triskellin
New Member
i am from sydeny =D
Posts: 12
|
Post by triskellin on Jan 6, 2002 1:39:01 GMT -5
ok so i was wondering which styles u guys concentrate on the most in your training? i know you learn 3 styles, but can you choose 1 to concentrate in? obviously i'm interested in the people who consider lung ying their #1 art as i train in it myself, so are there any out there?
|
|
Adrian
New Member
Rumours? What Rumours?
Posts: 31
|
Post by Adrian on Jan 6, 2002 2:32:43 GMT -5
Hi Linda, I think in general (particularly in the lower grades) there is greater emphasis on wing chun first, followed by lung ying and then lok hup ba fa... though there will be times (such as at the recent training camp) where one style will be more heavily focused upon for a period of time (in the last camp, lung ying was a major focus)... For me personally.. I "like" lung ying techniques more... though I am still not at the stage where I can apply them... but that's just my opinion ;D
|
|
|
Post by white_rabbit on Jan 9, 2002 5:18:33 GMT -5
Gee... I really like the Dragon shape techniques, I just wish I could apply them more. I find they come out sometimes, as do the Lok Hap Ba Fat techniques, but mostly I think that Wing Chun is easiest to employ earlier.
The really big challenge I found with Lung Ying is with Sup Luk Dung: getting the foot work - hip - hand coordination right. It was a really big step for me to admit to myself that I had missed something when I learned it the first time to go back and re-learn it.
I think its one of those things that you might have to figure out for yourself if nobody tells you. Linda! how are you guys tought about it?
|
|
triskellin
New Member
i am from sydeny =D
Posts: 12
|
Post by triskellin on Jan 13, 2002 7:32:23 GMT -5
sup luk dung is taught for basic stances and techniques in my school. it teaches us how to step and strike properly, and has the 3 techs that occur in every single form. so we practice the 2 types of ma, and do walking exercises with the 3-4 techs. what we do is 'walk' up and down the room repeating the moves over and over again, individually, and also in combos. there's another stance exercise we do, which is grabbing both hands into the direction of your lead leg, and into your waist. we also do 2-man drills for about 4 of the techs, and sometimes i get ppl to line up and attack the person in the middle, and that person can only use those 3-4 techs. also, we've got a small class, so whenever we go through whole forms, it's not too hard to take our time and correct everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Apr 3, 2002 0:07:53 GMT -5
Why in training do you train with so many different styles? Why combine to try to create a superior martial art. A martial art which has more techniques to learn? Isn't the principle to wing chun to be 'simple direct and efficient'. Yet to combine so many martial arts you contradict the basic principles of wing chun to be 'simple'. Also the other styles are not 'direct' and until I can seriously see you guys put it into pracitce as in surviving on the street, then it can't really be called 'efficient' ( my opinion). And it may have been what you been taught. But isn't the idea of martial arts practicality what works for you? Someone who knows soemthign please reply because I'm askign innocent questions here.
|
|
Kiki
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by Kiki on Apr 8, 2002 2:42:44 GMT -5
I don't think learning an "advanced form" is really a contradiction to the keeping-it-simple approach of wing chun.
In the end (ie, in a real fighting situation) it all comes down to one technique anyways, no matter what style you use: a basic punch to knock out your opponent.
But in order to have your punch be as effective as possible, you need to train a lot of subtly different things. Of course you could go on and train just that one punch day in, day out, but seriously, how many of us would do that?
Both Wing Chun and Lung Ying have a lot of good forms and exercises that help you refine your technique without overpowering you with too many moves.
Also, those two styles, being developed by the same person, should be compatible, don't you think?
Just my opinion, I'm by no means an expert or anything...
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Apr 8, 2002 8:58:29 GMT -5
May I ask, have you ever knocked out an opponent? One punch, that is quite confident in that. You can go and hit an opponenet many times he may not fall.
Also the movements of Lung-Ying aren't exactly following the principle of 'direct efficient and effective'
Another thing, the fighters in Seattle are really strong and only have 5 techniques. Yes they do only have 5 punches and they are undefeated. I seriously want to see if any of us here could take any of them? I don't think so.
What I'm basically saying is that why don't any of the students stop and ask 'WHY'? I know I'm nto right, but I'm at least asking why. Now that is one step that will make me the better practitioner in the long run I believe.
|
|
Kiki
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by Kiki on Apr 9, 2002 20:16:31 GMT -5
I for one have neither the physique nor the experience to knock anyone out in one hit, and I am quite aware of that. When I said "one punch", I didn't refer to hitting your opponent once, but rather to relying mainly on that one technique, which is the basic wing chun punch, which has been acclaimed by experienced martial artists of a variety of styles as being highly effectual, if not the most effectual move you can hope to master.
Don't confuse lack of training with lack in the style when you refer to the Seattle fighters, who have considerably more experience both in their style and in actual fights than most of us uni students ever will.
It is a very good attitude to ask "why" as long as you keep an open mind, as you display to do. A geniune interest in the pros and cons of a chosen (or not chosen) style can never hurt your learning.
Wing Chun has convinced me for its pure effectiveness, but I still know too little of Lung Ying to make any educated comment beyond theory on this style.
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Apr 10, 2002 7:29:26 GMT -5
I understand what you are saying and accept your opinion. Nevertheless you have to face that you are learning Lung Ying by choice and purely by choice.
And when you say the one punch, I want you to tell me after so much training how much you can go into the streets and go back to wing chun 100%. I really don't think so.
Remember, be a master of your style and not its slave. You don't have to use the wing chun punch. You use what is going to work for you. So basically, just the concepts.
By the way, it is really nice talking to you. Look forward to your reply soon.
|
|
Kiki
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by Kiki on Apr 10, 2002 21:12:04 GMT -5
Well, I for one can say that wing chung principles worked for me in more than one "real" occasion (as in, a non-staged attack that I couldn't anticipate, aka street fight or mug).
I don't know if the style of wing chun suits everybody, but from what I have heard professionals of other martial arts that have had a bit of wing chun training say, its logic and ways are easily incorporated into one's own set of movements and fight aesthetics.
That aspect at least makes wing chun a top choice in my eyes.
You are of course correct that we learn the styles of our own free will, and I like the mentioning that you should strive to master the art and not be its slave.
I guess it depends on what your training goals are. Do you wish to be a fighter or martial artist (which can be very far from each other)? Do you want to be a star in tournaments or do something for your fitness? Do you want to learn about Asian cultural heritage or beat people up quickly if need be?
I have spent a lot of thought on these (and more) questions before every martial art I have taken up, and so far, i am getting what I expect to get.
By the way, do you currently train a martial art? And if so, what style? How does what you train compare (or not) to other martial arts?
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Apr 11, 2002 9:39:43 GMT -5
In this message board I'm not at liberty to say what martial art I participate in or train in. It is for the better at this stage I do not say. Sorry. I could tell you if you send me a personal message however.
Also I have been in my fair share of street encounters and survival is the key. I also know that there are many things you can't do. When you have between 5-40 people come at yu with trolley poles, chains, bottles and other various items...don't bother trying to 'tan sau', 'fuk sau', or 'chi sau' your way out of it.
Nevertheless, do you realise that I was the one who presented wing chun to be 'simple direct and efficient'. I know that you do train, but you have not been drilled in those concepts. Many references merely put wing chun as 'the shortest distance between two points'. As you probably know I know a little bit about Wing Chun
If you want to know more, because I guarantee that I can tell you a few things, maybe teach you a few things and learn a few things off you Kiki. Just send me a personal message okay? Not just through the board.
I don't mind if you do use the board, but it is just that there are things that I would not say in the board. There is a thing about 'no politics', but there are certainly real politics that exist. It is a shame because conclusions could have been made, but there has been failure from one side.
|
|
triskellin
New Member
i am from sydeny =D
Posts: 12
|
Post by triskellin on Jun 12, 2002 13:54:22 GMT -5
gosh i totally forgot about this msgboard, sorry! does adrian even check his own board anymore? lol well actually... ng mui didn't develop lung ying. she was dai yuk's 'mentor' (i can't think of a better word) and exchanged knowledge with him before developing wing chun. this was when she was still learning the traditional shaolin though. i remember something about after the temple getting burnt down, she was disenchanted with the old ways of shaolin and developed what is now known as wing chun. dai yuk also knew kung fu before travelling with ng mui, and refined his dragon with ng mui's teaching. so there is a shared history, but the time and events have affected what would presumably be of the same source. as for the compatibility, alot of the concepts differ and contradict (like power generation, centreline attack and things like elbow up/down), but i suppose you could look at that as a good thing if u want to be more 'all rounded'
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Jun 12, 2002 18:38:29 GMT -5
Well, to be honest my knowledge of the history is less than dusty, almost to the stage of wha..? hahaha.
Sorry, if you guys haven't seen I prefer to see myself as a practitioner of the martial 'skill' as opposed to the martial 'art'.
And the two styles are not compatible as such. I mean the do have different theories and just because one person could do both it is not a reason to be learning or teaching both. I think ultimately it should be down to the student's decision, sorry I meant the practitioner.
The problem I think is to taught to think. There needs to be an understanding that the styel must be adapted to yourself. I mean a 'tan sau' to deflect* the round punch (if you use it) will not succeed for a short person with weak arms whereas a 'fuk sau' will.
Oh wellz, that is only my opinion. Also can anyone tell me when the actual wing chun competition in Melbourne is this year? I mean I want to compete, probably just going in there and fighting. I'm one of those adrenalin people so yeah I don't expect to win. Just expect to go in there and have fun, maybe take a few licks and stuff but that is fighting. haha!
* - the term deflect was use purely because in the Wong Shun Leung method of Ving Tsun, there is no blocking. It is a deflection because attacks can be made simultaeneously. Nevertheless, there is no need to use any of the deflective practices if you have the confidence and attack straight and direct. You might still get hit, but the opponent will be worse.
|
|
|
Post by white_rabbit on Jun 13, 2002 9:26:00 GMT -5
How do you defend against a round punch, such as Choy Li Fut 'Sao Choy', with efficiency and directness??
Angle of attack and the size of the practitioner do not always allow for Tan sao to work. Some Wing Chun practitioners say that tan dar with a counter offensive side step will work, but when you think about it that is 2 hand techs + footwork to counter 1 hand tech = more moves than 1 (sao choy). Efficient?
Wouldn't it be more efficient to learn the defence from that same style (Choy LI Fut) or one which had similar round techniques (Lung Ying).
So Learning from a variety of styles and maintaining their integrity as seperate styles with separate theories of function can be give you efficiency which just one style may not.
I find it interesting that 'Open mind' speaks of the way that BPKFS train and claims some authority:
"do you realise that I was the one who presented wing chun to be 'simple direct and efficient'. I know that you do train, but you have not been drilled in those concepts. "
How do you know so much?
I have experienced the simplicity, directness and efficiency of BPKFS training.
You conceal yourself behind the 'no politics' quote, but then you just go and talk politics......
|
|
|
Post by Open_mind on Jun 13, 2002 20:29:32 GMT -5
I have sat in a BPKFS training or more.
As for politics, I still relate back to wing chun as it stands. How can you say that I hide behind a 'no politics' veil and speak politics if I haven't even said who I represent?
At this stage in time I represent myself and people who wish to present their ideas and think. As opposed to follow like sheep. I walk into a fight with no guarantees, only knowing that I have a ltitle more understanding of what I can and can't do. You can't ask for much more.
As for being 'simple direct and efficient', it isn't, sorry I'll say 'wasn't' mentioned at all till I mentioned it. So obviously it isn't one of the 'key' ideas that many of you would have.
I mean for a start to 'defend' against a round punch (sorry but I don't like the word defend), you are telling me that wing chun would incorporate two movements and a step? More than one technique maybe but only one movement. Hence it is efficient because it attacks the target directly and 9 out of 10 times it will cause damage required to consider the next move. For thsoe who have confidence (I still lack it but I'll move towards it), can actually use wing chun even more directly and efficiently.
Put it this way, I am not here to argue. I practice wing chun and I learn to apply it in a practical sense. All I can say is that I am still learning and willing to learn more. If you want to teach me or tell me a few things, or maybe find out a little about me or anything, then do so. In a practical sense. Meet me and test your theories. Fair?
you seem to be experienced enough in what you practice so message me and arrange for a meeting. Holidays are soon so it should be pretty convenient for both of us. If you are up for it then I'm looking forward to learning a few things or maybe teaching a few things.
If you aren't up for it, then I'm cool with that also. Just don't be one who learns from a textbook and I wish you the best of luck for the future and HAPPY TRAINING.
|
|