Moy Yat Ving Tsun

[KamonGuy2]

I think that there is a true Wing Chun and a false Wing Chun. Whilst there maybe many variations on the forms and technique, the "Trueness" of the Wing Chun science lies not in these variations, but in the proper energy development. If a practicioner of Wing Chun develops the proper energy coupled with the proper understanding of the principles that have a comanality in most schools of Wing Chun, then he is studying true Wing Chun, if however they are simply taking the hands of Wing chun without the proper development of energy then they are not studying true Wing Chun. The heart of Wing Chun is not technique, it is energy, and the application of that energy.

Respectfully

Mark

Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'.
Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist

 

[KamonGuy2]

You can add elements from other arts as long as they stay withing the boundries of WC. You wouldn't add a move if you knew that it would either break the rules of structure, cause you to forfeit your line, or require you to dip your shoulders. There are other guidelines but I just wanted to list a few..

I don't agree with that. It is one of the reasons why a lot of people laugh at wing chunners, because we say that we can fight in a cage etc and then start choking people out!!!
A choke, a sidekick, a headbutt are not wing chun moves but I have seen Sifu's incorperate them and claim that they are wing chun moves!!

In Kamon we do BJJ and we do use chokes but the point is that we acknowledge where the moves originate from

I don't understand why not also? We have hooks, and they're pretty effective because they come from below the opponent's viewing path and very sneaky because the shoulder doesn't dip...

A hook goes against economy of motion. It also has no structure behind it. They are most definately powerful (hence why boxers can knock people out), but they are a force that is derived outside wing chun principles
You have to lift your elbow to perform the move and once that happens, you are using muscle more than bodyweight behind the hit
I don't like mixing moves - that would make me a MMA fighter rather than a wing chunner, and whilst I train other arts, I prefer to give more credit to wing chun.

Thats good, it's your right to disagree and I appreciate your honesty. One thing however, pay more attention to the text I'm posting. You added context by saying "school isnt the best.". I never said anything about not being the best. I stated it as knowing the incorrect way So I guess your reply to that is pointless. <---not trying to make you mad Kamon, I enjoy your posts..

Your post said 'Everyone claims they are the correct way' which I took to mean the best, as it sounded as though those instructors were inferring other schools were not correct etc
I am not offended by your comments in the slightest - misinterperetations happen and I apologise for my dumbness.
To reiterate though, I still wouldn't call myself 'the correct way' as even Yip Man didn't do it the correct way (ie he changed a lot of stuff when he was training it and trained under different instructors)

I wouldn't care if someone thought they we're the best. It wouldn't be very WC of them though because a WC fighter should be a humble fighter, expecting to lose and fighting to win. This is why we grasp onto staying relaxed and watching everything as it happens. Like the crane..

A wing chun fighter should be humble - but I have met sso many who aren't (including me, hehe). I come form training where you must have confidence to win a fight or else you will lose and lose badly. I understand that you mustn't go round thinking you can beat anyone up, but if someone does fight you, you should have the confidence to think that you can take that person.
The worsst thing is going into a fight expecting to lose.

Yeah, I don't have a clue what your getting at or asking or stating but good job on the win.

Sorry I was talking about those schools claiming to know the correct way

 

[brocklee]

I don't agree with that. It is one of the reasons why a lot of people laugh at wing chunners, because we say that we can fight in a cage etc and then start choking people out!!!
A choke, a sidekick, a headbutt are not wing chun moves but I have seen Sifu's incorperate them and claim that they are wing chun moves!!

In Kamon we do BJJ and we do use chokes but the point is that we acknowledge where the moves originate from


A hook goes against economy of motion. It also has no structure behind it. They are most definately powerful (hence why boxers can knock people out), but they are a force that is derived outside wing chun principles
You have to lift your elbow to perform the move and once that happens, you are using muscle more than bodyweight behind the hit
I don't like mixing moves - that would make me a MMA fighter rather than a wing chunner, and whilst I train other arts, I prefer to give more credit to wing chun.


Your post said 'Everyone claims they are the correct way' which I took to mean the best, as it sounded as though those instructors were inferring other schools were not correct etc
I am not offended by your comments in the slightest - misinterperetations happen and I apologise for my dumbness.
To reiterate though, I still wouldn't call myself 'the correct way' as even Yip Man didn't do it the correct way (ie he changed a lot of stuff when he was training it and trained under different instructors)


A wing chun fighter should be humble - but I have met sso many who aren't (including me, hehe). I come form training where you must have confidence to win a fight or else you will lose and lose badly. I understand that you mustn't go round thinking you can beat anyone up, but if someone does fight you, you should have the confidence to think that you can take that person.
The worsst thing is going into a fight expecting to lose.


Sorry I was talking about those schools claiming to know the correct way

like bcbernam777 said. It doesn't matter what the move looks like or the actual move is, as long as the energy is behind it. My sifu taught me that walking directly into a person is WC. He even taught us how to angle our head incase we ever happen to be in that situation. He states that what makes it wing chun is that it is more efficient than if he were to have thrown a punch from that certain angle or distance.

The WC hook, just like most our moves, isn't like a boxer's hook. It's very efficient because the arm barely moves, it's the torque that's created from the body rotation that does the damage.

I believe you will learn it later down the road.

 

[CuongNhuka]

Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'.
Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist

May be thats what he meant?

Also, there is a way to do a hook and make it Wing Chun effective.

Also, Wing Chun teaches chokes, just indirectly.

 

[brocklee]

May be thats what he meant?

Also, there is a way to do a hook and make it Wing Chun effective.

Also, Wing Chun teaches chokes, just indirectly.

Yeah, the hook is similar to the back palm from the beginning of the second form. The arm and elbow move very little but the impact from the strike is great.

 

[CuongNhuka]

Yeah, the hook is similar to the back palm from the beginning of the second form. The arm and elbow move very little but the impact from the strike is great.

No, I meant a Boxing hook. Same with chokes being in Wing Chun.

 

[brocklee]

No, I meant a Boxing hook. Same with chokes being in Wing Chun.

A boxing hook consists of lowering the body, turning the hips and then dipping the throwing shoulder. If you can do it without those unnecessary motions, then yes I...I understand what you're saying.

The hook I was describing comes out similar to a bong sao, without the twist though. As the fist moves away from the body, still down the centerline, the elbow starts to raise until the the fist and elbow are at equal distances from the ground. Instead of extending the fist all the way out, it stays within about 2 feet of the chest (I know, western ideology...but that's the distance on me, when I look down). Once the fist is nearing the target, you begin the torquing process at the feet and continue until you get your desired result. lol The elbow, will be pointing away from the body, horizontally, and should only move a tiny bit. Like 2-3 inches, what ever is optimum for your build. There really is no swing or shoot to it...just torquing the joints and the rotation of the structure.

 

[bcbernam777]

Mark, nice post, although this is what I am unclear on - how do you define the 'proper energy'.
Personally I find that any wing chun that sticks to the fundamentals of centre line, simultaneous attack and defence, economy of motion and tension, thye will develop into a good wing chun artist

The proper energy is the foundational energy that is developed through the proper execution and devoted practice of the Sui Lum Tao. The Yee Jeee Kim Yeung Ma is positioned (and so named) for a good reason. The energy is hard to explain, and I am only a mere infant in its fullness, it is something that you taste only after many painful hours in the SLT. It is concerned both with proper body alignment, proper weight distribution, relaxation and the ability to utilise the natural leverage of the weight ratio on the balls of the foot, and the final mix in this energy is Chi. Now before we get all mystical and starry eyed, what is Chi? It is breath, and its importance cannot be overated or underated, it has a place in the natural order ofthe body, and so deserves particular importance. In essence with these combinations, the Wing Chunner learns to utilise gravity, and use it as its freind rather than his foe.

I am aware that this post may appear slightly cryptic, but that is the nature of the Wing Chun energy. Some boil it down to simple bio mechanics, or a principal of central alighnment, but it is more than this.

The only way to develop this energy is through the proper execution of the Sui Lum TAo, and this energy must be tasted rather than theoretically explained.

I apologise if this answer is insufficient, if you have any questions I would be happy to expound.

Thanks

Mark

 

[Danny T]

No Side kick, Chokes, or Hooks in Wing Chun?

Remember WC is a system of training not a particular style stay true to the principles, the underlying rules by which we move and it is WC. In Bil Jee there are hooks & chokes. In Chum Kiu there are side kicks, locks, chokes and many other usages of the movements and positions. There are also many takedowns, throws, sweeps, locks, breaks and much more all within the movements and they are very much a part of Wing Chun. As to changing or using different movements lets look a the pole and swords. Footwork is different, structure in the pole is different. Weight distribution is different based upon what is needed. Stay true to the principles within the movement and positions and it is wing chun. For example, based upon need and positional relationship the bong sao movement can be defensive, Ie. a deflection as most express it. It can also be an elbow strike, an arm break, used from the inside of the opponent&#8217;s guard, under the arm and with the turning action from Chum Kiu is a throw or takedown. These same movements and usages are also in other systems yet is still WC if utilized within the principles of WC.

Danny T

 

[brocklee]

No Side kick, Chokes, or Hooks in Wing Chun?

Remember WC is a system of training not a particular style stay true to the principles, the underlying rules by which we move and it is WC. In Bil Jee there are hooks & chokes. In Chum Kiu there are side kicks, locks, chokes and many other usages of the movements and positions. There are also many takedowns, throws, sweeps, locks, breaks and much more all within the movements and they are very much a part of Wing Chun. As to changing or using different movements lets look a the pole and swords. Footwork is different, structure in the pole is different. Weight distribution is different based upon what is needed. Stay true to the principles within the movement and positions and it is wing chun. For example, based upon need and positional relationship the bong sao movement can be defensive, Ie. a deflection as most express it. It can also be an elbow strike, an arm break, used from the inside of the opponent’s guard, under the arm and with the turning action from Chum Kiu is a throw or takedown. These same movements and usages are also in other systems yet is still WC if utilized within the principles of WC.

Danny T

This is exactly my point. The few moves that we have, have many other abilities that seem to go unrecognized.

 

[CuongNhuka]

A boxing hook consists of lowering the body, turning the hips and then dipping the throwing shoulder. If you can do it without those unnecessary motions, then yes I...I understand what you're saying.

There is a very good way. All it requires is a Tan Sao and a small amount of footwork. Your left hand perfroms a Tan Sao, and you shift your weight so that you go off line with your opponent (similar to in Chum Kyu), or step off line, and throw a hook with your right hand to your opponents ribs/side of head. I have done this a few times in Chi Sao and several times in full sparring (more karate like). When I do it in Chi Sao, my Sensei/Sifu starts to laugh and comment on my good training.

Which brings me to point number 2, to comment on something Kamon said. If you are training in two styles, both will come out. If you are doing Boxing while you do Wing Chun, expect to do a Boxing strike in Chi Sao. And expect to throw a Wing Chun technique in Boxing sparring/fight. If you are training well, it will develop into you muscle memory, and you wont have any choice but to put it into play.

 

[KamonGuy2]

There is a very good way. All it requires is a Tan Sao and a small amount of footwork. Your left hand perfroms a Tan Sao, and you shift your weight so that you go off line with your opponent (similar to in Chum Kyu), or step off line, and throw a hook with your right hand to your opponents ribs/side of head. I have done this a few times in Chi Sao and several times in full sparring (more karate like). When I do it in Chi Sao, my Sensei/Sifu starts to laugh and comment on my good training.

I know what you are saying here. First off, your opponent should not be giving you opportunity to do this! Secondly, in that position you could strike with any move - wing chun punch, palm, elbow etc. Why you are using a hook during a wing chun class, I have no idea.
It would be like me going into TKD and start using grappling.

Which brings me to point number 2, to comment on something Kamon said. If you are training in two styles, both will come out. If you are doing Boxing while you do Wing Chun, expect to do a Boxing strike in Chi Sao. And expect to throw a Wing Chun technique in Boxing sparring/fight. If you are training well, it will develop into you muscle memory, and you wont have any choice but to put it into play.

I train boxing and TKD whilst still teaching/training wing chun, and have never done a boxing move in chi sao!
In chi sao, you should be playing under a set format (ie wing chun movements). I cannot see how you would ssuddenly throw a hook into the equation when it is more efficent to strike using wing chun

Similarly, I have never thrown a wing chun move into a spar.

Despite muscle memory, the opportunity for wing chun should not arise in sparring at long range

Similarly, in movements like chi sao, hooks should not occur.

I understand that certain aspects from other styles might arise by mistake during wing chun training, but its bad and disrespectful to encourage it in a class. If I went to a BJJ and started to hit someone whilst I was grappling with them, I would expect to be chucked out. If a grappler came down to my class, joined up and started trying to grapple my students during certain drills I would chuck them out.

Fair enough if people want to do MMA, or during a free spar where anything goes, but during chi sao or in a boxing spar is a bit rude

Going back to hooks - I think peoples definition of hooks varies. I am talking about a swing, which breaks the guidelines of wing chun (economy of motion).

Some people are probably thinking of uppercutts (which are often known as hooks), which do appear in chum kil and bil gee.

At the end of the day, if you are fighting someone for real, you do what works, but my original point is that if you are learning an art based in class, you don't just make stuff up or take things from another art

 

[brocklee]

I know what you are saying here. First off, your opponent should not be giving you opportunity to do this! Secondly, in that position you could strike with any move - wing chun punch, palm, elbow etc. Why you are using a hook during a wing chun class, I have no idea.
It would be like me going into TKD and start using grappling.


I train boxing and TKD whilst still teaching/training wing chun, and have never done a boxing move in chi sao!
In chi sao, you should be playing under a set format (ie wing chun movements). I cannot see how you would ssuddenly throw a hook into the equation when it is more efficent to strike using wing chun

Similarly, I have never thrown a wing chun move into a spar.

Despite muscle memory, the opportunity for wing chun should not arise in sparring at long range

Similarly, in movements like chi sao, hooks should not occur.

I understand that certain aspects from other styles might arise by mistake during wing chun training, but its bad and disrespectful to encourage it in a class. If I went to a BJJ and started to hit someone whilst I was grappling with them, I would expect to be chucked out. If a grappler came down to my class, joined up and started trying to grapple my students during certain drills I would chuck them out.

Fair enough if people want to do MMA, or during a free spar where anything goes, but during chi sao or in a boxing spar is a bit rude

Going back to hooks - I think peoples definition of hooks varies. I am talking about a swing, which breaks the guidelines of wing chun (economy of motion).

Some people are probably thinking of uppercutts (which are often known as hooks), which do appear in chum kil and bil gee.

At the end of the day, if you are fighting someone for real, you do what works, but my original point is that if you are learning an art based in class, you don't just make stuff up or take things from another art

Yes, but WC isn't really an art. It's creation was mainly for straight up fighting. Also, its difficult to add anything to WC because the moves are already there. Earlier in the training process these are taught as simple blocks. As you learn to move around with WC you begin to feel that if you use one of these blocks in conjunction with a certain type of advancing step or side step, it doesn't matter, it ends up creating a strike. Or it may set u up with an arm lock or any other type of move you can think of.

Take the tan sao....combine that with a swift lunge forward and it's now a way to either gouge the opponents adam's apple or even stab under the jaw.

I'm not sure what stage of training you're on but WC is taught so that the first two forms are very square and the fundamental rules are strict. With a certain posture and certain stance. And when you do this, this has to be like that. Maintain your mother line and centerline. This is purely for training purposes and once that is drilled in your head and you can move around freely with a WC manner...you begin the 3rd form. The 3rd form should give a better understanding of the rules of WC and lets you know that they can be bent. It's for situations that hinder your WC abilities. Like if someone were to hug your feet tight and you're fighting someone else and needed more power. Mo' Powah!! lol You can't start the chain by moving your feet left or right because of the gentleman hugging your feet. Up to the first 2 forms that leaves you screwed on power.

After the 3rd form that's no problem at all. You just start the rotation of the joints in the knees instead of the ankles, or you bend your motherline and start the rotation at the hips. This looks very un WC, but take a look at the moves in the 3rd form.

Also, I don't think WC should be sparred. It puts an unfair advantage on us because of rules and not having the ability to fully attack.

Like someone said prior in this thread (I don't want to research, but the statement was very true). The most WC move of all is bringing a gun to the fight. It's very true. Sure theres no honor in it, but hey...you win I'd rather fight so I would never use that tactic. But it is the most efficient and very direct.

 

[KamonGuy2]

Yes, but WC isn't really an art. It's creation was mainly for straight up fighting. Also, its difficult to add anything to WC because the moves are already there. Earlier in the training process these are taught as simple blocks. As you learn to move around with WC you begin to feel that if you use one of these blocks in conjunction with a certain type of advancing step or side step, it doesn't matter, it ends up creating a strike. Or it may set u up with an arm lock or any other type of move you can think of.

Take the tan sao....combine that with a swift lunge forward and it's now a way to either gouge the opponents adam's apple or even stab under the jaw.

I'm not sure what stage of training you're on but WC is taught so that the first two forms are very square and the fundamental rules are strict. With a certain posture and certain stance. And when you do this, this has to be like that. Maintain your mother line and centerline. This is purely for training purposes and once that is drilled in your head and you can move around freely with a WC manner...you begin the 3rd form. The 3rd form should give a better understanding of the rules of WC and lets you know that they can be bent. It's for situations that hinder your WC abilities. Like if someone were to hug your feet tight and you're fighting someone else and needed more power. Mo' Powah!! lol You can't start the chain by moving your feet left or right because of the gentleman hugging your feet. Up to the first 2 forms that leaves you screwed on power.

After the 3rd form that's no problem at all. You just start the rotation of the joints in the knees instead of the ankles, or you bend your motherline and start the rotation at the hips. This looks very un WC, but take a look at the moves in the 3rd form.

Also, I don't think WC should be sparred. It puts an unfair advantage on us because of rules and not having the ability to fully attack.

Like someone said prior in this thread (I don't want to research, but the statement was very true). The most WC move of all is bringing a gun to the fight. It's very true. Sure theres no honor in it, but hey...you win I'd rather fight so I would never use that tactic. But it is the most efficient and very direct.

Very good post. I am an instructor of wing chun but still train. I have trained all forms, but I am very rusty on the dummy. I'm okay at the knife form but its not my favourite. Pole is my favourite.

Not sure what you mean by the gun thing. Do you mean an actual gun? I'm in the UK where guns are rare, and do you mean that the person who has the gun wins, because its the best weapon? Or is it just a metaphor?

I know what you mean by the movement incorperated into wing chun and this is what we do in Kamon. What I was trying to say is that a hook is one of those motions that is not really part of wing chun.

I do think wing chun is an art. It is very tetchy to say that certain martial arts are not arts - you could say that about BJJ or TKD. Technically they are sports. I agree that wing chun is more of a concept, but I still believe it is an art form

 

[brocklee]

Very good post. I am an instructor of wing chun but still train. I have trained all forms, but I am very rusty on the dummy. I'm okay at the knife form but its not my favourite. Pole is my favourite.

Not sure what you mean by the gun thing. Do you mean an actual gun? I'm in the UK where guns are rare, and do you mean that the person who has the gun wins, because its the best weapon? Or is it just a metaphor?

I know what you mean by the movement incorperated into wing chun and this is what we do in Kamon. What I was trying to say is that a hook is one of those motions that is not really part of wing chun.

I do think wing chun is an art. It is very tetchy to say that certain martial arts are not arts - you could say that about BJJ or TKD. Technically they are sports. I agree that wing chun is more of a concept, but I still believe it is an art form

Well, we practice two different lineages of WC. We have hooks in the one I train and they're dope. Lots of torque created for the hook.

And yes...I meant bring a gun, tank or bomb to the fight and its more WC then if you were to throw a punch.

 

[KamonGuy2]

Well, we practice two different lineages of WC. We have hooks in the one I train and they're dope. Lots of torque created for the hook.

And yes...I meant bring a gun, tank or bomb to the fight and its more WC then if you were to throw a punch.

Hmmm..... Yes and no. Its wing chun in a way that a gun is the most efficient/economical. But wing chun is a set system with set weapons.

As I said, a hook is extremely powerful, but is not wing chun. In order to create the torque, do you for instance go on tip toes?
Does the hook travel in a straight line from A to B?

A hook is not wing chun

 

[brocklee]

Hmmm..... Yes and no. Its wing chun in a way that a gun is the most efficient/economical. But wing chun is a set system with set weapons.

As I said, a hook is extremely powerful, but is not wing chun. In order to create the torque, do you for instance go on tip toes?
Does the hook travel in a straight line from A to B?

A hook is not wing chun

Well, i'll make sure to write that down.

lol WC is not set on a system of weapons. What ever is in your hands at the time is your weapon. If you dont have anything in your hands, then your hands are the weapons. If you don't have hands, you better hope you have good structure, cause that is now your new weapon. And so on and so on. You work with what you got.

I think you are well beyond me having to describe how torque is created to you. Right? You do know about bone joint power don't you? Have you done the 2nd form yet? Because you create these arguments that describe
the lack of knowledge. You can eliminate these discussions by being more open minded and less stuck on..."This is what I was taught, this is how it is".

It's nice to see you sticking to your guns on what you're taught and that's how it should be. There's alot more to it though and your doors seem closed.

 

[bcbernam777]

Like someone said prior in this thread (I don't want to research, but the statement was very true). The most WC move of all is bringing a gun to the fight. It's very true. Sure theres no honor in it, but hey...you win I'd rather fight so I would never use that tactic. But it is the most efficient and very direct.

Good pont, this is why Wing Chun is not this move or that move, this hand or that hand, or this utilisation of this principle in that situation. If there was one founding principle that I would say is essentially wing chunI would have to say the principle o effeciency, i.e. Achieving the most with the least effort. The problem with many arguments about Martial Arts, IMO, is that people are always saying "no in this situation, you would use this move, or you would do this" "no, no you wouldn't do that, you would do this or use this" and back and forth it goes, with no resolution. It reminds me of the story about Wong Shun Lueng who wasas in a restaurant and was being pestered by the owner of the restaurant, who was saying to him, "If i did this what would you do, or If I did this what would you do" finally Wong man said to him, "I dont know, why dont we go outside and find out".

The point is this, if you need a hook use it, if you need a Tan sao use it, use whatever is at your disposal, it is important that you find freedom from the art, and do not become a prisoner to its form and structure, this is of course the art of artlessness, and was the key reason why Bruce wrote the Tao Of JKD.

Whilst I appreciate the structural differences between a boxers hook and a "Wing Chun Hook" and the contrasting principals that come into play, there is a need to understand that all Martial arts are not and end to themeselves, but are a means of enlightenment, of understanding, yourself and those around you.

That is why when talking about who has the best style, is it Moy Yat or Choi Sheung Ting, or Derek Fung, is to a large degree irrelevant, because their style may be the best for you at that time whilst you are on the journey, then as you being to think and grow you being to spread your wings, trying out other styles, other ways of understanding the martial arts and ultimately understanding yourself in the process. perhaps from there you will come full circle and begin again with Wing Chun that is an individual choice.

The only thing further I will add to the current disscusion is this, muscle memory is a very keen animal, and once it is engrained it can be very hard to unlearn what you have learnt. In some cases, with particular martial arts, you will find that it is a requirement to unlearn what you have learnt, otherwise you will impede automatic timing and learning. An example of this is when I started Traingin under Sifu Fung, I was so deeply ingrained with JKD that I automatically fell into the fundamental concept of "blading" instead of the squarre on stance of Wing Chun, this was an element that I had to unlearn what I had learnt. (By the way, there is a form of blading in Wing Chun, but it comes from a totally different premise as that Of Wing Chun.)

Whatever you do, and whatever art you choose, make sure that you absorb it, understand it, apply it, learn from it, and contiinue to grow and expand within it.

 

[KamonGuy2]

So if you guys saw a guy doing a roundhouse kick, you would accept that it could be wing chun?

I think this is the problem with wing chun. There are lots of videos that get posted in response to people asking why wing chun doesn't enter the UFC (wing chunners doing trying to do cage fighting etc) and most of the time they are using moves like rear naked chokes or a side knee strike but still claim it is wing chun

It destroys the wing chun reputation.

 

[CuongNhuka]

So if you guys saw a guy doing a roundhouse kick, you would accept that it could be wing chun?

I think this is the problem with wing chun. There are lots of videos that get posted in response to people asking why wing chun doesn't enter the UFC (wing chunners doing trying to do cage fighting etc) and most of the time they are using moves like rear naked chokes or a side knee strike but still claim it is wing chun

It destroys the wing chun reputation.

Round house kick can be applied as a Wing Chun technique. And there are chokes taught in Wing Chun, they just aren't obvious. Besides, knee strikes are very Wing Chun, just like a straight punch.