What is your conception of Wing Chun Kuen?

[kj]

Something on the "mainland w.c. chi sau platforms" thread that I thought was legitimately interesting and fodder for discussion. I've transferred it to this new thread lest I interfere with ensuing dialog there.

Originally posted by t_niehoff
... WCK is fighting, or more precisely, fighting with a certain approach. No fighting, no WCK. So if you're not fighting, I don't know what you are doing -- though I could come up with a few terms for it if you'd like -- but it isn't WCK. At best, you're doing the prep work to begin practicing WCK.

This premise underscores that there are differing conceptions of what Wing Chun Kuen actually is. There are probably as many different conceptions of Wing Chun as there are people practicing it; even as individuals, our conceptions are likely to change over time. Some of these may be largely in agreement with one another, some may be fundamentally at odds.

Our notions of Wing Chun Kuen also serve as fundamental premises for many of the endless debates and inquiries on all manner of things from training methods, to the benefits (or not) of forms and chi sau, to who is or is not a real martial artist, the merits of cross-training, and on ad infinitum.

Given that, I am interested to learn - from the widest variety of you as possible - what is your conception of Wing Chun Kuen?

By way of example, in my conception Wing Chun is a training system in conjunction with a tightly integrated suite of concepts the primary purpose of which is to increase the probability of success when and if applied in a violent physical encounter, and which is encapsulated, practiced and transmitted in the form of an art.

I'll defer further elaboration as I am far more interested to hear your conceptions of what Wing Chun Kuen is. Lateral thinking warmly welcomed. Terence and I have already logged in on this; as a divergent kind of exploration, the more and varied perspectives the rest of you can share the better, with special encouragement to our less loquacious fellow members.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[t_niehoff]

Our method is called wing chun *kuen* - the "kuen" is of course short for kuen faat, fist or fighting method. BJJ, boxing, wrestling, muay thai, etc. all are different examples of fighting methods. Each is a different approach toward fighting, with different tools to implement that particular approach, and each comes with a means to learn and develop those tools. But one is not "doing" any of those unless one is fighting with it -- you're not boxing unless you are in the ring, you're not wrestling unless you are on the mat, you are not doing BJJ unless you are rolling, etc. The "doing" is putting the tools to work as they were meant to be used -- in a fighting environment. Everything else is the prep work. The "art" is in the performance of the activity (fighting) itself, in the final product. No fighting, then you are not "doing" WCK (you are preparing to do WCK), and there can be no art.

[Nick Forrer]

I agree with Terence despite the straw man arguments and crude swimming analogies

[reneritchie]

It attracts a lot of disfunctional communicators.

[Vajramusti]

dysfunctional too.

[Tom Kagan]

Ving Tsun Paai Kung Fu has a method.

Ving Tsun Paai Kung Fu has a result.

The phrase: "Kung Fu" has a method - Hard Work - and a result - Husband to Mother Nature (marriage to life).

If you ask someone what is their conception of Ving Tsun, you are really asking them what they want to be. Children and those still in the "beautiful springtime" of their life are never defined by what they do. Who they are is what they want to be, not what they do.

While fighting is a part of life, if your life is fighting, then if you use the Ving Tsun method, everything is fighting. You put yourself into the system, and you "become" fighting.


If what you want to be is the righteous imposing dualities and judging what is and is not Ving Tsun, then if you use the Ving Tsun method, everything is a judgment. You put yourself into the system, and you become the arbiter.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by kj
Given that, I am interested to learn - from the widest variety of you as possible - what is your conception of Wing Chun Kuen?

I think it is a theoretical concept of how fighting "should" be. Unfortunately, I think it was developed with too much theory and not enough testing- lots of great theory that doesn't hold up by the average practitioner in the real world.

[PaulH]

WC means "Praise the Spring!". What could be more refreshing than the exciting promise of Springtime? It is what you think it is. The WC long-lasting appeals are the fruits of joy, peace and a sense of liberation to each practitioner.

[ZIM]

Its about leveraging armshare, networking with emergent punches, promoting diversity in the fight-space, and thinking outside of the box.

[yellowpikachu]

Wing Chun Kuen ofcouse capable of function in fighting. Otherwise, it is not name as Kuen or Punch or combative art.



However, Thus I have heard, the concept of Wing Chun Kuen or Wing Chun figthing is -------- Reel/bind in , shock/vibrate/shoot out, Intercept/jamming/interupt on half way, and piecing/leaking through into any place it is non seal.


And it comes with tools: as light silk as the long sleves of the opera actor to reel. As powerfull as Tsunami inch power to shock. As fast as radio wave to intercep. and as aware as water to leak into every hole.




Like a tsunami for the shock, like a surf reel on the wave---- Wing Chun Kuen. I am not fighting, I am doing reel, shock, intercept, piecing.

[yellowpikachu]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Our method is called wing chun *kuen* - the "kuen" is of course short for kuen faat, fist or fighting method. .................. The "art" is in the performance of the activity (fighting) itself, in the final product. No fighting, then you are not "doing" WCK (you are preparing to do WCK), and there can be no art.

Terrence,

You mention about figthing which is similar to "moving".

So,
but what is your "faat" or vehicle of "moving"?

moving itself is just moving keep moving doesnt equal with flying with an aircraft.

[Vajramusti]

Yellowpiikachu sez:

Wing Chun Kuen ofcouse capable of function in fighting. Otherwise, it is not name as Kuen or Punch or combative art.

((Of course))



However, Thus I have heard, the concept of Wing Chun Kuen or Wing Chun figthing is -------- Reel/bind in , shock/vibrate/shoot out, Intercept/jamming/interupt on half way, and piecing/leaking through into any place it is non seal.

((Good overview- the devil again is in the details))


And it comes with tools: as light silk as the long sleves of the opera actor to reel. As powerfull as Tsunami inch power to shock. As fast as radio wave to intercep. and as aware as water to leak into every hole.

((Good ideal-and your laborious work is admirable and helpful
and very informative- but the mma crowd is going a different route and some attention spans are brief and listening abilities slight and postings repetitive..
Kudos to you in persisting inspite of all the name calling.
Hendrik- One can't take KFO's Alice in Wonderland setting seriously as a place for dialogue.))))

[t_niehoff]

Hendrik,

For me WCK is an approach toward fighting that involves a certain strategy (method) and tools (using the body, including the limbs) for implementing that approach. The forms or sets give us those tools. A person cannot develop great power with the punch from YJKYM except by doing it correctly (for them). The test isn't that it matches how you believe it should be done but rather that one has the power. As I told a visitor just the other night, "How can I say you are doing it wrong if you can make it work; and how can you say you are doing it right if you can't make it work?"

[yellowpikachu]

Originally posted by Vajramusti


((Good ideal-and your laborious work is admirable and helpful- but the mma crowd is going a different route.
Kudos tp you in persisting inspite of all the name calling.
Can't take KFO seriously as a place for dialogue.))))

we will always find others who has different and opposite oppinions.

and the only way we can win them over is, we tell the truth, let them to be free thinker, and let them see that there is benifit and merit offered to them in the truth.

[yellowpikachu]

Originally posted by t_niehoff


A person cannot develop great power with the punch from YJKYM except by doing it correctly (for them).

The test isn't that it matches how you believe it should be done but rather that one has the power.

so, just said power and CORRECT are not good enough.
peole can do modified thier YJKYM to a wide horse stance and still claim it is Wing Chun a like.
people can do a san chin stance and claim it is YJKYM in action......
one can do boxing punch....

All can generate great power and correct.

But is that WCK?



So,


first one has to define what is a YJKYM.. such as 1 to 1.25 shoulder wide distance between to legs. ect.....

second, what kind of power is that --- the characteristics, the momentum.... potential... kinectic....intensity......

third, one has to explain the process of the particular type of power generation and its momentum.

fourth, one has to be able to link that power to all motions
naturally....


so, just fighting without clear definition/proccess... is not going be WCK.

Just giving a clove to a student to punch the heavy bag to test power doesnt mean WCK.


The test is both about how much power can be generated AND is it according to the WCK methodology and process.

otherwise, boxing can be WCK because it creates great power. Hung Gar can be WCK because it creates great power. Dragon Style can be WCK . Taiji Can be WCK. Hsing Yee Can be WCK. because it creastes great power.... and list goes on and on.....

but is that WCK?


if we dont know our own process and methodology and we punch like a Bjj or TKD or Boxing then are we doing WCK? No wonder we got take down. because we are not doing WCK all the time. we are just doing something which give us great power and is that fit into WCK? Who knows?

if we have no track, no idea on what we are doing, and we are doing the same will others (whatever that the same means) what are we doing? how can we even knows our pro and cons ? how can we improve or eliminate the good or the bad....? we are flying blind technically.

Then, when our stuffs doesnt work, our reaction is "the ancestors" is not advance enough, the world has grow more advance today. and that can be true. but it can be true too that we have never do our homework and never listern to what the ancestors teach. or we also creat myth stories that hiding our ego in it like smoking opium and keep argue the myth is the truth, it is just others dont smoke the same opium, otherwise they will see that truth too.

just some thoughts.