  You shouldn't limit what you're going to say because you're afraid of someone else's reaction.  If someone wants to hop in here to stir up the nest, let em.  They're the ones wasting their time to do so, and will just get brushed off by the normal users that are parked in this section of the forums.  Not to mention the moderators here are pretty much on top of it when ever they notice something is taking a downward spiral.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 17, 2007)

brocklee said:


> Who cares if e-thugs hop around and attempt to bash. You shouldn't limit what you're going to say because you're afraid of someone else's reaction. If someone wants to hop in here to stir up the nest, let em. They're the ones wasting their time to do so, and will just get brushed off by the normal users that are parked in this section of the forums. Not to mention the moderators here are pretty much on top of it when ever they notice something is taking a downward spiral.


Yeah I didn't mean on here, I meant on the other forums. If you visit defend.net for example, you will find that wing chun is ridiculed. It's why I don't really look at it anymore!

Some arguments are fine, but a lot get personal. 

I have no problem withe someone coming down to train and swap ideas, but you get a lot of idiots coming down, thinking they can outfight you etc, or that wing chun doesn't work. Certainly they soon find out it does work, but I shouldn't need to prove or defend it.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 19, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> Yeah I didn't mean on here, I meant on the other forums. If you visit defend.net for example, you will find that wing chun is ridiculed. It's why I don't really look at it anymore!
> 
> Some arguments are fine, but a lot get personal.
> 
> I have no problem withe someone coming down to train and swap ideas, but you get a lot of idiots coming down, thinking they can outfight you etc, or that wing chun doesn't work. Certainly they soon find out it does work, but I shouldn't need to prove or defend it.


 
I am afraid that rubbish has exsisted for centuries, although I know how frustrating it can be when someone rubbishes your style, I had someone rubbishing to my face, then to make matters worse he king hit me on the jaw then tried to grapple me. He soon found himself with his face in the flower pot, spitting dirt (if I was being humble I would say it was unfortunate, but it was bloody marvelous).


----------



## Spartan (Sep 19, 2007)

I've decided to go and check out/ train w/ the local Moy Yat Ving Tsun club (this is the one I was reffering to when I said the instructor's only had a few yrs. experience). The clubs parent school is based in Omaha and their website is www.kungfuomaha.com. Anybody heard of them?


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 20, 2007)

bcbernam777 said:


> I am afraid that rubbish has exsisted for centuries, although I know how frustrating it can be when someone rubbishes your style, I had someone rubbishing to my face, then to make matters worse he king hit me on the jaw then tried to grapple me. He soon found himself with his face in the flower pot, spitting dirt (if I was being humble I would say it was unfortunate, but it was bloody marvelous).


Brilliant!
Yeah, even really good guys tend to get blasted. Everyone makes mistakes, everyone says silly things now and again but websites liek Bullshido and Martial arts Planet tend to stalk you until you slip up. I made one post and then never did it again!

I have seen people slag off Bruce Lee, even though they never met him etc
I find it ludicrous to judge a person or style when you have only seen them on TV or in a movie etc


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 20, 2007)

Spartan said:


> I've decided to go and check out/ train w/ the local Moy Yat Ving Tsun club (this is the one I was reffering to when I said the instructor's only had a few yrs. experience). The clubs parent school is based in Omaha and their website is www.kungfuomaha.com. Anybody heard of them?


 
Dude! Thats the Kung Fu school my Sensei trained at! You can even see him, he's second from the left (punching) in the bottom pic. They are a good school. I geuss they don't update there home page too often, since my Sensei hasn't been able to train with them too much in about 2 years.
Anyways, if you want Spartan, feel free to drop my school. We train in Papillion, if you can get out to use.


----------



## Spartan (Sep 20, 2007)

So, tell me about this school. How do they stack up to other wing chun schools? Also, what worked well about wing chun for your Sensei?


----------



## Spartan (Sep 20, 2007)

If I had my choice, I would train in a wing chun school under either Randy Williams or Emin Boztepe's organization - everything I've seen/ read about these fellows seems to stress a serious focus on realistic street survival. Can anyone tell me more about these dudes?


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 21, 2007)

Spartan said:


> If I had my choice, I would train in a wing chun school under either Randy Williams or Emin Boztepe's organization - everything I've seen/ read about these fellows seems to stress a serious focus on realistic street survival. Can anyone tell me more about these dudes?


I've only seen clips of Emin, but it was enough to get me interested in him. He is quite famous for the whole vs. William Cheung thing, but I have a clip of him doing chi sao on my phone!

As for Randy Williams, I have his books which are very comprehensive, but to be honest it doesn't look very street orientated. 

Are you in the US? UK?


----------



## Spartan (Sep 21, 2007)

I live in the US dude, St. Louis MO to be exact. The only people around town who study wc is that Moy Yat Ving Tsun study group I was talking about.
I'm a little skeptical about the whole affair to be honest. While it's true that you can't judge a school by their website, I feel you can get a slight feel for their training. From what I've seen, these guys don't have that hard edge I'm looking for (I come from a background of bjj/sambo/muay thai, so I'm used to going all out). Comments?


----------



## brocklee (Sep 21, 2007)

Spartan said:


> I live in the US dude, St. Louis MO to be exact. The only people around town who study wc is that Moy Yat Ving Tsun study group I was talking about.
> I'm a little skeptical about the whole affair to be honest. While it's true that you can't judge a school by their website, I feel you can get a slight feel for their training. From what I've seen, these guys don't have that hard edge I'm looking for (I come from a background of bjj/sambo/muay thai, so I'm used to going all out). Comments?



All out doesn't sound too efficient.  Why would you want to mix that with WC?


----------



## Spartan (Sep 21, 2007)

I'm not saying all out is always the answer. I do, however, think a martial artists needs to go full contact now and then so they can maintain a sense of reality. 

When I see some people train, I feel theirs a lack of discipline (for me, a certain degree of rigidity is a good thing). I know that street fights are unkind and if you fluff your training, you'll fold in the encounter.

That's just how I feel. 

Spartan


----------



## brocklee (Sep 21, 2007)

Spartan said:


> I'm not saying all out is always the answer. I do, however, think a martial artists needs to go full contact now and then so they can maintain a sense of reality.
> 
> When I see some people train, I feel theirs a lack of discipline (for me, a certain degree of rigidity is a good thing). I know that street fights are unkind and if you fluff your training, you'll fold in the encounter.
> 
> ...


 
I see what you're saying.  I agree.  When you said "all out", I thought you we're speaking of a rampage mode.  Just dumpin energy.  Cool, thanks for explainin.

SpArTaHhHhH!!!


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 23, 2007)

Spartan said:


> I live in the US dude, St. Louis MO to be exact. The only people around town who study wc is that Moy Yat Ving Tsun study group I was talking about.
> I'm a little skeptical about the whole affair to be honest. While it's true that you can't judge a school by their website, I feel you can get a slight feel for their training. From what I've seen, these guys don't have that hard edge I'm looking for (I come from a background of bjj/sambo/muay thai, so I'm used to going all out). Comments?



I train in Moy Yat VT. I don't know about the school you linked, but I think MYVT is a good system.

I would agree that from their website, it doesn't seem to have a "hard edge". The classroom seems so clean and sterile to me. Ours can sometimes feel downright grungy; we're there to work hard. What I immediately noticed what the pictures of a fat woman doing drills and forms. We have neither fat people nor women in my school, at least that I have ever seen. When I see fat people in a martial arts class, I have trouble taking the school seriously. (this rule does not apply to sumo stables) Same if there's a lot of women. Sorry, but that's just how I feel about it. Lastly, no one is sweating. At my school, after a two hour class, we can wring our shirts and make decent sized puddles on the pavement outside.

I would suggest checking out the school and maybe do a month or so to get the feel of it, as they have no contract.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 23, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I train in Moy Yat VT. I don't know about the school you linked, but I think MYVT is a good system.
> 
> I would agree that from their website, it doesn't seem to have a "hard edge". The classroom seems so clean and sterile to me. Ours can sometimes feel downright grungy; we're there to work hard. What I immediately noticed what the pictures of a fat woman doing drills and forms. We have neither fat people nor women in my school, at least that I have ever seen. When I see fat people in a martial arts class, I have trouble taking the school seriously. (this rule does not apply to sumo stables) Same if there's a lot of women. Sorry, but that's just how I feel about it. Lastly, no one is sweating. At my school, after a two hour class, we can wring our shirts and make decent sized puddles on the pavement outside.
> 
> I would suggest checking out the school and maybe do a month or so to get the feel of it, as they have no contract.


 
mmm... I'll leave the fat-phobia and sexism alone. However, the pics taken done in the first 5 minutes of class.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 23, 2007)

Spartan said:


> So, tell me about this school. How do they stack up to other wing chun schools? Also, what worked well about wing chun for your Sensei?


 
I honestly couldn't tell you much of anything. All I really know is some of the first 2 forms, the drills that go along, and some of the 'fist sayings'. My Cuong Nhu Sensei has had an intrest in Wing Chun that spurred him to study with these guys.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 23, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> mmm... I'll leave the fat-phobia and sexism alone. However, the pics taken done in the first 5 minutes of class.



I am not scared of fat people. I have simply noticed the scarcity of them amongst competent martial artists. You may have also noticed the rarity of obese sprinters, boxers, and gymnasts. 

Similarly, none of my comments were sexist. At least the way we train, most women would be out the door after the first time she lined up to get a few punches to the solar plexus from the teachers, if not the first time the medicine ball was slammed into her stomach. I know there are women out there who don't mind getting knocked around, but my guess is that the class where they get clocked in the face after doing a sloppy pak sao would also be their last class.

I think it's remarkable that every picture on that website, from forms to chi sao to wooden dummy to sao bao training, were taken in the first five minutes of class. You guys must have the world record for fastest SLT.


----------



## Spartan (Sep 23, 2007)

Tanizaki,
I'm feelin ya all the way bro.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 24, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> I am not scared of fat people. I have simply noticed the scarcity of them amongst competent martial artists. You may have also noticed the rarity of obese sprinters, boxers, and gymnasts.
> 
> Similarly, none of my comments were sexist. At least the way we train, most women would be out the door after the first time she lined up to get a few punches to the solar plexus from the teachers, if not the first time the medicine ball was slammed into her stomach. I know there are women out there who don't mind getting knocked around, but my guess is that the class where they get clocked in the face after doing a sloppy pak sao would also be their last class.
> 
> I think it's remarkable that every picture on that website, from forms to chi sao to wooden dummy to sao bao training, were taken in the first five minutes of class. You guys must have the world record for fastest SLT.


 
Just so you know, I'm about 10 lb.s over weight. My Sensei is a few pounds over weight. There is a 7th Dan in Aikido in my area who could be mistaken for a Sumo wrestler do to his size. Now, if you say that any of us are incompotent Martial Artists, I'll laugh at you. 

As for sexist, why would a woman be more likely to quite do to intense training? Besides, aren't punches in Pac Sao/Chum Choi supposed to be chest level?

It's not a record for speedy training, it's called 'being staged for the sake of PR'


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 24, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Just so you know, I'm about 10 lb.s over weight. My Sensei is a few pounds over weight. There is a 7th Dan in Aikido in my area who could be mistaken for a Sumo wrestler do to his size. Now, if you say that any of us are incompotent Martial Artists, I'll laugh at you.&#12300;/quote]
> In general, I am not very impressed with aikido. Maybe if he trained against resisting opponents, he wouldn't be so fat.
> 
> As for people being 3-10 lbs overweight, I don't generally consider that fat. Of course, I never said that there are no competent fat martial artists; I said that fat ones were rare. I was expecting you to pull out George Foreman, who is one of the greatest boxers of all time. However, I still wouldn't say that it is good for a boxer to be a tub of lard. That would be the logical fallacy known as "hasty conclusion", which you have just employed.
> ...


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm a big fat guy and I am not offended by your comments. I think that being fat shows laziness and over indulgence. I am guilty of both. I do work hard in training, but over indulge. I have been very toned and fitter than most but have let myslef go in recent years

I think it is also important to have a mix of all types of people in class - women, fat people, skinny people, etc. If you have a fight in the street, it could be against anyone, including fat people. If you are used to training with toned people all the time, you will struggle. 

There are a lot of fat people in the world who have made good martial artists - Sammo Hung and Buttersby/Begsby (I can't remember his name, but the cage fighter from Cage Rage)


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 25, 2007)

OK... dude... I have done Aikido with this guy. I tried doing the attacks with no force, and he got mad at me. He told me to do a full force, full commitment attack. He is in good shape, just fat. Which is possible, believe it or not.

Agian, this sounds kinda sexist. Talk to a Marine.

You said some thing to the effect of 'when they get punched in the face because of a weak pac sao'. When your doing the drill where one person is just doing pac sao, and the other is chain punching (called chum choi), isn't the puncher supposed to be going chest level?

No, they were. They set it up, just like they would in a real class, and then did the work out.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 25, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I'm a big fat guy and I am not offended by your comments. I think that being fat shows laziness and over indulgence. I am guilty of both. I do work hard in training, but over indulge. I have been very toned and fitter than most but have let myslef go in recent years


Thank you for an honest response.



> I think it is also important to have a mix of all types of people in class - women, fat people, skinny people, etc. If you have a fight in the street, it could be against anyone, including fat people. If you are used to training with toned people all the time, you will struggle.


I don't think people who present no challenge are useful in a class. 



> There are a lot of fat people in the world who have made good martial artists - Sammo Hung and Buttersby/Begsby (I can't remember his name, but the cage fighter from Cage Rage)



In my world, two is not "lots".

By the way, I noticed that you took a bit of a beating at The Site That Must Not Be Named recently.


----------



## Tanizaki (Sep 25, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> OK... dude... I have done Aikido with this guy. I tried doing the attacks with no force, and he got mad at me. He told me to do a full force, full commitment attack. He is in good shape, just fat. Which is possible, believe it or not.


But of course it is.



> Agian, this sounds kinda sexist. Talk to a Marine.


Talk to a jarhead about what?



> You said some thing to the effect of 'when they get punched in the face because of a weak pac sao'. When your doing the drill where one person is just doing pac sao, and the other is chain punching (called chum choi), isn't the puncher supposed to be going chest level?


We do punches to the face in the pak sao drill.



> No, they were. They set it up, just like they would in a real class, and then did the work out.



It doesn't seem to have worked out very well for you.


----------



## Spartan (Sep 25, 2007)

I will say that it is possible to be overweight, while still having good conditioning. There aren't many fighters in this category however - if your hitting your cardio, the pounds will usually come off.

I don't have any problem w/women training w/men. I would never want there to be any comprimise in the training - the group still has to hit it just as hard, same intesity.

As far as the website goes, while looks can be deceiving, it doesn't look like many of them could handle themselves in a dark alley.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Sep 26, 2007)

Tanizaki said:


> Thank you for an honest response..


No problem



Tanizaki said:


> I don't think people who present no challenge are useful in a class. .


I have found that some women and skinny people are a hell of a lot harder to fight than bigger people



Tanizaki said:


> In my world, two is not "lots"..


I only mentioned two people who are exceptional martial artists as an example. I could quote 20 people I know who are not toned who are good martial artists, but I didn't want to bore people



Tanizaki said:


> By the way, I noticed that you took a bit of a beating at The Site That Must Not Be Named recently.


Yeah, unfortunately so. I think I won some of them round in the end, but some people are just 'armchair martial artists' who have not had any kind of physical contact before. As BCBernam777 stated - they are mainly just internet bullies who are jealous of wing chunners


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 26, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I have found that some women and skinny people are a hell of a lot harder to fight than bigger people


 
Skinny people fight till there burger! A perfect canident for a Wing Chun player!


----------



## Spartan (Sep 28, 2007)

Any of you fellows ever cross-train in different styles?


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 29, 2007)

Spartan said:


> Any of you fellows ever cross-train in different styles?


 
Karate
Tae Kwon Do
Shaolin Chowga
Ging Mo Kune
Jeet Kune Do


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 29, 2007)

You shouldn't cross train until you have a very deep understanding of Wing Chun. So, wait until you're at about at Bil Jee, at earliest.

Outside that, there are a few that would work well. Wing Chun, many Filiphino styles, and Aikido are all based off the idea that 'if it looks about the same, and serves the same purpose, it's the same technique'. 
Filiphino styles are also based off drills, that are set up in similar ways. They are also based pretty heavily on using the hands, but after you learn it with a weapon. So, it'll feel a little backwards, for a while. Also, alot of Esrimadors are starting to include using the Wooden Dummy, ala Wing Chun.
Aikido is based on defending against a specific technique, in a specific way, until you have a deep understanding fo what you are doing, and are then show hundreds of variations. Just keep in mind, Aikido is designed so that you can modify the techniques to make them work for you. so, you would be allowed to modify your Aikido techniques to fit with your Wing Chun a little better. Not perfectly, but it will blend fairly well.

Personally, I think those groups of styles work well in blending. Not to mention a differnit line of Wing Chun. If you train in Moy Yat, you could learn Ting, Yip Man, or even go outside the Yip Man lines. Like Pan Nam, or Vietnamese.


----------



## tenth1 (Sep 29, 2007)

tanizaki, 
i am a fairly overweight person (about 280lbs) and yes like kamon guy i over indulge, i particularly like to drink a lot, however being fat does not mean that a person is an incompetent or in anyway physically weak, many of us fatties are able to present a significant challenge to any fighter i personally have been involved in many confrontations with people who thought they could pick on the fat guy only to discover that the sound of their jaw breaking is not a pleasant one.all i am really saying here is please dont judge people by their appearance or bodyweight such superficial things can often decieve


----------



## Spartan (Sep 30, 2007)

tenth1,
I know Tanizaki came off a little strong with the fat statements, and that's not cool. I've trained w/some big dudes myself and I know what people are capable of. 

I will say that I don't want to walk into a kwoon/dojo/gym and see an abundance of overweight people. To me, it shows a serious lack of discipline (from what I've read, Bruce Lee also felt this way about training). One can't say these days that martial skills completely come down to technique ability; there are to many bullheaded wrestlers/hockey/football players out there to let conditioning to go to the wind.

Lastly, you being a big guy, I'm sure your a formidible opponent. But don't confuse size and brute force for martial arts ability.


----------



## bcbernam777 (Sep 30, 2007)

bcbernam777 said:


> Karate
> Tae Kwon Do
> Shaolin Chowga
> Ging Mo Kune
> Jeet Kune Do


 
Let me clarify these are arts that I have trained in pre Wing Chun, me personally i do not believe in cross training for reasons that I have stated elseswere on the forum


----------



## Spartan (Oct 2, 2007)

Guys, I've recently been informed that the kung fu club in Omaha (kungfuomaha.com), is not the parent school of the Moy Yat Ving Tsun club that I've brought up for discussion.

With this said, I'd like to issue an apology to the club and everyone who's reading this post; I hope any slurs I might have made will not affect the club's or anyone else's reputation. Please form opinions based on your own observations.


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Oct 3, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Outside that, there are a few that would work well.


I disagree. There is a general consensus that wing chun never works well with karate, but I know a couple of people who have adpated wing chun and karate to work hand in hand and they pull it off well. So never say never. 

Every Aikido person I have come across has never been able to defend themselves properly. 
That is not to say Aikido is a rubbish art, but it is generally one I would not use to accompany wing chun

Muay Thai, BJJ and boxing work very well with wing chun, but I'm sure that most arts can be mixed


----------



## Spartan (Oct 3, 2007)

Kamon Guy, 
There's also kenpo karate too man. Although this style doesn't fall under the umbrella of traditional karate, it meshes extremely well w/ wing chun.


----------



## tenth1 (Oct 5, 2007)

i understand whay you are saying spartan but there is no confusion for me between brute strength and martial skill, this is why i train in martial arts to aquire more finesse to go with the tools i already have


----------



## CuongNhuka (Oct 5, 2007)

Kamon Guy said:


> I disagree. There is a general consensus that wing chun never works well with karate, but I know a couple of people who have adpated wing chun and karate to work hand in hand and they pull it off well. So never say never.


 
-rolls eyes and moves on-


----------



## KamonGuy2 (Oct 11, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> -rolls eyes and moves on-


-pulls pants down and flashes bum and moves on-


----------



## wck dallas (Oct 11, 2007)

Spartan said:


> What would you say the average time frame was for a student of this style to become an instructor?
> 
> I talked w/ a guy in my area who's starting up a club and apparently has only had a couple of years training. I then checked his instructor's website and it seemed that this was average timeline for student to instructor progression.
> 
> ...


 
 I spoke with a similar school not too long ago. the instructor said the students become instructors after 2 years. At my school the students begin helping instruct at red sash... which on average takes 4-5 years.


----------



## TMA17 (Sep 26, 2017)

Danny T said:


> Excellent Brocklee!!
> 
> Wing Chun is a "Training System" not a fighting style! The training system builds the attributes of the individual to what is best for that individual. If a one arm person wanted to training WC could he not be trained? Certainly but his training and style would be different than someone with two arms. His style would most certainly be different yet he would still be true wing chun.
> 
> ...




I'm new to WC (studying at a Moy Yat school) and have researched TMA for the last 5 months and I have to say I couldn't agree more with what you said.  In WC, like other Kung Fu or MA's, you're learning a skill.  How you apply it will vary.


----------



## DanT (Sep 26, 2017)

TMA17 said:


> I'm new to WC (studying at a Moy Yat school) and have researched TMA for the last 5 months and I have to say I couldn't agree more with what you said.  In WC, like other Kung Fu or MA's, you're learning a skill.  How you apply it will vary.


Just letting you know that you replied to a thread from 10 years ago.


----------

