mograph
Master of Arts
Well, arguably, it's improved since its beginning.The thread has become quite muddled.
... but it is considerably less witty.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well, arguably, it's improved since its beginning.The thread has become quite muddled.
I'm still trying to figure out what Wing Chun has against the Maine Maritime Academy
The thread has become quite muddled.
Incredibly unlikely that WSL hollowed the whole WC system out and replaced it with something he thought up all by himself, especially given the complexity, coherence, deep simplicity and effectiveness of the result. I think it is just wing chun, standard method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------Pan Nam Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/l-jpEHsP97w/maxresdefault.jpg
Snake-Crane Lineage:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Nn_a9trnHsg/VcDYK4TxgTI/AAAAAAAAAPw/U2iGcWUF8nU/s1600/tan+sao+1.jpg
KuLo22 Lineage:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ejJdNfQdE0Q/maxresdefault.jpg
It seems more likely to me that viewing Tan Sau primarily as a defensive movement is the standard method in ALL Wing Chun....and Weng Chun!
1. Of course tan sao is an important movement-one of the three seeds- tan, fok and bong- from the development of those three seeds-other motions arise to be properly used- provided structure and footwork are coordinated.
2. WSL was a good fighter but he was not always a good analyst IMO.Joe Frazier was a great boxer but not necessarily a good analyst. WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.
Neither of the two supposedly WSL guys on this list have been directly trained by WSL- so they depend on PB a lot.More dogmatic Gledhills.
3. PB is fast but that is only one attribute. In many videos he quickly rolls. strikes and then predictably just pushes the other fella
4. He doesn't do much tan sao- because he can't.
He has good substitutes- but mechanically imitating PB does not give you much IMO.
5. I have rolled with WSL. He has his limitations.
Any system when poorly executed can have his limitations. You can watch the "sparring" clip of WSL and Cheung- pretty sloppy.
6. We can learn from each other rather than being insecure and assuming that everyone else is wrong
on everything.
Just for the record. I do Chu sau Lei and Chu shong tin. I just really like Duncan Leungs lineage too for the long bridge stuff. You guy think theres no way WSL would of come up with that himself. Well the same for Duncan Leung. One thing WSL doesnt have is body structure.. a bit of hip stuff but thats all. Just put a palm on there face and blitz in seems to be the most common thing iv seen in the lineage.
Whats your guys opinion on David peterson then ? And who has the real WSL wing chun ? cause you are slightly right that was what I learnt on first lesson lol step into a hook with a fuk sao ( not tan )
The reason he went to Ip man after seeing WSL fight was because WSL did almost zero wing chun. He just threw a kick and chain punched. He wasnt trying to be invicible. He just saw his senior who was supposed to be great look average and not do wing chun at all.
He also entered a tournament and got ko'd. You guys seem to pretend that never happened.
I will try to find the article that WSL did. It mentioned his thoughts on how Ip man taught and how he teaches differently. If anyone knows where to find it cause I cant
Also are you guy.b and LFJ sparring regularly against non wing chun guys ? Just curious.
Not even going to get started on how we Tan in chu sau lei ( which is my most used and effective hand right now in sparring against my boxing/muay thai sparring partner and its not just for elbow placement....)
No. They violate principles we all agree on, like economy of motion; directness, efficiency, not chasing hands. All these things are agreed upon, but easier said than done, apparently.
In fighting for every rule you make there is an exception. This is because fighting has contradictions you cannot easily control with principles.
Not relevant. The comment is in relation to a Duncan Leung seminar, not a fight, where he is teaching to attack limbs as first line action by the looks of it.
So he is not teaching something that has relevance to fighting?
I think WSL wing chun trains body structure a lot and it is an integral part of the method. It is introduced right after about dan chisau stage has been taken on board and it continues throughout. Most people would be doing it daily, both solo with the pole and via the partner drill.
How would you fook a hook punch? Was it DP that showed you this?
What does wing chun look like?
In fighting people win and people lose. There is no problem in losing. There is a problem in never trying.
I look forward to reading it
I trained sport combat MA from early 2000s. VT more important to me now. Of course I test it.
Please do, I would be very interested to hear
In WC, generally speaking--not WSL VT in particular--, you strike directly to the center rather than "chasing hands". The same question, whether to attack limbs or "go direct" is also debated in the FMA circles I frequent. Some advocate first "de-fanging the snake". We do not. In the FMA I practice, like WC, when possible, we "go direct" and "kill the snake".
Of course like all "rules" this is a simplification and has exceptions. We also say "nearest weapon to closest target" ...so if on our way in we encounter a limb first, we hurt it. Of course that is more effective in a weapons based art. In WC we attack to the center. If we encounter an obstructing limb on the way in we move it aside (pak, bong, etc.) or move around it (huen, kau, etc.) or even use it to control and unbalance our opponent opening up a path for the other hand. There are different approaches, but in short, we do not forget that our objective is to strike to the center: Jieu ying, bat jieu sau (Chase center, don't chase hands).
WSL was a good fighter but he was not always a good analyst
WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.
I have rolled with WSL. He has his limitations.
He doesn't do much tan sao- because he can't.
Neither of the two supposedly WSL guys on this list have been directly trained by WSL- so they depend on PB a lot.
You guy think theres no way WSL would of come up with that himself. Well the same for Duncan Leung.
Just put a palm on there face and blitz in seems to be the most common thing iv seen in the lineage.
Whats your guys opinion on David peterson then ? And who has the real WSL wing chun ? cause you are slightly right that was what I learnt on first lesson lol step into a hook with a fuk sao ( not tan ).
The reason he went to Ip man after seeing WSL fight was because WSL did almost zero wing chun. He just threw a kick and chain punched. He wasnt trying to be invicible. He just saw his senior who was supposed to be great look average and not do wing chun at all.
He also entered a tournament and got ko'd. You guys seem to pretend that never happened.
I will try to find the article that WSL did. It mentioned his thoughts on how Ip man taught and how he teaches differently.
Also are you guy.b and LFJ sparring regularly against non wing chun guys ? Just curious.
All this over tan sau now.. first it was jam sau
WSL folks's principles like "efficiency" are quite loose and can be interpreted in quite different ways.
I'm intrigued by this. It's news to me. I wonder where you got this idea. Can you give examples showing how we interpret the efficiency principle in two different ways, or loosely?
Well thats good. Wing chun without structure is nothing imo.
It was a high fuk sao that wsl does in his chum kiu ? after the 3 turns, where both your hands extend out then do that movement that alot take for an arm break.. if that makes sense.
No I have never met David Peterson. It was a student of Darren Elvey.
Not throwing a kick and just chain punching... I know its impossible to not get hit ofcourse but I would much rather not get hit as much as possible.
I agree. But everyone claims that WSL was " The king of talking hands". Infact I just searched WSL beimo and this came up on the article " What I learned through beimo".
"" sifu Wong is said to have never lost a fight, and most witnesses claim that the majority of exchanges took no more than three techniques to determine his victory. "
But he got ko'd in a tournament fight by someone who was actually skilled. But who cares. Lets just agree to disagree.
Just watch a video Alan has done on it. I highly doubt you will agree but I dont care because it works for me.
I only come on the forum when im bored really. Its kind of annoying you cant edit or delete posts because im always changing my opinion on something and it really is just a snapshot of what I was thinking that moment.