# old MA mag article?



## wckf92 (Oct 14, 2016)

Does anyone have the full article (with the photos) on 'secrets of wing chun leg maneuvers' by a Curt James?
I keep finding it online but I think it had photos/pictures in it originally?

I.E. here is an example: Secret Wing Chun Leg Maneuvers

Does anyone have it (with the photo's) they'd be willing to share? Thx Gents!


----------



## wingchun100 (Oct 14, 2016)

That looks awesome. I hope someone can find it. If not...did you try doing a search according to certain terms mentioned in the article? You might not get the pictures that went with this piece itself, but they might suffice. Personally I am interested in searching for "Eight Kicks (_Wing Chun Bot Gerk_), Eight Leg Principles (_Bot Gerk Faat_), and Twelve Blocking Legs (_Sup Yee Dong Gerk_)."


----------



## geezer (Oct 14, 2016)

Interesting. Was Curt James a student of Augustine Fong in Tucson Arizona back in the late 70s and 80s? Joy would know. The name sounds familiar.


----------



## Dong xiao hu (Oct 14, 2016)

I will check my collection. I might have that one

Sent from my Z797C using Tapatalk


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 14, 2016)

Dong xiao hu said:


> I will check my collection. I might have that one
> 
> Sent from my Z797C using Tapatalk


Thank you sir!!!

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## KPM (Oct 14, 2016)

geezer said:


> Interesting. Was Curt James a student of Augustine Fong in Tucson Arizona back in the late 70s and 80s? Joy would know. The name sounds familiar.


 
Yes he was.  I met him once.  Pretty intense guy.  Had his own school in Tucson for awhile.  Everything in that article would be from Augustine Fong's curriculum.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 14, 2016)

geezer said:


> Interesting. Was Curt James a student of Augustine Fong in Tucson Arizona back in the late 70s and 80s? Joy would know. The name sounds familiar.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes. Curtis's materials are basically Fong materials.Curtis and Fong sifu parted ways.


----------



## Dong xiao hu (Oct 16, 2016)

I have checked my collection and I seem to not have that issue from 91 sorry.

Sent from my Z797C using Tapatalk


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 16, 2016)

Dong xiao hu said:


> I have checked my collection and I seem to not have that issue from 91 sorry.
> 
> Sent from my Z797C using Tapatalk


No problem bro...appreciate you checking!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## Treznor (Oct 27, 2016)

It's not much... but it's a start


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 27, 2016)

Treznor said:


> It's not much... but it's a start
> Awesome thx!


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 27, 2016)

Treznor said:


> It's not much... but it's a start


Awesome thx!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 3, 2022)

Found this even if its been some time I'm sure it'd useful if someone still checks here


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 5, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Found this even if its been some time I'm sure it'd useful if someone still checks here
> View attachment 28035


Invisible kicks are the quintessential Crane technique.

No shadow!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 5, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> Invisible kicks are the quintessential Crane technique.
> 
> No shadow!


That's awesome! By any chance do you know where I can find more info on these kicks in Wing Chun? It seems to be a dead end


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 5, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> That's awesome! By any chance do you know where I can find more info on these kicks in Wing Chun? It seems to be a dead end


I'll try to pull up some pics but basically southern Crane technique kicks use hand feints along with short range gut busting teeps.  One of those, the "Shadowless" kick, became infamous in Hong Kong cinema for a hundred years.

Similar technique made famous in Karate Kid 1 for working, and not working in Karate Kid 2 against Chosen.  When Miyagi says "ask drum", I respond "Crane!".  Same animal, different technique.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 6, 2022)

Spent some time referencing my Wing Chun history books.   One helpful reference for Wing Chun Crane kicking techniques that don't happen to pop up in Wing Chun's short fist sets are the broader southern Tiger-Crane combo methods, since they share a lot of Crane and Dragon material with Wing Chun (and, the most critical modern proponents of both Tiger Crane and Wing Chun happened to both open up medical shops in Foshan...).



			https://northcountykungfu.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Fu-Hok.jpg
		


Basically, the kicks that are "missing" in Wing Chun aren't missing, they're just not transmitted through a lot of modern lineages.  The 8 listed in the article above are probably a subset of a larger group practiced in the south.  Basic kicks of all different types (or as I like the call them, the "gerk squad") should be part of any kung fu kicking drill list (I have a list like this somewhere with maybe 12 different kicks, which I think include all 8 listed in that old newspaper article based on the description).

The kick on the top left is the famous "Shadowless kick", the Mu Ying Gerk.  the two below it are southern White Crane, actual kicks aren't shown, just the setup.  The one on the bottom right is the source of the Okinawan Tang-Te Crane kick.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 6, 2022)

Side note.

This is probably another example of how fist sets aren't enough to convey the full breadth of an art.  For some reason fist sets last for eons, but lists of useful drills get buried and thrown away.  Whether or not a Wing Chun student is ever exposed to the complexities of kicking depends entirely on their instructor's pedigree, and how much they were shown and practiced with kicking the crap out of the wooden man over and over.

One of the best modern and _skilled _Wing Chun arists is Jackie Chan, he does some good Wing Chun kicks on the dummy in Rumble in the Bronx, and in older classics, but you get the idea. Short range nut buster kicks (which work _very _well in competition by the way).


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 7, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> I'll try to pull up some pics but basically southern Crane technique kicks use hand feints along with short range gut busting teeps.  One of those, the "Shadowless" kick, became infamous in Hong Kong cinema for a hundred years.
> 
> Similar technique made famous in Karate Kid 1 for working, and not working in Karate Kid 2 against Chosen.  When Miyagi says "ask drum", I respond "Crane!".  Same animal, different technique.


I think I've heard of the shadowless kicks and them being a straight line/Lifting kick rather than bend the knee and snap the leg type. Is that the same concept here? That's honestly really cool how it's been around for so long and hidden in cinema also!


Oily Dragon said:


> Spent some time referencing my Wing Chun history books.   One helpful reference for Wing Chun Crane kicking techniques that don't happen to pop up in Wing Chun's short fist sets are the broader southern Tiger-Crane combo methods, since they share a lot of Crane and Dragon material with Wing Chun (and, the most critical modern proponents of both Tiger Crane and Wing Chun happened to both open up medical shops in Foshan...).
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Oh this is Interesting! I've seen this before but haven't had the time to go through it and such. That would make sense I know Wing Chun tends to not use alot of flashy kicks. The basic ones but maybe a small twist on it. I guess the slant kick is a good example of that. Haha that's a great name! Yeah I totally agree it's probably found in other sets. I just wasn't sure since atleast the names are different so it's hard to assume what exactly is unique about the kicks. I think I have a few of them figured out since the principals probably line up with the order of the kicks atleast. Oh wow thats cool! Would you mind sharing it? I'm sure it would be a great help not just for me but anyone looking for these kicks. Even if they are basic it would be good for others to understand that also. Yeah that shadowless kick looks similar to what I've seen/been taught in just lifting directly to the target no snapping. I did see in chow gar they do that but at the last second before impact do a snap so I suppose it's a little like fa jing. Yeah these are great pictures I definitely appreciate the time you've taken to help me out.  


Oily Dragon said:


> Side note.
> 
> This is probably another example of how fist sets aren't enough to convey the full breadth of an art.  For some reason fist sets last for eons, but lists of useful drills get buried and thrown away.  Whether or not a Wing Chun student is ever exposed to the complexities of kicking depends entirely on their instructor's pedigree, and how much they were shown and practiced with kicking the crap out of the wooden man over and over.
> 
> One of the best modern and _skilled _Wing Chun arists is Jackie Chan, he does some good Wing Chun kicks on the dummy in Rumble in the Bronx, and in older classics, but you get the idea. Short range nut buster kicks (which work _very _well in competition by the way).


Yeah I can agree. If I remember right Bruce Lee said himself you have to use the whole body.  It's sad that alot of the stuff gets lost in time. Fortunately I've had experience in various arts so I got exposed to a good amount of kicking but I was always told that Wing Chun didn't have many kicks. I'm glad I found this cause I always felt something was wrong with that concept. Ah yes! This is a great scene! Yeah I can see why they work well. I enjoy a mix of close and long range kicks. I really don't do the flashy ones but I've enjoy them all


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 7, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I think I've heard of the shadowless kicks and them being a straight line/Lifting kick rather than bend the knee and snap the leg type. Is that the same concept here? That's honestly really cool how it's been around for so long and hidden in cinema also!



In the canonical Wong Fei Hung lineage, the shadowless kick (from the rabid dog street legend) is like you said, but it's also not just a kick, it's a smash between fist and foot.

I forgot to point out that this image should be viewed right to left, the Crescent Moon Hand and Foot is the setup to the kick (and it's taught straight like you said, like a shovel kick, in the Tiger Crane Paired Fist but very important to consider: pretty much any type of front kick works just as well.  Drill 8-12 different front types, push heel, instep, whatever, and there's no reason you can't substitute them.  The actual important part is left arm, raised in the right image as the feint that smashes down on the head, while the right leg kicks.







Cmyers0323 said:


> Oh this is Interesting! I've seen this before but haven't had the time to go through it and such. That would make sense I know Wing Chun tends to not use alot of flashy kicks. The basic ones but maybe a small twist on it. I guess the slant kick is a good example of that. Haha that's a great name! Yeah I totally agree it's probably found in other sets. I just wasn't sure since atleast the names are different so it's hard to assume what exactly is unique about the kicks. I think I have a few of them figured out since the principals probably line up with the order of the kicks atleast. Oh wow thats cool! Would you mind sharing it? I'm sure it would be a great help not just for me but anyone looking for these kicks. Even if they are basic it would be good for others to understand that also. Yeah that shadowless kick looks similar to what I've seen/been taught in just lifting directly to the target no snapping. I did see in chow gar they do that but at the last second before impact do a snap so I suppose it's a little like fa jing. Yeah these are great pictures I definitely appreciate the time you've taken to help me out.


Any time.  Here's another "fancy" kick setup by southern standards, pretty common right leg side kick from Crane/Dragon/Unicorn stepping transition (depending on who you ask).  Again, just one image but there are a few ways I can remember to pull this off, including a teep, a heel push, and even leaping kick and flying knee version.






Cmyers0323 said:


> Yeah I can agree. If I remember right Bruce Lee said himself you have to use the whole body.  It's sad that alot of the stuff gets lost in time. Fortunately I've had experience in various arts so I got exposed to a good amount of kicking but I was always told that Wing Chun didn't have many kicks. I'm glad I found this cause I always felt something was wrong with that concept. Ah yes! This is a great scene! Yeah I can see why they work well. I enjoy a mix of close and long range kicks. I really don't do the flashy ones but I've enjoy them all


It's unfortunate that so many choose to pick up Wing Chun, but stop there.  If I had stopped at Hung Ga Kuen, I would never have picked up the Chuka Shaolin Phoenix Eye Fist, which is probably one of the most useful techniques I've ever come across.  Yet another technique image from the southern Tiger Crane that doesn't come close to describing all the different Crane technique ways the index finger can be used to dig into the opponent.  If you have a little brother you you want to torture, this is all the technique you need.  Also in Wing Chun somewhere, as well as Japanese art where it's called_ ippon ken,_ the "One Fist"


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 7, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> In the canonical Wong Fei Hung lineage, the shadowless kick (from the rabid dog street legend) is like you said, but it's also not just a kick, it's a smash between fist and foot.
> 
> I forgot to point out that this image should be viewed right to left, the Crescent Moon Hand and Foot is the setup to the kick (and it's taught straight like you said, like a shovel kick, in the Tiger Crane Paired Fist but very important to consider: pretty much any type of front kick works just as well.  Drill 8-12 different front types, push heel, instep, whatever, and there's no reason you can't substitute them.  The actual important part is left arm, raised in the right image as the feint that smashes down on the head, while the right leg kicks.
> 
> ...


That makes alot of sense. When it comes to the fist and foot I'm assuming you mean something similar to the picture hiding dragon leaping tiger? If so I've seen/ know alot of forms with moves similar "kick/punch" at the same time before landing into a horse stance.


Ah I see that makes alot more sense now!I think that's the hard part of learning some stuff from pictures is the in-between can be hard to figure out. I'm guessing the invisible kick/shovel kick is probably what the wing chun lists as the first kick "lifting" for a low front kick? Yeah I agree so many people do round and side kicks but I hardly see many do front kicks. Oh okay yeah I see what you mean with the arm being a feint. Makes sense with what you said about the crane using them prior to fainting then. 

That's cool! I've seen that stance before with similar names I've seen it also called scorpion and scissor stance. That would be pretty cool! It's definitely aore unique stance.

Oh yeah I definitely agree. I always thought Wing Chun was alot smaller of a system than it really is. I'm enjoying finding more and more on it. I've been training in it for so long yet in still learning new stuff haha. That's definitely a very great technique! I've used and been hit with it before and it's a great way to hurt someone haha. Haha thanks ill have to try that out! I've seen alot of grabbing and gouging in the monkey system also which makes sense.

You said you had a list of 12 kicks that also contained the 8 wing chun ones?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 7, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> You said you had a list of 12 kicks that also contained the 8 wing chun ones?


I do, but my notes are chicken scratch.  I'm trying to figure out how to import them into Microsoft Word right now.

Transcribing all these texts isn't easy!  I have to deal with a lot of riff raff, daily.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 8, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> I do, but my notes are chicken scratch.  I'm trying to figure out how to import them into Microsoft Word right now.
> 
> Transcribing all these texts isn't easy!  I have to deal with a lot of riff raff, daily.


Ah I see. Honestly alot of my notes are the same so I understand haha. Now I just rely on using my phone so I can just search key terms. Haha yeah I can see why it's alot of work. If your ever able to get them and don't mind posting them that would be great. I know this list was connected to Augustine Fong but I've watched a few of his videos and I didn't see anything directly talking about it.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 8, 2022)

I dod hear they are apparently in the Ip man Wooden Dummy but I don't know if they're the same 8 kicks in this list


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 8, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I dod hear they are apparently in the Ip man Wooden Dummy but I don't know if they're the same 8 kicks in this list


I'm going through my drill lists now, assembling the "Gerk Squad".  I have a list of 18 basic drills, 18 advanced drills, and about 300 terms in hanzi and English to work through, but I'm sure I can come up with at least 12 kicks.  I did once have a specific list of just kicking drills, and I cannot find it. 

Here's the thing about the Wooden Dummy though: it doesn't kick back.  In my opinion the best way to really learn all these kicks is on a heavy bag.  I don't own a Wooden Dummy, but I do own a faithful bag, and boy he's seen 10,000 kicks.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 8, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> I'm going through my drill lists now, assembling the "Gerk Squad".  I have a list of 18 basic drills, 18 advanced drills, and about 300 terms in hanzi and English to work through, but I'm sure I can come up with at least 12 kicks.  I did once have a specific list of just kicking drills, and I cannot find it.
> 
> Here's the thing about the Wooden Dummy though: it doesn't kick back.  In my opinion the best way to really learn all these kicks is on a heavy bag.  I don't own a Wooden Dummy, but I do own a faithful bag, and boy he's seen 10,000 kicks.


Awesome I appreciate it! That sounds super amazing honestly. Come to think of it I do remember being taught at one point a Wing Chun kicking form years ago. It was called dyan tek or lighting kick I believe I'd have to find the book that referenced it. That would be great if you can! Awh man that sucks hopefully you'll find it one day I can definitely relate to having lost stuff like this it sucks cause the real gold is usually impossible to find again.  Yeah your right I do like the Dummy alot and I was told it over time Conditions your hands and arms. I have a heavy bag myself and I use it alot. Yeah I agree especially if you want to go for power training a heavy bag is the better option. Haha yeah thats definitely the right way to use it!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 9, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Awesome I appreciate it! That sounds super amazing honestly. Come to think of it I do remember being taught at one point a Wing Chun kicking form years ago. It was called dyan tek or lighting kick I believe I'd have to find the book that referenced it. That would be great if you can! Awh man that sucks hopefully you'll find it one day I can definitely relate to having lost stuff like this it sucks cause the real gold is usually impossible to find again.  Yeah your right I do like the Dummy alot and I was told it over time Conditions your hands and arms. I have a heavy bag myself and I use it alot. Yeah I agree especially if you want to go for power training a heavy bag is the better option. Haha yeah thats definitely the right way to use it!


I've been reading over the principles because that's truly the second half of the kicks and from my understanding I would say
1) Lifting- would probably be like the invisible kick concept

2) nailing - I saw a kick where theology the leg almost fully extended and then kick at the intended target so the leg goes in a slightly Downward but forward motion. So I'm not to sure what general concept could be taken from that

3)Sweeping is this also self explanatory just sweeping motions used for take downs like in the beginning of bil jee? I'm not sure how you can apply it to all of the 8 kicks 

4. Scooping 

5. Stomping strictly Downward motions?

6. Circling

7. Snapping

8. Skipping self explanatory basically taking a small skip before the kick to close the distance 

I could make assumptions about the rest but that isn't always the way to go haha


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

I bought a magazine that had the 8 kicks. The article is the same that was linked but these are all of the pictures. Im still not sure where else this can be found (Inside Kung Fu December 1991) it doesn't seem to have everything but I think this helps alot


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I bought a magazine that had the 8 kicks. The article is the same that was linked but these are all of the pictures. Im still not sure where else this can be found (Inside Kung Fu December 1991) it doesn't seem to have everything but I think this helps alot



Wow! Can't believe you found it. I've been looking for it for years.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Wow! Can't believe you found it. I've been looking for it for years.


Yeah i guess I got lucky. I noticed the bottom of the picture said inside kung fu and just happened to find a copy of it. Hopefully this helps whoever else is looking for it. I'm not sure if there's anything more on it but now we atleast have pictures of all of the kicks. I've figured out some of the leg blocks so that should help also


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I bought a magazine that had the 8 kicks. The article is the same that was linked but these are all of the pictures. Im still not sure where else this can be found (Inside Kung Fu December 1991) it doesn't seem to have everything but I think this helps alot


And there it is, a Wing Chun kick above the waist, on the dummy.  And the ankle breaking kick.  Neat!

The similarity between the Tan Tui sets and these photos isn't coincidental.  I've always suspected Tan Tui is one of those sets that isn't often taught in Wing Chun schools, but really should be, because so many of the southern non-Wing Chun schools do it.  Especially given the 24-12-8 thing. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Yeah i guess I got lucky. I noticed the bottom of the picture said inside kung fu and just happened to find a copy of it. Hopefully this helps whoever else is looking for it. I'm not sure if there's anything more on it but now we atleast have pictures of all of the kicks. I've figured out some of the leg blocks so that should help also


Thank you for posting it.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Thank you for posting it.


No problem! I'm sure many can use this


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> And there it is, a Wing Chun kick above the waist, on the dummy.  And the ankle breaking kick.  Neat!
> 
> The similarity between the Tan Tui sets and these photos isn't coincidental.  I've always suspected Tan Tui is one of those sets that isn't often taught in Wing Chun schools, but really should be, because so many of the southern non-Wing Chun schools do it.  But that's just my opinion.


Yeah I see what your saying. I guess it shows just how much there still is to learn. I never would have expected such a high kick but I really enjoy it. It makes sense there's similarities I could see it not being taught alot I mean I hadn't even heard of a Wing Chun kicking form till a few years ago. It's good more and more of this information is coming out so we can all benefit from it


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Yeah I see what your saying. I guess it shows just how much there still is to learn. I never would have expected such a high kick but I really enjoy it. It makes sense there's similarities I could see it not being taught alot I mean I hadn't even heard of a Wing Chun kicking form till a few years ago. It's good more and more of this information is coming out so we can all benefit from it


This is the way.  Wing Chun isn't constrained to 3 forms.  See?  And yet the arguments I have had with Wing Chun students over this simple thing they seem to miss.  It's basically Bruce Lee's same critique, why limit yourself?

What I meant by the "24-12-8 thing", I should clarify.

Confucianism eroded by the confluence of Taoism and Buddhism (the Shaolin Trifecta), is how these arts are drawn out on paper, film.  Old northern sets have 24, 12 kicks, newer southern sets have 12, 8.  There's only one kick though, the one that hits all by itself.  That's the idea, anyway.

My kicks are probably my worst assets, but I can still kick above my head, which is something.  Time to stretch...


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

Oh yeah I totally agree! I think alot of it comes from misinformation. I always knew 3 empty hand forms and 3 other sword, staff, and dummy form. oh wow thats really interesting. I do find the wing chun kicks interesting because atleast for this it's 8 kicks but in reality there's way more because of the principles. It is unfortunate over time all of this has been lost or just forgotten. I see what your saying between hands and legs my hands are better but I can still kick pretty well. I've been doing tons of research for kicks. I even got the bagua 72 kicks book. Have you heard of that?


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I even got the bagua 72 kicks book. Have you heard of that?



I've never heard of it. 
Can you snap a pic of the cover and post it here please? Thx!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> I've never heard of it.
> Can you snap a pic of the cover and post it here please? Thx!


Yeah definitely! You can find some of it online but the whole book I wasn't able to so I just bought it. It's in Chinese but has some pictures so I could just use my phone to translate it. The second picture is of the first two kicks there definitely alot different than what I expected but pretty cool either way!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

They follow the principle "a step is a kick and a kick is a step" so there kicks are apparently all hidden withing their walking so to speak and such. It makes sense so you really need to be trained properly to get this stuff. I've had some training in bagua and I can see why it's done this way it makes it so the kicks go well with walking so you have a constant forward pressure


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Yeah definitely! You can find some of it online but the whole book I wasn't able to so I just bought it. It's in Chinese but has some pictures so I could just use my phone to translate it. The second picture is of the first two kicks there definitely alot different than what I expected but pretty cool either way!



Thank you!


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Thank you!


No problem! It's a pretty cool book I haven't fully read it yet. Just been collecting kicking based books haha. This was the site I got it from. I might get more if their stuff. Besides needing to be translated they seem to have a nice collection of books Bagua Chinese  Simplified Bagua


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> "a step is a kick and a kick is a step"



Well I don't know anything about Bagua...but that saying was something I heard in my earliest days of wing chun training. And it did not have to do so much with 'hidden' kicks in stepping/walking...but more to do with combative mindset.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Well I don't know anything about Bagua...but that saying was something I heard in my earliest days of wing chun training. And it did not have to do so much with 'hidden' kicks in stepping/walking...but more to do with combative mindset.


That's interesting! I did more recently find out wing chun had the same concept. I guess from what I've read and been taught they say forward Stepping creates front kicks and such this a book that has that concept written down.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> That's interesting! I did more recently find out wing chun had the same concept. I guess from what I've read and been taught they say forward Stepping creates front kicks and such this a book that has that concept written down.



Yeah IMO it has to do with "stepping with a purpose". In other words...in WC there is a saying: rush in upon loss of contact (or other varying ways of saying the same thing). So, if space is suddenly there, through the training methods and numerous drills of wing chun...we eat up that space as fast and as violently as is needed. That would be with a strike from arm distance...or if needed the horse will crash in to eat up the space and may or may not be accompanied by a kick. Of course, this is all my opinion and subject to how one was trained in wing chun. 

I do know this much: the leg training of wing chun is quite painful and brutal and as such it is either not taught/passed down or if it is then it is not emphasized because typically students want to focus on the hands and neglect the horse/leg training.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Feb 23, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> Spent some time referencing my Wing Chun history books.   One helpful reference for Wing Chun Crane kicking techniques that don't happen to pop up in Wing Chun's short fist sets are the broader southern Tiger-Crane combo methods, since they share a lot of Crane and Dragon material with Wing Chun (and, the most critical modern proponents of both Tiger Crane and Wing Chun happened to both open up medical shops in Foshan...).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The upper two are present in our southern style.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Feb 23, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> In the canonical Wong Fei Hung lineage, the shadowless kick (from the rabid dog street legend) is like you said, but it's also not just a kick, it's a smash between fist and foot.
> 
> I forgot to point out that this image should be viewed right to left, the Crescent Moon Hand and Foot is the setup to the kick (and it's taught straight like you said, like a shovel kick, in the Tiger Crane Paired Fist but very important to consider: pretty much any type of front kick works just as well.  Drill 8-12 different front types, push heel, instep, whatever, and there's no reason you can't substitute them.  The actual important part is left arm, raised in the right image as the feint that smashes down on the head, while the right leg kicks.
> 
> ...


The cross step in the above picture gets left behind because of the difficulty in executing it quickly. Get caught in that position and its going to go poorly.


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Feb 23, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Yeah IMO it has to do with "stepping with a purpose". In other words...in WC there is a saying: rush in upon loss of contact (or other varying ways of saying the same thing). So, if space is suddenly there, through the training methods and numerous drills of wing chun...we eat up that space as fast and as violently as is needed. That would be with a strike from arm distance...or if needed the horse will crash in to eat up the space and may or may not be accompanied by a kick. Of course, this is all my opinion and subject to how one was trained in wing chun.
> 
> I do know this much: the leg training of wing chun is quite painful and brutal and as such it is either not taught/passed down or if it is then it is not emphasized because typically students want to focus on the hands and neglect the horse/leg training.


No legs, no punch.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 23, 2022)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> No legs, no punch.



Exactly


----------



## Wing Woo Gar (Feb 23, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> And there it is, a Wing Chun kick above the waist, on the dummy.  And the ankle breaking kick.  Neat!
> 
> The similarity between the Tan Tui sets and these photos isn't coincidental.  I've always suspected Tan Tui is one of those sets that isn't often taught in Wing Chun schools, but really should be, because so many of the southern non-Wing Chun schools do it.  Especially given the 24-12-8 thing. But that's just my opinion.


Wow. I’m not a Wing Chun guy, but these are all interesting connections. We do have Tan Tui sets in our system As well


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 24, 2022)

Yeah I agree with what your saying. I've been trained similar. Although I never took just wing chun so the leg work was a mix of other styles I'm enjoying more and more the stuff I find. I've seen some other forums talking about more training methods. Personally I believe we should use our whole body so I'm enjoying the more indepth leg training stuff 


wckf92 said:


> Yeah IMO it has to do with "stepping with a purpose". In other words...in WC there is a saying: rush in upon loss of contact (or other varying ways of saying the same thing). So, if space is suddenly there, through the training methods and numerous drills of wing chun...we eat up that space as fast and as violently as is needed. That would be with a strike from arm distance...or if needed the horse will crash in to eat up the space and may or may not be accompanied by a kick. Of course, this is all my opinion and subject to how one was trained in wing chun.
> 
> I do know this much: the leg training of wing chun is quite painful and brutal and as such it is either not taught/passed down or if it is then it is not emphasized because typically students want to focus on the hands and neglect the horse/leg trainin


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 24, 2022)

Anyone have more info on the 8principles? I'm sure there's more to It than explained. I get the idea is a specific body mechanic that like said can be adapted to other kicks. It should help complete the kicks. The pictures are great but without the principles there just normal low front, front, side, and Crescent kicks


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 24, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Anyone have more info on the 8principles?


Try the advanced search feature...I'm sure we've discussed this sort of thing in the past.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 24, 2022)

Thanks ill check it out. I haven't seen really anything talking about it. I think I could say that's more important than the kicks themselves because I know you can mix and match


wckf92 said:


> Try the advanced search feature...I'm sure we've discussed this sort of thing in the past.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Feb 24, 2022)

Wing Woo Gar said:


> The cross step in the above picture gets left behind because of the difficulty in executing it quickly. Get caught in that position and its going to go poorly.


"Get caught" in any position is going to go poorly.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 24, 2022)

@Cmyers0323  watch his legs around the 1:05 mark. Part of WC training is to train how to recover from less than ideal situations. This is one example. There are other things happening here, but this may give you an idea of one of the leg concepts.


----------



## wckf92 (Feb 24, 2022)

...same here around 1:40


----------



## Callen (Feb 24, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Anyone have more info on the 8principles? I'm sure there's more to It than explained. I get the idea is a specific body mechanic that like said can be adapted to other kicks. It should help complete the kicks. The pictures are great but without the principles there just normal low front, front, side, and Crescent kicks


The idea of emphasizing 8 kicks and 8 separate principles is that it teaches when a kick is combined with a principle, you get a specific action. So for example, when a jing gerk 正踢 (front kick) is combined with huen gerk 圈腳 (circling/arching kick), it creates the Wing Chun Slant Kick. However, just like taan, bong and fuk, kicking concepts are learned and taught through the lens of the entire system. In essence, Wing Chun kicking is as much about the entire system as it is about the actual kick.

IMO, you will eventually arrive at the point where you need to actually learn the Wing Chun system in order to gain useful traction towards truly understanding the kicking aspects. This is mostly due to the fact that the Wing Chun kick is not a stand-alone concept, it is but one part of the whole. Pull it out of the context of the system and it no longer has the same meaning.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 24, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> ...same here around 1:40


Yeah definitely I see what your saying here. I enjoy the subtle moves also. It's good there's video of some of this stuff also


----------



## CMyers0323 (Feb 24, 2022)

Callen said:


> The idea of emphasizing 8 kicks and 8 separate principles is that it teaches when a kick is combined with a principle, you get a specific action. So for example, when a jing gerk 正踢 (front kick) is combined with huen gerk 圈腳 (circling/arching kick), it creates the Wing Chun Slant Kick. However, just like taan, bong and fuk, kicking concepts are learned and taught through the lens of the entire system. In essence, Wing Chun kicking is as much about the entire system as it is about the actual kick.
> 
> IMO, you will eventually arrive at the point where you need to actually learn the Wing Chun system in order to gain useful traction towards truly understanding the kicking aspects. This is mostly due to the fact that the Wing Chun kick is not a stand-alone concept, it is but one part of the whole. Pull it out of the context of the system and it no longer has the same meaning.


Ah yeah I see what your saying. I remember being taught the slant kick and how like you said it was a combination of the two. I've had some years of Wing Chun training I just never came across this concept before atleast not the principles which I find interesting since as said you can basically combine in many ways to have way more than just 8 kicks. I've just been searching well as of now the Wing chun kicking principles in detail. I'm sure most of them are obvious like skipping and most likely circling depending on how broad they can work with that concept. Yeah I totally agree that's why I try to get most of my training in an official class setting. I still do alot of research in my down time just to expand my knowledge. I definitely see what your saying though


----------



## CMyers0323 (Apr 23, 2022)

Any suggestions for traditional Wing Chun leg drills? There's tons of hand drills on the internet but not nearly any much leg stuff


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 23, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Any suggestions for traditional Wing Chun leg drills? There's tons of hand drills on the internet but not nearly any much leg stuff


The key stance connecting Wing Chun with its ancestors like Southern Dragon, White Eyebrow, and Hung Ga Kuen is the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma for a good reason.  This is a very powerful exercise that focuses spinal and pelvis alignment, quadracept tension, core engagement, and breathing. 

A lot of Wing Chun students practice this is a fighting stance, and shouldn't.  It's really an exercise in endurance and flexibility (which is why it's a fundamental stance in the other southern arts).

Grab a big pillow (or other person if you're that lucky), and squeeze with your inner thighs.  Repeat.  I think this is probably one of the best drills there is (trapping someone with your legs and core until one of you expires).  How far in you can turn your toes is, believe it or not, says a lot about your inner tension.  If you're tight anywhere else, forget about your toes, man.


----------



## Eric_H (Apr 23, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> Wing Chun with its ancestors like Southern Dragon, White Eyebrow, and Hung Ga Kuen


There is no credible proof any of these styles are direct ancestors of wing chun. Please stop peddling this snake oil.

Yi Gee Kim Yeung Ma like stances are found in Wutang kung fu as well. Are you going to tell me Leurng Yi or Sei Yern Kuen is a WC ancestor too?



> A lot of Wing Chun students practice this is a fighting stance, and shouldn't.  It's really an exercise in endurance and flexibility (which is why it's a fundamental stance in the other southern arts).



If you think it's just for exercise, or a strength-building stance like Sei Ping Ma is for other styles, you are missing the point IMO. In free fighting, Yee Gee Kim Yueng Ma is most commonly executed as an action, not a stance. 

The static stance is there to teach you how to feel what it's like to be rooted in the WC way - most other WC footwork is derived from YGKYM and every step should end with the YGKYM action of grounding. I agree that it is not a static stance to be stood in blindly for fighting, but if you are not using the "verb" of YGKYM in every step, I would say you have not developed WC footwork.



> Grab a big pillow (or other person if you're that lucky), and squeeze with your inner thighs.  Repeat.  I think this is probably one of the best drills there is (trapping someone with your legs and core until one of you expires).  How far in you can turn your toes is, believe it or not, says a lot about your inner tension.  If you're tight anywhere else, forget about your toes, man.


I've never heard about this type of exercise, but reads like you're advocating to be on the extreme end of the YGKYM stance like I've seen some in the Leung Ting based lines do. Probably not my cup of tea, but if it aids your training, more power to you.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Apr 24, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> The key stance connecting Wing Chun with its ancestors like Southern Dragon, White Eyebrow, and Hung Ga Kuen is the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma for a good reason.  This is a very powerful exercise that focuses spinal and pelvis alignment, quadracept tension, core engagement, and breathing.
> 
> A lot of Wing Chun students practice this is a fighting stance, and shouldn't.  It's really an exercise in endurance and flexibility (which is why it's a fundamental stance in the other southern arts).
> 
> Grab a big pillow (or other person if you're that lucky), and squeeze with your inner thighs.  Repeat.  I think this is probably one of the best drills there is (trapping someone with your legs and core until one of you expires).  How far in you can turn your toes is, believe it or not, says a lot about your inner tension.  If you're tight anywhere else, forget about your toes, man.


The "hour glass stance" right? If so Thats cool. I've been told it's really good and it wasn't until I heard about an application for blocking groin strikes that I was able to appreciate it more. I can definitely see the spinal alignment since it some how reminds me of doing the wuji or spinal alignment from Tai Chi. Wow that drill is so simple yet it sounds amazing I think I'll be practicing it from now on. It's the simple stuff that really gets me wanting to train harder haha. I've been trying to think of ways to apply trapping to the legs and wholebbody really so this helps alot! Yeah makes sense I've been reading more about relaxing and such which I've always been told but being given actual methods just shows all the tension we carry. Thanks though I'll be using this from now on!


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 24, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> The "hour glass stance" right? If so Thats cool. I've been told it's really good and it wasn't until I heard about an application for blocking groin strikes that I was able to appreciate it more. I can definitely see the spinal alignment since it some how reminds me of doing the wuji or spinal alignment from Tai Chi. Wow that drill is so simple yet it sounds amazing I think I'll be practicing it from now on. It's the simple stuff that really gets me wanting to train harder haha. I've been trying to think of ways to apply trapping to the legs and wholebbody really so this helps alot! Yeah makes sense I've been reading more about relaxing and such which I've always been told but being given actual methods just shows all the tension we carry. Thanks though I'll be using this from now on!


Wing Chun students often focus on striking and trapping applications from the waist up and tend to ignore the real power (which comes from older neijia) in the style, which is based on very common Southern family elements (Dragon, etc.)

I'd reckon 99% of Wing Chun aficionados don't even get to this level of training (the crushing _gwat_).  They'll be happy with slapboxing.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Apr 24, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> Wing Chun students often focus on striking and trapping applications from the waist up and tend to ignore the real power (which comes from older neijia) in the style, which is based on very common Southern family elements (Dragon, etc.)
> 
> I'd reckon 99% of Wing Chun aficionados don't even get to this level of training (the crushing _gwat_).  They'll be happy with slapboxing.


Yeah I agree. I've seen alot of fights and you can almost feel their focus or just energy is strictly upper body. I'm all about using the whole body in as many ways as you can. I guess it was when I found out "wing chun doesn't kick" I decided to do my research cause it just didn't feel right to not use my legs. I'm sure they don't I'm always looking for new ways to train are there resources I can find with this stuff?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 24, 2022)

Eric_H said:


> There is no credible proof any of these styles are direct ancestors of wing chun. Please stop peddling this snake oil.


It's academic research from the last 20 years (Judkins et. al.).  Most of the valuable, legitimate academic research on Wing Chun is less than 20 years old (which is why when I read old Black Belt Magazine articles about Wing Chun, they read like pure fantasy).  Wing Chun is much younger than these other styles, but grew up immersed in them, and it contains a lot less material, but identical material, to styles like Hung Kuen, and what it does contain (like the Adduction Stance) is, quite frankly, some of the best, most legit Shaolin training material out there.  And thus, ripe for exploitation and commercialization for a long time, sadly.  

There is a rich cultural history that Wing Chun is part of that includes interactions with masters of Southern Dragon, Bak Mei, all Five major southern families, the related styles such as Five Ancestor fist.  As far as ancestral influences, WC probably has about a dozen contributing styles (all of which are mentioned in the academic literature above).  They are ancestors, since they are older.  And everything seen as Wing Chun today goes back to people in the last 200 years who trained with those other styles, and merged them.  This is kind of like the people who train MMA today, but choose to represent a specific art (for WC, Alan Orr is probably the best, but not only example).

If anything is "Snake oil", it's the stuff peddled by Wing Chun teachers for the last 100, especially in schools that missed out on things like Guoshu.  I prefer to disillusion people using stuff from real historians, rather than "Class notes", which vary in quality especially around "lineage".  In fact, I hate discussing lineages because nothing is more untrustworthy in CMA, imho.  I often come across stuff in the literature that dismantles something older I found somewhere else, but as far as the connected lineages, that stuff is easy to show especially in the southern parts of China (because we're dealing with the more or less modern post-Ming era, rather than ancient writings and artwork which are out there, but far more open to interpretation).



Eric_H said:


> Yi Gee Kim Yeung Ma like stances are found in Wutang kung fu as well. Are you going to tell me Leurng Yi or Sei Yern Kuen is a WC ancestor too?


"Wutang kung fu", is also not its own entity in a vacuum.  There is really no such thing, the styles found at Wutang were also found at Shaolin.  Shaolin Si was actually a major epicenter in the development of Tai Chi (Mahar).  Wutang mountain just happens to be one of many where Taoism (not even martial arts, but actual priesthood) flourished.  

Yi Gee Kim Yeurng Ma "like" stances are not the same as the canonical form found in the south, either.  Like a lot of other southern stancework it is lower, and more body weight oriented.




Eric_H said:


> If you think it's just for exercise, or a strength-building stance like Sei Ping Ma is for other styles, you are missing the point IMO. In free fighting, Yee Gee Kim Yueng Ma is most commonly executed as an action, not a stance.


Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma should never, ever used a fighting stance in CMA.  I'd argue this with any so-called "master" on earth.  Unless you completely drop the "Yee Gi" part and stand with your feet parallel, which is also a terrible stance for fighting and getting thrown.  It's closest to say, the Muay Thai stance, but even that basic stance shows the risks of "Free fighting" with such a method.

As an action?  Yee Gi is found in some training stance transitions (including Iron Wire, a very high level southern set).  But for "Free fighting, it doesn't even make sense from a physiological point of view.  It's right there in the name, "Yee Gi".  A lot of people will claim to do the "Yee Gi Ma", and not realize they're missing the "二" part.


Eric_H said:


> I've never heard about this type of exercise, but reads like you're advocating to be on the extreme end of the YGKYM stance like I've seen some in the Leung Ting based lines do. Probably not my cup of tea, but if it aids your training, more power to you.


I've learned several versions of the stance (the Shaolin qigong versions, the Iron Thread internal training versions, the WC version).  Sure, there's a range (and more "internal"/less "external" versions are important at higher levels to avoid injury).  

As far as "extreme", it's important to keep in mind the key focus of Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma is "goat riding" thigh squeezing strength, hip flexibility, which is why it's found in many internal qigong sets.  Rooting, sure but in a very fundamental way (Hung Kuen students learn it on day with in some lineages).

One of Neigong's goals is to relax the whole body and increase mobility, while building muscle, tendon, and ligament strength.  The old Shaolin way of doing this for the "Gwat" region is the Yee Gi (one of the oldest extant stances in MA history next to the 5 and 11), and it's basically the same as doing this kind of drill, but in body weight mode.


----------



## wckf92 (Apr 24, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> (the crushing _gwat_)



Can you explain what is meant by this term? Thanks!


----------



## wckf92 (Apr 24, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> wing chun doesn't kick


Who told you that!?


----------



## CMyers0323 (Apr 24, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Who told you that!?


Maybe not completely that they don't kick but that there isn't alot of kicking. Unless if it was a misunderstanding that there aren't many actual kicks? I know the 8 kicks can be made into many but that takes a higher level of understanding. 
My most recent memory of someone saying it wad 
 a more recent video I saw of some Wing Chun guy teaching this martial arts youtuber named "sensi seth" the guys funny but weather his skits are his true feelings or not doesn't seem to support Tma. Anyways he had this guy teach him Wing Chun (can't remember the guys name) and he said that usually Wing Chun doesn't kick alot. 

I guess it's just something people always thought that Wing Chun is more hands than feet. Then you got the wana be people who just do the movie Wing Chun stuff.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Apr 24, 2022)

The _Bubishi* _illustrates and describes 48 self-defense situations with counters, NONE of which feature kicks.  There are a couple of ground defense (or drop moves) with leg scissors, a surprising number of other leg grab takedowns, and one sweep, but not a single kick.  There are 5 moves showing testicle grabs and 6 entailing strikes to the larynx and/or eyes.

The style seems to be related to Monk Fist (Arhat Boxing) which, along with White Crane, are thought to be the main Chinese ingredients in Okinawan karate.  Indeed, as McCarthy_ Hanshin, _has pointed out, many of the techniques illustrated can still be found in today's katas. 

The above-mentioned breakdown of techniques I think illustrates where early karate placed its emphasis - debilitating strikes and grappling takedowns.  Additionally, in the 48 sequences only ONE punch is featured; all other strikes are with the open hand.

I have previously noted some similarities between Wing Chun and traditional Okinawan karate.  Few kicks were used, and those were usually aimed at the groin and knees. 

* (For those not familiar, the _Bubishi_ is a Chinese text highly prized by early karate masters such as Kyan, Higaonna, Mabuni, Funakoshi, Miyagi and Shimabuku.)


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 24, 2022)

wckf92 said:


> Can you explain what is meant by this term? Thanks!


I'll try to find a hanzi version but it generally refers to the baby making region and the muscles around it.  It's a fundamental " internal" method and shows up almost everywhere that matters.

The Yee Gi has many names for a good reason.  Some are coded, some are kind of obvious.  Character II, Goat Riding, Adduction.

My Tai chi chuan sifu really understands the concept.  It's all about landscaping.


----------



## Callen (Apr 24, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> Any suggestions for traditional Wing Chun leg drills?


When you say traditional Wing Chun leg drills, what do you mean?

Both kicking and footwork are covered throughout the curriculum. The forms build on footwork repeatedly; and like all of the Wing Chun concepts and principles, there are various drills and applications that develop those attributes into skill, leg drills included. The Baat Jam Do form for example, is arguably one of the most important guides in terms of developing swift, proactive footwork. It has even been said that the BJD form is more about footwork than it is about the knives.



Cmyers0323 said:


> There's tons of hand drills on the internet but not nearly any much leg stuff


I know we have touched on this a little in past posts, but you can only learn so much from the internet. If you really want to truly understand the system, training with a knowledgeable sifu/coach/instructor is the way. No offense, of course.



Cmyers0323 said:


> I guess it was when I found out "wing chun doesn't kick" I decided to do my research cause it just didn't feel right to not use my legs. I'm sure they don't I'm always looking for new ways to train are there resources I can find this stuff?


So if you need to kick, you kick. It’s that simple.

Whole body unity, structure and kicks all follow all of the same concepts and principles in Wing Chun, we do not separate them into stand-alone ideas. There's no need to look too far, it's all explained in the mechanics.

Structure development, footwork and unit power can be found in several places. Chum Kiu (沉橋) introduces body unity, structure, kicking and linked footwork. Luk Dim Boon Gwan (六點半棍) reinforces body unity in application, and develops punching power through the connection of dynamic footwork, the waist and elbows.... just to name a few.


----------



## Eric_H (Apr 25, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> It's academic research from the last 20 years (Judkins et. al.).  Most of the valuable, legitimate academic research on Wing Chun is less than 20 years old (which is why when I read old Black Belt Magazine articles about Wing Chun, they read like pure fantasy).  Wing Chun is much younger than these other styles, but grew up immersed in them, and it contains a lot less material, but identical material, to styles like Hung Kuen, and what it does contain (like the Adduction Stance) is, quite frankly, some of the best, most legit Shaolin training material out there.  And thus, ripe for exploitation and commercialization for a long time, sadly.


I think we can all agree, most versions of WC history have to be taken with a grain of salt. I've not read Judkin's work, so I will not comment on it, however I don't see why his version should not also be open to scrutiny. I don't believe WC is younger than all of the styles you listed as they mostly were supposedly formed between 1730-1850, with various re-formattings done by notable masters here and there.



Oily Dragon said:


> There is a rich cultural history that Wing Chun is part of that includes interactions with masters of Southern Dragon, Bak Mei, all Five major southern families, the related styles such as Five Ancestor fist.  As far as ancestral influences, WC probably has about a dozen contributing styles (all of which are mentioned in the academic literature above).  They are ancestors, since they are older.  And everything seen as Wing Chun today goes back to people in the last 200 years who trained with those other styles, and merged them.  This is kind of like the people who train MMA today, but choose to represent a specific art (for WC, Alan Orr is probably the best, but not only example).


Every mom is a woman but not every woman is your mom. Just because these styles existed does not mean they had direct influence on WC's founding. However, it seems we fundamentally have a disconnect - I see WC as a purposeful departure from the animal style mindset+body (This has been attributed to monks/nuns, military influence, secret societies, take your pick as to the reason) whereas many other styles are clear evolution on the animal style frames - Hung Kuen or Chi Sim Weng Chun is a great example of this.

To continue on the attitude of an animal concept but have it driven by a fundamentally different engine and structure is not a father to son type of direct relationship.



Oily Dragon said:


> If anything is "Snake oil", it's the stuff peddled by Wing Chun teachers for the last 100, especially in schools that missed out on things like Guoshu.  I prefer to disillusion people using stuff from real historians, rather than "Class notes", which vary in quality especially around "lineage".  In fact, I hate discussing lineages because nothing is more untrustworthy in CMA, imho.  I often come across stuff in the literature that dismantles something older I found somewhere else, but as far as the connected lineages, that stuff is easy to show especially in the southern parts of China (because we're dealing with the more or less modern post-Ming era, rather than ancient writings and artwork which are out there, but far more open to interpretation).


I think it is a bit far fetched to say every WC teacher of the last 100 years is purposely being deceiving.



Oily Dragon said:


> "Wutang kung fu", is also not its own entity in a vacuum.  There is really no such thing, the styles found at Wutang were also found at Shaolin.  Shaolin Si was actually a major epicenter in the development of Tai Chi (Mahar).  Wutang mountain just happens to be one of many where Taoism (not even martial arts, but actual priesthood) flourished.
> 
> Yi Gee Kim Yeurng Ma "like" stances are not the same as the canonical form found in the south, either.  Like a lot of other southern stancework it is lower, and more body weight oriented.


This is why I listed the specific styles. Wutang is it's own bag of politics, not worth diving in to for this discussion. My point is that these shapes show up not necessarily because of parentage or styles, but because the human body only works so many ways.



Oily Dragon said:


> Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma should never, ever used a fighting stance in CMA.  I'd argue this with any so-called "master" on earth.  Unless you completely drop the "Yee Gi" part and stand with your feet parallel, which is also a terrible stance for fighting and getting thrown.  It's closest to say, the Muay Thai stance, but even that basic stance shows the risks of "Free fighting" with such a method.
> 
> As an action?  Yee Gi is found in some training stance transitions (including Iron Wire, a very high level southern set).  But for "Free fighting, it doesn't even make sense from a physiological point of view.  It's right there in the name, "Yee Gi".  A lot of people will claim to do the "Yee Gi Ma", and not realize they're missing the "二" part.
> 
> ...


I think we are in some alignment here, but your point isn't totally clear.



Oily Dragon said:


> One of Neigong's goals is to relax the whole body and increase mobility, while building muscle, tendon, and ligament strength.  The old Shaolin way of doing this for the "Gwat" region is the Yee Gi (one of the oldest extant stances in MA history next to the 5 and 11), and it's basically the same as doing this kind of drill, but in body weight mode.


This paragraph seems to contradict your earlier statement of the difference between Yi Gee Ma and Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma, so I don't quite follow. I dig the video though, we do some similar mobility stuff at my weightlifting gym.


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 25, 2022)

Eric_H said:


> I think we can all agree, most versions of WC history have to be taken with a grain of salt. I've not read Judkin's work, so I will not comment on it, however I don't see why his version should not also be open to scrutiny. I don't believe WC is younger than all of the styles you listed as they mostly were supposedly formed between 1730-1850, with various re-formattings done by notable masters here and there.
> 
> Every mom is a woman but not every woman is your mom. Just because these styles existed does not mean they had direct influence on WC's founding. However, it seems we fundamentally have a disconnect - I see WC as a purposeful departure from the animal style mindset+body (This has been attributed to monks/nuns, military influence, secret societies, take your pick as to the reason) whereas many other styles are clear evolution on the animal style frames - Hung Kuen or Chi Sim Weng Chun is a great example of this.



First and foremost, Judkins is probably the most authoritative historian on Wing Chun's creation.  Hence the name of their book,









						The Creation of Wing Chun
					

This book explores the social history of southern Chinese martial arts and their contemporary importance to local identity and narratives of resistance. Hong Kong's Bruce Lee ushered the Chinese martial arts onto an international stage in the 1970s. Lee's teacher, Ip Man, master of Wing Chun...



					www.google.com
				




Wing Chun is unmistakeably Dragon, Snake, and Crane.  Whether or not people see other older styles like the Plum Flower depends on their experience, which unfortunately in the case of Wing Chun is so scarred and marred by controversy.

That's why it's important to be positively critical of Wing Chun, to combat the negativity of the last 30 years.  Wing Chun is a melting pot, and those are always frought with drama.  For comparison, see Hung Ga Kuen!  (Hundreds of movies compared to Wing Chun).


Eric_H said:


> I think it is a bit far fetched to say every WC teacher of the last 100 years is purposely being deceiving.


How familiar are you with the Eight Immortals?

All of Chinese warfare is deception, dude.  Right to the final inch (cheurng kiu).


Eric_H said:


> This paragraph seems to contradict your earlier statement of the difference between Yi Gee Ma and Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma, so I don't quite follow. I dig the video though, we do some similar mobility stuff at my weightlifting gym.


Yee/Yi is the character 2 in hanzi.  It's simple to describe in writing in the BC era.  You put your feet in that formation, and sink the root.

Later on, somebody starts pointing out (in writing) these are basic animal mounting skills.  Duh.

Fast forward a few thousand years, today we know the importance of keeping the _gwat _region strong.  This, according to the Daoists, is the elixir they seek.  The Shaolin would laugh it off, and continue to sweep around the temple gate.

The Wing Chun student just needs to own their inner animal spirit.  This is easier in other styles, their training is more diverse.  But there's nothing more kung fu than willpower.  You can always spot real kung fu that way, by what the student builds.  Wing Chun's hallmark has always been potential.


----------



## Eric_H (Apr 26, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> First and foremost, Judkins is probably the most authoritative historian on Wing Chun's creation.  Hence the name of their book,


According to who? You may find him so, but as far as I know, his work isn't widely accepted by the WC community.


Oily Dragon said:


> Wing Chun is unmistakeably Dragon, Snake, and Crane.  Whether or not people see other older styles like the Plum Flower depends on their experience, which unfortunately in the case of Wing Chun is so scarred and marred by controversy.


As before, I agree that WC has animal attitudes - but again this does not imply parentage from animal styles. When I talk of parentage, it is like having a new model year on a car - usually things get better, new bells and whistles are added, but the core frame and engine remain the same. When the same company goes to make a new car on a new frame, they take with it some of the learnings of the previous models, but when the frame and engine are new, it is not the same beast anymore. That's not evolution on the same concept, it's a purposeful departure.


Oily Dragon said:


> How familiar are you with the Eight Immortals?


We grab a beer every other sunday. They're some great people.


Oily Dragon said:


> All of Chinese warfare is deception, dude.  Right to the final inch (cheurng kiu).


Ok, so you're saying all WC teachers are actively lying. That's a bold claim.


Oily Dragon said:


> Fast forward a few thousand years, today we know the importance of keeping the _gwat _region strong.  This, according to the Daoists, is the elixir they seek.  The Shaolin would laugh it off, and continue to sweep around the temple gate.
> 
> The Wing Chun student just needs to own their inner animal spirit.  This is easier in other styles, their training is more diverse.  But there's nothing more kung fu than willpower.  You can always spot real kung fu that way, by what the student builds.  Wing Chun's hallmark has always been potential.


You've kind of circled back on my original point though - similar lines of knowledge from different sources tend to converge on things that are actually true. Per what you've said here, other arts can arrive at the same conclusion of how to develop certain things in an upright stance. This doesn't mean all of those arts are the direct ancestor of something that pulls from that common truth.


----------



## CMyers0323 (Apr 26, 2022)

Callen said:


> When you say traditional Wing Chun leg drills, what do you mean?
> 
> Both kicking and footwork are covered throughout the curriculum. The forms build on footwork repeatedly; and like all of the Wing Chun concepts and principles, there are various drills and applications that develop those attributes into skill, leg drills included. The Baat Jam Do form for example, is arguably one of the most important guides in terms of developing swift, proactive footwork. It has even been said that the BJD form is more about footwork than it is about the knives.
> 
> ...


I guess what I mean for leg drills would be like it another forum here they talk about Ip Man having a special leg drill where they used a stick of some sorts to strengthen the leg. I've also seen other drill outside of Wing Chun using the "kicking shield" target and have a 3 man rotating drill. Stuff like that. I just wasn't sure if there was any Wing Chun firect leg drills. 


Oh yeah I definitely agree. While I do train and train in school I usually use my down time to study what I can on the Internet or through books just as an extra way of training haha. Yeah i get what your saying its been some time since i was able to stop by the Wing Chun School near me but i do agee nothing like just jumping in and training. 

Yeah thats always been my belief I looked into the Wing Chun kicking just to see how I could make it more effective and it seems Wing Chun had its own method of kicking rather than a traditional shaolin type or other style. I'll have to take a closer look at Chum Kiu. I know all of the stuff looks simple but there's alot more to it. I'll check out Luk Dim Boon Gwan and I appreciate the advise its always nice to be able to talk anything martial arts with other knowledgeable people .


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 26, 2022)

Eric_H said:


> According to who? You may find him so, but as far as I know, his work isn't widely accepted by the WC community.


The East Asia Program of Cornell University.  He's a Visiting Scholar there.

There's a lot in the book (which is meticulously researched) that will upset Wing Chun students, but none of it is very surprising.

As far as respectable academic works on kung fu, there are few, and this (along with those of scholars like Meir Shahar on Shaolin) is one of those few.

Somebody (Geezer) called it dry.  I agree, it's terribly boring, and there are no pictures of techniques or breakdowns of the style.  Just who trained it, where, when, how, and where they fit into the big family tree (which is super enormously complex).


Eric_H said:


> As before, I agree that WC has animal attitudes - but again this does not imply parentage from animal styles.


Well the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma is the basic Crane animal stance in a lot of different CMA, the Biu Ji is part of Snake styles, etc.  Wing Chun didn't invent it.

The Dragon, Plum Flower, weapons and other stuff is also in there.  The weapons are a thousand years older than Wing Chun, and a lot of the animal styles were scooped up by whole familes (Jow, Chow, Hung), and later on instead of being called "Snake Style", Snake became just one of 5 animal motifs (Dragon, Snake, Tiger, Leopard, and Crane).  No longer a style, a way of categorizing a technique (e.g. Jow Ga Crane technique).  But not just with animals, the Wu Xing elements, yin/yang modes too (and a lot of it is tied back to traditional Chinese folk medicine, accupunture, etc).

If you really want to go deep, you could say Wing Chun is the unofficial "6th Southern Family".  If I said "Wing Chun Ga" to a Cantonese person they'd know exactly what I meant by that.



Eric_H said:


> Ok, so you're saying all WC teachers are actively lying. That's a bold claim.


Let's be honest, the origin myth of Wing Chun is a lie too, and tall tale telling is a fundamental part of Chinese martial arts.

We could talk all day about Ng Mui and not get anywhere.  If you have a chance to read Judkins' book, we'd have a LOT more to talk about.


Eric_H said:


> You've kind of circled back on my original point though - similar lines of knowledge from different sources tend to converge on things that are actually true. Per what you've said here, other arts can arrive at the same conclusion of how to develop certain things in an upright stance. This doesn't mean all of those arts are the direct ancestor of something that pulls from that common truth.


The full formal name of the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma (二字羊馬步) is found in practically all styles that claim Shaolin heritage (and you have to concede, few arts flex their Shaolin rep more than Wing Chun, and it's often a little cringey).

And then you can go down the list of technique names.  If the name in hanzi is the same, that's not the same thing as two English speaking people comparing "Crane vs. Crane".  箭搥 is 箭搥 in every CMA style.

There is Crane technique here below.  It's beauitful (*美*人照鏡), but I guarantee you few will find this video if they go looking for kung fu. 美人照鏡 is very common to Wing Chun and a lot of its peers, and even Northern styles.  It's all borrowed from somewhere else.  That's the way of all things.


----------



## Callen (Apr 26, 2022)

Cmyers0323 said:


> I guess what I mean for leg drills would be like it another forum here they talk about Ip Man having a special leg drill where they used a stick of some sorts to strengthen the leg. I've also seen other drill outside of Wing Chun using the "kicking shield" target and have a 3 man rotating drill. Stuff like that. I just wasn't sure if there was any Wing Chun firect leg drills.
> 
> 
> Oh yeah I definitely agree. While I do train and train in school I usually use my down time to study what I can on the Internet or through books just as an extra way of training haha. Yeah i get what your saying its been some time since i was able to stop by the Wing Chun School near me but i do agee nothing like just jumping in and training.


It can be difficult to know what to train outside of class as well, so I understand the challenges of finding drills that relate to where you are in terms of your progress in the system and the curriculum that your school teaches. A lack of practical context can do more harm than good, so it's also smart to be cautious about training certain concepts before you're ready to understand them.



Cmyers0323 said:


> Yeah thats always been my belief I looked into the Wing Chun kicking just to see how I could make it more effective and it seems Wing Chun had its own method of kicking rather than a traditional shaolin type or other style. I'll have to take a closer look at Chum Kiu. I know all of the stuff looks simple but there's alot more to it. I'll check out Luk Dim Boon Gwan and I appreciate the advise its always nice to be able to talk anything martial arts with other knowledgeable people .


I appreciate your positive attitude (mou dak 武德). Gong fu is truly about putting in hard work over time. The more you invest into it, the more you will get out of it.

If we were in person, I would just show you how chum kiu (沉橋) and the luk dim boon gwan (六點半棍) forms relate to whole body unity (unit power), footwork and mobility. The mechanics set the pace for understanding where unit power comes from. It requires exploring how the feet, waist and elbow work together. Once you get it, everything changes. However, you need solid basics and foundation development to properly apply footwork to actions. That's why the order of learning things is paramount.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Apr 26, 2022)

Callen said:


> the luk dim boon gwan (六點半棍) forms relate to whole body unity (unit power), footwork and mobility. The mechanics set the pace for understanding where unit power comes from.


A: Does WC have ...?
B: You can find those in WC knife form and also in WC stick form.

Why someone has to develop unit power, footwork, mobility until weapon training? Should those foudation be developed during the open hand training already?


----------



## hunschuld (Apr 27, 2022)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A: Does WC have ...?
> B: You can find those in WC knife form and also in WC stick form.
> 
> Why someone has to develop unit power, footwork, mobility until weapon training? Should those foudation be developed during the open hand training already?


Yes those things are developed before weapons training. The reason weaopns training comes last is that you are supposed to first develop these basic attributes before you can use the weapons effectively.


----------



## hunschuld (Apr 27, 2022)

Greasy Dragon have you even read Judkins book? If so you either have tremendous comprehension issues or you have an agenda of some sort.

His actual actual wing chun research is non existent. The last third of the book deals with wing chun directly and it is very clear he has done very little actual research . He relies almost totally on Leung Ting's research, the stories told by Yip Chun and Yip Ching a bit of Rene Ritchie and a few other stories. Yes he does a good job at looking at the historical social reality of the times to try to determine what stories are more plausible than others but that is all. No real independent research or actual document citations. He touches on some old stories of some lesser known but very important Wing Chun Sifu such as Ng Sun Cho Lui Chow and Jui Wan but very little in depth . He is just passing on stories without actually researching the stories. If anything his book gives more credence to Leung Tings Roots and Branches despite Leungs own agenda in writing the book.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 27, 2022)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*
Keep the comments friendly and professional. Or staff has to intervene, threads get locked, and people get suspended.

Mark A Cochran
@Dirty Dog 
MartialTalk Senior Moderator


----------



## Callen (Apr 27, 2022)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A: Does WC have ...?
> B: You can find those in WC knife form and also in WC stick form.
> 
> Why someone has to develop unit power, footwork, mobility until weapon training? Should those foudation be developed during the open hand training already?



Your quote from my comment is out of context. I’ll do my best to clear things up.

I never suggested waiting until weapon forms to develop unit power, footwork and mobility. That's why I referenced both Chum Kiu and Luk Dim Boon Gwan in my comments about unit power. But to clarify, here’s why I spoke about both forms.

Firstly, Cmyers0323 mentioned that he was looking for new ways to train and was interested in resources to develop whole body power. I was simply attempting to point out that unit power and mobility can be found in the system, and his search for supplemental resources outside of training the Wing Chun curriculum might be unnecessary. I further explained that from my experience, a practitioner does not have to look too far to realize that these attributes can be found in the mechanics of the system. That’s why, from the perspective of my training, I used both Chum Kiu and Luk Dim Boon Gwan as examples of unit power.

The first basic example of unit power, footwork and mobility starts with Chum Kiu. This is where whole body power is introduced through juen ma, yiu ma, chum kiu ma (尋橋馬 all footwork in the chum kiu form) and kicking. These are not typically explored before the second empty hand form in most curriculum, and for good reason.

Another example, also from my experience, that helps to solidify and develop the mechanics of unit power, footwork and mobility is the Luk Dim Boon Gwan. While Luk Dim Boon Gwan may seem like an “advanced” weapon form to some, in my training, it is actually a developmental tool that can be implemented very early on in the system. Wong Shun Leung taught us that the pole form was more than just weapon training, he advocated it as a way to develop punching power and whole body unity. In WSLVT, the Luk Dim Boon Gwan actions are very similar to the empty hand forms and shapes. As a result some sifu start their students on the pole around the same time as Chum Kiu (as it is with many HK styles of Ving Tsun as well). It is actually quite common in the circles that I train in, and here's why.

The Luk Dim Boon Gwan shares the same basic concept of offense and defense together, so Lin Siu Dai Da is implied in all of the pole actions. Because the pole is long and heavy, it cannot be trained and utilized effectively using arms only; so the legs are used to support the shoulders and arms during defensive actions (arms propped on the legs and waist), which borrows power from the stance. The low horse during attacking thrusts forces the elbow to stay down and close to the body’s side stance, developing solid punching power from the ground. The footwork in Luk Dim Boon Gwan is wide with balls of the feet in contact with the ground, influencing the feet to remain proactive and ready. This ready footwork develops dynamic short distance power, connects the arms, legs, and waist, creating whole body structure. In this way, Luk Dim Boon Gwan can be much more than a weapon form depending on how it is understood.

In my opinion, Chum Kiu and the Wing Chun pole are both great examples that help to better explain how the mechanics of the Wing Chun system influence the proper development of unit power, footwork and mobility. Again, my basic premise all along was that whole body power is is in the system if you know where to look. I used the familiar waypoints of those two forms because they are cornerstone examples of unit power development, often trained in tandem in many curriculum.


----------



## Poppity (Apr 27, 2022)

Error


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 27, 2022)

hunschuld said:


> Greasy Dragon have you even read Judkins book?


Yes, I read the whole thing.

All 348 pages.  It's all true.

9 alone are devoted to references.  Do you know what the significance of that number is to Wing Chun, measured in plum flowers?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 27, 2022)

hunschuld said:


> He relies almost totally on Leung Ting's research,


This doesn't check out.

There are over 150 references in those 9 pages; Leung Ting is 1 of them, and calling his work "research" is a stretch.  He's literally subjective.


----------



## jlq (Apr 29, 2022)

Oily Dragon,
what hunschuld said about Mr. Judkin's book is actually spot on.

Mr. Judkin's is a scholar par excellence, no doubt, and surely knows how to put together a work following academic standards. Unfortunately, this seems to intimidate a lot of people and perhaps read his work with less critical thinking than they should.

While he has a long list of references, he mainly draws just on a few on them for the bulk of his text.

Especially so when it comes to the part which actually relates to Wing Chun.

The problem for him - and other researchers - is that they are basically all doing armchair work, meaning that they rely on whatever written sources the have access through through their own personal collections and libraries. When it comes to Wing Chun, and many other styles, there simply is not much material available. While a lot of books are written in the West about Wing Chun. this is a relatively recent development, and the information in those books, especially when it comes to matters of history and the development of the style, are limited to what trickled through to the West via Hong Kong. So, basically, you will have different retellings and elaborations of the basic stories which were first shared, and then, over the years you will find that different people borrow story elements from other "histories" or simply merge them, somehow discovering the "true" history... 

Now, when it comes to the information on Wing Chun, its practitioners, and its development in Mainland China, he mainly draws on two sources, one being Leung Ting's "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun", the other one being a locally published work (in Fatsaan, that is) called "Fatsaan Mo Sat Man Faat" or "Foshan Martial Arts Culture". The greater part of this book is actually about Choi Lei Fat (Mr. Judkin's brings quite a bit of information about that style into his book), a lesser part is actually about Wing Chun. This book is not actually a serious scholarly work, in fact it looks and reads like a high school project, or one of those obligatory papers certain research or study faculties/organizations have to produce on a regular bases, and since it is more about just getting them done than producing actual quality content, not too much work and effort is put into it. Most of the information about Wing Chun in that book was from the late Master Ho Hoi Lam, who was the Dai Sihing of Yiu Kei's students, i.e. the senior student of Yiu Choi's son, Yiu Kei. Why is that important? Well, Ho Hoi Lam undoubtedly knew much about his particular lineage and their stories, but less so about others. Ultimately, the problem here is that it is essentially just one source of information. Had the writers of that book visited people like Ngau Gung (Leung Ngau), who was until his passing a year or so ago at the age of 98 the oldest of Yuen Kei Saan's student's still alive, they might have gotten much more interesting information and another perspective and of course, there are many others who have valuable knowledge about the history and develpment of Wing Chun in Fatsaan.

Given that he really does not have much information about the situation about the state of Gung Fu, and especially Wing Chun in Fatsaan, - he only knows what he can read through the very few sources available to him - a lot of his conclusions and descriptions of things are not accurate and give a wrong picture. For example, he goes into a discussion and analysis of "Wing Chun" as a "marketplace", claiming that Ng Chun So was instrumental as a Wing Chun teacher. The thing is, people like Ng Chun So, never had nor operated what we in the West would call a "martial arts school", nor was it generally open to the public. There was no advertising or marketing campaigns to draw in students. In Fatsaan, all they way up to the 1980s Wing Chun was taught "privately", to small groups of people only. Only when people like Pan Nam Sifu and Lun Gai Sifu started teaching in  the Fatsaan Jing Mo, Wing Chun became, what we in the West would understand as "schools". Also, some people, like Lam Seui Boh Sifu started teaching in public, in front of the Jo Miu, charging no money back in those days.

These are (just a few) of the things you can learn if you are actually doing field research talking to local people, who are still connected to the past, instead of simply relying on the little information you can find in books.

Also, the book fails to considerate certain things which have been know in China for a long time, but somehow never trickled through to the West, for example when Chan Wah Shun was born and when he passed away, that Leung Bik did indeed exist (he is listed in the Leung family Juk Po), that he has descendants, among those a great grand daughter who is learning Pan Nam Wing Chun under one of the oldest students of Pan Nam, etc. 

You can be the greatest scholar in the world, but if you base your paper on an extremely limited sample size of sometimes questionable quality and try to conclude things based on that, the product will by its very nature not be very authoritative.

Many things can be said about Leung Ting, and his various books, but mostly the opinions on his material is based more on dislike or antipathy towards him as a person, than objective observation.

Leung Ting's "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun" is basically him sharing information he gathered about various styles of Wing Chun over the years, some based on personal interviews, some based on articles from various martial arts publications.

He shares the information he gained and analyzes them critically based on his knowledge, experience and insights. He makes it very clear what his opinion is and why he believes so. So, his reporting of the information is not "subjective", but his analysis, sure is - and that will be the case for everybody. Mr. Judkin's is actually doing the very same thing, but being a scholar and well versed with academic standards, he presents his analysis and opinions ("understanding") a bit differently than Leung Ting. 

Leung Ting's book is not authoritative in any way either, but its value lies in the documentation of the information he gained from interviewing various people. He "produced" new knowledge and enriched the pool information available to armchair scholars to draw, quite unlike any work before or since. It is a sort of time stamp and gives an idea of what people thought, believed and knew at that time. 



Best regards


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 29, 2022)

jlq said:


> Oily Dragon,
> what hunschuld said about Mr. Judkin's book is actually spot on.


Not really.


jlq said:


> *This book is not actually a serious scholarly work, in fact it looks and reads like a high school project, or one of those obligatory papers certain research or study faculties/organizations have to produce on a regular bases, and since it is more about just getting them done than producing actual quality content, not too much work and effort is put into it. *


You're one of the Wing Chun people upset by his book, aren't you?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 29, 2022)

hunschuld said:


> *No real independent research or actual document citations*


Tell me more!


----------



## Callen (Apr 29, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> You're one of the Wing Chun people upset by his book, aren't you?


Out of curiosity Oily, are you a Wing Chun practitioner? It just occurred to me that you often refer to Wing Chun with an outsider perspective, mixed with some disdain.

Also, why do you think Wing Chun people are upset by Judkin’s book?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 29, 2022)

Callen said:


> Out of curiosity Oily, are you a Wing Chun practitioner? It just occurred to me that you often refer to Wing Chun with an outsider perspective, mixed with some disdain.
> 
> Also, why do you think Wing Chun people are upset by Judkin’s book?


Yes.

I have two disdains, actually.

3 people have gotten very upset so far, I'm ready for the 4th.

I don't think Hunschuld or Jlq read the book.  This is a very well researched historical scholarly work from a top tier university expert, published by SUNY, on the origins of the art.

Obviously it pulls the rug out of a lot of people.  And they are legion online.


----------



## Callen (Apr 29, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> I don't think Hunschuld or Jlq read the book. This is a very well researched historical scholarly work.


In terms of their contrasting review, have you read "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun"?



Oily Dragon said:


> Obviously it pulls the rug out of a lot of people.


In your opinion, how does Judkin's book do that?


----------



## Oily Dragon (Apr 29, 2022)

Callen said:


> In terms of their contrasting review, have you read "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun"?


You mean this one?







Callen said:


> In your opinion, how does Judkin's book do that?


There's a whole range of mythbusting about various things Daoist, Shaolin, Ip family, which one would hope for in a scholarly work.

It will come across as kryptonite to the stereotype "Wing Chun Man", if he exists.  And he does.

For someone like me who studies lots of styles and wants a sniff test, it's probably the best legit work out there today.


----------



## Callen (Apr 29, 2022)

Yeah, that book. What did you think about the parallels of "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun" and Judkin's book? Awesome cover too! I'm personally partial to the fake Han style queue that LT is wearing, its a nice touch 



Oily Dragon said:


> There's a whole range of mythbusting about various things Daoist, Shaolin, Ip family, which one would hope for in a scholarly work.
> 
> It will come across as kryptonite to the stereotype "Wing Chun Man", if he exists. And he does.


I think there are definitely going to be people who don't particularly like Judkin's book that don't fit the "Wing Chun Man" stereotype. There are a lot of folks in the Wing Chun community that dispel the many wuxia, magical realism origin myths, and that number is growing.


----------



## Callen (Apr 29, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> For someone like me who studies lots of styles and wants a sniff test, it's probably the best legit work out there today.


Interesting. A sniff test in terms of what?


----------



## hunschuld (Apr 29, 2022)

Oil, 

You need to stop sniffing whatever it is you sniff. You have confirmed that every post you have made on all topics are suspect because your clearly don't understand what you are reading.

I suggest everyone that thinks Oil knows what he is talking about read the book or at least the last third that deals with wing chun. The book is available for free in an online pdf. It took me about 5 minutes to find the complete book online for free.

I will not  post the link since the book was written for profit.

As JLQ points out there is  information available in China that has not made it to the rest of the world. 
There are actually authenticated writings and documents about wing chun that exist ,most held in private families however some are public. A true scholarly book would have cited some of these for historical accuracy. Judkins  does not use any of them. The book is fine for what it is.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Apr 29, 2022)

There are plenty of legends and myths associated with MA.  Hard facts are difficult to come by for various reasons.

1.  There are few written primary sources as much of the early teaching was restricted to few individuals and knowledge was passed on from master to student orally.

2.  Wars destroyed many books and scrolls over the centuries in China as temples burned.  During WWII, most of Okinawa was burned and bombed to rubble, leaving little documentation and with the thousands killed, a number of old karate masters, human repositories of the art, perished, as did their first-hand historical knowledge

3.  The documents that did survive are obviously not in English.  Only recently have there been Western martial art experts fluent in Japanese and Chinese.  Joe Swift is one and has authored many articles on Okinawan karate history, as has the renown Patrick MCarthy, first to translate the _Bubishi _into English.

4.  A number of historical Chinese sources are written in the old style classical form which is hard for modern Chinese to accurately translate, much less Westerners.

5.  The old recent/late masters may have been only a generation or two away from the legendary masters and had oral traditions directly passed down to them.  Problem was that they did not deem to share their knowledge with curious Westerners they did not know.  Luckily, the two men mentioned in #3 lived/live in Japan, have stellar reputations and earned the trust of current Okinawan/Japanese masters and having traveled to China, some of their masters as well, finally getting them to share their knowledge and scrolls passed down to them.

So, yes, hard accurate facts are hard to come by and much of what has been written in English has been based on just a few sources and quoted over and over by others.  But as described above, new sources are being accessed and increased understanding of TMA is still to come.  In the meantime, I enjoy the legends and myths and the lessons they may teach.


----------



## jlq (Apr 30, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> Not really.
> 
> You're one of the Wing Chun people upset by his book, aren't you?



Yes, really.



I would suggest you read what I wrote again very carefully and consider the points I made. You are not making any arguments to counter the issues I raised, so your statement is - as of now - just unfounded opinion.

And...

What gives you the impression that I am upset by this book?

The passage of my post which you quoted, does not - again, I suggest you read more carefully what I wrote before drawing conclusions - relate to Mr. Judkin's book, but his main source of information about Gung Fu in Fatsaan, the "Fatsaan Martial Arts Culture". I wrote this quite clearly. You seem to have missed the point of what I wrote and why I wrote it...



Callen said:


> There are a lot of folks in the Wing Chun community that dispel the many wuxia, magical realism origin myths, and that number is growing.




Applying critical analysis and critical thinking, levelling some well founded criticism at academic works does not imply being upset, it simply implies actually thinking about the material presented, instead of simply accepting that what I read is fact or "the truth". It does not mean that one believes in any of the things you quoted. 


Next question, why would I be upset about a book, and especially what is presented in Mr. Judkin's work?

There is absolutely nothing in this book which was in any way new to me, in fact I found it very lacking in substance about Wing Chun and its development. Like I said, he is limited by his sources which, when it comes to actual Wing Chun relevancy are very, very few. There is not one of these sources which I didn't already have in my personal library of martial arts books, or which I had not already seen in local libraries in Fatsaan and Gwongjaau at the time the book was published.

While the books and the sources might obviously impress some people, I am not - peoples' mileage vary.



Oily Dragon said:


> I don't think Hunschuld or Jlq read the book. This is a very well researched historical scholarly work from a top tier university expert, published by SUNY, on the origins of the art.



Given the fact that I commended the scholarship of the book, but pointed out its weaknesses and limitations and provided a critical analysis of the main work he cites when it comes to Wing Chun and its development in Fatsaan, you conclude that I must not have read the book? I think that is a pretty weak, and more emotional conclusion than a rational one. Again, you might be very impressed by the work, but others less so. I guess the less you know, they more impressive you would find this work.

As far as reading the book, if you read what I wrote with less emotional investment in the matter, it should be pretty obvious that I have indeed read the book. In fact, I have read all the sources - and in most cases, where applicable - checked the sources of the sources quoted. As I wrote previously, there is nothing new to what he presents or sources.



Once again, I will point out that the scholarship, "scientific method" and presentation is impeccable, but it is not authoritative in any way because of the problems with the - very limited sources - he draws on when he actually discusses Wing Chun (Chapter4). I suggest you take a good look at those 90 references and check out which sources he drew on and to what extent. To put this in perspective: of 90 citations, 29 are from "Fatsaan Martial Culture" (Ma Zineng), 19 from "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun" (Leung Ting), 11 from Yip Chun and Tse, 10 from Yip Ching and Heimberger and 6 from Chu, Ritchie and Yu's "Complete Wing Chun". The rest are cited just once, mostly.  D
So, while you might be impressed with the number of sources listed and think it is thorough and in-depth historical scholarship, as is evident from going through the citations list, it is anything but that. I suggest you do the work to count which works are cited in chapters 2 and 3 as well, when it comes to certain subjects and then reevaluate your statement about "well researched". It is not Mr. Judkin's fault, but as I said in my first post, he suffers from a lack of sources to draw on.
It is quite amusing that on the one hand you consider Mr. Judkin's book amazing and authoritative, but at the same time seem deride Leung Ting's work, and claim it to be "subjective", when it is in fact the second most integral source which is drawn on when it comes to the history and development of Wing Chun...





Oily Dragon said:


> There's a whole range of mythbusting about various things Daoist, Shaolin, Ip family, which one would hope for in a scholarly work.
> 
> It will come across as kryptonite to the stereotype "Wing Chun Man", if he exists. And he does.
> 
> For someone like me who studies lots of styles and wants a sniff test, it's probably the best legit work out there today.



Like I said, there is nothing particularly new or revelatory in the book - from my perspective. In fact, there could have been much more mythbusting done if he had more access to local information instead of simply being an armchair researcher (I do not mean this in a derogatory fashion, but simply in the sense that he didn't do actual field research to produce new knowledge but instead relied on whatever textual material he had access to via his private collection and libraries, be the physical or virtual). For example, the exact years of Leung Jan's life and death, his family, his pharmacy, Leung Bik, etc. this is all known in Fatsaan, Hoksaan, Gwongjaau, etc. and has been for a long time. But because he didn't have access to this information, and it is not found in any of the books he had access to when preparing this work, he obviously had to rely on "old" and inaccurate stuff to draw his conclusions on. Again, it is not his fault, just a limitation caused by what sources he had access to.

In spite of the problems and limitations of the book, as I see them, I am still of the opinion that it is a must have book, it is definitely the best available of its kind, and very informative on an "entry level" for people interested in the subject. Just don't take anything in there as the final word, but a best attempt by the author(s) based on the sources available to them at the time. It is not in any way, shape or form "authoritative" or comprehensive. 

I definitely agree with you that any "Wing Chun fundamentalists" will not appreciate when faced with the proposition that the stories they have heard in reality are anything but real, and there will be a certain resistance to accepting this fact. There are so many stories, so much misinformation and so much nonsense accepted as fact by different people these days, and unfortunately many people will defend this stuff with the fervor of a religious fanaticist, regardless of the magnitude and strength of evidence of the contrary to their specific beliefs.




Reading through your many posts, it is clear that you do study a lof of things, but I must say - absolutely no disrespect  or offense intended - that most of this seems to be at a very superficial level. If you had really studied certain things in more depth, you would not connect the dots in the ways that you do it... You might convince people who are inexperienced and who haven't really studied the subject to believing that you really have a serious level of insights and understanding of it, but old hands and experienced people, such as hunschuld and others on this forum, recognize things for what they are.

Just my impression based on what you have posted in this forum, FWIW.



You say you study Wing Chun... I am curious what style you practice, under which Sifu, and for how long you have been practicing. Also, I remember reading that you were studying the Tiet Sien Kuen of the Lam family? If so, same questions.

Best regards


----------



## geezer (Apr 30, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> ....Let's be honest, the origin myth of Wing Chun is a lie too, and* tall tale telling is a fundamental part of Chinese martial arts.*
> 
> The full formal name of the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma (二字羊馬步) is found in practically all styles that claim Shaolin heritage (and you have to concede, few arts flex their Shaolin rep more than Wing Chun...
> ....It's all borrowed from somewhere else.  That's the way of all things.


I must be getting really old and soft because I find myself agreeing with parts of what both you and Eric are saying. 

...But anyway, it's really great to see informed people arguing about Wing Chun again! Keep it up.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Apr 30, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> The full formal name of the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma (二字羊馬步) is found in practically all styles that claim Shaolin heritage ...


One of the YGKYM functions is the leg skill - "shin bite". I believe the Bagua system use it a lot too.


----------



## Eric_H (Apr 30, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> The East Asia Program of Cornell University.  He's a Visiting Scholar there.


That's cool, it is certainly something. That school doesn't have any authority to speak for WC though.


Oily Dragon said:


> There's a lot in the book (which is meticulously researched) that will upset Wing Chun students, but none of it is very surprising.


I don't think it is as meticulous as you say. He disqualifies all lineages that aren't from Ip Man in the first few chapters (that's about as far as I've gotten, but will continue to go through it).


Oily Dragon said:


> Well the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma is the basic Crane animal stance in a lot of different CMA, the Biu Ji is part of Snake styles, etc.  Wing Chun didn't invent it.


No, but whoever did make WC did seem to filter everything through a new lens. New engine, new framework. Some things fit, some things don't.


Oily Dragon said:


> Let's be honest, the origin myth of Wing Chun is a lie too, and tall tale telling is a fundamental part of Chinese martial arts.


If you're talking about the Ng Mui fable, then yes. I don't think anyone thinks that actually happened.


Oily Dragon said:


> The full formal name of the Yee Gi Kim Yeurng Ma (二字羊馬步) is found in practically all styles that claim Shaolin heritage (and you have to concede, few arts flex their Shaolin rep more than Wing Chun, and it's often a little cringey).


I haven't studied all the different Shaolin descended styles, so I won't speak for them. Back to my original point, similar-to-same stances happen to show up in non-shaolin places too. However, I can't argue the cringey flex. Achievement unlocked, we've found common ground 😂


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

Callen said:


> Interesting. A sniff test in terms of what?


This thread is a great example.  Read Hunschuld's responses, or the other Wing Chun trolls.


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

Callen said:


> Yeah, that book. What did you think about the parallels of "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun" and Judkin's book? Awesome cover too! I'm personally partial to the fake Han style queue that LT is wearing, its a nice touch


It's interesting that Judkin's work is being mis-characterized by several posters, and that Leung Ting is only referenced on less than 20 pages of the work.

The other half dozen+ Leung family members collectively have more mentions.

I guess I should have mentioned Judkin's co-author at some point, but I assumed that people providing feedback on the book here, actually read it.  

I was wrong.  They not only haven't read it, they claim to have a PDF version of it...


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

hunschuld said:


> Oil,
> 
> You need to stop sniffing whatever it is you sniff. You have confirmed that every post you have made on all topics are suspect because your clearly don't understand what you are reading.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

jlq said:


> Yes, really.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your posts and lies about the book.  I don't believe you have a copy available, but if you do cite a page and line number for me.

Be a gentleman.


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

geezer said:


> I must be getting really old and soft because I find myself agreeing with parts of what both you and Eric are saying.
> 
> ...But anyway, it's really great to see informed people arguing about Wing Chun again! Keep it up.


Oh it's getting even better.

Somehow I accidentally conjured up the long-running beef between the Yip and Leung families, by posting the most definitive scholarly work on Wing Chun published, ever, according to reviews that matter.

This never, ever happens in the other southern schools...


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 2, 2022)

Eric_H said:


> That's cool, it is certainly something. That school doesn't have any authority to speak for WC though.


That's an interesting question.


Eric_H said:


> I don't think it is as meticulous as you say. He disqualifies all lineages that aren't from Ip Man in the first few chapters (that's about as far as I've gotten, but will continue to go through it).


It's more like he takes a huge amount of people who claim to be legit Wing Chun and narrows them down, using genealogies and statements, to figure out who actually probably trained with who. 

People change what they call their style all the time.  Like I've been saying, it's a nest of various styles that co-mingled for a few hundred years.  One person's Snake, Crane, and Dragon is another's Wing Chun is another's Jun Fan is another's something or other.

20 pages of references.  The notes alone go from pp 283-312.

4 pages of references of over 150 works cited, of which Leung Ting authored 1.

"high school project" was a big red flag.  Hoo boy, I've done it now.  Too much truth at once.


----------



## jlq (May 3, 2022)

Oily Dragon,
the premise for any good and productive discussion is a) the willingness and ability to hear/read what is actually being said and b) the ability to understand what is actually being presented. I don't know which one is the problem for you... But one thing is for sure, the points I made quite clearly do not register with you, as you have demonstrated repeatedly. 

Let me give you an example:

I wrote this:



jlq said:


> Now, when it comes to the information on Wing Chun, its practitioners, and its development in Mainland China, he mainly draws on two sources, one being Leung Ting's "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun", the other one being a locally published work (in Fatsaan, that is) called "Fatsaan Mo Sat Man Faat" or "Foshan Martial Arts Culture". The greater part of this book is actually about Choi Lei Fat (Mr. Judkin's brings quite a bit of information about that style into his book), a lesser part is actually about Wing Chun. This book is not actually a serious scholarly work, in fact it looks and reads like a high school project, or one of those obligatory papers certain research or study faculties/organizations have to produce on a regular bases, and since it is more about just getting them done than producing actual quality content, not too much work and effort is put into it.



Anyone with the capability to read and with a minimum of reading comprehension should be able to see that when I called something not a serious scholarly work, it was OBVIOUSLY not Mr. Judkin's book. Especially given that just above this paragraph I wrote the following:



jlq said:


> Mr. Judkin's is a scholar par excellence, no doubt, and surely knows how to put together a work following academic standards.



So, as I specifically stated, I was referring specifically to the book "Fatsaan Martial Arts Culture", which is the main source Mr. Judkin's draws on when it comes to Wing Chun and its development in China.

But given your response:



Oily Dragon said:


> jlq said:
> *This book is not actually a serious scholarly work, in fact it looks and reads like a high school project, or one of those obligatory papers certain research or study faculties/organizations have to produce on a regular bases, and since it is more about just getting them done than producing actual quality content, not too much work and effort is put into it.*





Oily Dragon said:


> You're one of the Wing Chun people upset by his book, aren't you?



This quite clearly went over your head...

I tried to clarify it for you:



jlq said:


> What gives you the impression that I am upset by this book?
> 
> The passage of my post which you quoted, does not - again, I suggest you read more carefully what I wrote before drawing conclusions - relate to Mr. Judkin's book, but his main source of information about Gung Fu in Fatsaan, the "Fatsaan Martial Arts Culture". I wrote this quite clearly. You seem to have missed the point of what I wrote and why I wrote it...



Based on your latest response



Oily Dragon said:


> "high school project" was a big red flag. Hoo boy, I've done it now. Too much truth at once.



it seems the only conclusion must be that you either do not read what is written or that things just don't register with you, in spite of multiple attempts to clarify things. Under such conditions, intelligent and productive discussions are impossible...

Now on to something else.


Oily Dragon said:


> It's interesting that Judkin's work is being mis-characterized by several posters, and that Leung Ting is only referenced on less than 20 pages of the work.
> 
> The other half dozen+ Leung family members collectively have more mentions.





Oily Dragon said:


> 20 pages of references. The notes alone go from pp 283-312.
> 
> 4 pages of references of over 150 works cited, of which Leung Ting authored 1.



Again, you quite obviously do not read or comprehend what is written, and as such unable to follow the argument.

To save some time, I shall quote myself once again:



jlq said:


> Once again, I will point out that the scholarship, "scientific method" and presentation is impeccable, but it is not authoritative in any way because of the problems with the - very limited sources - he draws on when he actually discusses Wing Chun (Chapter4). I suggest you take a good look at those 90 references and check out which sources he drew on and to what extent. To put this in perspective: of 90 citations, 29 are from "Fatsaan Martial Culture" (Ma Zineng), 19 from "Roots and Branches of Wing Chun" (Leung Ting), 11 from Yip Chun and Tse, 10 from Yip Ching and Heimberger and 6 from Chu, Ritchie and Yu's "Complete Wing Chun". The rest are cited just once, mostly. D
> So, while you might be impressed with the number of sources listed and think it is thorough and in-depth historical scholarship, as is evident from going through the citations list, it is anything but that. I suggest you do the work to count which works are cited in chapters 2 and 3 as well, when it comes to certain subjects and then reevaluate your statement about "well researched".



You obviously do not understand what I wrote... It seems you simply look at the lists of works cited, but didn't actually make the effort to read how much each of those works is actually cited in the text. Even when I listed it for you, you quite clearly did not bother to check for yourself, but simply keep hanging on whatever conviction which has entrenched itself in your head. 

Which begs the question, have you ever written an academical paper yourself or do you know how to read one? If you had, you would understand that a common mistake (willful or unwilfull) is to quote as many sources as possible to give the work an air of being well-researched, but if 90 percent of the material used is taken from just 1 percent of the sources cited, that is actually a very badly researched work. Given that you are obviously more impressed by the number of sources listed instead of having an understanding of how and to what extent these sources are used, it seems you don't really know how to read and evaluate academic works.

But I am digressing...



Oily Dragon said:


> It's interesting that Judkin's work is being mis-characterized by several posters, and that Leung Ting is only referenced on less than 20 pages of the work.



Where is Judkin's work being misrepresented? Do yo deny that whenever it comes to Wing Chun (say in chapters 3 and 4), he draws mainly on two sources? I pointed one chapter out to you, it is there in black and white for everyone - who bothers to look carefully - to see! I suggested you check out the notes for chapter 4, and see whether or not I am correct. Note that in several notes, several source are cited. 

Again, Leung Ting is just mentioned once in the list of sources, but I am talking about the number of times this work has been quoted (see above).



Oily Dragon said:


> Your posts and lies about the book. I don't believe you have a copy available, but if you do cite a page and line number for me.
> 
> Be a gentleman.



How do you get the idea that I am lying about the book and what exactly is a lie? Strong words, I hope you can back them up and show me some examples of where I lied about the book.

And once again, simply because I am far less impressed with this book than you are and don't think it has the same value as you do doesn't mean that I am upset by the book. It just means that it takes A LOT less to impress me than you... 

You are obviously not using your brain - you could easily check whether or not my claims about chapter 4 and the number of notes and sources cited is accurate or not. Further, you can just as easily check if the book "Fatsaan Martial Arts Culture" is found in the list of works cited, and also if I got the author right.

How would I know these things if I don't have that particular book?

But since you are seemingly incapable of drawing a logical conclusion based on this, I shall indeed help you out a little bit, as requestd:

The notes to Chapter 4 (which show which sources are cited and how often) are found on pages 301-305 in the paperback edition (2015) and on pages 323-326 in the pdf version.



Oily Dragon said:


> I guess I should have mentioned Judkin's co-author at some point, but I assumed that people providing feedback on the book here, actually read it.



I don't think we need to mention the co-author, as I doubt he actually contributed much. He is not a scholar, but Mr. Judkin's Wing Chun teacher. There is an interview with the authors somewhere on the internet on the publishing of the book. It doesn't sound like Mr. Nielson contributed that much from a scholarly perspective.



Oily Dragon said:


> 4 pages of references of over 150 works cited, of which Leung Ting authored 1.




Hm... 4 pages of references? In my paperback edition the list of works cited ("references") stretches from p. 327 to 335. A bit more than 4 pages... I wonder, did YOU really read the book?  

If, for whatever absurd reason still insist that I don't own a copy of the book, I can make it even more easy for you: Simply hit me up on Whatsapp or Wechat, and we can do a live video call where I show you my copies of the book (digital and softcover versions). 

Let me know...





Oily Dragon said:


> Somehow I accidentally conjured up the long-running beef between the Yip and Leung families, by posting the most definitive scholarly work on Wing Chun published, ever, according to reviews that matter.
> 
> This never, ever happens in the other southern schools...



I think for some reason you have too much emotion invested in this - I can only speak for myself, but you surely didn't conure up any "beef between Yip and Leung families". Why is there any beef between anyone simply because some people point out that there are some limitations associated with the work you obviously treasure like a bible? I can only speak for myself, but I have no beef with anyone, I do not champion any particular lineage or their view on things. I would guess hunschuld feels exactly the same...

I can see that you base your belief and argument based on some sort of "appeal to authority", a common mistake when trying to make a point or strengthen one's argument.  This indicates that you do not have enough knowledge or understanding of the subject to form your own opinion and apply some critical analysis and thinking when it comes to the subject. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter whatever the reviews say, and who wrote them - the fact that the parts relating to actual Wing Chun (its history and development in Mainland China) is mainly based upon a few works and as such is very much lacking in information. And as such it is not quite that authoritative as the hype portrays it.

Again, to you - based on what knowledge and experience you have - it might very well be very impressive, to others less so. Still, I would agree that it is the best book of its kind, but with its limitations. I would definitely recommend any Wing Chun enthusiast to study it, but take it as a reference, not a definitive and exhaustive source on the subject. I said as much before, but maybe this time it will sink in.

Finally, you conveniently ignored my question as to your actual martial arts background, so forgive me for repeating the questions:

1. How long have you been training in Wing Chun, which teacher and in which lineage?
2. How long have you been practicing Lam Sai Wing's Hung Ga Kuen?

For now...

Best regards


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 5, 2022)

jlq said:


> I wrote this:
> 
> *Anyone with the capability to read and with a minimum of reading comprehension *should be able to see...
> 
> *So, as I specifically stated, I was referring specifically to the book "Fatsaan Martial Arts Culture"*, *which is the main source Mr. Judkin's draws on when it comes to Wing Chun and its development in China.*


Why do you keep lying about this book?  Why do you and Hunschuld keeping changing the "main" source?  Is it Leung Ting, or that?

I've got plenty of Wing Chun cred, bud.  You're not going to win this.

I also have the book in hand.  You do not.


----------



## Oily Dragon (May 5, 2022)

jlq said:


> I can only speak for myself, but you surely didn't conure up any "beef between Yip and Leung families".


I sure did.

You're not fooling anyone.  

Definitely not me, you might as well consider me your Wing Chun Overlord.


----------



## jlq (May 6, 2022)

Hmm... who is the troll?



I don't think anyone can be so dense as to not understand clearly what I wrote, or keep repeating nonsense in the manner you do unless one is willfully oblique...



But since it is fun and puts into perspective how seriously one should take you:



Oily Dragon said:


> Why do you keep lying about this book? Why do you and Hunschuld keeping changing the "main" source? Is it Leung Ting, or that?
> 
> I've got plenty of Wing Chun cred, bud. You're not going to win this.
> 
> I also have the book in hand. You do not.



Again you demonstrate your inability to read and comprehend what is written. 

Who keeps changing the main source? 

If you'd bother to actually read what I wrote, I wrote from the beginning that when it comes to the local Wing Chun and its development in Fatsaan, he mainly drew on the work I mentioned, followed by Leung Ting's book. I documented this by an actual citation count. I surely never changed anything, nor did hunschuld for that matter... 

So, instead of simply repeatedly claiming I am lying about this book, do show exactly where and what I am lying about. If you can't... Well, better stay silent and concede that YOU are indeed the one who speaking nonsense.

What is it going to be?



As far as plenty of Wing Chun cred, among whom? People who don't know anything, perhaps... But the ones with a little bit of education on the subject undoubtedly recognize that you come across as a rather confused individual who is do quite a bit of very imaginative and creative dot-connecting.

The way you have been conducting yourself in this discussion, not reading, not comprehending, ignoring and not addressing counterpoints doesn't really indicate that you are "winning" anything. If you believe you are doing a good job defending your position, your appraisal of the situation is just as deluded as a lot of the "insights" you are trying to share on this forum.




If I don't have the book, explain where I got those numbers from... Since you have it in front of you, instead of simply claiming that I don't have the book, you could enlighten us what exactly is on those pages in your edition, a screenshot perhaps?

Anyway, since you insist that I don't have the book, let's hook up on Whatsapp, and I shall show you live the book and the pages I referred to. If you are not willing to back up your claim or take this offer, the appropriate thing to do is to let the matter go and remain silent.

The ball is in your court...





Oily Dragon said:


> I sure did.
> 
> You're not fooling anyone.
> 
> Definitely not me, you might as well consider me your Wing Chun Overlord.



This just confirms an ongoing trend, that your imagination and reality are at times quite far from each other.



So, what exactly is the beef you have conjured up between Yip and Leung family? And how does that relate in any way to the points I have been making?

Please do explain yourself...

I would consider your more of an "Overlord of Delusion", if anything.




To round this off, let me repeat the questions:

1. How long have you been training in Wing Chun, which teacher and in which lineage?
2. How long have you been practicing Lam Sai Wing's Hung Ga Kuen?


Are there any answers forthcoming?




Best regards


----------



## Eric_H (May 6, 2022)

Oily Dragon said:


> That's an interesting question.
> 
> It's more like he takes a huge amount of people who claim to be legit Wing Chun and narrows them down, using genealogies and statements, to figure out who actually probably trained with who.


Yeah, but it's at best a partial or at worst a cherry-picked view of WC. It's like trying to talk about the entire NFL when you only know about the New York Jets.


Oily Dragon said:


> People change what they call their style all the time.  Like I've been saying, it's a nest of various styles that co-mingled for a few hundred years.  One person's Snake, Crane, and Dragon is another's Wing Chun is another's Jun Fan is another's something or other.


You're misconstruing my point - I have posited that WC was a purposeful break from the animal styles. The framework, engine and strategy all changed. That's not a re-labeling of the same content.


Oily Dragon said:


> 20 pages of references.  The notes alone go from pp 283-312.
> 
> 4 pages of references of over 150 works cited, of which Leung Ting authored 1.
> 
> "high school project" was a big red flag.  Hoo boy, I've done it now.  Too much truth at once.


I didn't say any of those things. I think you are confusing your critics as they are proving to be numerous.


----------



## Dirty Dog (May 6, 2022)

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Despite a reminder posted in this thread, it has basically degenerated into something akin to a religious war. Therefore...
THREAD LOCKED PENDING STAFF REVIEW

Mark A Cochran
@Dirty Dog 
MartialTalk Senior Moderator


----------

