The problem With practicing WC and other arts...

[Xue Sheng]

Some additional thoughts:

I've seen people do the forms in my system, without any understanding of the underlying methodology. They were taught the forms more from a "collection" approach to learning. There was no teaching of the fundamentals and basics, as they are done in my system. Just the choreography of the form itself.

It's easy to tell when that was done, because even tho the choreography is "correct", everything about HOW it is being done is wrong. The rooting and stances and rotation and delivery of technique is all wrong. It's just some guy waving his arms about in imitation of our system. And as a tool for practicing and developing skill, it makes the form worthless.

You can train one style and only one style and see the same thing; You can train one style and only one style for years and all of a sudden realize you were not doing it correctly. The rooting, stances, movement and possibly the delivery (not sure about that one) of technique is all correct..... but the intent is wrong, the understanding of the forms as to what the applications really are is wrong due to improper intent.

As for the delivery; I am not sure if that would be correct or not since it could be correct in that it works and works rather well but it is incorrect based on what the style you are training is trying to do since you have had the wrong intent and wrong visualization due to having the wrong intent.

 

[Flying Crane]

You can train one style and only one style and see the same thing; You can train one style and only one style for years and all of a sudden realize you were not doing it correctly. The rooting, stances, movement and possibly the delivery (not sure about that one) of technique is all correct..... but the intent is wrong, the understanding of the forms as to what the applications really are is wrong due to improper intent.

As for the delivery; I am not sure if that would be correct or not since it could be correct in that it works and works rather well but it is incorrect based on what the style you are training is trying to do since you have had the wrong intent and wrong visualization due to having the wrong intent.

I think we've got to remember that it's really not difficult to hurt someone. You don't need perfect technique, nor a superior method to do that.

But that being said, at least from my experience, that underlying method is teaching one to engage the full body in delivery of every technique. This gives the technique the maximum amount of power that the individual is capable of, but without relying on raw physical strength in, for example, the arms and shoulders when throwing a punch. Rather, the full strength of the entire body is harnessed.

One could certainly just muscle their way thru our techniques, and they would "work", i.e., they could hurt someone. But doing so lacks an understanding of the method that our system is teaching. If the method is understood and skill is built, the potential of those techniques is much greater, and that's what gets lost when the wrong things get mixed together.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I think we've got to remember that it's really not difficult to hurt someone. You don't need perfect technique, nor a superior method to do that.

But that being said, at least from my experience, that underlying method is teaching one to engage the full body in delivery of every technique. This gives the technique the maximum amount of power that the individual is capable of, but without relying on raw physical strength in, for example, the arms and shoulders when throwing a punch. Rather, the full strength of the entire body is harnessed.

One could certainly just muscle their way thru our techniques, and they would "work", i.e., they could hurt someone. But doing so lacks an understanding of the method that our system is teaching. If the method is understood and skill is built, the potential of those techniques is much greater, and that's what gets lost when the wrong things get mixed together.

true, but with something like Yang style Taijiquan it can simply be impatiences... and I am trying to figure out a way to describe this in words and it is proving to be rather difficult. I guess the best way I can put it at the moment is to say I look for or manufacture the opening for an attack instead of waiting for it to be obvious and/or waiting for the opponent to make me attack them. In visualization in the form visualizing an attack or a defense instead of visualizing stick and follow and feel

 

[WC_lun]

Excellent post, Flying Crane. I'd rep you, but I guess I already have recently

 

[Punchy]

funny, I've been using almost this exact language in describing Tibetan White Crane, and the importance of understaning the principles that drive the system, rather than just collecting the techniques.

This discussion isn't really about Wing Chun and other arts. Rather, it's really about practicing multiple arts, or mixing various arts together. There's a similar discussion going on over on Kenpotalk as well.

The issue to me is this: a well-designed system should have an underlying methodology that drives everything. Understanding how that works, and working to develop skill thru that methodology is what is important. I think a lot of people don't understand this, and instead they just look at the techniques and collect techniques. If that is how you look at the big picture, then you will be inclined to believe that you can just do that: collect techniques from where ever, and mix it all together and it'll be fine. THe problem lies in conflicting methodologies that may reside in different systems. The methodology gives you an approach to training and a consistency in how you do everything, no matter what technique you are doing. If you try to simultaneously practice several systems that each have a different underlying methodology, then you will have problems. If you punch in X sytem, and punch in Y system, and punch in Z system, but each system differs in how it teaches you to harness the power of the body to deliver that punch, then you are always kinda fighting yourself because you keep jumping from X to Y to Z methodology, instead of staying focused on one method and excelling at that.

The end result of the punch in X and Y and Z systems may all be the same, but the road you take in practicing each of them may be different, and that's where it's a waste of your time if you are trying to pursue them all.

It is possible to mix things, or practice more than one system at a time. But I think you need to be careful of what you mix and make sure it isn't creating a conflict in the methodology. If you just collect techniques and don't consider the underlying methodology, then your mix is likely to be dysfunctional and even schitzophrenic. And it's really really really easy to clutter your curriculum with junk that doesn't fit well with what you are doing, and you really do not need in the first place.

Probably won't win any popularity contests with this but here goes.....

I think Bruce Lee in many ways hurt martial arts. I know, I know, he in many ways brought reality back to MA, .something that was sadly lacking, and I find him an inspiration in many ways.
But he created a bunch of half baked immitators who learned pieces and parts of different systems and "created their own systems".

Very few study their art in depth anymore.

 

[Flying Crane]

Probably won't win any popularity contests with this but here goes.....

I think Bruce Lee in many ways hurt martial arts. I know, I know, he in many ways brought reality back to MA, .something that was sadly lacking, and I find him an inspiration in many ways.
But he created a bunch of half baked immitators who learned pieces and parts of different systems and "created their own systems".

Very few study their art in depth anymore.

You're not the only one who's thought this. He kinda gave license to everyone to just kinda make up their own crap, make up their own rules and their own standards, and call it "great". And people then justify it by quoting Bruce. If I never saw another person quote Bruce to justify what they are doing, I'd be happier for it.

 

[WC_lun]

Bruce Lee interested many many people in the martial arts. I cannot see this as a bad thing. He was not a god, which many think he is, but I believe that is on them. Others take what he taught out of context to support thier own flawed thoughts on martial arts, but if Bruce Lee didnt exsist, they'd just find some other justification.

Even as great as Bruce lee was, his Wing Chun was not advanced. Read the stuff he wrote and watch him work out and it is pretty easy to tell this. He was a great martial artist, but he was not a great Wing Chunner. The Wing Chun in JKD is a product of his limited training in WC. That doesn't mean it is bad, but it does miss things that a Wing Chun player would think essential for good Wing Chun. I don't believe the mixture that is JKd is supurior to WC, just different. Part of that is because there is training missing from the WC.

 

[arnisador]

I have to disagree with JKD being high level WC.

I do too, but JKD lineages vary greatly. The one I studied comes through Paul Vunak and includes a heavy emphasis on Muay Thai and eskrima and while WC, esp. the "straight blast" but also trapping, is an important part, I'd say (kick-)boxing and fencing form a larger part of the overall strategy.

 

[arnisador]

Probably won't win any popularity contests with this but here goes.....

I think Bruce Lee in many ways hurt martial arts. I know, I know, he in many ways brought reality back to MA, .something that was sadly lacking, and I find him an inspiration in many ways.
But he created a bunch of half baked immitators who learned pieces and parts of different systems and "created their own systems".

Very few study their art in depth anymore.

I know what you mean, but that applies to so many arts--I don't think "absorb what is useful" is really to blame. It seems that when a founder of a recently-created art dies, everyone was his chosen successor and the art fractures.

I can remember in the 80s when some chains were advertising that if you had a green belt in anything then they'd give you a black belt in their "art", train you to teach ultimate self-defense, and set you up with a storefront. There are a lot of factors here.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Probably won't win any popularity contests with this but here goes.....

I think Bruce Lee in many ways hurt martial arts. I know, I know, he in many ways brought reality back to MA, .something that was sadly lacking, and I find him an inspiration in many ways.
But he created a bunch of half baked immitators who learned pieces and parts of different systems and "created their own systems".
Very few study their art in depth anymore.

Nah, he did not do that, it was going on long before he came along, some good and some bad, he is just the most recent excuse people use.

If it wasn't for the cultural revolution people maybe saying the same of Wang Xiangzhai. He too created his own system based on multiple styles he trained however he was considerably further along in Xingyiquan than Bruce Lee was in Wing Chun when he created Yiquan

You're not the only one who's thought this. He kinda gave license to everyone to just kinda make up their own crap, make up their own rules and their own standards, and call it "great". And people then justify it by quoting Bruce. If I never saw another person quote Bruce to justify what they are doing, I'd be happier for it.

And Li Tianji played a major role in the development of the Beijing 24 form and he was not really a Taiji guy either there have been multiple people inventing multiple styles they refer to as taijiquan as well as others long before Bruce Lee came along, some good, some horrible. Sanshou is a conglomeration actually. Bruce Lee just happens to be the most famous. As for quote from Bruce Lee and not meaning to upset you but this one I have always liked and there are a whole lot of people out there apparently never read it.

let me remind you Jeet Kune Do is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one's back

People did not need Bruce Lee to make stuff up, it has been going on for centuries, he just happens to be the most famous and the most recent.

I do not deify Bruce Lee but I do not vilify him either,actually I learned a heck of a lot about Xingyi, Taiji and Wing Chun in my short stint in JKD. Saw a lot of similarity to Xingyiquan actually, it was not enough to make me a JKD guy but I did learn awful lot in a very short time.. and that impressed me.

 

[rickster]

Still...whoud have been great to train-workout with him

 

[Punchy]

Still...whoud have been great to train-workout with him

I'd jump at the chance

 

[WC_lun]

Sure it would have been great to work with him. There's martial artist now that aren't Wing Chun that I'd love to work with. I wasn't trying to take anything away from Bruce Lee with my comments, but it is important to understand that Bruce was not a high level Wing Chun guy and that JKD, while a great art, is not based upon high level Wing Chun. What Wing Chun techniques are in JKD have the same weakness that any other art mixed with Wing Chun have...the engine driving those techniques is not the one designed to drive them.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Sure it would have been great to work with him. There's martial artist now that aren't Wing Chun that I'd love to work with. I wasn't trying to take anything away from Bruce Lee with my comments, but it is important to understand that Bruce was not a high level Wing Chun guy and that JKD, while a great art, is not based upon high level Wing Chun. What Wing Chun techniques are in JKD have the same weakness that any other art mixed with Wing Chun have...the engine driving those techniques is not the one designed to drive them.

Again no one ever said it was; it was simply a reference to something Kong Chi Keung (Ip Man >> Au Chi Sing >> Kong Chi Keung) said who is a Wing Chun Sifu in Hong Kong who also studied JKD that was stating what his JKD teacher told him that Bruce Lee may have said it was only to show that there is a possibility that the Founder of JKD would not agree with what some say as it applies to Wing Chun not being important to JKD.

 

[Punchy]

Sure it would have been great to work with him. There's martial artist now that aren't Wing Chun that I'd love to work with. I wasn't trying to take anything away from Bruce Lee with my comments, but it is important to understand that Bruce was not a high level Wing Chun guy and that JKD, while a great art, is not based upon high level Wing Chun. What Wing Chun techniques are in JKD have the same weakness that any other art mixed with Wing Chun have...the engine driving those techniques is not the one designed to drive them.

Bruce Lee seems to have been a pretty smart guy and I think his understanding of WC surpassed his ability in WC.
I think in many ways he saw beyond technique, into concept, and although he did not train very far into the system, he was able to adapt other things to fit the mold.
Had he not made it big in the movies, I'm sure he would have went on to be a very high level WC man.