Master wong lineage
- Thread starter celestial_dragon
- Start date
celestial_dragon
Yellow Belt
Every branch of wc has their own movements, and modified forms of movements.
celestial_dragon
Yellow Belt
He speaks English with a Chinese/ British accent, because at ten years old he moved from Vietnam to England, and has lived in England most of his life.
mook jong man
Senior Master
That they do , but that can also be a convenient excuse to justify the incorrect interpretation of Wing Chun core principles.
Though the techniques may differ slightly, the application of the principles should be universal.
Danny T
Senior Master
Absolutely. The principles must upheld and applied, the manner they are applied to create technique, for the most part, is unimportant. That is style not the system. When one breaks from the core principles and does things that are completely void of the systematic methods you can call it whatever you want, but it isn't Wing Chun.
chinaboxer
Green Belt
Wing Chun practitioners IMO fall into two basic categories.
1. those that use the movements with physical muscle and physical speed to get the job done.
2. those that use the movements with the least amount of physical muscle and physical speed to get the job done.
the difference between the two is huge. the first example is almost always brought about because of a lack of understanding of "structure", that's why in order to make their wing chun work, they have to get physical.
the second example must have an understanding of "structure" or else they would never be able to get their wing chun to work. obviously, this way is more in line with a "woman's martial art" and "using the least amount of (physical) effort to get the job done".
to understand the "structure" of wing chun, means to understand the concepts and principles. there is no short cut or way to avoid it.
as far as "Master Wong" is concerned, all i can do is work from what he demonstrates on his video Tutorial, so my opinion is solely based on that. but it's very obvious that he's relying on physical muscle and physical speed.
i'm not saying that this way is wrong, but when wing chun is practiced this way, how can you keep it up? how can you maintain this method in your later years? this type of training only leads to retirement, and becomes no different than boxing or muay thai etc...in the sense that eventually they all have to "bow out" to the younger, faster practitioners.
now as far as his lineage is concerned, i agree...who really cares, because when i see him teach wing chun on his videos, it's pretty clear to me that his understanding of it is very "physical" and not very "conceptual". and physical wing chun is something that anyone with a brain, can learn from a few videos, seminars and books, without a sifu, because the focus is on what wing chun should look like on the "outside" rather than what it should feel like on the "inside".
1. those that use the movements with physical muscle and physical speed to get the job done.
2. those that use the movements with the least amount of physical muscle and physical speed to get the job done.
the difference between the two is huge. the first example is almost always brought about because of a lack of understanding of "structure", that's why in order to make their wing chun work, they have to get physical.
the second example must have an understanding of "structure" or else they would never be able to get their wing chun to work. obviously, this way is more in line with a "woman's martial art" and "using the least amount of (physical) effort to get the job done".
to understand the "structure" of wing chun, means to understand the concepts and principles. there is no short cut or way to avoid it.
as far as "Master Wong" is concerned, all i can do is work from what he demonstrates on his video Tutorial, so my opinion is solely based on that. but it's very obvious that he's relying on physical muscle and physical speed.
i'm not saying that this way is wrong, but when wing chun is practiced this way, how can you keep it up? how can you maintain this method in your later years? this type of training only leads to retirement, and becomes no different than boxing or muay thai etc...in the sense that eventually they all have to "bow out" to the younger, faster practitioners.
now as far as his lineage is concerned, i agree...who really cares, because when i see him teach wing chun on his videos, it's pretty clear to me that his understanding of it is very "physical" and not very "conceptual". and physical wing chun is something that anyone with a brain, can learn from a few videos, seminars and books, without a sifu, because the focus is on what wing chun should look like on the "outside" rather than what it should feel like on the "inside".
I like his style too. I have never met him in person. From his clips, I can see that he understands what "combat" is all about. If all Taiji guys are taking his approach, people won't laught at Taiji that much today. I have not seen his WC clips but I have seen a lot of his Taiji clips. I like his Taiji clips better than those famous Taiji guys such as CMC, CXW, ... that can bore you to death. I can see some hope in Taiji by the way he is teaching. I had said this in another forum and I say the same in this forum too.
I've already stated my opinion, basically that as long as it can be verified as real wing chun, who cares, but have one reservation I'd like to add. If he has a student who is really interested in lineage, whether for scholarly purposes, practical purposes or some other reason, he seems like he will not give that student the information(I may be wrong, don't personally know him). To me, this seems unfair to the student and/or future instructor in the style who wants to know his lineage, or verify it to friends/family/other martial artists/students. He may share it with a student if they have enough of a need, but if not I feel as if it's not fair to withhold the information.
celestial_dragon
Yellow Belt
Even though he has never said his lineage, by the way he executes his movements, they are almost the same as GM Pan Nam.
But could a student of his claim that lineage truthfully if pressured to state their lineage? He may, but unless it's really clear (don't know enough about Wing Chun to cross examine the two) I would feel a bit guilty claiming a lineage to GM Pan Nam while studying under Master Wong.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
I have no opinion of his Wing Chu nor do I feel I am qualified to, however you are qualified and I respect your view. Also I really do not understand why, when asked, he just doesn't say "My sifu was....." that is not doing anything based on his sifu's reputation. There are a lot of people out there with lineages to Yang Chengfu or the current Yang family who are horrible at Yang Taijiquan. There are those that are impressed by lineage and those that look a little closer at the skill. Lineage is, IMO, important to root out the occasional fake but they are no measure of skill and understanding. Heck I know a guy that is claiming lineage to a (deceased) famous Taiji sifu and he did likely train with him but I doubt that sifu ever considered him a student. I trained with Chen Zhenglei but he would not know me and certainly would not consider me a student or part of the Chen family lineage...but I am sure there are a few that were there and trained with him that are claiming it.
I just went to his website to see if he had an answer.
His Taiji is not that good either and he really does not understand it based on what I saw but then he really does not care what I think either.
Last edited:
Vajramusti
Master Black Belt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not just a matter of the roots of his learning.He just does wing chun wrong. See his chi sao tape full of muscle force rather than skill.
WingChunIan
Blue Belt
So that should narrow down his lineage. Until very recently the UK Wing Chun community was fairly restricted. Most of the senior players trace their lineage through Ip chun, Ip Ching, Wong Shun Leung, Victor Kam, Leung Ting and Lee Shing through various routes and pretty much all of it until recently was Ip Man derived. More recent introductions have come in the guise of mainland lineages and folks like Alan Orr etc and there are one or two other key individuals teaching Wing Chun as part of a broader kung fu syllabus. Maybe this will help you in your quest.
WingChunIan
Blue Belt
By student, do you mean in person or over youtube?
Right on the dot ... as to overall knowledge and understanding.
Example 1: Practitioner level
Example 2: Master level
Sometime you don't want to tell your students who your WC teacher is. Here is one example.
You learned WC from teacher A. You come to teacher B and fall in love with his art X and you become deciple of teacher B. After you have finished learning style X with teacher B, you start your own school. In your school you teach both style X and WC. Since your WC did not come from your teacher B, in order to respect your teacher B, you won't mention teacher A's name.
What I have just described did happen in the real word expecially if teacher A and teacher B don't get along.
You learned WC from teacher A. You come to teacher B and fall in love with his art X and you become deciple of teacher B. After you have finished learning style X with teacher B, you start your own school. In your school you teach both style X and WC. Since your WC did not come from your teacher B, in order to respect your teacher B, you won't mention teacher A's name.
What I have just described did happen in the real word expecially if teacher A and teacher B don't get along.
Why would you not simply say " The X I teach comes from B, and the WC I teach comes from A"? Surely there is no disrepect to either teacher to acknowledge what you learned from each. To my mind, it seems disrepectful of A not to recognise the value of what you learned from him. Especially if you're teaching it to others.
The problem may be:
- teacher A and teacher B don't get along.
- teacher A is one or more generation below teacher B.
Here are 2 examples:
Person X mentions his style A teacher infront of his style B teacher. His style B teacher said, "Your style A teacher is one generation below me. He would call me teacher. Now you call him as your teacher infront of me as if he and I are on the same generation".
B is C's teacher. B takes C to meet B's teacher A. C then learns directly under A and becomes A's disciple. Should C call B as "teacher" or "brother"?
The implication of the post I quoted and replied to was that different material (even different arts, since you specified X and WC) from A and B. So other than ego, this seems a non-existent issue. I would call my current teacher my teacher, and my former teacher my former teacher. Simple. Easy. Accurate. Respectful.
Out of respect both B and C let A make that call.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-