What is wrong with wing chun

[Knapf]

And what, if anything, does that comment have to do with the fact that you've admitted to not knowing the entire curriculum, yet claim confidently to know what's not in it?

You don't want to believe me even though I had some experience in it so I point you to a credible forum where people who also haven't any experience(and maybe also those who do have some experience in it) "bash" it .

 

[Knapf]

Not really.

If he could hold his own ,he wouldn't need to act all holy.Of course if you don't like what I say try complaining to the mods about me. Explain to them about him calling me a child first

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You don't want to believe me even though I had some experience in it so I point you to a credible forum where people who also haven't any experience(and maybe also those who do have some experience in it) "bash" it .

I didn't say I don't believe you. I said there's no credibility in your claim. Pointing to other people with no experience who bash it does not add any credibility.

"I've never studied advanced physics - just what I learned in high school and college - but it doesn't really cover how isotopes decay."

"You are certain of that, even though you've only studied the rudiments?"

"Yes. And a bunch of people on the Philosophy forum say the same thing, so it must be true."​

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If he could hold his own ,he wouldn't need to act all holy.Of course if you don't like what I say try complaining to the mods about me. Explain to them about him calling me a child first

Saying someone is not worth arguing with is not "all holy". That's pretty hyperbolic.

 

[Knapf]

I didn't say I don't believe you. I said there's no credibility in your claim. Pointing to other people with no experience who bash it does not add any credibility.

"I've never studied advanced physics - just what I learned in high school and college - but it doesn't really cover how isotopes decay."

"You are certain of that, even though you've only studied the rudiments?"

"Yes. And a bunch of people on the Philosophy forum say the same thing, so it must be true."​

I was pointing out that you don't have to be a member of WC to question it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I was pointing out that you don't have to be a member of WC to question it.

Agreed. But to make a claim that something isn't in there, when you haven't experienced the full curriculum is ludicrous.

 

[Knapf]

Saying someone is not worth arguing with is not "all holy". That's pretty hyperbolic.

That's what people who have holier than thou attitude behave. They can't dispute you. So they tell others to ignore you and then start mumbling to themselves

 

[Knapf]

Agreed. But to make a claim that something isn't in there, when you haven't experienced the full curriculum is ludicrous.

Like I said before, if someone doesn't believe me, perhaps I can demonstrate to them then they can decide if I have credibility or not. But we both know no one's gonna pay for the airfare.

 

[DaveB]

Like I said before, if someone doesn't believe me, perhaps I can demonstrate to them then they can decide if I have credibility or not. But we both know no one's gonna pay for the airfare.

So why say it?

Anyone can question another art, but you didn't question it, you argued you knew it better than those who study it.

The fact you don't know wing chun invalidates your opinion about what it contains or how you would use the art in a given situation.

The fact that you then tried to argue your view invalidates the benefit of the doubt most people would be inclined to give you.

Ignore Knapf and move on. A martial artist cares not for opinions of others but of their own experience.

Ignorance is not a good reason to start a fight. Some day his cup will become less full hopefully but it is not today.

I posted some on topic stuff but the discussion breezed past it.
Hopefully we'll return to topic soon.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

so in the WC you learned...you learned only 3 forms...all of which you stand there like a post?

Can you show me the 4th WC solo form that has footwork in it?

 

[wckf92]

Can you show me the 4th WC solo form that has footwork in it?

I don't know what you mean by "4th WC solo form"

But footwork is contained in CK, BJ, MYJ, and both weapons forms.

 

[DaveB]

Can you show me the 4th WC solo form that has footwork in it?

This what I was referring to.

 

[jobo]

This what I was referring to.

thats why people laugh at wc, man beats up coat rack

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This what I was referring to.

Even the wooden dummy training, it doesn't include how to move in fast while your opponent moves back fast not just 1 step, not just 2 steps, but many steps.

 

[jobo]

Even the wooden dummy training, it doesn't include how to move in fast while your opponent moves back fast not just 1 step, not just 2 steps, but many steps.

if they put the coat rack on wheels it would make it more realistic, that way when he kicks hr can chase it across the room

 

[wckf92]

Even the wooden dummy training, it doesn't include how to move in fast while your opponent moves back fast not just 1 step, not just 2 steps, but many steps.

Perhaps you are interpreting things too literally.
IME, rapid footwork is in the weapons forms.

 

[drop bear]

I agree with most of the sentiments but I'm not sure if these suppositions represent what one is supposed to be doing when using the chun.

I mentioned the wooden dummy form and how it showcases more movement than I've ever seen in a wing chun fighter on YouTube.

Another thing I think chun fighters are probably supposed to do more of is to take advantage of head movement.

Head movement came out of boxing, but when you are fighting with kicks and grappling any body lean fixes your feet in place and leaves you vulnerable from the waist down.

My sifu was quite clear that we were to try and remain upright for this reason and was good at exploiting body lean. That's not to say we should get hit rather than weave, but moving the feet was preferable.

I'm sure any day now mma fighters will start routinely taking advantage of those with boxing backgrounds.
.

Three dimentional movement. Moving in and out. Powering punches from the hip rather than from magic.

The punches are still straight line so you get nailed in a counter punch. And the defensive system is over complicated.

Chunners really need to box. At the very least to understand why they are doing those movements in the form.

And stop fighting like this.

 

[DaveB]

Perhaps you are interpreting things too literally.
IME, rapid footwork is in the weapons forms.

 

[DaveB]

It's interesting that wing chun has a staff form at all.
Is there a reason why one could not reinterpret the movements as empty hand techniques for use at range?

 

[SOD-WC]

Three dimentional movement. Moving in and out. Powering punches from the hip rather than from magic.

The punches are still straight line so you get nailed in a counter punch. And the defensive system is over complicated.

Chunners really need to box. At the very least to understand why they are doing those movements in the form.

And stop fighting like this.

hahahaha love it. both fly in with bicycle punchesnon stop. nothing screams more WC then this match