Drunken Monkey

no idea.... my grand dad was a bit of a bad kid in his days along with his brothers... but i never learnt a single thing from him cos he was in hk and i was in uk. my cousins grand-dad was also a bit of a bad boy back in the day. he's the one who taught me my five animals although this was after i started my wing chun here in uk. so family wise, there is a bit of history but i'm not exactly following in their steps. i.e i'm not really learning from them in the 'family' fashion. so i am the first....... kinda.....

...they wouldn't be punching at your shoulders. we like to aim for the head.... sore cos of movements. IF you're doing it 'wrong' it will absolutely knacker your shoulders.

...the point is, i think 'master' does not exist. there are people who can tech you and people who can't. there are people who you can learn from and people who you can't. that is it. the title isn't used in any culture when talking about martial arts except in ENGLISH where it is a bad translation of 'teacher' 'martial father' 'head of school' 'door keeper' 'keeper of the dojo' 'keeper of the quan' and too many other titles. NONE of which means master. the 5th dans and above well, you can call them master (which you've already shown to be your opinion that they are) but i think the good ol' regular title of 'teacher' is still more fitting. i know i'm probably picking at your choice of words and not paying attention to your intention but i hope you understand what i'm trying to get at. master means nothing. in chinese it only means 'guy in charge of....' i don't think peole should be focusing on how good they might get or how good they want to get and worry about how good (or not) they are now. too many people think about how in x amount of years time they will be this or that and don't think today or tomorrow which is what matter's most. which is again part of where belts don't help. they remove the focus from the individual onto an inanimate object that has nothing to do with actual skill.

now that's just stupid.

.....not sure about that blanket statement about contracts..... i mean, often, the contract also contains all of the legal stuff about safety, responsibility, insurance and all them disclaimers and stuff.

hey.... might be a reason for some of us to meet up..... chatham isn't too far from me, just a short hop on the A2. hmm, what's a weedy little wing chun guy gonna do against a hundred angry goju people?

from the chinese styles that i know. the first thing regarding 'inch power'/'shock power'/'short range bridge power' is that you must have proper structure and control of correct structure. one way to harness the power of structure is to maintain perfect structure so that the ground becomes the point where your 'push' begins. another way is to carry your structure forward in a step so that your mass/momentum+effect of ground adds 'push' effect. finally, you can 'snap' into perfect structure to produce a 'zero-inch' snap/push. BUT none of these things are done in a way that compromises your basic structure. i should point out that this is slightly different to 'spring' energy/power that looks similar in execution (where structure is maintained at all times but 'relaxed'...)

i'm gonna' check out the local wing chun place on saturday ....hehehe..... prepare for sore shoulders

.....that's one of the problems i think. a lot of people think that there is a stage when there is no more to learn; that there is a final destination. and that is where the belts come in. they don't help the situation. in fact, i think they kinda hinder real development. people get too hung up on the titles and forget about simply being able to 'do'. on the flip side, the belts do serve a purpose and that is to let the instructor know what 'level' you are at. that is what i think the belts are for. they are not for you as a reward or reference of some sort. they are to help the instructor know how/what/when he should be teaching you.

....i say nothing wrong with it except perhaps the name, which is what a lot of people have an issue with, esp. the guys who actually train in a fighting system. but i say don't discredit what them guys do. they spend a lot of time and effort, much more than the majority of us here training in the thing that they love and enjoy. that alone deserves respect. and seeing as so few of us actually actively train at an xma type of place, very few of us are truely qualified to judge what/how they teach. a lot of guys go to say that xma type stuff isn't for fighting but how many xma guys actually say that the flash is for fighting? that is just something that the non-xma guy attributes to the xma guys. it's just as false as saying TKD doesn't produce fighters or traditional styles don't work or bjj only knows how to ground fight or stand-up styles don't know how to grapple

belt system? what belt system?

....ok. general question. if i am still feeling a little muscle pain, does it mean i am still recovering and should give it another day? or is it ok to work when still hurting?

mcdojo is a generic term for a bad school. some things that make a bad school: bad teaching/teaching of bad techniques i.e no background, unproven history, lineage (or perhaps strange 'new' style) more concerned with making money i.e many ways to get money (lots of gradings, lots of belts, lots of inbtween belts grades...) suspicious practices (i.e a person doesn't turn up for a grading session but has paid.... and his name is read out as having passed....) but these things are by no means a good judge of things. just cos the style is 'new' doesn't mean it's not good. just cos there are a lot of grades doesn't mean the teaching/technique is bad. a place has to make money to survive. and in the final example, well, mistakes can happen... the only way to really tell is how you feel. forget all that jazz about being 'open minded', be rational and see if anything is amiss. don't ignore your instinct on these things.

....leaning is wrong.

push kick that made me kneel to the ground shhhhh.... you're not supposed to tell people what the kicks are for in wing chun....... ahem! anyway. i'm currently trying to write up a list and explanations of the priciples and sayings and well, it's not easy. i never realised there were so many.... a lot of them are always said in passing and only when actually writing them down have i noticed how many there are. i mean, five major sayings (fist sayings) five on energy lots of little ones about general mindset general fighting principles lots.... then comes trying to describe what they mean and in some cases, trying to better translate from chinese. this might take some time. it might be better if you just ask a few questions about things you might have read/heard elsewhere. i'll post my part two when i'm done.

hmm, just cos i'm a big fan, go find the zero gravity guys' videos. nice work from guys who deserve to go far. DAMN!

....i dont know about you guys but where-ever i get hit, generally tends to hurt....

it's not really a pain to learn. it's just very easy to reach a plateau cos of how little there is to actually 'learn'. a lot of the time is spent 'practicing' and unless you have people who are just as enthusiastic as you are (or even more so) to train with, things can get very dull very quickly. yep. repetitive is the word. because the system itself contains very few moves (even less that you use on a regular basis) everything is repeated and repeated, over and over.... you would remember me saying how the punch is practiced and trained everyday at every class. after this, the basic pak sau+punch (and its variations) are the next most practiced things. these two things can easily take up an hour or two. then bam! class over and all you would've done would be punches and one 'block'.... it's a pain to learn because it's quite hard to show you exactly what/how you should be doing things (due to the nature of body variations, different levels of strength, situation etc etc). what happens is that more often than not, you are told a general idea of what is you should be doing and then you have to find out for yourself what to do. it can feel like you aren't actually being taught. in that way, you are in charge of how well you do and how far you go. in a way it's a good thing cos it weeds out the '5 minute' students.... also, sometimes it can be hard to believe that it can actually work. effective wing chun really does mean doing harm. there is no half way. hit with all or don't hit at all. and that's where a problem arises. wing chun is about hurting and causing damage. things that you can't do in training. (and even on a dummy, it isn't quite right...) also, i think too much emphasis is put on chi sau as test of fighting ability. whilst it is a good judge of your wing chun, it might not be a suitable judge of fighting as once again, you don't actually complete the hits. how do you know it works if you never really test it? again, i can't really explain without being there in person. if you do pop in and give it a go, you'll see what i mean. hmm, do we have another convert? hehe... one day, you shall all see the light....

.........today. i have printed out another 12 sets of job application letters. made a few phone calls to chase up on my CVs did a little run of sainbury's. prepared+cooked dinner. wall bag stuff (and i think i've bruised a knuckle). finished 'life of pi' ahem....failed to go to post office........ahem......

......only cos no-one else seems to do it..... pah. i have to admit, that last post was nothing more than a way to swell my already over-inflated ego.... you shouldn't indulge me like that!

1) do you log in using the link at the top? or fill in the boxes at the bottom? or log in as you need to reply to a thread/post? 2) do you start going through the forums from the top then work your way down? or start from the bottom then work your way up? or "other"?

...y'know, sometimes i wonder if the chinese forum should be renamed "drunken monkey's mailbox"...

.....well, the thing is, if a shogun/lord asked (or should that be ordered?) one of his samurai to go and kill someone in secret, he would have to do it. he would then employ every skill at his disposal to complete the mission. he might not actually know 'ninjitsu' but he would still be a 'ninja' for the mission.... the point was, most shogun/lords/whatever normally had someone who was specially trained for that sort of thing and so 'ninja' and samurai were separate entities. but this was not always the case. y'know, like government agancies. an agent is always an agent but sometimes, they are a covert agent (for a mission).

......y'know. i'm not sure how i feel about that site.... everything seems a bit 'simplified'. i'm not a big fan of the animations; they're missing a lot and i mean A LOT. and the videos well, videos never tend to show what wing chun is. anyway. i'm sorry if i was a bit long winded. wasn't sure what you were really asking. i mean, you did want someone to explain how things are, right? there are still more 'chapters' if you want, that deal with: principles and ideals 'loose' techniques use of the forms training loose techniques weapons and their forms and maybe a few things that i can;t think of right now.... but i'm not really sure if i need to go that far or if anything beyond talking about principles is really necessary. i should point out that i am not keen on discussing actual applications of techniques.... as such i will tell you how we do things and why but i am reluctant to go into to much detail about what you would do. to give a fixed answer is to fix the technique when in reality it is a living thing that is open to change.

...see, now you're missing the point. in fact you are so hard up on defending bruce lee that you are no different to those who are always trying to criticize him trying to prove just because he was the greatest . y'see what i do is try to counter common misconceptions. people go on about how bruce lee was a good philospher citing his studies. BUT anyone who knows what he was like knows that he was hardly the ideal student and as you pointed out, most of what he said, wasn't his.... people go on about how he was the first to train/expose himself to many styles. well, should i point out that dan inosanto was a master of various filipino styles as well as judo and karate. and this was before he met bruce lee. people say he was undefeated but again, i cite his main wing chun teacher wong shun leung as the man bruce lee couldn't beat (but then wong shun leung was just another martial art freak of nature....) people say he was the one to spread martial art to the masses. but c'mon is this really a good thing? this is my opinion but i think the state of affairs in the martial arts world would be better if he hadn't shown the world martial arts the way he did. people like to say that he was the 'perfect' martial artist, a hero, someone to look up to. BUT conveniently forget that he was far from being a good man. yes he has done things for the benefit or martial arts. yes he was a very focussed individual. yes he trained like no one else did at the time. he certainly was/is the most famous martial artist (mainly for the wrong reasons) but that doesn't make him the best. too many people confuse what they see on the screen with who the man really was.