Wing Chun and Wing Tsun differences.

[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]

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 am in the same situation and yes many would find me boring because of my willingness to drill something to what many consider the point of boring redundancy but my serious students wouldn't have it any other way.

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.

Based on this explanation I agree and teach things very similar to what you are describing.

 

So to my original point it seems that you have nothing that I don't, except for maybe that kick which I wouldn't use because it goes above the waist if kicking at the kidneys. I stand by my comment that it is there you just have to have an open mind and be willing to except things not taught to you by closed minded instructors who only teach what they have been taught and soon it becomes dogma. I would tend to agree that many do not do these things but it is not because it isn't there it is because it hasn't been taught to them, it is there they just have to find it.

 

BTW what is your lineage as I am in possession now of several videos of mainland WC and find it very interesting it seems to have an incredible likeness to Tai Chi.

[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

[pvwingchun]

maybe through this forum we can enlighten the unenlightened

Too many close minded WC folks out there I do what I do and am comfortable with it. And every now and then I get in a conversation with someone like you that will actually listen and respond without being up on their pedestal all the while telling you that you are wrong.

[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

[ovine king]

still not sure about your insistance that the things found in your wing chun MUST have been omitted/forgotten/whatever from the other lines that do not have them.

 

not sure if you did it but as part of my training i also did a lot of 'old school' (non style specific) training like small plum flower, walking the circle and some other small hand/foot excercises.

 

it was part of the 'kung fu' but not part of the wing chun (if that makes any sense at all....)

 

i did it.

 

you might not have.

 

doesn't really mean anything.

 

also, the grappling/joint locks in any chinese martial art normally falls under a separate catagory (chin-na).

 

as such, shaolin chin-na is the same as wing chun chin-na which is the same as tai-chi chin-na.... and so on.....

 

so you can't really say it is wing chun chin-na because really it's just chin-na.

[KungFuMan]

Well if some of these other styles of Wing Chun "do not have them" then they must have done something to not have them.

 

The reasons why some of these aspects do not exist in some other schools/systems of Wing Chun is explained I believe by my and pvwingchun's previous posts.

 

As for the grappling. My main reference was to the GROUND FIGHTING aspects of WC which of course incorporates Chin-na as well as striking techniques all within the WC principles and concepts.

 

Eventhough Chin-na techniques are present in Kung Fu in general, the way they are used is not necessarilly the same in all styles. This all depends on the individual styles theories and concepts as well as their strenghts and weaknesses. E.G. an eagle claw practitioners use of certain chin-na technique will be different to that of a WC exponents' of the same technique - stance, guard, etc.

 

So you are right there is no Wing Chun Chi-na and I have not say that there is. However there is chin-na that is "adopted" by WC as it may be adopted by Tiger Claw within its own theories and concepts.

 

I have also practiced non-style old school trainning, usually for conditioning and Chi-kung, and that was always specified as shaolin exercises and not Wing Chun - eventhough there is the obvious overlap.

 

KungFuMan

[ovine king]

but it is also possible that the grappling aspect was added later.

 

chin-na tends to look the same no matter which style you look at; the nature of how chin-na works means that there is very little room for personalistion. stance and guard have very little to do with how you would do a chin-na technique.

 

anyway.

 

when you say grappling, do you include the holds and throws that are more commonly seen in jujutsu and jiujitsu or are you only talking about the striking and locks?

[KungFuMan]

I am talking about groundfighting, ie. when both parties are on the ground trying to trap each other and strike as wel when opportunity arises. Chin-na is only part of the story.

 

KungfuMan

[ovine king]

just trying to get a good picture of what you're talking about, that's all. i keep bringing it back to chin-na because that group of techniques are the main ways to take down/throw/lock etc etc. it's just me being general in an attempt to minimise confusion.