KungFuMan

Maybe it is because of the style's name Seriously though, I live in London, Uk and make a habit of going to different MA schools - usually karate and kung fu - to watch the classes. This is for my own personal research. I have not been able to find Shito-Ryu nor some other lesser known styles of karate. If anyone can name a good Shito-Ryu dojo in the London area please do so. Any info will be appreciated. Kung Fu Man

No, not just because cma is "older", but because cma has greatlly inflluenced dozens of MA in South East Asia. Kung Fu Man

Sevenstar wrote: "centerline is not unique to cma....." Of course not. However, one could argue that all of the styles that you have quoted, can to varying extents trace their rootes to cma. KungFuMan

I heard of a young man who died in a semi-contact karate tournament. Apparently he got punched in the head. It is sad but we are all martial art practitioners and I think that we have to accept the risk that we will get hurt once in a while during our martial journey. The risk of death however is not so high though and as another poster said, you can die doing anything. In closing I would say to lessen the risks even further, train hard, train regularly, correctly and don't be afraid. KungFuMan

Thankyou for your kind words. It is also a pleasure to meet a WC practitioner who understands Wing Chun and seems to practice/teach it the way it is and is not afraid to say it. Looking forward to reading your future posts. KungFuMan

About the kick. Its main targets are BELOW the kidney level, however the kidneys are included in the list of potential targets and is used when the opportunity presents itself as it would when using a front throat kick to the throat. The lineage is linked to Yuen Kay San (I think that is the right way to put it). However, there is another mainland master who influenced the lineage that I practice and for the life of me I cannot recall his name and I don't have my chart handy to look for it. All I know is that his influence is much greater in what I practice than Yuen Kay San. As for tai chi. The only resemblance to tai chi perhaps is the emphasis on chi kung, and the softness of what I practice compared to other WC schools that I have seen. We do not use wide stances (shaolin stances) eventhough there are WC practitioners that use them in mainland china. We do not use weights and are carefull even in the frequency of push/press up practice. However, I believe as probably you do, that in various levels, tai chi principles exist in all authentic WC lineages. Iron palm training involves hitting the sand bucket and the sand bags - like in all WC - and chi kung also plays a big part in this as well. The darts seem to be rare, at least in Hong Kong lineages but as I said before you will probably find references to them. I agree with you that a lot of stuff that exists in WC is never taught and this is what worries me. A serious student of Wing Chun deserves to have an instructor who teaches it the way it is. That includes the grappling and so on. Then the student having studied hard and having understood the principles and concepts of this style can do his own research based on what he has learnt and can further "search" for other aspects and applications of this great art. Unfortunately we live in a world that many MA "experts" don't know that for example grappling exists in WC and is taught by many sifus - or maybe not so many sifus....lol. Just have a look in other Wing Chun threads in this forum to see the opinions and "facts" put forward by posters who have practiced one hundred and one different arts for the past few decades and using that as a qualification have presented their views on Wing Chun (as well as other TMA's). Things are so bad that I bet that if you started a Wing Chun VS Modern Ballet thread there would be posters (usually mma or modern martial arts practioners) who would take the side of the ballet dancers...LOL. Anyway, jokes aside, my main worry concerns the misunderstandings that are floating around regarding Wing Chun and maybe through this forum we can enlighten the unenlightened. KungFuMan

Ok back again, The the round kick targets are no higher than the kidneys but include the legs. I would demonstrate it to you but for obvious reasons I can't. You may find these kicks eventually as you continue your research. Good Luck. It is our view that without regular and extensive chi kung practise ones kung fu is extremely limited. The aim is to develope internal strength. Luckily for me my current sifu does not depend on kung fu classes to make a living - currently he does not even teach publicly. And the sifu before him - who is still my sifu, but lives far away, lives a kung fu life....he is not very concerned with money matters and always maintains a healthy number of serious students despite his rigoreous training program and what some people might call boring classes. In short, they teach the system the way it was meant to be taught and do not take financial considerations into account, as each of them has found his way around them. I would also say that a punch is not just a punch. There are many punching techniques taught in many CMAs and they are not all the same. On the basice level there will be different ways that they are delivered to different areas of the body on a higher level the energy release (ref: internal training/ chi kung) is different. Let me assure you that what I practise is real Wing Chun with a traditional lineage that goes back to mainland china. Darts. You will find them if you look for them. As for the rest of what you said, I think that I agree with most of them. KungFuMan

pvwingchun, I explained as best as I could under the circumstances. I only say the round house or turning kick that is taught is not a "karate kick". The knee rises in the central line as it would if you were going to perform a front or side kick then you "turn" the knee and perform a round kick. Whoops my time is running out on the computer will right in a minute....

In Wing Chun, centerline theory concerns the defense of your centerline....think of an imaginary line going down from the middle of your head to your genitals. In the area of that line is where most of your vital spots are and they have to be protected. In Wing Chun you protect that line and at the same time aim to penetrate the opponent's. This involves guarding the central line at all times and learning to defend and attack without exposing it. Of course the centerline theory is not only a Wing Chun theory but a general CMA theory. In a real battle, exposing your central line to a kung fu expert would mean certain death - if he is that way inclined that is. The theory is simple but the application and the techniques required are not. One can expand on what I have said but this is basically a simple explanation for a simple concept. Kung Fu Man

Maybe the Wing Chun guy was a disciple of Jason de Lucia.. Nevermind I have not heard about that one and I would like to know as well if anyone can help, it will be great to see the techniques used by both of the exponents and it will be interesting to see if they used their arts and their respective stances in the combat or if they just bounced around using general kick boxing techniques. KungFuMan

pvwingchun, Let me stress again that I did not make the posts on this thread to say that what I am doing is better than yours or I am better than you or anyone else for that matter, etc. I was merely stating a fact. If you do not believe what I say then that is fine too. A few points. Within OUR lineage chi kung practise is stressed immensely as the belief is, without good chi kung you won't have good kung fu. It is not up to the instructor. In the past where there have been interaction between my sifu and his students with other WC practitioners from other lineages one of the main differences seemed to be that the others were harder and stiffer in their techniques including Chi Sao. I have been given a syllabus in by my sifu that I am not allowed to show to others. There are no "secret techniques" or anything like that but that is how it is, it is more a question of respect and integrity. This means that I cannot list you techniques. What I can say is that grappling is delved upon very seriously. You don't have to look or search for it because IT IS THERE AND IT IS BEING TAUGHT. And it is not a fusion with another grappling art such as bjj or wrestling. As you have correctly stated it is all done using WC principles and concepts. The ground fighting here does not only involve grappling but also hand and leg strikes to vital organs, while both exponents are on the ground using of course the WC principles. No need to say Chin-na is omnipresent in all of this. Kum la (spelling?) chi sao is practised heavily. Also the turning or the round house kick is part of the kicks taught in this lineage. This apparently does not exist in the Hong Kong lineages. If it does exist in some branches, then I am more the happier, so if you know anything let me know too. There are also punching techniques that do not exist, at list in some of the Hong Kong lineages. These may be associated more with some of the major shaoling styles. The weapons are of course the butterfly knives, the staff and the darts. The darts are the last weapon. I am afraid that I can't say anymore. If you search the net you will find variations on Wing Chun that may pleasantly surprise you. Happy searching. Kung Fu Man

Ovine King, I don't really know what we are discussing anymore. I see what you are saying. You could have a WC system/lineage that lets say uses 3 hand and leg strikes and still be effective. And of course the time it takes to complete a system or at least get to instructor level is not necessarilly reflective of a style's superiority or inferiority. What I am saying is that there are hand and leg techniques not to mention ground fighting and grappling in the lineage of Wing Chun that I practise that are not present in the Yip Man system. I forgot we also emphasis Chi Kung practise very heavily and I MEAN very heavily. All of the above reflect in the AVERAGE time it takes for one to become an instructor in this lineage and it has nothing to do with the instructor wanting my money. I will also mention that Yuen Kay San is not the only- mainland - influence in my lineage. I stress that most of the modernization that alarms me has happened post Yip Man - whom as I said before I respect and even admire. However, based on what I have heard from more than one source he did "change" and "cut out" certain techniques from Wing Chun. This is not necessarily a bad thing as you have implied or said, but then it is not automatically a good thing either and I suppose it all depends on ones point of view. I DO believe that Yip Man WC is an effective system of kung fu and that is what matters in the end for most people at least. KungFuMan

Ovine king, The only reason I referred to Yip Man's cousin was because you mentioned him first, paralleling his grappling classes to what is taught by my sifu. From what you have said in your post what he teaches may or may not be different to what my sifu teaches. All I can do is say that the grappling taught by me sifu is part of our Wing Chun syllabus and it is WC grappling using the WC principles. This is the way that my sifu learnt his Wing Chun. The grappling includes prolonged groundfighting including strikes (punching as well as leg techniques) and chin-na. Going back to Yip Man, his Wing Chun does not have some of the leg and fist techniques that are existant in the lineage that I practise. From what I know, in general in Yip Man WC it does not take a minimum of 8 years to become a sifu. I am not putting down the Yip Man WC lineage and nor am I qualified to do so. I am merely stating a fact. I know that YMWC is a potent MA and that it is real kung fu and my respects to any SERIOUS practioners of this art. However, when you have techniques taken out of an existing MA so much that you even reduce the time a practitioner needs to get to instructor level than you can see where I am coming from when I say that this is a simplification of an art. And it has happened post YipMan which is a real worry. Also, I don't believe that simplifying a MA automatically equates to improving it, as I think another forum member implied. What I believe is that you learn the art fully the way it was meant to be learnt and when you yourself understand and master that art you can simplify it for YOUR own use. That is where traditional kung fu and karate schools will lead you. Anyway, that is my view and opinion of the discussion. Aren't forums a wonderful thing... KungFuMan

DunDunna, As I have said before, WC and WT SHOULD be the same art. The problem is that according to what I have heard WT is meant to be shall we say a more "evolved" style. Or more "practical" for "modern times" etc. When you come down to it WC and WT are the same arts with the latter one being somewhat a little modified. I am not saying that this is necessarily bad or good just that sometimes when traditional MA styles are modified or "improved" they loose their essence and yes even their effectiveness in the long term - at the expense of effectiveness gained in the short term. This may or may not be the case with Wing Tsun, but it certainly is with many Wing Chun and other traditional MAs. KungFuMan

DunDunna, WC and WT SHOULD be the same thing just like Tai chi and Taiji are. The name Wing Tsun has for a while been registred and is a business trademark. Ovine King, If wether or not grappling is in Wing Chun is questionable then maybe you should put that to Yip Man's nephew who is teaching WC grappling to the Hong Kong police. The fact is from what I have seen and heard (which may not be much in the grand scale of things) Yip Man Wing Chun - as taught in kwoons that are open to the general public - seems to be taught without the inclusion of grappling/groundfighting. This reflects in the fact that the existence of grappling in WC is not known to many martial artists including many WC practioners themselves. Also if people are "teaching what they were taught" without seeing what is behind what they learnt then are they not teaching simplified Wing Chun. Also, I believe some people do simplify and standardise Wing Chun (and other kung fu styles) further to make it easier to teach. Just my view. So you can find Wing Chun schools that don't even practise chi kung in any significant way....kung fu WITHOUT chi kung.....what kung fu? Going back to existance of grappling in Wing Chun being questionable, I would like to add that ground fighting is officially part of my Wing Chun syllabus. KungFuMan

pvwinchun, I agree with you. The problem is some of the "sifus" nowadays don't even know about and/or certain Wing Chun aspects such as the grappling (among others). Many so called martial arts researches or "experts" don't even know that they exist in Wing Chun. The problem is that when one trains with a sifu who does not practise correct Wing Chun or one who teaches the "new and improved" or "modern" Wing Chun, then one cannot hope to experience the full richness of this style. This in turn means that they have to look and research elsewhere, and believe me, in an era of Mcdojos or Mckwoons, this is not easy. KungFuMan

ovine king, I train with a sifu who does not currently teach the public because of time restrictions. kungfuman

CapitalKarate, Shaoling kungfu is a fighting/selfdefense art. If you find the right school/instructor and train hard you will know how effective kungfu can be. It will take a lot longer to master than your average modern martial art and even some traditional MA's, but when you do master it you will see that it is worth the time and effort. Just a personal comment. I believe that if you are training kung fu you are better off putting all your available time and effort into it, rather than sharing that time practicing other martial arts as well. If you choose any major style of kungfu it is more than likely that it will cover striking, grappling and even ground fighting. We are talking about complete fighting systems/styles here. That is my personal opinion. By the way I see that you practice Shorinryu karate. My respects. That is a great art. If you practice it long enough (assuming that you are in a good school) you will become an effective fighter as well - without any need to cross train, again my opinion. Sorry about "my opinions", but I think I have answered your question about wether shaolin kung fu is effective or not. Good luck. KungFuMan

pvwingchun, You better believe it. We employ punching kicking and not to mention ground fighting techniques techniques that do not exist in many Wing Chun and Wing tsun schools. I repeat I am not saying that mine is better than yours all anything like that. All I am doing is just stating a fact. Another fact (the price we pay), is that it takes us 8 years of solid training to come to instructor level as opposed to what I believe to be 4-5 years (if not less) in many other Wing Chun schools. By the way, it is easier look hard and find these techniques if some of the modern "masters" don't take them out for the sake of standardization among other motives. You are in Arizona I see. Do you happen to train with or know of Augustin Fong (spelling?)? He is very well respected by many WC practioners including myself. Ovine king, the line of Wing Chun I practice goes back to Yuen Kay San and others. It does not have a special name and it is called Wing Chun Kuen. KungFuMan

I know for a fact that a lot of the techniques that exist in the Wing Chun that I practice do not exist in Wing Tsun, and most Wing Chun schools that I have researched. Some people know this and they call it simplification. This does not mean ineffective or bad, just simplified. Oversimplified? Standardised? Maybe? Who knows, I don't want to argue over this matter. If it works for you and you are happy then there is no problem with what you practice. The fact that the WC see that I practice has more techniques and takes longer to get to instructor may have a lot to do with the fact that the branch of WC that I practice belongs to a mainland china lineage and not a Hong Kong one. And I am not saying that mine is good and yours is bad. KungFuMan

Sevenstar, You are not a jack of all trades if you study one style that may use various methods and applications within its own individual concepts and theories. I do see your point, but is irrelevant to what I said. According to your argument a tennis player may also be considered a jack of all trades because he may do running and cardiovascular for stamina and weight lifting for strengh, and etc. According to me it is more likely that he is a jack of all trades if he plays tennis, squash, ping pong badmington and racketball. KungFuMan

Some people believe that WT is a more simplified version WC which itself has been simplified by many modern "masters". The reason behind this alleged simplification seems to have more to do with standardization for commercial purposes than with improvements. KungFuMan

Taku, My personal belief is that for now at least the world does not need a new style of martial arts. I believe that there are too many anyway. However to create a new style one has to have mastered at least one authentic style of MA (i.e. not John Smith style of karate). Many modern MA "founders" believe that "studying" many styles automatically qualifies them as as serious martial artists and even new style creators. Mostly it doesn't. What it does make them is a JACK OF ALL TRADES AND MASTER OF NONE. It is best not to fall into this trap. There is nothing wrong in studying a martial art and then adopting it to your own personality while keeping its essence. This is what the end result of kung fu and even karate studies is according to my own research, where what you have learnt is cutomized to the individual practitioner making the art more effective. Also, to even create a family style such as you have mentioned you need to have mastered your art first. KungFuMan

Shorin Ryuu, Very interesting and informative post. I have always curiously looked into the difference between okinawan and Japanese styles of karate. I am looking forward to reading your thoughts on the the differences between the Shotokan and Okinawan karate punches. kung fu man

Seventstar, "kyokushinkai in recent times has been influenced by thai boxing"...... Are you talking in competition fighting or street fighting? Also, we are not talking about thai boxing but western boxing. And, as I said before, there are other schools of traditional karate that are hardcore and effective (covering and practicing fighting aspects that a boxer would not dream of). Also, I believe that your definition of "blood and guts" karate is different to mine. Nowadays in the west real karate training is rare. This is my opinion based on what I have observed and that there are Mcdojos and dojos that are slightly better than Mc dojos, for the most part. These better Mcdojos are sometimes mistaken for the real thing and perhaps these are the "blood and guts" karate that you are referring to. I am happy to say that there are authentic traditional karate (and kung fu for that matter) but they are very few and not so easy to find.