# Wing Chung Article



## barnaby (Jul 2, 2006)

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=55


----------



## Street Brawler (Jul 3, 2006)

barnaby said:
			
		

> http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=55


 
Pretty impressive, but do you think that their traditional Wing Chun was better than today's Wing Chun?. They always claimed of those street fights they had. Where those fights up to the level, or just a teen fighting?.


----------



## ed-swckf (Jul 4, 2006)

Street Brawler said:
			
		

> Pretty impressive, but do you think that their traditional Wing Chun was better than today's Wing Chun?. They always claimed of those street fights they had. Where those fights up to the level, or just a teen fighting?.


 
What do you consider as todays wing chun?  And what is the level to meet?


----------



## ed-swckf (Jul 4, 2006)

barnaby said:
			
		

> http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=55


 
Nice article, i always enjoyed reading hawkins cheungs stuff.


----------



## Street Brawler (Jul 5, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> What do you consider as todays wing chun? And what is the level to meet?


 
I mean the level that allows you to beat proffesionals. These street contests were for teens and anyone who wanted to fight. I mean you cannot beat unqualified people and say that your system was superior at a certain era. Today's Wing Chun is the same in it's concepts. The only difference comes in the way you are trained. If you have a visit to Langenzell Castle in Germany, you will see how they teach. In Yipman's days, anyone trained and could claim to be a Wing Chun trainer, they did not payed that attension to individuals, you can realize that from the same article by Sifu Hawkins Cheung .


----------



## ed-swckf (Jul 5, 2006)

Street Brawler said:
			
		

> I mean the level that allows you to beat proffesionals. These street contests were for teens and anyone who wanted to fight. I mean you cannot beat unqualified people and say that your system was superior at a certain era.


 
So wing chun being the seemingly better system among all those involved in biemo means nothing?  Obviously wing chuns effectiveness is equal to the the situations it has tested sucessful against and if you keep that in mind and the fact that its all down to the individual you can take that on board.  Its like grappling arts have an extremely high success rate in professional competitions but does that make it a superior martial art?  Well yes, but only in that environment.  Wing chun had a high sucess rate in the biemo environment and so it was superior at that time in that environment.




			
				Street Brawler said:
			
		

> Today's Wing Chun is the same in it's concepts. The only difference comes in the way you are trained. If you have a visit to Langenzell Castle in Germany, you will see how they teach. In Yipman's days, anyone trained and could claim to be a Wing Chun trainer, they did not payed that attension to individuals, you can realize that from the same article by Sifu Hawkins Cheung .


 
Well the article i read did show that yip man was attentive toi individuals needs, for example:

"Furthermore, he adjusted his methods to the student's character, natural ability, size, coordination and need. For example, if someone couldn't get the swivel (e.g.. keeping both heels planted and shifting the front of the feet simultaneously to the right or the left. while the upper body shifts). he had the person step and turn. This became two-count instead of one-count technique, but it allowed the student to do the job. "

And i didn't see any evidence of the article saying anyone can be a trainer either?  I mean yip man was one man with his own method of teaching and of course that will change from sifu to sifu.  I'm dubious of that being the criteria to set wing chun into traditional and modern, particularly with the different teaching methods of other wing chun familys both then and now.


----------



## Street Brawler (Jul 5, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> So wing chun being the seemingly better system among all those involved in biemo means nothing? Obviously wing chuns effectiveness is equal to the the situations it has tested sucessful against and if you keep that in mind and the fact that its all down to the individual you can take that on board. Its like grappling arts have an extremely high success rate in professional competitions but does that make it a superior martial art? Well yes, but only in that environment. Wing chun had a high sucess rate in the biemo environment and so it was superior at that time in that environment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You got a point, Excellent saying and thanks for your kind attension . I just wanted to be sure about the street brawls at that time. Real Brawls finishes in seconds, especially when there is a crowd. Was HK Brawls of Wing Chun involving weapons also?, or just bare hands?. A real brawler must be a Yamazaki to defend himself (everything dirty to win) .


----------



## ed-swckf (Jul 5, 2006)

Street Brawler said:
			
		

> You got a point, Excellent saying and thanks for your kind attension . I just wanted to be sure about the street brawls at that time. Real Brawls finishes in seconds, especially when there is a crowd. Was HK Brawls of Wing Chun involving weapons also?, or just bare hands?. A real brawler must be a Yamazaki to defend himself (everything dirty to win) .


 
It would probably depend upon the rules decided on in any particular neighberhood although i've not really heard about weapons being used.  Its probably a bit risky to allow weapons, it would up the risk of fatiltys i'm sure.


----------



## barnaby (Jul 7, 2006)

I actually saw a bit of footage of some of the hong kong "roof-top" fights, and it was awhile ago, and only one view in class, but no, there were not weapons in the mix, and yes, they were over very quickly.  the one I remember best was a simple blast of center line punches overwhelming the opponent, and basically running over him.


----------



## Street Brawler (Jul 7, 2006)

barnaby said:
			
		

> I actually saw a bit of footage of some of the hong kong "roof-top" fights, and it was awhile ago, and only one view in class, but no, there were not weapons in the mix, and yes, they were over very quickly. the one I remember best was a simple blast of center line punches overwhelming the opponent, and basically running over him.


 
Perhaps it would be kind from you if you provide us some links to see these contests . 
I always heard of them and beleived what was said, then came upon reading that one of the Yipman disciples was there participating and winning. I know this guy as a big boaster, he boasts and can be defeated in a real brawl. I mean if this guy could win, these contests level must be very low. Can anyone here help me to sort this out?. I mean if that guy was winning, you, me, and everyone can be champoins, with all respects to the Sifus, I know some were extraordinary fighters such as Sifu Lok Yui, Tsui Sheung Tin, Wong Shun-Leung, Hawkins Cheung, and Leung Ting. Sorry if any misunderstanding involving these and other great sifus, because I consider them legends.


----------



## barnaby (Jul 7, 2006)

Street Brawler -- Unfortunately it's not a good time to look into archives right now, and I can tell you you're not going to get the kind of analysis you want out of this footage -- very old tape, very stationary, hard to see what's happening.  At some future date I will look into the footage as a curiosity but as far as wondering what was going on at the time, I'd say it would have to have varied by extremes, as far as the level of fighting.  Your boaster could easily have played up the fights he won, against lower level fighters, and conveniently forgotten the others.  Sad fact of life but not everyone, especially the boasters, is entirely honest all the time.


----------



## Street Brawler (Jul 8, 2006)

barnaby said:
			
		

> Street Brawler -- Unfortunately it's not a good time to look into archives right now, and I can tell you you're not going to get the kind of analysis you want out of this footage -- very old tape, very stationary, hard to see what's happening. At some future date I will look into the footage as a curiosity but as far as wondering what was going on at the time, I'd say it would have to have varied by extremes, as far as the level of fighting. Your boaster could easily have played up the fights he won, against lower level fighters, and conveniently forgotten the others. Sad fact of life but not everyone, especially the boasters, is entirely honest all the time.


 
Ok. It's all up to you pal . There was a guy here posted some stuff about those contests. check about it in old threads. The guy was yipman sifu. I just would thank you for your attension and wish you the best in your training.


----------



## barnaby (Jul 8, 2006)

ed-swckf said:
			
		

> Nice article, i always enjoyed reading hawkins cheungs stuff.


cool.  if you know of anything else by Hawkins online let me know.


----------



## ed-swckf (Jul 9, 2006)

barnaby said:
			
		

> cool. if you know of anything else by Hawkins online let me know.


 
Well i'm assuming you've read the articles on his website?


----------



## barnaby (Jul 28, 2006)

absurdly, no but I will.  here is that website for others as well:
http://www.hawkinscheung.com/


----------

