WC Punch

[KPM]

I
But you have described #3 as non-simultaneous block then strike. You are still missing simultaneous deflection and striking with a single arm in a single beat, and seem totally confused as to how that might be done.

.

I don't read it that way at all. You are referring to John's #1. John's #3 actually says:

3. Use the same arm to block/deflect and strike.

Just because he didn't include the qualifier..."at the same time", this doesn't mean he is NOT referring to that. He already has the "block then strike" covered in #1, so obviously #3 is block and strike at the same time....with the same arm.

 

[LFJ]

I don't read it that way at all. You are referring to John's #1. John's #3 actually says:

3. Use the same arm to block/deflect and strike.

Just because he didn't include the qualifier..."at the same time", this doesn't mean he is NOT referring to that. He already has the "block then strike" covered in #1, so obviously #3 is block and strike at the same time....with the same arm.

No.

#1 is block and strike at the same time with two arms.

#3 is block then strike with the same arm.

He already described what he meant and it was not simultaneous.

See this post.

"3. block and punch back by using the same arm - Your opponent punch, you use right 扶手(Fu Shou) to block his punch. Redirect his punching arm to pass your face (sensing and manipulating arms). You then punch back with the same right hand."

 

[LFJ]

No, it sounded like you were saying you wouldn't do two arms at once.

When superfluous I would not.

Most WC, from my point of view, does secondary actions as a first response, violating all 3 of the core principles of VT fighting strategy.

But what is clear, is that you have a much narrower view of what "LSDD" refers to that everyone else here. I see it as having several layers. One of which is defending with one arm while striking with the other at the same time. Another is defending and striking at the same time with the same arm. Another is angling off-line with a strike at just the right moment so that you don't even engage the striking arm at all.

Your 1st idea is simultaneous attack and defense, but LSDD refers to a single specific type of action that simultaneously displaces as it strikes. That is the unique skill and tactic of VT, hence the maxim, further spelled out by "da sau jik si siu sau". The striking arm is also the neutralizing arm. Can't get any clearer than that.

Even when using a helping action, the striking arm should still possess this dual function in case there is further obstruction along its path. That is LSDD still referring this quality in a single arm.

You call it narrow. I call it clearly defined VT strategy and tactics. You get that in a coherent system. Ambiguity in core concepts is for the confused.

Your 3rd idea doesn't work because siu means to eliminate, to dispel, or to remove. This requires acting upon the limb. Dodging doesn't accomplish that.

 

[guy b.]

Your system, and everyone else's system is named VT as well as WC. It is your lineage that is defined as WSLVT. To claim you do not have a lineage is wrong since you are very set on WSLPBVT is the only true VT. So the annoying part is not that you claim you practise YM VT

My system is called VT. It is the system taught by YM. There is no special different thing called WSLVT- there is only VT, and this is what I practice. It is your business if you also practice VT

Life is easier for me, I train WT. It is not identical to what YM was teaching. It is a belief that it is an improvement in how to make WC/VT work for europeans. For bigger guys, and so on.

Ok, so then you do not practice VT. That is fine. Why then are you worried if I do?

 

[guy b.]

It makes no sense for guy b, the 3rd (or the 4th?) generation under YM to tell someone XYZ, the 2nd generation under YM that he is right and XYZ is wrong.

YM -> ??? -> ??? -> guy b
YM -> ??? -> ??? -> ??? -> guy b
YM ->??? -> XYZ

Do we have any forum member who is the 1st generation under YM?

YM -> you

If we both claim to practice VT then coherence and non contradiction according to the defining ideas of the system are all that matters. Do you practice VT?

 

[KPM]

My system is called VT. It is the system taught by YM. There is no special different thing called WSLVT- there is only VT, and this is what I practice.

---This is not true. You don't know exactly what YM taught. If you think WSL made no updates or adaptations or personal touches to his Wing Chun then you are delusional. And plenty of people in your system refer to it as "WSLVT." So what makes you so special that you think otherwise?

---And again....since you seem to continue to miss the point.....the "VT" spelling is not unique or special. No one has a copyright on that spelling as specifically referring to Ip Man Wing Chun. So for you to continue to use it as a very specific thing is wrong and is only going to continue to credit confusion and discord. More people refer to Ip Man's system as "Wing Chun" than people that say "Ving Tsun."

 

[guy b.]

If you think WSL made no updates or adaptations or personal touches to his Wing Chun then you are delusional.

Why would I choose to disbelieve what WSL said?

 

[KPM]

Why would I choose to disbelieve what WSL said?

Why would you choose to disbelieve what 3 people that were also Ip Man students told John Wang? We've had this discussion in the past as well.

 

[guy b.]

I've had discussions with people from other martial art systems and they are more willing to accept that there are variations in the applications of techniques.

One technique, One stance, One tactic, does not make or break a system, nor does it define one.

YM VT is a very tightly defined and coherent system. It is defined by the ideas that it is based upon. Contradict the fundamental conceptual base of the system and it is not the system any more. This is what a system is.

Usually in Chinese MA when someone changes something they credit and rename the system after themselves, or a real or imaginary ancestor.

 

[guy b.]

Why would you choose to disbelieve what 3 people that were also Ip Man students told John Wang?

I have no knowledge of John Wang or any of those three people. I do know what WSL said though. Why would I disbelieve him?

 

[geezer]

I have no knowledge of John Wang or any of those three people. I do know what WSL said though. Why would I disbelieve him?

You talk as if you were WSL's todai. And a very devoted one at that!

...Did you ever even meet WSL?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

No.

#1 is block and strike at the same time with two arms.

#3 is block then strike with the same arm.

He already described what he meant and it was not simultaneous.

See this post.

"3. block and punch back by using the same arm - Your opponent punch, you use right 扶手(Fu Shou) to block his punch. Redirect his punching arm to pass your face (sensing and manipulating arms). You then punch back with the same right hand."

Do we agree that your arm has to deal with your opponent's

- leading arm,
- back arm,
- before your hand can reach to his face?

Do we also agree that your hand has to pass your opponent's

- wrist gate,
- elbow gate,
- before your hand can reach to his shoulder gate (face)?

In the previous 哈拳(Ha Chuan) example that I gave, I stated, "Use a hook punch toward your opponent's head, If he blocks, you then change your circular punch into a linear punch and use the same arm to punch on his chest. Just as the 扶手(Fu Shou) example, both are not linear. The reason is simple. Your opponent's arms in in your striking path and you have to deal with it first. If you use linear punch, you fist will hit on your opponent's arm instead.

If your opponent's arm is in your striking path, your striking arm has to block (or deflect, or neutralize, or ...) your opponent's arm first before your hand can reach to his face. It's in 1 strike but there is still one before the other.

 

[Vajramusti]

Why would you choose to disbelieve what 3 people that were also Ip Man students told John Wang? We've had this discussion in the past as well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A broken telephone perhaps.
In any case...dropping Ip Man's name does not necessariyl capture I*p Man wing chun. There aere many people who attended Ip Man's group classes.
Relatively few were taught in detail personally by Ip Man extensively.Ho Kam Ming and WSL were. But there are some differencesw between them.

 

[Phobius]

There is also the funny belief here that YM taught everyone the same. That the system is so stale that it can not survive any change in teaching. So specific and vulnerable that any added drills would make it incoherent.

When I say I learn something different, I am simply stating that YM WC/VT was taught to his students. I am learning what my sifu is teaching me and he is not YM. Therefore I do not study YM WC/VT. I can not say what changes he made to the system that I would need because I can not be sure YM would teach me the same way my sifu does. He decides what path is best for me during development, my path is not the same as another and as such if the path he set me on is not the same that YM would set me on, I am not learning YM WC/VT.

Personally I think a system that needs to be taught exactly the same way to all people no matter their personalities, physical abilities, heights or other traits in order to be good, well I find that sad and quite honestly a little too close to fanatical. Not talking about our WSLVT devotees here but rather in general. If they claim their system needs to be so stale in order to be VT then that is their thought on the matter. I am sure there are other students in their classes that are taught differently or picks up different things during class.

 

[geezer]

If your opponent's arm is in your striking path, your striking arm has to block (or deflect, or neutralize, or ...) your opponent's arm first before your hand can reach to his face. It's in 1 strike but there is still one before the other.

This is absolutely correct, John. In our Yip Man VT we teach that simultaneous defense and counter (lin siu dai dar) uses two hands moving at precisely the same time to defend and attack, as with tan-da, gaun-da, pak-da, etc.

For us, da sau jik si siu sau is usually associated with using one hand to defend and counter, as when your punch deflects your opponenent's punch and proceeds to hit. The deflection comes an instant before the strike hits it's target, so although extremely efficient, this is not precisely simultaneous.

Both are excellent illustrations of VT's efficiency. Both are good VT. So what the heck are we arguing about???

 

[Danny T]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relatively few were taught in detail personally by Ip Man extensively.Ho Kam Ming and WSL were. But there are some differences between them.

Whhhaaaatttttt!!!!
There are differences between them...That certainly can not be...surely you jest!

 

[guy b.]

I am learning what my sifu is teaching me and he is not YM. Therefore I do not study YM WC/VT. I can not say what changes he made to the system

No changes have been made to what remains YM VT since YM. Therefore it is YM VT, not the VT of whoever is teaching it. If changes have been made then it is not YM VT. Simple.

He decides what path is best for me during development, my path is not the same as another and as such if the path he set me on is not the same that YM would set me on, I am not learning YM WC/VT.

Ok

Personally I think a system that needs to be taught exactly the same way to all people no matter their personalities, physical abilities, heights or other traits in order to be good, well I find that sad

The same training progression is used every time in VT because the timing and order are important parts of the attribute and skill development of the system

 

[geezer]

No changes have been made to what remains YM VT since YM. Therefore it is YM VT, not the VT of whoever is teaching it. If changes have been made then it is not YM VT. Simple.

Well for one thing, I'm told that Grandmaster Yip was very traditional and only taught Chinese. So the very fact that you are learning VT, and in a lineage that includes other non-Chinese instructors, teaching in foreign tongues is a major deviation from Yip Man's teaching! How much else was changed?

The same training progression is used every time in VT because the timing and order are important parts of the attribute and skill development of the system

Grandmaster Yip used different training progressions and different versions of the forms at different periods of his life ...the Fo'shan period, early Hong Kong period, and the later period in Hong Kong. Yet it was all YM VT.

WSL best known followers apparently do things differently, yet they all practice WSL VT. And you continue to spout this stuff. Guy, you really have lost all credibility on this forum ...at least apart from your one co-religionist.

BTW are you still engaging in that regular full contact bare-knuckle sparring every couple of weeks that you used to talk about? If so I'd be careful about the head shots. Too many hard hits can cause a lot of problems, including a deterioration of reasoning capacity. We wouldn't want that to happen.

 

[KPM]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relatively few were taught in detail personally by Ip Man extensively.Ho Kam Ming and WSL were. But there are some differencesw between them.

Yes. There are differences between them. Ho Kam Ming's Wing Chun is not the same as Wong Shun Leung's Wing Chun. So by Guy's definition, HKM's Wing Chun is not Ip Man's "VT" at all. So why are you encouraging him?

 

[KPM]

No changes have been made to what remains YM VT since YM. Therefore it is YM VT, not the VT of whoever is teaching it. If changes have been made then it is not YM VT. Simple.

I think you are probably at least partially correct! But that means that Ip Man Wing Chun died with Ip Man in 1972! If you think that WSL was doing exactly what Ip Man was doing....again....you are delusional. All you have to do is compare footage of WSL to that footage of Ip Man shot shortly before his death. WSL maintained essentially a 50/50 weight distro. Ip Man is clearly weighting more to one leg than the another in those videos. So there is a difference right there!