no right or wrong

[matsu]

whilst introducing/teaching us newly graded students the first section of the second form, sifu commented how there were a few different versions of sections of the form and that none were wrong,they were just that.... different and as such had different applications of each said versions.
he then went on to comment on how many videos he had of different forms from his many visits to hong kong and how varied they were..... and that none were wrong.
they just had different applications and that if one lineage tried to incorporate every application within each form we would all be doing an individual form for hours....
consequently each lineage has chosen to emphasise a particular version for a specific application.... and none in effect were wrong..
he summized that actually the politics and bulls##t that has split wingchun for so long has been focused for so long on the differences within lineages INSTEAD of our commonalities...
and because we do not hold allegience to any one particular direction we can take the best-read most effecient in his mind from every single one and therefore take wing chun forward instead of holding it back by squabbling over how we hold our hand in a certain technique or a section of a given form.
i dont know why i have just typed all of this. after a glass of wine(large) i decided i would share, just in case it made someone.... anyone think differently about their wing chun.
........ ill shut the door on me way out lol
matsu

 

[WC_lun]

There are TONS of differences in forms from school to school, lieage to lineage. If the concepts are there, its all good!

 

[l_uk3y]

This is so true. Reading comments about other peoples Wing Chun over the last few years, whether it be via you tube comments or etc. It is always painful reading how much BS there is between diff clubs/lineages

At the end of the day. If you can show why you do a technique in a particular way and explain the purpose of the technique and why you do it that way. Then it is not incorrect. It is only incorrect if your teaching that method and can't explain why the heck your doing it.

I could only imagine what sort of comments I would get if I posted a Vid on youtube showing WC entry, Hapkido takedown then finishing off with a WC rollpunch whilst Opp on their back. I'd be flamed for being WRONG when in reality I find they link together quite well.

P.S That large glass of wine sounds like a good idea. Something I shall look forward to tonight now its in my mind.

Cheers. Luke

 

[zepedawingchun]

My sifu changes the forms all the time. It's one way of him seeing when the last time you trained with him, or your stage of development. Also, it has a lot to do with how he sees a certain hand position and decides if it needs to do this instead of that. Having said that, I know about 4 different ways to perform the third part to Biu Jee. None of them wrong, all of them right, depending in how you use them. It definitely makes it difficult sometimes but enlightening.

 

[Tensei85]

I think its fine to have variations, as variation is the spice of life or I think that's how that line goes.

But really the variation should be in line with Wing Chun principles not so much concepts as concepts can vary greatly, lead you to the point of something differing greatly from Wing Chun body mechanics.

But I've also seen a crap load of different variations for Cham Kiu, even Biu Ji & a lot of others...

So principles & body mechanics must be present.

 

[geezer]

whilst introducing/teaching us newly graded students the first section of the second form, sifu commented how there were a few different versions of sections of the form and that none were wrong,they were just that.... different and as such had different applications...

I feel thats a very generous position to take. I agree that you can't fully judge another group's variation of the forms unless you consider the applications they have in mind. On the other hand, I have no trouble criticizing a poorly done form in my own lineage, where I have greater understanding of the application and intent.

On a broader scale, sometimes I've seen interpretations of the forms in other groups or "lineages" that are unsatisfying from the perspective of structure, concept, and application as well. In some cases the applications that are given do not seem logical and efficient from my perspective. In other words, I agree that we need to keep an open mind, but an open mind is not the same as an uncritical or undiscerning mind.

 

[yak sao]

I feel thats a very generous position to take. I agree that you can't fully judge another group's variation of the forms unless you consider the applications they have in mind. On the other hand, I have no trouble criticizing a poorly done form in my own lineage, where I have greater understanding of the application and intent.

On a broader scale, sometimes I've seen interpretations of the forms in other groups or "lineages" that are unsatisfying from the perspective of structure, concept, and application as well. In some cases the applications that are given do not seem logical and efficient from my perspective. In other words, I agree that we need to keep an open mind, but an open mind is not the same as an uncritical or undiscerning mind.

Good point. Some 'WC' people run down all other lineages, besides their
own as being wrong. While I beleive the equally wrong approach is to freely accept all other 'WC' as being right simply because it's 'WC'.
To readily criticize or readily accept everything you see is not critical thinking...in fact it is not thinking at all.

 

[Danny T]

“There is no right or wrong – only the consequence”, this statement is often spoken by my sifu.

Function follows form then form follows function but in application there is only survival. I believe this to mean in the lower level of understanding and ability we look at forms as the way to move and/or to create the postures and structures. From there we begin to address the functions. As we grow in skill and understanding we start addressing the actual function and address what the form should be. In the advance stages form and function simple happen with no thought of is this right or wrong. There is only the consequence.

 

[mook jong man]

In some cases the applications that are given do not seem logical and efficient from my perspective. In other words, I agree that we need to keep an open mind, but an open mind is not the same as an uncritical or undiscerning mind.

This is my opinion as well , while there are some differences in the tools that we choose to employ to counter a specific attack , but there are somethings that are universal as well.

If there is too many steps in your counter and you are making large elaborate movements then I will say that your Wing Chun is wrong.

If I see angles in arms that are not what they should be , then that arm will fold up and collapse under the first heavy strike that hits it.
If the angle is correct the arm will stand up to the pressure.

If you see hard blocking instead of the use of shearing deflection then that is wrong as well.
The lumps that are forming on your arm and the fact that your stance is being affected by the impact will tell you that it is wrong .

We can give some leeway as far as the tools that are used , because I can use several different counters to a round house kick and they are all right.

But it is in the execution of techniques I believe that we can be critical , things like no economy of movement , too much use of brute strength , not practical and direct etc.

There is a hell of a lot of crap out there masquerading under the name of Wing Chun and I feel if we don't speak out against it we are in a sense condoning it and being complicit in our silence.

 

[WC_lun]

This is my opinion as well , while there are some differences in the tools that we choose to employ to counter a specific attack , but there are somethings that are universal as well.

If there is too many steps in your counter and you are making large elaborate movements then I will say that your Wing Chun is wrong.

If I see angles in arms that are not what they should be , then that arm will fold up and collapse under the first heavy strike that hits it.
If the angle is correct the arm will stand up to the pressure.

If you see hard blocking instead of the use of shearing deflection then that is wrong as well.
The lumps that are forming on your arm and the fact that your stance is being affected by the impact will tell you that it is wrong .

We can give some leeway as far as the tools that are used , because I can use several different counters to a round house kick and they are all right.

But it is in the execution of techniques I believe that we can be critical , things like no economy of movement , too much use of brute strength , not practical and direct etc.

There is a hell of a lot of crap out there masquerading under the name of Wing Chun and I feel if we don't speak out against it we are in a sense condoning it and being complicit in our silence.

Nice post!

Someone may do something different and that doesn't make it wrong or right. It is just different. However, there are concepts and principles that underlye what we do. If the technique being shown isn't built upon those concepts and principle then it can be determines if it is WC or not. There is a lot of stuff out there masquerading as WC that just isn't. To the layman who doesn't have the eyes to see, it all looks the same, until it is placed under pressure. Then the bad stuff fails, making Wing Chun look less than solid in the process. So yeah, we have a responsibility to point out the bad stuff, as long as we don't mistake different for bad.

 

[matsu]

sifu is very quick to criticise other wing chun, but only if he thinks it is bad wing chun or incorrect, as the last few posts have intimated.
i think it has been his lifes work to research and work thru all that he comes across to assess wether innhis mind and his direction wether it works and is worth keeping.
he is constantly saying wing chun was neer meant to be just what is was, it is an evolving art. and so many people forget that yip man changed more than anyone else in the history of our art.
i think i posted this originally to get us thinking of our commonalities,,not of the minor differences that tear us aprt.
i read mooks posts,kamon'geezers,and zepede's and although they are all slightly different variants and thought processes,they all strike accord and i feel i am able to improve if i take note.. there are lots of other posts by lots of others,that in turn have helped me "understand" or get the move etc
so thank you for continuing this thread accordingly
matsu

 

[Vajramusti]

IMO-not all of wing chun is coequal- the sloppy versions of the art have created real problems of quality control. Also teachers have spent quite varying times in learning from good teachers.

Unfortunately, people sometimes judge the art by seeing bad versions of wing chun. Nothing wrong with the art itself. But there are rights and wrongs in versions of the art. But folks can learn from each other.

 

[graychuan]

... But there are rights and wrongs in versions of the art. But folks can learn from each other.

:ultracool