jigsaw poker with wing chun

[Poppity]

So i am going to post my own observations which people are more than welcome to disagree with.

Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.

With regard the similarities, most accept that they are wing chun. With regard the differences there is contention.

From what i have learnt, i am able to recognise across a number of lineages some differences which are in my own art... But that is what i can see from my part of the jigsaw, not all just some.

There seems to be two approaches, those who say that the pieces of the jigsaw they have are the entire art, and those say they have some of the pieces but that there is more out there.

Of the latter group some seem to look outside wing chun to fill the gaps and others embark on a game of jigsaw poker, unwilling to reveal what they have but wanting to know what the others do.

i fall into this last category.

 

[Danny T]

So i am going to post my own observations which people are more than welcome to disagree with.

Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.

With regard the similarities, most accept that they are wing chun. With regard the differences there is contention.

From what i have learnt, i am able to recognise across a number of lineages some differences which are in my own art... But that is what i can see from my part of the jigsaw, not all just some.

There seems to be two approaches, those who say that the pieces of the jigsaw they have are the entire art, and those say they have some of the pieces but that there is more out there.

Of the latter group some seem to look outside wing chun to fill the gaps and others embark on a game of jigsaw poker, unwilling to reveal what they have but wanting to know what the others do.

i fall into this last category.

- the human body can only move in certain ways no matter what system is being practiced

-one cannot pass on what one does not have.

-we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.

-no one has all the answers nor all the questions.

-applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from.

 

[Poppity]

- the human body can only move in certain ways no matter what system is being practiced

I agree, and yet a boxer can distinguish his style from Hung Gar. The fundamentals underlying any fighting system are different, which makes them separate systems.

-one cannot pass on what one does not have.

I agree, completely.

-we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.

I agree, but I would add from what we are taught as well. For example (and sorry for the mansplaining).... I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253 (2+3 =5 etc.) but I would not have taught him how to multiply by 11 or even what multiplying by 11 means, and more importantly this way does not always work without being altered. Should that person only rely on what I have taught him and say he knows how to multiply by 11?

-no one has all the answers nor all the questions.

I agree, completely.

-applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from

I am going to disagree here... mainly because there are fundamental principals underlying wing chun. A person should be able to see a technique from any system and understand how it would apply in a variety of ways in wing chun.

The technique should change to fit the fighting system, the system should not change to fit a technique.

Edit. And when you do change the technique you will nearly always find it was already in the system.

 

[Cephalopod]

I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253

Am I the only one who has never seen this? That's super cool, thanks!

Regarding OP:
I have always maintained that what I've learned in WC doesn't cover all defense scenarios (such as the rather absurd example I once gave of running across an open field 200 yards from a scout sniper).

As such I am always open to new ideas from other lineages, styles and modalities.

However, I must be able to reconcile this new idea with certain principles that I have been training daily for many years otherwise it will simply be of no use to me. For example if a technique requires me to lift and flex my shoulder, it will never happen under duress. I have been training myself for too long to do the opposite and I cannot respond in two opposite ways to the same stimulus.

I can acknowledge that a concept involving opposite principles may work (perhaps much better than what I know), It just wont work for me. I'm too old and crotchety at this point

An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.

 

[yak sao]

An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.

well said

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

An outside idea that does not contradict the principles that I train, I don't really consider to be a separate style. I simply consider it to increase my understanding of my own style.

The WC system and the XingYi system are both

- linear, and
- punch from the center of the body.

What do you think to add

- footwork coordinate with punch, and
- compress and release power generation method,

into each and every WC punch?

Here is an example,

- His punch coordinated with his foot work.
- 1/2 of his move is used for compress (leading leg step in, arm circle, hands move next to the waist, move back leg next to leading leg). 1/2 of his move is used for release (leading leg step in, block, punch, back leg slide in).

Do you think these 2 ideas can be merged into the WC system, or do you think it may contradict with WC?

 

[Poppity]

Cephalopod,

I agree with everything you wrote.
Not that you need my validation, just saying.

 

[Danny T]

-we all see and therefore process things from our personal perspectives.

I agree, but I would add from what we are taught as well. For example (and sorry for the mansplaining).... I could teach a person that when multiplying 11 to another double digit, just add the two figures together and insert the number in the middle e.g. 11 x 23 = 253 (2+3 =5 etc.) but I would not have taught him how to multiply by 11 or even what multiplying by 11 means, and more importantly this way does not always work without being altered. Should that person only rely on what I have taught him and say he knows how to multiply by 11?

Sure and that is why one would want to be taught...to have more or greater perspective.

-applications will be based on ones perspective and experiences. No matter where those experiences come from

I am going to disagree here... mainly because there are fundamental principals underlying wing chun. A person should be able to see a technique from any system and understand how it would apply in a variety of ways in wing chun.

The technique should change to fit the fighting system, the system should not change to fit a technique.

Edit. And when you do change the technique you will nearly always find it was already in the system.

Certainly, but it one has no perspective of WC or how to look for applications one will do something but not necessarily what we consider wc. And, this is also why training with different people we gain new applications of techniques gaining more perspectives.

 

[Cephalopod]

- footwork coordinate with punch, and
- compress and release power generation method...

...Do you think these 2 ideas can be merged into the WC system, or do you think it may contradict with WC?

I'd be happy to merge them but they're already there.

The punch you've seen in SLT is a method of training the elbow and fist to move with respect to the body.
The real power in a WC punch comes from subtle but explosive movements of the core and footwork driving the whole body.

 

[Cephalopod]

Cephalopod,

I agree with everything you wrote.
Not that you need my validation, just saying.

Au contraire, validation always feels good!

 

[wckf92]

Across a number of lineages there are similarities and differences in the forms and applications.

Even differences within the same lineage!!!

 

[Martial D]

Even differences within the same lineage!!!

I've literally never met two sifus' that teach the exact same Wing Chun, just as my Wing Chun varies in more than a couple ways from MY sifus' Wing Chun.

 

[Poppity]

Hi Danny T,

I agree it is important to get taught, but I would say what is as equally as important is to recognise the limitations of the teaching and teacher... for example there will be some instances where in the "11 x" example, a guy I show that method to, will go off and teach others "11 x" and say that is how its done, and when you have a chain (as in lineages) it only takes one link to adopt that approach..., equally there will be guys I show that method to, who will go off analyse it, work out the fundamentals and then create their own theorems... I think thats part of the attraction and danger of wing chun and why its more important to learn and understand the underlying principles.... I mean that sort of approach worked for Srinivasa Ramanujan.

I agree with your last comment.

Thankyou for the response though

 

[Poppity]

Hi Martial D and Wckf92,

when you see differences in your own lineage, I bet you can recognise them and understand where they came from and why they are the way they are... like in the YKS lineage some attribute particular "Sum Nung branch" techniques as coming from Cheung Bo because of his build and longer arms.

My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms, which is why Ip Man's version appears like a skeleton form when compared to many mainland forms... its straight forward and direct...but its also why you never see the private forms of the mainland practitioners, just the public forms... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.

 

[wckf92]

Hi Martial D and Wckf92,

when you see differences in your own lineage, I bet you can recognise them and understand where they came from and why they are the way they are... like in the YKS lineage some attribute particular "Sum Nung branch" techniques as coming from Cheung Bo because of his build and longer arms.

My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms, which is why Ip Man's version appears like a skeleton form when compared to many mainland forms... its straight forward and direct...but its also why you never see the private forms of the mainland practitioners, just the public forms... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.

I think it's mostly just sifus who put their personal signature or stamp inside their forms.

 

[Poppity]

definitely, nearly all of the differences within a lineage come from which techniques a particular sifu prefers or specialises in...but I reckon they still work within the framework of what they have been taught... unless they have not been taught much and are a bit of a carpet bagger.

With regard to personal signatures too... that is definitely the case and you can see it in the forms, like where Ip Man's form starts with the crossing arms, whereas most mainland forms have a pre-signature (which look similar across lineages) before the point where Ip-Man's form starts.

 

[Cephalopod]

My understanding is that the fundamental principles of any lineage are in their forms...
... if you can read the form, you can understand the principles of their approach.

This is true to a certain degree. You can indeed learn some principles which are emphasized by a WC practitioner by examining subtleties in his/her form.

But the really juicy principles are much harder to discern by visual observation.

In my club we talk about 3 layers of skill superimposed, from basic to advanced: Structure, tension and timing.

Structure, the actual physical positioning of body and limbs, is obviously very apparent in the forms.

Tension is somewhat apparent but the tension you hold on your own is quite simple. The tension with which you respond to an opponents movement and force is a much more complex animal.

Timing, the ability to follow (or get ahead of or get behind) on/off changes in your opponents movement and force, doesn't even come up in the forms.

I'd say that many of the defining principles of our style as we practice it fall in the second 2 catagories. They cannot be observed, let alone taught, by form alone. Not even verbally in fact.

I'm a strong believer that many WC skills can only be passed down kinesthetically, by touching hands chisao gorsao etc., from teacher to student.

 

[wckf92]

I'd say that many of the defining principles of our style as we practice it fall in the second 2 catagories. They cannot be observed, let alone taught, by form alone. Not even verbally in fact.

I'm a strong believer that many WC skills can only be passed down kinesthetically, by touching hands chisao gorsao etc., from teacher to student.

Dang skippy! Well said sir.

 

[Juany118]

I'd be happy to merge them but they're already there.

The punch you've seen in SLT is a method of training the elbow and fist to move with respect to the body.
The real power in a WC punch comes from subtle but explosive movements of the core and footwork driving the whole body.

As is explained here, in part.

 

[Poppity]

This is true to a certain degree. You can indeed learn some principles which are emphasized by a WC practitioner by examining subtleties in his/her form.

But the really juicy principles are much harder to discern by visual observation.

In my club we talk about 3 layers of skill superimposed, from basic to advanced: Structure, tension and timing.

Structure, the actual physical positioning of body and limbs, is obviously very apparent in the forms.

Tension is somewhat apparent but the tension you hold on your own is quite simple. The tension with which you respond to an opponents movement and force is a much more complex animal.

Timing, the ability to follow (or get ahead of or get behind) on/off changes in your opponents movement and force, doesn't even come up in the forms.

I'd say that many of the defining principles of our style as we practice it fall in the second 2 catagories. They cannot be observed, let alone taught, by form alone. Not even verbally in fact.

I'm a strong believer that many WC skills can only be passed down kinesthetically, by touching hands chisao gorsao etc., from teacher to student.

Hi again,

For sure, when you apply the techniques with another person in the very close arena of wing chun tension and timing all come in, and they are crucially important.

... Its just my view but I would say tension and timing are all about application (and fair do, without application wing chun is useless so I fully acknowledge these are important principles) but before we even get to the application, I would say there are base principles at play... like if you see a guy doing shadow boxing, or shadow muay thai or shadow wing chun, you can recognise the style from the principles which separates that fighting system from others.

Your point on structures is great, because across lineages, structures are generally similar and great reference points in a different lineage's forms, its what movements surround the structure, I find interesting... because in the mainland forms which we never see, and are never talked about, the movements surrounding a structure hint at the applications which follow that structure.... and just occasionally a practitioner will forget they are doing the public form and a couple of clues about their wider applications of a structure will slip in to their form.

... that said its why Ip Man's forms are so popular, they are effectively "choose your own application" forms. (again my view, and from what I have been taught, so feel free to disagree here).

Edit: read what I wrote, and it made no sense... this is a better version (honest)
.