What was Wing Chun designed for?

[karatejj]

The striking method i have seen is western. Which should say something about their compatibility.

That video does not directly contradict WB strategy.

BJJ actually contradicts every striking method.

But that still doesn't mean you can't cross train it.

wow dude, you really aren't understandin the argument. he's saying that his wing chun is different (hell it looks different, i not sure its wing chun). But it sure as hell isn't western boxing! Movement completely different

I guess bjj contradicts no striking method because it is mainly roling about on teh groundrather than standing up and hitting the other guy--u can add that with no change to your striking style...personally i prefer not to be cuddling wit another man if i can help it tho

 

[drop bear]

wow dude, you really aren't understandin the argument. he's saying that his wing chun is different (hell it looks different, i not sure its wing chun). But it sure as hell isn't western boxing! Movement completely different

I guess bjj contradicts no striking method because it is mainly roling about on teh groundrather than standing up and hitting the other guy--u can add that with no change to your striking style...personally i prefer not to be cuddling wit another man if i can help it tho

Which boxing are you comparing this to?

 

[karatejj]

Standard boxing skillz that u learn in the boxing club! No boxer stands feet 2gether goig side 2 side like that @ range..staggered stance so u can punch as requires. he not even getting his in2 punches 2 generate power, nothing like boxing.

Not like wing chun either tho..no idea what it is

 

[LFJ]

----Be aren't talking about the Phillipines or China. We're talking about a group of Europeans training for MMA. So don't you think its reasonable to think that their exposure to the technique come from WB via MMA? Isn't that just common sense?

You can't talk about "common sense" regarding a system where you have no knowledge or experience.

That's called guessing.

--- I already explained that it doesn't matter who might have done it first historically. What matters is where they would have been exposed to it in a modern context. They were training MMA. So doesn't it seem likely that this was their exposure to the technique?

No. It absolutely does matter. Because if it's already part of the system, that's where it "came from", plain and simple.

If you were able to provide a video of any WSL student doing a high cover outside of an MMA context, then I might be willing to go along with you.

This "outside of an MMA context" is an unreasonable loophole you're setting up.

Because it's a Biu-ji tactic, "beyond the pointing finger", beyond the core VT method, it will not be needed in VT vs VT. It will only be used against other styles.

Here's the thing...

You originally challenged me to explain where this high cover is in the BJ form, because you didn't believe it was part of the system, and thought it not being in the form would prove that.

So, I demonstrated that it is in fact in the form, with photos and ample explanation.

You then complained about the last photo, despite it being the exact same arm position as in the form and other photo, because it's done with one arm like boxers do.

But, you know as well as anyone else that VT/WC/WT forms use double-arm actions that are applied individually.

You then objected that the body and head position is different. But, of course we aren't restricted to fighting exactly like the forms. Things are used to meet whatever needs.

So, you then objected that the action in the form doesn't pause there even for a second.

But, you are unaware of what in TCMA is called ding-sik, or "fixed positions" where flowing actions in forms can be paused and used as shields or the like.

The Shaolin example I showed also had a non-stop whirling action in the form, but applied the shield as a ding-sik.

Laan-sau is an example in standard VT that can be held as long as necessary/practical to bar an opponent's facing while attacking them.

This cover at the end of BJ can extend out in large frame, as in the form, in a searching pattern to sweep the area and intercept whatever may be coming.

Or it can be done in the small frame, as in the still images above, to shield the head and come straight back to fighting guard or striking.

Obviously, when not recovering from a ducking position, when upright and looking forward, there's no need to extend and sweep a zone while recovering position. We can simply cover tight and go straight back to attacking.

Like I said, you can't learn VT, or any TCMA, by watching video. You need to have the actions explained to you. They are often not obvious.

So, I have demonstrated that the action is in fact part of the system, in BJ. You are just unfamiliar with how the system works. Not a big deal.

Your next objection seems to be that only Sean's group does it, and they're Europeans, so it doesn't count.

You want to see a WSL student doing it, but you create the loophole that it must be VT vs VT, which generally wouldn't require this type of action.

So, ruling out your unreasonable loophole, you did say this:

If you were able to provide a video of any WSL student doing a high cover outside of an MMA context, then I might be willing to go along with you.

I don't know why you're still saying "might be", if it has been clearly demonstrated to be in the form, and WSL's direct students do it. What other objection or loophole might you be holding out? And why are you so opposed to it being a legitimate part of VT?

Anyway, here is a WSL 1st gen. student, Cliff, teaching it to a child in sparring drills, then using it himself in play sparring, both in double and single-arm form.

You might make this about his overall performance. I don't think it's a great example of VT sparring either, but the point is you asked for video of a WSL student using it. So, here you go.

It's in the form, multiple groups do it, including 1st gens and several gens down the line, Europeans and Chinese alike. What reasonable position can you have to say it's not a legit part of VT?

If you want to continue saying it came straight from boxing, as opposed to other TCMAs, or simply being a refinement of the natural instinct to cover one's head that numerous unrelated styles have come to on their own, you need to provide proof or evidence to back that claim up... or just acknowledge that it is a legit part of VT, like many other TCMAs.

 

[LFJ]

The striking method i have seen is western. Which should say something about their compatibility.

Vertical fist, low elbow? Not really modern WB.
Side to side parallel stance, perpendicular to the opponent with squared body at long-range? Not in WB.

Hook punches and uppercuts also contradict the strategy because it interrupts the ability to deliver continuous facing attacks which is what VT is basically all about.

You only need to think about what happens when you miss a hook or uppercut to see why. VT does not use large rotating punches, and actually aims to use the opponent's rotation against them.

To use a WB strategy and tactics, the VT strategy and tactics have to be abandoned. I would say that makes them incompatible.

BJJ actually contradicts every striking method.

You don't need to use BJJ's standup, anti-striking strategy and tactics.
VT striking can stand alone, with grappling and ground skills added.

It is definitely good cross-training, that doesn't need to contradict the VT striking method at all.

 

[KPM]

You can't talk about "common sense" regarding a system where you have no knowledge or experience.

---The "reasonable person", say an MMA guy that knows nothing at all about Wing Chun, could look at Sean's video clip and come to the same conclusion. Because that was a clip of a group of WSLVT guys training for MMA. And when we see sweeps and throws and other grappling things from MMA you admit that they are "add ons" to Wing Chun. But when we see high covers and ducks and weaves and hopping footwork that also come from MMA, you say that this is "pure" WSLVT. But you want to say I am not using "common sense"???




No. It absolutely does matter. Because if it's already part of the system, that's where it "came from", plain and simple.

---But you haven't proven that it was already part of the system! You showed a modern MMA training clip. That doesn't prove anything. I've asked repeatedly for video that was more "straight up" WSLVT and you ignored me. The videos you just posted of Cliff Au Yeung are closer. But its strange that it took you this long to find those and provide them, yet you had plenty of time to spend trying to dig up stuff in an attempt to discredit me with "character assassination", when you could have supplied those videos of Au Yeung right form the beginning and this may have been a very different conversation!



This "outside of an MMA context" is an unreasonable loophole you're setting up.

---No its not. See above about "common sense." If you provide an MMA training video, showing things commonly used in MMA and claiming that they are "pure" WSLVT, then the burden of proof is on you. There is nothing in Sean's video to suggest that what they were doing didn't come from MMA just as the grappling came from MMA. Again....just plain common sense! And one doesn't have to be an expert on WSLVT to reach that



You then complained about the last photo, despite it being the exact same arm position as in the form and other photo, because it's done with one arm like boxers do.

---No. I objected to the comparison because in the actual video WSL doesn't pause in that position at all. It is a fast sweeping motion. So freezing a dynamic motion from the video in one position to suit your own ends is not quite the same as them being the same thing. That would be like taking one of the sweeps which you have already admitted come from outside of WSLVT, then freezing a frame from the "Huen Ma" or circling legs motion from the beginning of the BJ form that matches a part of the sweep and then saying "That sweep was pure WSLVT and does not come from grappling and is nothing like the sweep you see in grappling systems."


But, you are unaware of what in TCMA is called ding-sik, or "fixed positions" where flowing actions in forms can be paused and used as shields or the like.

---I never denied the concepts were there. But when you make use of a concept to copy a motion almost exactly as is already found in boxing and MMA, then the common sense conclusion is that the boxing/MMA motion was the inspiration for using the concept in that particular way. And there's nothing wrong with that! But then to turn around and call it "pure WSLVT" is a bit off. If it was so "pure" is would be obvious in the forms, and you would not have to take big liberties with your concepts to come up with it. But again, there is nothing wrong with this! This is how martial arts evolve....by taking inspiration from other methods and realizing where it can fit in easily with what you already do. You just need to be honest about how that evolution is taking place. Those aren't common motions in anyone's Wing Chun, or they would have shown up long ago and been seen regularly in videos already.




You might make this about his overall performance. I don't think it's a great example of VT sparring either, but the point is you asked for video of a WSL student using it. So, here you go.

---Yeah thanks. Where was that 30 pages ago when I first asked you to provide it? Still didn't see any bobbing & weaving or hopping footwork. Still didn't see any "long range game"....you know, the topic that started this whole discussion before the multiple diversions to argue about various things??? But I'm tired of arguing with you. Like I said, if you had come up with this video long ago we may have had a different discussion. But instead you chose to just to dogmatically stick to what you were saying and argue.

---And you know, it just seems odd to me that if the BJ form is the advanced form taught at higher levels, and is about recovering from bad situations that your "standard" Wing Chun that you learned prior to BJ might not deal with well....seems odd that Au Yeung would be teaching this to a child. Is this child at BJ level? It just seems odd that Au Yeung would be taking an advanced concept and teaching a child how to adapt that concept. Seems more likely to me that Au Yeung has also "updated" his Wing Chun a bit to meet the needs of sparring in a modern context. A modern context where high covers are needed because people throw loopy punches and not nice straight punches like Wing Chun. A modern context where other systems have been using a high cover for this reason. I've got other things I could say about those new videos that you wouldn't like. But I'm done with this.

 

[LFJ]

---The "reasonable person", say an MMA guy that knows nothing at all about Wing Chun, could look at Sean's video clip and come to the same conclusion. Because that was a clip of a group of WSLVT guys training for MMA. And when we see sweeps and throws and other grappling things from MMA you admit that they are "add ons" to Wing Chun. But when we see high covers and ducks and weaves and hopping footwork that also come from MMA, you say that this is "pure" WSLVT. But you want to say I am not using "common sense"???

You could come to that and think yourself reasonable, but still be wrong, as you are.

---But you haven't proven that it was already part of the system!

It's right there in the form, which was your original challenge.

I've asked repeatedly for video that was more "straight up" WSLVT and you ignored me. The videos you just posted of Cliff Au Yeung are closer. But its strange that it took you this long to find those and provide them,

I answered each of your challenges in turn.

You asked where it was in the form. I showed you.
You asked why it's done this way or that. I told you.

You asked for video of a WSL student doing it. I showed you.

when you could have supplied those videos of Au Yeung right form the beginning and this may have been a very different conversation!

It doesn't change the facts one bit.

This "outside of an MMA context" is an unreasonable loophole you're setting up.

---No its not. See above about "common sense." If you provide an MMA training video, showing things commonly used in MMA and claiming that they are "pure" WSLVT, then the burden of proof is on you.

And I showed it in the form, as was your original challenge.

There is nothing in Sean's video to suggest that what they were doing didn't come from MMA just as the grappling came from MMA. Again....just plain common sense! And one doesn't have to be an expert on WSLVT to reach that

Again, you can reach that, and simply be wrong, which you are.

I objected to the comparison because in the actual video WSL doesn't pause in that position at all. It is a fast sweeping motion.

Answered. The position is in the motion as a ding-sik.

But, you are unaware of what in TCMA is called ding-sik, or "fixed positions" where flowing actions in forms can be paused and used as shields or the like.

---I never denied the concepts were there. But when you make use of a concept to copy a motion almost exactly as is already found in boxing and MMA, then the common sense conclusion is that the boxing/MMA motion was the inspiration for using the concept in that particular way.

It was demonstrated to be the exact same arm position in the form and in use.

Your "common sense conclusion" is simply wrong.

If it was so "pure" is would be obvious in the forms, and you would not have to take big liberties with your concepts to come up with it.

Wrong. You simply haven't learned the system.

You would not have come to the same action in the Shaolin form either without explanation.

The reason is, and I'm sorry to say this, you can't learn from form videos.

You might make this about his overall performance. I don't think it's a great example of VT sparring either, but the point is you asked for video of a WSL student using it. So, here you go.

---Yeah thanks. Where was that 30 pages ago when I first asked you to provide it?

No. You only just asked for it. I provided it right away.

You previously asked for pure VT in sparring. I showed it, despite your uneducated objections.

Now you were asking specifically to see this high cover performed by a direct student of WSL. I showed it.

Still didn't see any bobbing & weaving or hopping footwork. Still didn't see any "long range game"....

Shown previously. These videos were an answer to your request to see the high guard by a WSL student.

Like I said, if you had come up with this video long ago we may have had a different discussion.

You only just asked for this specifically.

And it doesn't change the facts. You cannot disqualify it based on timing.

---I've got things I could say about those new videos that you wouldn't like.

Heck, I could say a lot of things about it that Cliff and his students wouldn't like either!

But, that's not the point. I met every challenge you posed to meet the burden of proof for this being legit VT.

You said you might go along with it if I can provide video of a WSL student doing the high guard.

Did so, and you are disqualifying it based on timing?

Obviously, you have no proof or evidence that it has anything to do with Western Boxing, or was not part of VT.
You only have incorrect "common sense" assumptions and bald assertions. That's it.

You want to make this bald assertion to justify mixing your WC with WB by saying we do it, too.

Why do you need WSLVT to validate your decision?
You can mix your WC with WB all you want.
But, it has nothing to do with WSLVT.

 

[wckf92]

You can't talk about "common sense" regarding a system where you have no knowledge or experience.

That's called guessing.



No. It absolutely does matter. Because if it's already part of the system, that's where it "came from", plain and simple.



This "outside of an MMA context" is an unreasonable loophole you're setting up.

Because it's a Biu-ji tactic, "beyond the pointing finger", beyond the core VT method, it will not be needed in VT vs VT. It will only be used against other styles.

Here's the thing...

You originally challenged me to explain where this high cover is in the BJ form, because you didn't believe it was part of the system, and thought it not being in the form would prove that.

So, I demonstrated that it is in fact in the form, with photos and ample explanation.

You then complained about the last photo, despite it being the exact same arm position as in the form and other photo, because it's done with one arm like boxers do.

But, you know as well as anyone else that VT/WC/WT forms use double-arm actions that are applied individually.

You then objected that the body and head position is different. But, of course we aren't restricted to fighting exactly like the forms. Things are used to meet whatever needs.

So, you then objected that the action in the form doesn't pause there even for a second.

But, you are unaware of what in TCMA is called ding-sik, or "fixed positions" where flowing actions in forms can be paused and used as shields or the like.

The Shaolin example I showed also had a non-stop whirling action in the form, but applied the shield as a ding-sik.

Laan-sau is an example in standard VT that can be held as long as necessary/practical to bar an opponent's facing while attacking them.

This cover at the end of BJ can extend out in large frame, as in the form, in a searching pattern to sweep the area and intercept whatever may be coming.

Or it can be done in the small frame, as in the still images above, to shield the head and come straight back to fighting guard or striking.

Obviously, when not recovering from a ducking position, when upright and looking forward, there's no need to extend and sweep a zone while recovering position. We can simply cover tight and go straight back to attacking.

Like I said, you can't learn VT, or any TCMA, by watching video. You need to have the actions explained to you. They are often not obvious.

So, I have demonstrated that the action is in fact part of the system, in BJ. You are just unfamiliar with how the system works. Not a big deal.

Your next objection seems to be that only Sean's group does it, and they're Europeans, so it doesn't count.

You want to see a WSL student doing it, but you create the loophole that it must be VT vs VT, which generally wouldn't require this type of action.

So, ruling out your unreasonable loophole, you did say this:



I don't know why you're still saying "might be", if it has been clearly demonstrated to be in the form, and WSL's direct students do it. What other objection or loophole might you be holding out? And why are you so opposed to it being a legitimate part of VT?

Anyway, here is a WSL 1st gen. student, Cliff, teaching it to a child in sparring drills, then using it himself in play sparring, both in double and single-arm form.

You might make this about his overall performance. I don't think it's a great example of VT sparring either, but the point is you asked for video of a WSL student using it. So, here you go.

It's in the form, multiple groups do it, including 1st gens and several gens down the line, Europeans and Chinese alike. What reasonable position can you have to say it's not a legit part of VT?

If you want to continue saying it came straight from boxing, as opposed to other TCMAs, or simply being a refinement of the natural instinct to cover one's head that numerous unrelated styles have come to on their own, you need to provide proof or evidence to back that claim up... or just acknowledge that it is a legit part of VT, like many other TCMAs.

Good post. Informative. Thx LFJ.
I've always known about the 'ding sik' but never knew the name of it...cool!

 

[LFJ]

---And you know, it just seems odd to me that if the BJ form is the advanced form taught at higher levels, and is about recovering from bad situations that your "standard" Wing Chun that you learned prior to BJ might not deal with well....

BJ is not "advanced".

seems odd that Au Yeung would be teaching this to a child. Is this child at BJ level? It just seems odd that Au Yeung would be taking an advanced concept and teaching a child how to adapt that concept.

It's not advanced.

Seems more likely to me that Au Yeung has also "updated" his Wing Chun a bit to meet the needs of sparring in a modern context. A modern context where high covers are needed because people throw loopy punches and not nice straight punches like Wing Chun. A modern context where other systems have been using a high cover for this reason.

"Loopy" punches are not a "modern" thing. VT developed surrounded by "loopy" punching styles.

Of course you would use this cop-out after making the challenge to see any WSL student doing it, which you doubted.

Here you go again:

 

[drop bear]

Vertical fist, low elbow? Not really modern WB.
Side to side parallel stance, perpendicular to the opponent with squared body at long-range? Not in WB.

Hook punches and uppercuts also contradict the strategy because it interrupts the ability to deliver continuous facing attacks which is what VT is basically all about.

You only need to think about what happens when you miss a hook or uppercut to see why. VT does not use large rotating punches, and actually aims to use the opponent's rotation against them.

To use a WB strategy and tactics, the VT strategy and tactics have to be abandoned. I would say that makes them incompatible.



You don't need to use BJJ's standup, anti-striking strategy and tactics.
VT striking can stand alone, with grappling and ground skills added.

It is definitely good cross-training, that doesn't need to contradict the VT striking method at all.

vertical fist.

squared stance.

lets see if they are throwing hook punches in that pure VT video.

They don't. Well that is something they could adopt if they wanted to. The use the same duck and weave in response. Some similarities and some differences.

Which is about right for two systems integrating.

 

[LFJ]

vertical fist.

Rotational punch, unlike VT. Still an uncommon punching method in modern boxing.

squared stance.

Feet not parallel and perpendicular to the opponent at long range.

 

[LFJ]

The use the same duck and weave in response.

Nothing non-VT about it in the context that it's done.

 

[Knapf]

LFJ, do you have a link to your VT organization? Not taking part in the conversation.Just curious about what it's all about.

 

[LFJ]

LFJ, do you have a link to your VT organization? Not taking part in the conversation.Just curious about what it's all about.

I don't have an organization. It's just standard WSLVT that I'm talking about.

For my money, the best and most easily accessible examples in the West will be under the VTKFAE.

 

[KPM]

BJ is not "advanced". It's not advanced.

----Ok! If you say so! I guess that's why its not taught until several years into the system.

 

[LFJ]

BJ is not "advanced". It's not advanced.

----Ok! If you say so! I guess that's why its not taught until several years into the system.

No. You have no idea of the curriculum or rate of instruction in this system.
You don't need to wait years for the big secrets like in some lineages.

While BJ is beyond the core VT, this cover does not compromise VT structure or strategy in any way.
So, it could be taught early on as a functional guard when needed, no problem.

Other parts of BJ are also not "advanced" in any way. For example, when arms get raised, instead of trying to climb over, we go under. That's not "advanced". It's just recovery to main tactics.

BJ in our system isn't about advanced power generation methods, special elbow strikes, finger jabs, etc. that other systems involve. It's not an "advanced" form.

 

[karatejj]

No. You have no idea of the curriculum or rate of instruction in this system.
You don't need to wait years for the big secrets like in some lineages.

While BJ is beyond the core VT, this cover does not compromise VT structure or strategy in any way.
So, it could be taught early on as a functional guard when needed, no problem.

Other parts of BJ are also not "advanced" in any way. For example, when arms get raised, instead of trying to climb over, we go under. That's not "advanced". It's just recovery to main tactics.

BJ in our system isn't about advanced power generation methods, special elbow strikes, finger jabs, etc. that other systems involve. It's not an "advanced" form.

Wow u dropping sum knowlege bombs here! I never knew this stuff

Maybe now we can talk about why NOBODY ELSE wingchun looks like this...

 

[KPM]

Wow u dropping sum knowlege bombs here! I never knew this stuff

Maybe now we can talk about why NOBODY ELSE wingchun looks like this...

Careful man! You're going to get the whole lecture about how Wong Shun Leung was the only person that learned the "real" Wing Chun from Ip Man and everyone else's Wing Chun was learned incompletely or improperly and is therefore "broken." that has been a recurrent theme here many times. So don't get LFJ started. Just go back and search for threads he has participated in and you will quickly find it!

 

[karatejj]

Careful man! You're going to get the whole lecture about how Wong Shun Leung was the only person that learned the "real" Wing Chun from Ip Man and everyone else's Wing Chun was learned incompletely or improperly and is therefore "broken." that has been a recurrent theme here many times. So don't get LFJ started. Just go back and search for threads he has participated in and you will quickly find it!

ur kidding me?? Lol is this what it is?

 

[Danny T]

Is footwork, turning, kicking, kneeing, not taught within the learning of SLT? Isn't a lot of CK taught along with SLT?
Isn't a lot of BJ also taught along with SLT and CK?
In my training it was and it is in what I teach as well.
Is SLT just for beginners and CK for intermediate practitioners so BJ must be advanced? I think not.