# A complete Wing Chun system



## zuti car (Apr 23, 2015)

Often we hear someone has or hasn't a complete system . My question  is , what is a complete wing chun system? If we look at Yip Man's lineage there aren't two Yip's students , even his sons, who have same curriculum . Sometime system's contents are so different that is hard to believe they all came from same source (teacher) . Now, what is a criteria for complete system, what is a minimum technical or any other content that make some system complete ? How can we determine if system is complete or not , this is especially important for people who are starting their wing chun practice?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Apr 23, 2015)

zuti car said:


> what is a complete wing chun system?


There exist no complete system on this planet. A wife who

- is pretty,
- is rich,
- is well educated,
- came from royal family,
- cooks well,
- keeps house clean,
- loves you to death,
- is willing to take a bullet for you,
- is good on bed,

just doesn't exist.

You will have 2 choices here. You can try to find a:

1. "rich wife". For the rest of your life, you just eat out everyday, give up your sex life, and ...
2. No 1 wife who is pretty, a No 2 wife who is rich, a No 3 wife who is ...


----------



## Drose427 (Apr 23, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Often we hear someone has or hasn't a complete system . My question  is , what is a complete wing chun system? If we look at Yip Man's lineage there isn't two Yip's students , even his sons, who have same curriculum . Sometime system's contents are so different that is hard to believe they all came from same source (teacher) . Now, what is a criteria for complete system, what is a minimum technical or any other content that make some system complete ? How can we determine if system is complete or not , this is especially important for people who are starting their wing chun practice?



This is where things get iffy.

Wrestling was a part of Okinawan Karate training, I believe it was Wados founder who even took the time to make videos of it.

Now because of that, and Jujustu's influence, Karate has a myriad of grappling moves actively taught both in and out of kata. 

Nearly all of which can be drilled and practiced in a BJJ/wrestling environment and if you look enough, you can find Okinawan karate schools that do many of those drills and some free wrestling. But, it isnt the point of focus or done nearly as much as striking. Generally, what is is based around getting back to your feet with a lock or choke if that becomes impossible.

These trickled into the many of the korean systems as well, the locks, chokes, etc we do from our lineage to JJ/karate can be done from both standing/rolling. 

But like most schools, we drill the application itself with a resisting opponent whose already in control of,  rather than spending an hour or two live wrestling.

BJJ is essentially the opposite. It's grappling came from the same place as ours, but the style was taken in the opposite direction. 

Strikes to set up grappling vs grappling to set up strikes.

Now, what would make a complete system?

Simply having the tools for both, while favoring one?

or

Regularly, training both the point of equilibrium?

In theory, the karate guy can take 30 minuted of each class 7 days a week to focus on Wrestling/grappling practice. But his grappling still wont be as refined or well versed as the BJJ guy rolling 7 days a week for 2 hours. Just as the BJJ guy striking for 30 minutes at the end of class isnt going to out strike the Karate guy doing the opposite.

Personally, I dont consider simply having the tools the criteria. For the exact reason above. For me to consider it "complete" they would have to be rounded off evenly, and no one style can do that.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 23, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Often we hear someone has or hasn't a complete system . My question  is , what is a complete wing chun system? If we look at Yip Man's lineage there aren't two Yip's students , even his sons, who have same curriculum . Sometime system's contents are so different that is hard to believe they all came from same source (teacher) . Now, what is a criteria for complete system, what is a minimum technical or any other content that make some system complete ? How can we determine if system is complete or not , this is especially important for people who are starting their wing chun practice?


 
The art is complete if it satisfies all your criteria for studying it.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

dlcox said:


> The art is complete if it satisfies all your criteria for studying it.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

Yup. For me the wing chun that I do is a complete system. Continuing my wing chun development is quite satisfactory. Although I know things about other systems- I do not need to import and mix systems.
Ip Man's students varied widely in their time spent with Ip man hence the differe
nces in their understanding of Ip Man's wing chun.
Ip Man's wing chun is based on some key principles which are "natural" simple but profound and allows people to adjust and face quite a wide range of challenges.
Fist work, palm work, finger work, elbow work, shoulder work, feet, knees,throws,stability, mobility, from all sorts of angles, ground work if unavoidable. dealing with strikers, grapplers, kickers-it's all there.


----------



## Mephisto (Apr 24, 2015)

dlcox said:


> The art is complete if it satisfies all your criteria for studying it.


I disagree. Generally when instructor says "this is a complete system" he means the art trains in all major technical Areas. Striking and grappling/groundfighting being the two most basic other areas might be combatives/self defense, weapons, and healing arts. Even each of those categories have several sub areas like weapons = stick, blade, projectile, gun, ect. You are giving the term "complete" a more philosophical and personal meaning, that's fine but that's not gonna be in line with how the term is actually used, especially when it comes to marketing and advertising martial arts. But I'm also willing to accept that the saying "complete martial art" is bs anyways and unusually just a selling point.





Vajramusti said:


> Yup. For me the wing chun that I do is a complete system. Continuing my wing chun development is quite satisfactory. Although I know things about other systems- I do not need to import and mix systems.
> Ip Man's students varied widely in their time spent with Ip man hence the differe
> nces in their understanding of Ip Man's wing chun.
> Ip Man's wing chun is based on some key principles which are "natural" simple but profound and allows people to adjust and face quite a wide range of challenges.
> Fist work, palm work, finger work, elbow work, shoulder work, feet, knees,throws,stability, mobility, from all sorts of angles, ground work if unavoidable. dealing with strikers, grapplers, kickers-it's all there.



Again I'm gonna disagree here, WC is not a complete system. WC may have some weapons work and an answer to grappling (in the minds of some) but it does not have ground fighting and thus is not complete, in addition to other factors WC is missing that a complete art would have. This is the problem with people claiming their system is complete. They think their system has an answer for everything and infer that it is not necessary to cross train.

Many martial arts and students consider their system complete and some are closer than others but few if any systems actually are. If you truly train all technical areas id question your ability in any one area unless you train 40+ hours a week. Every area you train takes away time you could be training in another area thus decreasing your skill. I think it's better for a system to know its specialty and seek to develop that specialty rather than claim to know it all. Boxers don't claim to be a complete system but some will claim to have the best punches and they may very well be right. You have to have a realistic grasp of your system and know what it will teach you. If your answer is that your system has everything you're probably lying to yourself.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Apr 24, 2015)

You all make some good points for sure. Another good topic of discussion by Zuti.
I'll just throw this into the mix: how would one know one has learned the complete system/art?  ;-)
For example, Yip Man folks learn the three forms, wooden man, pole, knives (the big six) and they think (or are told) that they have 'completed the system'. How would they know their instructor has passed on all to them? Simple answer: you don't.
I agree with the opinions of Kung Fu Wang, dlcox, and Vajramusti. I do however disagree somewhat with Mephisto's stance on this. If one restrains their WC and it's core ideas, concepts, and key principles...then yes...your expression of your version of WC might be somewhat limited; however, taken with a grain of salt...or a more flexible interpretation...those same core ideas, concepts, and key principles make the art much broader in a full spectrum way. Just my .02
Great discussion Gents!


----------



## zuti car (Apr 24, 2015)

Can a system be complete without grappling ? We have majority of traditional systems without grappling or some rudimentary grappling and I think there is a reason that. Grappling became popular after it's success in MMA matches but that is a specific setting with specific conditions where grappling arts can dominate , but like I said that is very specific situation and I think a good starting point for another discussion .  My question was specifically directed to wing chun , what makes one wing chun system complete ? Some systems have 3 empty hand forms, dummy , pole and knives. Some don't have empty hand forms at all . Some have more than a dozen empty hand forms and several dummy and weapon forms . Some hae san sik and forms. Some have more weapons than usual pole and knives. So , what is a criteria to determine what system is complete ?


----------



## Kwan Sau (Apr 24, 2015)

system
http://www.martialtalk.com/javascript:void(0)
NOUN

a set of connected things or parts forming a complex whole, in particular.
a set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an organized scheme or method:
Zuti, you are correct in the examples you listed about other WC 'systems' having different components. I guess, so long as a WC practitioner can use what he has learned in a variety of contexts and situations (without grafting on components from non-WC arts) then can we say that person has learned / is expressing the entire system(?)


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 24, 2015)

zuti car said:


> My question was specifically directed to wing chun , what makes one wing chun system complete ? Some systems have 3 empty hand forms, dummy , pole and knives. *Some don't have empty hand forms at all* . Some have more than a dozen empty hand forms and several dummy and weapon forms .



Wow, really? There are Wing Chun systems with no empty hand forms? I hadn't heard of those.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 24, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Wow, really? There are Wing Chun systems with no empty hand forms? I hadn't heard of those.


Kolo systems , they have san sik method , not forms. Original Cheung Bo's system had no forms , only san sik .


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> Yup. For me the wing chun that I do is a complete system. Continuing my wing chun development is quite satisfactory. Although I know things about other systems- I do not need to import and mix systems.
> Ip Man's students varied widely in their time spent with Ip man hence the differe
> nces in their understanding of Ip Man's wing chun.
> Ip Man's wing chun is based on some key principles which are "natural" simple but profound and allows people to adjust and face quite a wide range of challenges.
> Fist work, palm work, finger work, elbow work, shoulder work, feet, knees,throws,stability, mobility, from all sorts of angles, ground work if unavoidable. dealing with strikers, grapplers, kickers-it's all there.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 24, 2015)

PS. Wing chun is complete in the sense that in a balanced way it trains the body, the mind and
energy for self defense, awareness and general health.

It is not the only way- top quality taiji will do those things too.
A good understanding of wing chun  prepares you well for doing many other things in life.

Wing chun is not for dunderheads- if you on purpose lie on the ground, smoke and drink excessively, stay in inner turmoil, create chaos in body- mind- energy
coordination.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 25, 2015)

There is an interesting piece of Pao Fa Lien history . Hong Kong brunch claims that Leung Jan learned from Dai Dong Fung on the red boats but only learned 3 from 10 or so forms . In that case most of wing chun styles today are incomplete .


----------



## Callen (Apr 25, 2015)

Thanks for this post. Great discussion!

Many practitioners believe they have completed the system based on passing all the curriculum within their particular lineage, but in reality it's just the beginning. There is no true end or finishing point to Wing Chun. There is always much to learn.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Apr 25, 2015)

Callen said:


> Many practitioners believe they have completed the system based on passing all the curriculum within their particular lineage, but in reality it's just the beginning. There is no true end or finishing point to Wing Chun. There is always much to learn.


Agree!

In the long fist system that I have trained, I have to learn about 12 open hand forms and 8 weapon forms, a total of 20 forms. The

- 3rd road Pao Chuan, and
- 4th road Cha Chuan

are 2 must learning forms. Since there are

- 10 roads Pao Chuan, and also
- 10 roads Cha Chuan,

not only my long fist training is not complete, my long fist teacher and his long fist teacher's training are not complete either.

One of my other long fist brothers has a 2nd long fist teacher. He had learned the

- 1st road Cha Chuan,
- 2nd road Cha Chuan, and
- 3rd road Cha Chuan,

from that teacher. Even that long fist teacher, his long fist is far from complete.

In the Shuai-Chiao system, there are over 400 throws. Has any Shuai-Chiao masters ever mastered all those 400 throws? I don't believe we can find even 1 Shuai-Jiao master on earth who can claim that he has mastered all 400 throws.

Our life time is just too short to complete anything. We can only do our best. Again, if we try to do everything, we may end with nothing.


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 25, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Often we hear someone has or hasn't a complete system . My question  is , what is a complete wing chun system? If we look at Yip Man's lineage there aren't two Yip's students , even his sons, who have same curriculum . Sometime system's contents are so different that is hard to believe they all came from same source (teacher) . Now, what is a criteria for complete system, what is a minimum technical or any other content that make some system complete ? How can we determine if system is complete or not , this is especially important for people who are starting their wing chun practice?


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 25, 2015)

Ip Man did not use a cookie cutter to turn out students. The longer you stayed and learned from him provide you were a good student
the greater likelihood of understanding the art.  By the time IM's sons started their wing chun IM had basically  retired.


----------



## zuti car (Apr 25, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> Ip Man did not use a cookie cutter to turn out students. The longer you stayed and learned from him provide you were a good student
> the greater likelihood of understanding the art.  By the time IM's sons started their wing chun IM had basically  retired.


So , you want to say that Yip Man didn't care if his own sons got the best of his art? I find that highly unlikely . What is possible and would be consistent with Chinese culture and traditions ( and Yip did care greatly about these things) is that Yip taught his sons complete art but withheld some key points from all others. I don't say that actually happened , but if there was a gap in knowledge , that gap could be found everywhere else but within his sons's systems .


----------



## Vajramusti (Apr 25, 2015)

zuti car said:


> So , you want to say that Yip Man didn't care if his own sons got the best of his art? I find that highly unlikely . What is possible and would be consistent with Chinese culture and traditions ( and Yip did care greatly about these things) is that Yip taught his sons complete art but withheld some key points from all others. I don't say that actually happened , but if there was a gap in knowledge , that gap could be found everywhere else but within his sons's systems .


---------------------------------------------------- Regarding the first sentence- that is not what I said.


----------



## geezer (Apr 25, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> Ip Man did not use a cookie cutter to turn out students. The longer you stayed and learned from him provide you were a good student
> the greater likelihood of understanding the art...



Perhaps, and perhaps not.Yip Man did not stay with Chan Wah Shun and Ng Chun So as long as some, but his skill in his prime was said to be unsurpassed.

On the other hand I spent more time with my sifu (although not nearly enough!) than some of my kung-fu brothers who quickly surpassed me. What you learn and what you achieve is a complex equation. Time is one factor. Some other factors include athletic ability, intelligence, drive and desire, and available time and money.

So although the great master Ho Kam Ming spent a very long time with Grandmaster Yip, that alone doesn't explain his skill. That Yip Chun is the eldest son of GM Yip certainly has not caused him to be recognized as the best, or as an "inheritor" of the system. By contrast, my own sifu had very limited time with GM Yip, yet IMO his technical skill was _quite good,_ in fact better than many of his seniors in the art. His problems are more a matter of ego, and shameless self promotion. Only the great William Cheung apparently surpassed him in that!


----------



## zuti car (Apr 25, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------------------- Regarding the first sentence- that is not what I said.


I know what you said . You said no one learnt more from Yip Man than Ho Kam Ming . Well , that may or may not be true . It is a fact that less intelligent people  need more time to learn something .


----------



## geezer (Apr 25, 2015)

zuti car said:


> It is a fact that less intelligent people  need more time to learn something .



Works for me!


----------



## dlcox (Apr 25, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I disagree. Generally when instructor says "this is a complete system" he means the art trains in all major technical Areas. Striking and grappling/groundfighting being the two most basic other areas might be combatives/self defense, weapons, and healing arts. Even each of those categories have several sub areas like weapons = stick, blade, projectile, gun, ect. You are giving the term "complete" a more philosophical and personal meaning, that's fine but that's not gonna be in line with how the term is actually used, especially when it comes to marketing and advertising martial arts. But I'm also willing to accept that the saying "complete martial art" is bs anyways and unusually just a selling point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You have to keep in mind that what you view as complete may not be true for another. This doesn't make one opinion correct over another, it simply expresses a different view. People study TMA for a variety of reasons that may not necessarily have anything to do with the completeness of the martial tactics involved. Some may practice simply for exercise, others to learn form, some to refine one aspect of defense such as wrestling. To them they may feel as what they do is complete as what they are doing fulfills all their requirements for doing it.


----------



## r'n'r (Apr 27, 2015)

A complete system should have an answer to every question, but not necessarily all the answers to a single question.


----------



## Mephisto (Apr 27, 2015)

dlcox said:


> You have to keep in mind that what you view as complete may not be true for another. This doesn't make one opinion correct over another, it simply expresses a different view. People study TMA for a variety of reasons that may not necessarily have anything to do with the completeness of the martial tactics involved. Some may practice simply for exercise, others to learn form, some to refine one aspect of defense such as wrestling. To them they may feel as what they do is complete as what they are doing fulfills all their requirements for doing it.


Well a lot of the discussion on the thread has leaned toward comparing WC to other WC lineages. So within that context I'll the topic alone. These discussions go on within my FMA system, some groups have things other groups don't, as a result some groups consider themselves more "complete" in relation to other lineages within the system. It can be a mess to sort out.

But if we're talking about a "complete system" as the saying is generally used in martial arts things are different. It has nothing to do with why people study. Obviously people train for different reasons. It doesn't matter if a person thinks what they do is "complete" or not. When an instructor says "we offer a complete martial arts system" it means the system covers all training areas, striking, weapons, grappling, ect. I'd be curious if anyone can find an instance where an art advertised as "complete" is supposed to mean anything different. A die hard boxer might say "boxing is all I need" and tell himself that it's a "complete" art but most everyone else will agree that boxing fails to prepare you for some key areas of fighting.

I'm saying the term "complete" as it's often used to promote a martial arts system  infers that said system prepared you for all fighting ranges, this there is no need to train elsewhere. Few systems actually meet this standard but many claim to.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 27, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> Well a lot of the discussion on the thread has leaned toward comparing WC to other WC lineages. So within that context I'll the topic alone. These discussions go on within my FMA system, some groups have things other groups don't, as a result some groups consider themselves more "complete" in relation to other lineages within the system. It can be a mess to sort out.
> 
> But if we're talking about a "complete system" as the saying is generally used in martial arts things are different. It has nothing to do with why people study. Obviously people train for different reasons. It doesn't matter if a person thinks what they do is "complete" or not. When an instructor says "we offer a complete martial arts system" it means the system covers all training areas, striking, weapons, grappling, ect. I'd be curious if anyone can find an instance where an art advertised as "complete" is supposed to mean anything different. A die hard boxer might say "boxing is all I need" and tell himself that it's a "complete" art but most everyone else will agree that boxing fails to prepare you for some key areas of fighting.
> 
> I'm saying the term "complete" as it's often used to promote a martial arts system  infers that said system prepared you for all fighting ranges, this there is no need to train elsewhere. Few systems actually meet this standard but many claim to.


Well the OP actually states "A Complete Wing Chun System". To answer this we have to address what is Wing Chun. Is it striking, locking, throwing or kicking? Is it equal in each aspect or based on unequal percentages of one persons preference & understanding? Is there enough principle & theory in the concepts to address all the aspects & variables involved? Can anyone person claim to know or understand it all? Is it in reality the person that is incomplete and not the art? How much specialization in each field of striking, locking, throwing & kicking does one need to attain? Basic fundamentals of each or attainment of black belt in Jujutsu, Muay Thai, Boxing & Shuai Jiao in order to be competent? Each aspect of fighting is able to defeat another based on ones proficiency in that field. Completeness does not exist outside of one feeling competent in what they do. Moot points can be argued back & forth until all involved are blue in the face. At the end of the day all that matters is if what you do makes you feel what you have is complete, not what someone advertises as such.


----------



## Kwan Sau (Apr 28, 2015)

dlcox said:


> Q1: Is there enough principle & theory in the concepts to address all the aspects & variables involved?
> Q2: Can anyone person claim to know or understand it all?
> Q3: Is it in reality the person that is incomplete and not the art?
> Q4: How much specialization in each field of striking, locking, throwing & kicking does one need to attain?



I believe these are profound questions by dlcox. Well done sir. And, in my extremely humble opinion...here goes:
Q1: Yes, absolutely. All "seeded" in SLT, and the ideas (and hopefully their applied understanding) grow from there.
Q2: Heck no. Anyone who does...equates to a closed mind. Simply congratulate them and walk on...
Q3: Heck yeah!
Q4: Just enough to reduce the threat sufficiently so that I can walk away, and they are admitted to the ICU.


----------



## Mephisto (Apr 28, 2015)

dlcox said:


> Well the OP actually states "A Complete Wing Chun System".


See my previous quote below in response to you.


Mephisto said:


> Well a lot of the discussion on the thread has leaned toward comparing WC to other WC lineages. So within that context I'll (leave) the topic alone .


Early on in the thread it wasn't evident to me that the op was comparing WC to wc. I choose not to compare one WC group to another. It's internal politics that don't concern me. I can only contribute to the discussion of what a "complete" art is.



dlcox said:


> To answer this we have to address what is Wing Chun. Is it striking, locking, throwing or kicking? Is it equal in each aspect or based on unequal percentages of one persons preference & understanding? Is there enough principle & theory in the concepts to address all the aspects & variables involved? Can anyone person claim to know or understand it all? Is it in reality the person that is incomplete and not the art? How much specialization in each field of striking, locking, throwing & kicking does one need to attain? Basic fundamentals of each or attainment of black belt in Jujutsu, Muay Thai, Boxing & Shuai Jiao in order to be competent? Each aspect of fighting is able to defeat another based on ones proficiency in that field. Completeness does not exist outside of one feeling competent in what they do. Moot points can be argued back & forth until all involved are blue in the face. At the end of the day all that matters is if what you do makes you feel what you have is complete, not what someone advertises as such.


I'd agree completeness may not exist. But I have stumbled across lead instructors and masters that believe their art has it all and claim that their art is complete. Weather they are complete or not is an issue that must address the person making the claim. But as the term complete is commonly used it is not open to interpretation in the way you explain. I could care less if you find your art complete. If you tell me or any other person about your art and you say "it is a complete system" you are implying that a practitioner does not need to train anything else. A person making such a claim may believe it fills all of their needs but by telling me that their system is "complete" they are inferring that the system will meet all of my needs too.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 28, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> See my previous quote below in response to you.
> 
> Early on in the thread it wasn't evident to me that the op was comparing WC to wc. I choose not to compare one WC group to another. It's internal politics that don't concern me. I can only contribute to the discussion of what a "complete" art is.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with you, but it isn't so cut & dry. There are so many variables to factor in that it becomes a rabbit hole. Ones view of completeness will be different than another's, just as ones learning process differs, just as comprehension differs. To decide what is needed for completeness will invariably be based upon individual needs and not just consensus. I get what your saying but you are also dismissing an important aspect as not being relevant, and that is of the individual perception as it plays into decision making. It all comes down to what someone views as "complete", everyone will have different criteria that needs addressed. As far as an art being "complete", especially an art like Yong Chun, I'd say yes it theoretically is, problem is can any one individual apply it's principles & concepts to Ti, Da, Shuai & Na a manner that is coherent. So while in essence the art may truly be complete, the man is not complete in the understanding of it. I agree that the generic use of the word complete does not have the connotation's that I put to it in its general interpretation. However, the understanding of the definition will vary in many degrees depending on the context it is subjected to. When someone describes their art as complete, in reference to fighting theory & technique I generally take it with a grain of salt. Their opinions of what constitutes complete may widely vary from mine. We all have needs on varying levels that no one individual has the answers for, complete does not exist, it is philosophical, it is not tangible and is ambiguous outside of clearly defined context. Even then I'm not sure, perhaps we need a better word to convey our meaning.


----------



## Mephisto (Apr 28, 2015)

dlcox said:


> I don't disagree with you, but it isn't so cut & dry. There are so many variables to factor in that it becomes a rabbit hole. Ones view of completeness will be different than another's, just as ones learning process differs, just as comprehension differs. To decide what is needed for completeness will invariably be based upon individual needs and not just consensus. I get what your saying but you are also dismissing an important aspect as not being relevant, and that is of the individual perception as it plays into decision making. It all comes down to what someone views as "complete", everyone will have different criteria that needs addressed. As far as an art being "complete", especially an art like Yong Chun, I'd say yes it theoretically is, problem is can any one individual apply it's principles & concepts to Ti, Da, Shuai & Na a manner that is coherent. So while in essence the art may truly be complete, the man is not complete in the understanding of it. I agree that the generic use of the word complete does not have the connotation's that I put to it in its general interpretation. However, the understanding of the definition will vary in many degrees depending on the context it is subjected to. When someone describes their art as complete, in reference to fighting theory & technique I generally take it with a grain of salt. Their opinions of what constitutes complete may widely vary from mine. We all have needs on varying levels that no one individual has the answers for, complete does not exist, it is philosophical, it is not tangible and is ambiguous outside of clearly defined context. Even then I'm not sure, perhaps we need a better word to convey our meaning.


I think we both agree that "complete" is generally a bs way to advertise a system. It infers that the person who's system is complete has all the answers, few people outside of that system would agree with such a claim.


----------



## dlcox (Apr 28, 2015)

Mephisto said:


> I think we both agree that "complete" is generally a bs way to advertise a system. It infers that the person who's system is complete has all the answers, few people outside of that system would agree with such a claim.


Every style has a chink in its armor, everyone has varying levels of needs. For a teacher to make broad statements about the ability to address those needs, because they believe what they have is complete, without knowing of or understanding those individual needs is a huge red flag. With every style there is bias towards specific tactics & techniques. A boxer with rudimentary wrestling skills that are rarely reinforced may not be the best person to learn how to grapple from, simply because they have some knowledge. This is no fault of the style though, maybe it is a method that has a lot of grappling in it and the teacher just prefers boxing. The fault then lies in the man promoting the style as "complete".


----------



## PiedmontChun (Apr 29, 2015)

Some might say it is a complete system, and some may not. The question is, a "complete system" for what exactly? I would think WC/WT is complete for defending oneself competently in all empty handed ranges. I think its folly for people to think they have to cross train other arts just to be a well equipped fighter. 

Is it complete for extensive weapons fighting like many japanese systems? No, as it intentionally only trains two weapons. Is it complete for use in the ring match where the rules favor a grappler? No. Is it complete against a skilled wrestler determined to take you to the ground and more comfortable staying there to fight than you are? You see where I am going with this.....


----------



## TSDTexan (Oct 5, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Wow, really? There are Wing Chun systems with no empty hand forms? I hadn't heard of those.



Sifu Leung Jan reorganized the way he taught Wing Chun in Ku Lo village at the end of his life.

It wasn't JUST taught as ad hoc short sequences of techniques for drilling.

Each of the San Sik sequences in KLPS has a specific body mechanic, intent, "theme", "gong", or whatever you'd like to call it.

Leung Jan took this into careful consideration when he designed the San Sik.

They are progressive in nature, meaning you work on them in a particular order and they develop your body and your "gong" in a specific way.

Each San Sik has an accompanying two man application drill so you know exactly what it is training you to do.

Some of them have more than one way to train them as two man drills.

Each San Sik is also applied on the dummy. So in KLPS you start using the wooden dummy right away. Like on day one.

You don't wait for to be 3 handfoms into the curriculum before being exposed to wooden dummy practice, as regular WC would have you do.

And of course each San Sik is applied in Chi Sao (Sticky hands) as well as Jao Sao (sparring).

Leung Jan knew time was short at the end of his life and has a very narrow window to pass on the culmination of his life's experience training and fighting with the art of Wing Chun and he came up with an ingenious and effective way to do this.

Each of the 12 San Sik contains one cycle with 3 motions, or 3 separate points, totaling at 36.

Each Small Set may be practised Solo in the Air, Solo on the dummy (Jong Sau), in a 2 man set, and with the Yee Gee Dao.


If I had to define Leung Jan's art... using musical terms. He created Jazz. While he used traditional forms for the source he broke them up and allowed to keep the techniques.

It was live, it was improv but rooted in standards broken into bite sized bits.

Leung Jan earned the title of “Wing Chun Kuen Wong” or "King of Wing Chun Fist" over the course of his life from winning over 300 challenges in which he remained undefeated.

He retired to his home village of Ku lo, after selling his family business (a medical pharmacy) at age 73, In 1883 according to my notes, but most say 1885.

This is when he taught the last of his students, who were mostly relatives.

It is also believed by most WC historians,  that, during the opera ban in post-1855, Leung Yee Tai and Wong Wah Bo lived in the surrounding area of Foshan.

At this time, Leung Jan continued his WC studies (started post 1840s), and some oral traditions credit Leung Jan alongside his second teacher Wong Wah Bo with creating the three hand forms which are the main vehicle for the transmission of the Pin Sun Wing Chun system.

When Dr. Leung Jan's pupils would ask what the difference was between their boxing and the boxing outside their village Dr. Leung Jan would say; 

_The Wing Chun outside our village is the Jing Sun (Straight Body) "Facing" style, which is divided into three parts; Siu Lin Tau, Chum Kiu, Biu Jee. The Wing Chun from our village is the Pin Sun (Side Body) style, which is taught in one part but differ very little and are really from the same family! 

The pole method of the Facing style is the Luk Dim Boon Gwun (6.5 Pole) but in our village it is the Som Dim Boon Gwun (3.5 Pole)._

Over the next three years Dr. Leung Jan taught his students all his skills but unfortunately, do to old age, passed away at the age of 76. 

His most senior student, Wong Wah Sam, went on to teach Fung Chun, Fung Min, Fung Lim, Koo Siu Lung, and others the Pin Sun Wing Chun art. 

Fung Chun, the last living grand student of Dr. Leung Jan, is now retired living back in Koo Lo village where he is the head of the Fung family Pin Sun Wing Chun clan.


----------



## geezer (Oct 6, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Fung Chun, the last living grand student of Dr. Leung Jan, is now retired living back in Koo Lo village where he is the head of the Fung family Pin Sun Wing Chun clan.



A footnote. Fung Chun passed away in 2012, R.I.P. 

T.S.D. are you now training in Gu-lo village Wing Chun?


----------



## TSDTexan (Oct 6, 2015)

geezer said:


> A footnote. Fung Chun passed away in 2012, R.I.P.
> 
> T.S.D. are you now training in Gu-lo village Wing Chun?



This was the wing chun style my Judo Coach trained in.
These were the only two arts he trained in

Sad to hear Fung Chen died.

No. Not currently training in any lineage of WC.
If I was it would be something like Robert Chu MasterClass...
Or sifu Klaus Brand... for the hair...
Or...
Ngo Dac Na type WC with Sifu Phu Ngo, over at entershaolin.com
Or Applied WC..


I look at WC for strategy,  tactics, and training methods.

I do the 3 handforms in Sanchin Dachi, as if I were doing Sanchin. Sometimes I actually do sanchin loops while doing bridge hand or little idea hand forms.

Both as dynamic tension and as if I were in normal WC pigeon horse.

I use a pheonix eye vertical punch either with the lower three per orthodox wc or the one knuckle when working accuracy drills for pressure points.

What I teach my students is nothing like my personal mutant art. Karate, and WC are not so far apart, as everyone thinks.

Its a perception thing.

Uchei Ryu is really at its core pangainoon gungfu.

Reviving Meotode: The Ancient Okinawan Karate Concept of Kicking *** | KARATE by Jesse


The Husband/Wife hands (meotode) of Motobu Choki are in total agreement with WC tenets... block&strike as one instead of block then strike.

Both hands defend, both hands attack.

"Upon seeing this, I grabbed his hand, took up a position of kake-kumite ( something like "pushing hands"  at the outside wrist) and said, 'what will you do?" -Motobu Choki.

He also used a one inch punch that was very powerful.

The difference between most WC (and most types of karate)that is biggest is Side on stance like nihanchi usually is in, and the Square centered symmetrical WC "frontal" horse.

And power generation methods for strikes, recycling energy, and breathing.

If anything I do experiment with WC stuff in my karate and I am not a wing chunner.

I love hard/soft arts.


----------



## Vajramusti (Oct 6, 2015)

dlcox said:


> The art is complete if it satisfies all your criteria for studying it.




True enough.


----------



## KPM (Oct 6, 2015)

geezer said:


> A footnote. Fung Chun passed away in 2012, R.I.P.
> 
> T.S.D. are you now training in Gu-lo village Wing Chun?


 
Steve, that sounds like it was taken from one of Jim Roselando's articles.


----------



## TSDTexan (Oct 6, 2015)

KPM said:


> Steve, that sounds like it was taken from one of Jim Roselando's articles.



Its from my notes, which are from many sources, not just 1 of some sifu's articles. The problem is redundancy... a lot of this is common knowledge stated by many folks.


----------



## KPM (Oct 6, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Its from my notes, which are from many sources, not just 1 of some sifu's articles. The problem is redundancy... a lot of this is common knowledge stated by many folks.



Ah!  That might explain why the first part sounds like something I wrote awhile back!  ;-)


----------



## TSDTexan (Oct 6, 2015)

KPM said:


> Ah!  That might explain why the first part sounds like something I wrote awhile back!  ;-)




Ku-lo village is the style of WC you trained or are you a more mainline? If the latter.... did your research come first hand by mouth... or by book? Like Robert Chu's Complete Wing Chun... the definitive guide to wing chuns history and traditions book?
I got a signed first ed.  Btw.


----------



## KPM (Oct 7, 2015)

TSDTexan said:


> Ku-lo village is the style of WC you trained or are you a more mainline? If the latter.... did your research come first hand by mouth... or by book? Like Robert Chu's Complete Wing Chun... the definitive guide to wing chuns history and traditions book?
> I got a signed first ed.  Btw.


 
I practice and teach Ku Lo Pin Sun.  I learned directly from Jim Roselando and Marc Kenny with direct input from Henry Mui.  I have an instructor certificate from Henry Mui.


----------



## yak sao (Oct 7, 2015)

KPM said:


> I practice and teach Ku Lo Pin Sun.  I learned directly from Jim Roselando and Marc Kenny with direct input from Henry Mui.  I have an instructor certificate from Henry Mui.



Where are you located?


----------



## JPinAZ (Oct 7, 2015)

dlcox said:


> Every style has a chink in its armor, everyone has varying levels of needs. For a teacher to make broad statements about the ability to address those needs, because they believe what they have is complete, without knowing of or understanding those individual needs is a huge red flag. With every style there is bias towards specific tactics & techniques. A boxer with rudimentary wrestling skills that are rarely reinforced may not be the best person to learn how to grapple from, simply because they have some knowledge. This is no fault of the style though, maybe it is a method that has a lot of grappling in it and the teacher just prefers boxing. The fault then lies in the man promoting the style as "complete".



This is talking mose about MA styles and individual personal style. This is different than if talking about the 'system' of WC. The system is separate from one's personal skill level or stylistic usage (preference) of a the system they are using.

FWIW I like the way I've heard it put in the past: "A WC system is complete when you cannot add to or take away from the system without also taking away it's efficiency & effectiveness". Of course, this is also based on how one views 'efficiency & effectiveness"


----------



## KPM (Oct 7, 2015)

yak sao said:


> Where are you located?



Washington D.C. area


----------



## yak sao (Oct 8, 2015)

KPM said:


> Washington D.C. area



If you ever find yourself in Louisville Kentucky definitely look me up


----------



## wckf92 (Oct 8, 2015)

yak sao said:


> If you ever find yourself in Louisville Kentucky definitely look me up



Crap... just drove through Louisville last week!!!


----------



## yak sao (Oct 8, 2015)

wckf92 said:


> Crap... just drove through Louisville last week!!!



Sorry I missed you. See you next time through ?


----------

