The Real Wing Chun

[MizuRyu]

It can if you fight like you spar. The reason sparring doesn't exist is because Wing Chun focuses are too harshly on those vital points and things can go very wrong very fast. There is a degree of Gor Sao.. or light sparring, but the eye gouges, throat strikes, knee breaks, neck breaks, ear boxing, and crotch shots are usually taken out completely and it's just a basic practice of strike placement; the drills fill in the rest. It's never the same as beating the crap out of someone with gloves on, but it serves a shadowing purpose.

[pocketcoffee]

I have trained wing chun and have done hard sparring during that training. We used to train, to a degree, to hit certain areas as you pointed out but most of that part of training was to do with how to make those targets available. The way we made those targets available meant that if we could hit them, it would be obvious. Example of this would be if we managed to bui sau to push their head up/back to reveal throat. If we did this we would still aim to finish the movement except instead of striking in hard, we'd walk in and apply a push.

Did it hurt? Sure but it wasn't fatal and it got the point across. Much of the sparring was to do with making the entry anyway and how or what we hit with is secondary. There isn't anything that you can't spar with to a degree. Besides, everything starts with a punch and if you don't even do hard sparring with punches then how good can your more dangerous techniques be seeing as the only difference between them and basic sparring is what you hit with. How you get to that hit doesn't change.

[Traditional-Fist]

Not only is it a generalisation, it more or less doesn't need to be said.

It is not a generalisation. If one has practiced authentic kung fu for years to a high level then he should be able to finish an opponent with three DIRECT HITS. If not then there is something wrong.

Re-phrasing him slightly you get, if you can't beat the other guy, you're either not very good or your training isn't very good.

Sorry, that is not what I said. Let me rephrase myself then : "If having achieving a high level of skill in Wing Chun (or any other genuine kung fu style for that matter), one can't put down ones opponent with three DIRECT HITS, then there is something wrong with ones kung fu and god help him if he is faced with multiple opponents." I hope that what I meant is more clear now.

And let me guess, if that guy is doing the wrong kind of wing chun, then yours must be the correct kind of wing chun?

I believe that you are reading too much into my posts.

I do practice genuine Wing Chun. So do many others on this planet. That is not the point. The point is that if one cannot finish an opponent with three direct hits then one is not practicing a correct form of Wing Chun or one is a lower level student.

Can I ask what kind of wing chun yours is,

Of course you can. It is a Mainland Chinese lineage of Wing Chun (as opposed to Hong Kong).

why it is better than the rest

I did not say that it is better than the rest.

It is a good lineage and a very effective system of Wing Chun that includes grappling, ground fighting and many other striking techniques that I have not seen in many of the more common lineages of Wing Chun.

However, on the minus side, it takes longer to learn and make effective. Having said that, I WAS NOT comparing Wing Chun styles and I never said "mine was better than yours" etc. I.E. Again, whatever lineage of Wing Chun kung fu that you practice, if it is a genuine lineage and a good school and you have attained a high level, then you should be able to stop your opponent with 3 DIRECT HITS. That is all I am saying. And that statement stands true for any style of authentic kung fu and not just Wing Chun.

and where can I go to learn your wing chun?

I am afraid it will be very difficult to train in what I trained, unless you live in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That is the only place that I know (outside China) where you can train it and that is where I trained it. I have not found anything that is similar to it here in London. So much that I train it on my own and take instruction in another genuine style of kung fu which I was most fortunate to come across.

Also, there may be another sifu in Paris, France who teaches it, but I have no details about him at the moment.

What part of the world are you posting from?

[bushido_man96]

Replying to Traditional-Fist's post above:

The points that you make are still generalizations, and unsafe ones I feel at that. I have never been a proponent of something like the "three hit knockdown guarantee;" I just don't feel that anyone can make a legitimate claim like that. Sure, you are talking about vital areas to strike, but things can change in a heartbeat in an encounter. And just because someone doesn't drop after 3 "perfect" hits, does not say anything about a fighter's skill, or lack thereof.

[Traditional-Fist]

Replying to Traditional-Fist's post above:

The points that you make are still generalizations, and unsafe ones I feel at that. I have never been a proponent of something like the "three hit knockdown guarantee;" I just don't feel that anyone can make a legitimate claim like that. Sure, you are talking about vital areas to strike, but things can change in a heartbeat in an encounter. And just because someone doesn't drop after 3 "perfect" hits, does not say anything about a fighter's skill, or lack thereof.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one, bearing in mind that 3 direct hits or "perfect hits", as you put it, are by implication, FULL POWER HITS on INTENDED target areas.

[elbows_and_knees]

It is not a generalisation. If one has practiced authentic kung fu for years to a high level then he should be able to finish an opponent with three DIRECT HITS. If not then there is something wrong.

and you have a key word there - SHOULD. theoretically, any student spending any length of time in any style SHOULD be able to, but that's not always the case.

Sorry, that is not what I said. Let me rephrase myself then : "If having achieving a high level of skill in Wing Chun (or any other genuine kung fu style for that matter), one can't put down ones opponent with three DIRECT HITS, then there is something wrong with ones kung fu and god help him if he is faced with multiple opponents." I hope that what I meant is more clear now.

now that, I would consider a generalization. no matter how direct the hits are, you can't exact how many it would take to put down all of the people, all of the time. fighting is not that exact.

I am afraid it will be very difficult to train in what I trained, unless you live in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That is the only place that I know (outside China) where you can train it and that is where I trained it. I have not found anything that is similar to it here in London. So much that I train it on my own and take instruction in another genuine style of kung fu which I was most fortunate to come across.

mainland wc? I'm pretty sure I know several who train it in the US. I'll check.

[pocketcoffee]

Are those 3 direct hits without the other guy fighting back or is it assumed that he doesn't know what he is doing anyway and hence unable to resist? By far the biggest problem I see in wing chun training is that it only approximates what other styles does in its references and it does this in a way that renders that approximation useless as it usually only ever of a single movement without reference to what the opponent might actually also do.

Calling it mainland China wing chun does not really mean much as there are more than one lineages of wing chun that mainly teaches in China. Of course, things being the way they are, saying something like mainland China wing chun only means that it is non Yip Man wing chun. Even then, if you are talking about Yuen Kay San wing chun then even that has had massive influences from Yip Man back from when he and Yuen Kay San more or less developed the poon sau excercises. Then there's the other lines of wing chun that some Yip Man students were practiced in before they studied uner him. Lee Shing and Jiu Wan come to mind here.

I live not too far from Central London by the way and depending on the time of year, am in china quite frequently as well.

[Traditional-Fist]

and you have a key word there - SHOULD. theoretically, any student spending any length of time in any style SHOULD be able to, but that's not always the case.

It SHOULD be in Wing Chun or any other authentic kung fu style, for that matter.

now that, I would consider a generalization. no matter how direct the hits are, you can't exact how many it would take to put down all of the people, all of the time. fighting is not that exact.

Hitting people in particular target areas is not that exact or easy if they are resisting. But if you have reached a high level in any real kung fu style, including Wing Chun, then you should be able to put someone down with 3 EXACT BLOWS [THAT CONNECT] TO INTENDED TARGET AREAS.

mainland wc? I'm pretty sure I know several who train it in the US. I'll check.

I didn't say that there aren't any mainland chinese lineages outside China. I said that I did not know of any outside China, besides the one in Rio de Janeiro. However, please do check all the mainland Chinese lineages of Wing Chun that you come across. I am sure you will see many fascinating differences. There are some that look [soft] almost like Tai Chi and others that have multitude of techniques not seen here in the West.

Having said that, I hope that the ones you find are not Mc Donald lineages of Wing Chun or WC that is "modernized for today's needs", etc.

[Traditional-Fist]

Are those 3 direct hits without the other guy fighting back or is it assumed that he doesn't know what he is doing anyway and hence unable to resist?

As I put it before and clearly I believe, I am talking about Direct blows to intended targets. I assume that the other guy is fighting as well, or why else would one hit him. The point here is that there is no excuse for the other guy standing and unaffected, when the blows connect.

By far the biggest problem I see in wing chun training is that it only approximates what other styles does in its references and it does this in a way that renders that approximation useless as it usually only ever of a single movement without reference to what the opponent might actually also do.

Are you referring to your own Wing Chun trainning or are you generalising?

Calling it mainland China wing chun does not really mean much as there are more than one lineages of wing chun that mainly teaches in China.

Much more than many people believe.

Of course, things being the way they are, saying something like mainland China wing chun only means that it is non Yip Man wing chun. Even then, if you are talking about Yuen Kay San wing chun then even that has had massive influences from Yip Man back from when he and Yuen Kay San more or less developed the poon sau excercises. Then there's the other lines of wing chun that some Yip Man students were practiced in before they studied uner him. Lee Shing and Jiu Wan come to mind here.

Sorry, I don't get your point and its relevance to my earlier post.

I live not too far from Central London by the way

and depending on the time of year, am in china quite frequently as well.

Good. Then next time you are in (south) China (not Hong Kong), you can research the Wing Chun kung fu further. I am almost envious .

[pocketcoffee]

Are you referring to your own Wing Chun trainning or are you generalising?

I was generalising. From what I have seen and participated in, from classes in the UK, Hong Kong and China, I have only ever come across a class that would train with reference to how other people do things. Saying that, knowing the way that Wing Chun works, I know that you don't really need to really know how some other style deals with things but every time someone did an impersonation of a "boxing style" jab or hook or cross, I had to look away because that impersonation was a poor excuse for a half decent strike. Have you ever sparred against a boxer? A karate guy? A hung kuen guy? A jutjusu guy? A Jiujutsu guy? Or did you also just pretend that you knew how they would fight and then imitate what you thought they did?

Sorry, I don't get your point and its relevance to my earlier post.

My point is, calling something mainland china wing chun doesn't mean much as all that does is rule out ONE line of wing chun, that being Yip Man's. My second point is that even though some lines of wing chun have remained in China, they are not all without heavy influence from Yip Man.

Good. Then next time you are in (south) China (not Hong Kong), you can research the Wing Chun kung fu further. I am almost envious.

You did not need to tell me that Hong Kong is not China and thus you do not need to differentiate them to me. What makes you think I have not already visited several Wing Chun schools in China?