Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
No offense but you do have a myopic view of WC. I'm not saying this is bad, but not all WC is the same.
Wing Chun Sparring
- Thread starter KPM
- Start date
anerlich
Brown Belt
One thing that bothers me about this discussion is that it seems to boil down to:
SLT and CK contain the basic mainstream WC mechanics, structure, posture, ...
BJ breaks the rules, but only so far. It's still WC. You have waist twisting elbow strikes, crouching / level changing, bending at the waist, blocks/redirections using both arms instead of just one, ...
This seems contradictory. BJ not using WC mechanics, but still WC, therefore WC mechanics.
So there seems to be a three tier categorisation of technique:
SLT and CK contain the basic mainstream WC mechanics, structure, posture, ...
BJ breaks the rules, but only so far. It's still WC. You have waist twisting elbow strikes, crouching / level changing, bending at the waist, blocks/redirections using both arms instead of just one, ...
This seems contradictory. BJ not using WC mechanics, but still WC, therefore WC mechanics.
So there seems to be a three tier categorisation of technique:
- SLT and CK mechanics
- BJ mechanics
- The outer darkness and futility of every other martial technique, effective or not
The gross body movements in BJ don't boil down to the movements in core VT. That isn't myopic, just a fact.
HG and similar people like the idea that their gross body movements can be refined down into something more succinct because it makes it all seem like less of a waste of time. They rationalise it as training full body linkage, power generation, gross movement pathways, which can later be pared down. The reason I don't think applicable to VT is that VT movement is different, and VT method is very structured, interlinked, and time dependant. Going at it by boiling down is only likely to lead to complete confusion.
Directly VT applicable movement for force generation is explicitly trained in another part of the system, also started right at the beginning
Last edited:
Welcome back Guy! Where have you been?No, I would say BJ uses WC mechanics, it just teaches you instances when you depart from those mechanics. It is the "exception to the rules", not a whole new set of rules.
BJ is error correction. It shows what can go wrong with the VT core system and how to correct mistakes. It shows ways to recover from lost position, and ways to cut losses if things go wrong.
By definition of you lose position then the core system (plus mechanics) is no longer workable. Awareness of the danger and recovery then becomes the priority instead. It doesn't look like core VT because it isn't core VT.
Nobody Important said:
This sounds like an argument I have heard Robert Chu and various friends make several times. I have also heard it made about SPM various people. I think in VT terms it can only be the result of training a system that doesn't work properly, because YM VT contains integrated and complete methods for force generation and is a stand alone method rather than one for special or particular circumstances only.
Gross movement is trained from the beginning.
wingchun100
Senior Master
My first Sify always referred to BJ as the "Desperation form," when you have lost control of the centerline.
I look at it more like what KPM described-- showing you movements that go beyond the core mechanics of VT, to be used when necessary. That might be in an "emergency" or to recover in an "Oh sheisse!" situation, or it could equally be to take advantage of an opportunity.
To me it shows how, after a certain level, VT thinking can be applied more broadly, in a wider range of circumstances.
Another thing --in response to the earlier statements by Nobody --a lot of the movements in Biu Tze are more risky. Risky in the sense of being potentially dangerous to your opponent, but more importantly, risky to the VT practitioner himself in that they often have tighter tolerances and require more suppleness and skill to execute effectively.
SNT and CK techniques not only teach the core structures, steps and power generation principles, but they teach the "high percentage" stuff. That's why you work that stuff first.
SNT and CK techniques not only teach the core structures, steps and power generation principles, but they teach the "high percentage" stuff. That's why you work that stuff first.
wingchun100
Senior Master
Sify. I need to watch my typing. LOL
Anyway, I agree with you. It shows that the principles underlying WC can be applied to moves that many would consider to not be "true WC."
anerlich
Brown Belt
Yeah. I am playing Devil's advocate here somewhat.
I would say, though, that while Bil Jee might be similarly inside and outside of "core" Wing Chun, sort of like the neck of a Klein bottle, some of the arguments put forward regarding the particular issue have a similar relationship to the "core" of logic.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Guy b stated: “The gross body movements in BJ don't boil down to the movements in core VT. That isn't myopic, just a fact.
HG and similar people like the idea that their gross body movements can be refined down into something more succinct because it makes it all seem like less of a waste of time. They rationalise it as training full body linkage, power generation, gross movement pathways, which can later be pared down. The reason I don't think applicable to VT is that VT movement is different, and VT method is very structured, interlinked, and time dependant. Going at it by boiling down is only likely to lead to complete confusion.
Directly VT applicable movement for force generation is explicitly trained in another part of the system, also started right at the beginning.
BJ is error correction. It shows what can go wrong with the VT core system and how to correct mistakes. It shows ways to recover from lost position, and ways to cut losses if things go wrong.
By definition of you lose position then the core system (plus mechanics) is no longer workable. Awareness of the danger and recovery then becomes the priority instead. It doesn't look like core VT because it isn't core VT.”
You state that the movements in Biu Jee do not boil down to core movements in Wing Chun. That those who believe that “larger” movements can be refined to “smaller” movements are mistaken. Yet you go on to state that Biu Jee is a method used to regain core mechanics and movement. I agree that it is, but how can it be a recovery method that leads back to what is considered “proper” without correction, redirection and refinement?
You say that the movements in Biu Jee are not “core” Wing Chun movements. Here is my perspective. Before a student begins the study of Wing Chun, they do not have Wing Chun movement, mechanics and structure. It is through the study of Wing Chun that they gain these things. My point all along has been, that while learning the movement of Wing Chun, a student will consistently violate the “core” by breaking structure and mechanics, lose power and balance in the course of their learning, etc. How do they recover to proper form? If Biu Jee is a method of recovering to regain proper “core mechanics”, why is this methodology not being taught from the onset? If it’s not being used, then what is being used to teach them to do this? Are people using another method, or are they outright ignoring the methodology presented in Biu Jee? Everything is about the “core”, focusing on maintaining this core is a priority, but during the process of learning failure to maintain it will occur, what method is used (that adheres to the methodology of the system) if it is not the methodology of Biu Jee?
If the movements in Biu Jee do not boil down to core movements in Wing Chun (as you state), how then, can Biu Jee be said to be a method of recovery? You state that Biu Jee is not core Wing Chun. I disagree, it is my opinion that Biu Jee simply starts off “big” and ends “small”, metaphorically. It starts off as “outside” of Wing Chun mechanics to end up as “inside” Wing Chun mechanics. If you like, you can look at it as “incorrect” to “correct”. Isn’t this the same methodology used to teach? As I stated before no one enters into Wing Chun already “knowing” how to perform its techniques, utilize its theory or apply its structure, they are outside the core mechanics. Through practice they refine their “big” movement to proper “small” movement, incorrect to correct. And will need constant redirection and reinforcement of collapsed, compromised and poor structure to regain proper core mechanics as they stray. Is that not the purpose of Biu Jee?
Wing Chun, like any martial art, is a method of refinement. We refine to get better. There has to be a method to follow in order to correct, if Biu Jee isn’t this method of redirecting to right our course from the beginning, then what method is? If there is another method used in the beginning what use is Biu Jee at the end?
HG and similar people like the idea that their gross body movements can be refined down into something more succinct because it makes it all seem like less of a waste of time. They rationalise it as training full body linkage, power generation, gross movement pathways, which can later be pared down. The reason I don't think applicable to VT is that VT movement is different, and VT method is very structured, interlinked, and time dependant. Going at it by boiling down is only likely to lead to complete confusion.
Directly VT applicable movement for force generation is explicitly trained in another part of the system, also started right at the beginning.
BJ is error correction. It shows what can go wrong with the VT core system and how to correct mistakes. It shows ways to recover from lost position, and ways to cut losses if things go wrong.
By definition of you lose position then the core system (plus mechanics) is no longer workable. Awareness of the danger and recovery then becomes the priority instead. It doesn't look like core VT because it isn't core VT.”
You state that the movements in Biu Jee do not boil down to core movements in Wing Chun. That those who believe that “larger” movements can be refined to “smaller” movements are mistaken. Yet you go on to state that Biu Jee is a method used to regain core mechanics and movement. I agree that it is, but how can it be a recovery method that leads back to what is considered “proper” without correction, redirection and refinement?
You say that the movements in Biu Jee are not “core” Wing Chun movements. Here is my perspective. Before a student begins the study of Wing Chun, they do not have Wing Chun movement, mechanics and structure. It is through the study of Wing Chun that they gain these things. My point all along has been, that while learning the movement of Wing Chun, a student will consistently violate the “core” by breaking structure and mechanics, lose power and balance in the course of their learning, etc. How do they recover to proper form? If Biu Jee is a method of recovering to regain proper “core mechanics”, why is this methodology not being taught from the onset? If it’s not being used, then what is being used to teach them to do this? Are people using another method, or are they outright ignoring the methodology presented in Biu Jee? Everything is about the “core”, focusing on maintaining this core is a priority, but during the process of learning failure to maintain it will occur, what method is used (that adheres to the methodology of the system) if it is not the methodology of Biu Jee?
If the movements in Biu Jee do not boil down to core movements in Wing Chun (as you state), how then, can Biu Jee be said to be a method of recovery? You state that Biu Jee is not core Wing Chun. I disagree, it is my opinion that Biu Jee simply starts off “big” and ends “small”, metaphorically. It starts off as “outside” of Wing Chun mechanics to end up as “inside” Wing Chun mechanics. If you like, you can look at it as “incorrect” to “correct”. Isn’t this the same methodology used to teach? As I stated before no one enters into Wing Chun already “knowing” how to perform its techniques, utilize its theory or apply its structure, they are outside the core mechanics. Through practice they refine their “big” movement to proper “small” movement, incorrect to correct. And will need constant redirection and reinforcement of collapsed, compromised and poor structure to regain proper core mechanics as they stray. Is that not the purpose of Biu Jee?
Wing Chun, like any martial art, is a method of refinement. We refine to get better. There has to be a method to follow in order to correct, if Biu Jee isn’t this method of redirecting to right our course from the beginning, then what method is? If there is another method used in the beginning what use is Biu Jee at the end?
anerlich
Brown Belt
Might be worth remembering that Bil Jee was originally a jealously guarded secret. You had to be training for many years before you got exposed to it. I've met a number of people I regarded as having pretty good fighting skills, including wing Chun skills, that were never taught it.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Some Wing Chun branches don't have a Biu Jee or Chum Kiu form, opting to instead, integrate the methodology into a version of Siu Lim Tau or something similar. Some branches integrate some of the principles of Biu Jee into Ji Ben training, prior to beginning forms. Seems to me only some of the Yip Man branches have issues with this philosophy.
wckf92
Master of Arts
Speaking of the three forms, etc...isn't it interesting how the first form contains seeds of the other two...perhaps, in essence, giving birth to them?
But, on the other hand, I've always wondered if the original order or methods went like: 3rd form, 2nd form, and finally 1st form. And was it this reason that "they" were able to take aspects (seeds) of BJ and CK and embed them into SLT? Boggles the mind a bit.
I mean, if one looks at life in general...don't we as a species gravitate towards constantly refining stuff until we feel it arrives in its simplest most efficient form?
Consider Weng Chun. Weng Chun likely started out with just the "Weng Chun Kuen" form, the dummy form, and a version of the pole. The Weng Chun Kuen form is 11 sections and the only footwork is pivoting. This is said to be because this was developed in the Red Boats. Later the Jong Kuen form and the Sheung Kung form were added. These were intended to take movements from the prior forms and add in much more footwork, because now the system had moved off of the Red Boats where footwork was constrained and had become "land based." They contain a lot more footwork than either the Wing Chun CK or BJ forms. This is also how the differences in the pole form is explained. The rather short pole form with the pole held away from we find in Wing Chun is said to date back to the Red Boat era and is related to techniques used by the guys "poling" the big boats along. The much more elaborate and mobile pole form from Weng Chun that holds the pole close to the body is said to be an updated version from when Weng Chun became "land based" rather than "boat based."
Now look at this the same way for Wing Chun. The SNT form could very well be based on what was practiced on the Red Boats where not much footwork was included. CK and BJ would build upon that, not the other way around. Same thing in the short sets of Ku Lo Pin Sun. The initial sets have no footwork, then pivoting is added in subsequent sets, then more mobile stepping is added in sets after that.
Now look at this the same way for Wing Chun. The SNT form could very well be based on what was practiced on the Red Boats where not much footwork was included. CK and BJ would build upon that, not the other way around. Same thing in the short sets of Ku Lo Pin Sun. The initial sets have no footwork, then pivoting is added in subsequent sets, then more mobile stepping is added in sets after that.
Nobody Important
2nd Black Belt
Hi Keith,
It's interesting, it may even hold a kernel of truth, but there is a major flaw with this theory.
1. The oral histories of Hung Kuen state that they also were at one time taught on the Red Boats, their system went from compact before the boats to expanded (movement) after the boats.
2.The opera practitioners performed elaborate northern Kung Fu & gymnastics, so they they obviously we're not confined. They would often practice their craft on shore, not on the boats. When on the boats there was little leisure time outside of meals & sleeping.
3. There is an art called Suen Kuen ( Boat Fist) that states it's was developed by the boat people for defense, it looks like any other southern art, with heavy use of horse stance.
2.The opera practitioners performed elaborate northern Kung Fu & gymnastics, so they they obviously we're not confined. They would often practice their craft on shore, not on the boats. When on the boats there was little leisure time outside of meals & sleeping.
---Yes, this is a good point and one that I have thought of myself. Just because you traveled around on the boats as a performer doesn't mean you spent all of your time on the boats! And Painted Face Kam was said to know lots of elaborate martial arts for the performances other than his Weng Chun. Weng Chun would not have been nearly "flashy" enough for the Opera troupes! But it could be that being secret about things during a time of unrest and revolution was a factor. It could be that the Wing/Weng Chun was not practiced openly as the performance styles were, requiring training in more confined spaces. Hard to say. But what I wrote above is what my Sifu said Tang Yik explained to him.
---Yes, this is a good point and one that I have thought of myself. Just because you traveled around on the boats as a performer doesn't mean you spent all of your time on the boats! And Painted Face Kam was said to know lots of elaborate martial arts for the performances other than his Weng Chun. Weng Chun would not have been nearly "flashy" enough for the Opera troupes! But it could be that being secret about things during a time of unrest and revolution was a factor. It could be that the Wing/Weng Chun was not practiced openly as the performance styles were, requiring training in more confined spaces. Hard to say. But what I wrote above is what my Sifu said Tang Yik explained to him.
