Ng chan wing chun

[MOSHE]

Moshe,

bik ma?

???????????

[kung fu fighter]

???????????

bik ma is Shuffle stepping similar to fencing footwork, if your front foot steps forward 6 inches, your back foot is dragged forward 6 inches to maintain the correct distance in your stance

[MOSHE]

bik ma is Shuffle stepping similar to fencing footwork, if your front foot steps forward 6 inches, your back foot is dragged forward 6 inches to maintain the correct distance in your stance

Chum Kiu uses simple angle changing to easily face enemies within 180-degrees, to easily change position 360-degrees,

[kung fu fighter]

Chum Kiu uses simple angle changing to easily face enemies within 180-degrees, to easily change position 360-degrees,

do you mean the moving side on facing stance?


and is this what you mean by running horse?

[Tom Kagan]

I m not sure of the word in English 'but itS like your opponent ceintures or belts you with his arms

At the same time you spread your arms from your body ,bend your upper body and extend your legs
If it's done well the opponent will even fall in front of you , if not he will not escape from the following movement in the Tao

Absolutely incorrect. This movement's details as contained within the Ving Tsun 3rd form are completely incompatible with throwing someone using technique instead of muscling through it (and risking back injury).

Swinging your opponent over you is not good thinking for fighting. Ving Tsun doesnt have such ideas!

No, it is good thinking for fighting. (Hitting a person with the entire planet hurts.) It's just not part of a style whose attacks consist of punching and kicking. Thus, I agree Ving Tsun does not include this.

Why save a bear hug for last ? why not show a double leg kick if bear hugged to the guys friends in front ? why not grab his nutz ? Why not stamp on his foot ? why not reverse head butt ? why not seung ma with twisiting stance like judo ? I have seen a double gum sao forwards develop more force to break the bear hug....

Without commenting on why or even what it is for, and sidestepping your alternative suggestions, Ving Tsun is full of apparent inversions of the learning progression.

the same system but with an underlying difference that changed the BG from 'deadly' to 'recovery' of lines if arms trapped, raised , overturned, re-facing a mobile target, multiple opponents, grabbing arms to turn an opponent into others or simply to turn them if a strong long arm was presented as a lever in defense.

This is closer to my understanding as well.

While I am greatful for the information listed, it can be misinterpreted . BG wasnt shown outside for its 'deadlyness' but for it showing our vulnerability and how we escape our own mistakes...that our opponents would also know to ...escape our own attacking ideas.

Occam's Razor would suggest it may not have been shown "outside" simply because it was ordered further into the learning progression and few people stick around that long, anyway.

Just waiting for Tom Kagan to pipe in about how your kungfu sux!

I never said Kevin's Kung Fu sucked. If you reread what I wrote, I said if he couldn't explain it, then it sucked. A subtle distinction? Perhaps, but it was one he got - he essentially said what we are discussing was too verbose, boring, and/or he was too lazy to attempt to do so via forum posts. (I agreed.)


And Joy:

For the love of Ng Mui, learn to use the d@mn [quote] syntax. I'll send you five dollars if you do.

[Graham H]

And Joy:

For the love of Ng Mui, learn to use the d@mn quote syntax. I'll send you five dollars if you do.

I'll send 5 as well!

GH

[CFT]

I never said Kevin's Kung Fu sucked. If you reread what I wrote, I said if he couldn't explain it, then it sucked. A subtle distinction? Perhaps, but it was one he got - he essentially said what we are discussing was too verbose, boring, and/or he was too lazy to attempt to do so via forum posts. (I agreed.)

I have re-read what you wrote, I stand by what I said.

In response to Moshe:

If your movements are 1 cm away from a break down, your kung fu sucks.

In repsonse to Kevin G:

If a 1 cm change causes your movement to break down, you suck. If that happens, maybe what you were taught sucks too, but you definitely suck.

[lance]

There is no real input - it's become yet another "we've got the real wing chun" claim without any specifics to back it up. But I'm offering MOSHE the chance to get specific, especially since there is another story from another lineage that runs very parallel.

Sorry, but when he makes statements like the "basic movements" one he made - I want to see backup evidence.

William Cheung has said that the Leung Bik version of wing chun he learned (which he now calls TWC) was the authentic wing chun, and if I may paraphrase his claims: these (TWC) movements are the "basic movments of wing chun that are the most efficient."

EXACTLY WHAT MOSHE IS SAYING ABOUT NG CHAN'S WING CHUN.

Okay, but MOSHE also says that Ng Chan's wing chun is very different from William Cheung's TWC in its "basic movements".

Fine, but now it's time to back that up with some details/specifics/evidence. You see, whether you agree with William Cheung's assessment of the TWC "difference" or not (and you don't have to agree)...

and regardless of whether or not you believe William Cheung's story as to where TWC came from...

at least he's shown the world what this "TWC" wing chun system looks like; and yes, in many ways it is different than what the rest of Yip Man's students were doing - regardless of whether or not someone deems those differences as better or worse .

So If you're going to make claims like these - you need to at least show people what you're talking about.

Otherwise, it's nothing but talk.

So this doesn't have to be a William Cheung vs. Ng Chan debate - but simply a conversation that includes full disclosure.

ultimatewingchun , I agree with you too , but yet if no one can provide us with
real resources of information concerning Ng Chan and his connection to William
Cheung , then you might as well do your own research . It ' s true though we
were ' nt born when Ip Man was around so we have to look for true information on Ng Chan and his connection to william chueng . To me always people going to say they know the whole story about Ip Man or his entire students . If it ' s true ,
then they ' ll provide true information otherwise they ' re only making up stories .
My WC friends told me that Ng Chan wanted to keep a low profile on himself okay , what about videos on him I saw his picture , but what about videos of him
doing any of the WC forms . They all talk about it , but yeah ! I want to see it too .

[Tom Kagan]

I have re-read what you wrote, I stand by what I said.

In response to Moshe:


In repsonse to Kevin G:

What part of *if* is hard to understand in my words?


I stand by my words, too: If a 1 cm deviance causes a BREAKDOWN (should not read as a slightly less than perfect result). So, the onus is on the reader: does 1 lousy cm induce complete suckitude?

Moshe said a 1 cm difference would cause a breakdown. Kevin did not. Therefore, I said Moshe sucks and said nothing of Kevin.

[CFT]

They are saying it makes a difference, so qualifying your statements with *if* makes no difference.

Moshe's sifu says 1cm difference may result in a different intended outcome, which chimes with what you say as 'less than perfect', but then says it might make the difference between life and death.

[MOSHE]

ultimatewingchun , i agree with you too , but yet if no one can provide us with
real resources of information concerning ng chan and his connection to william
cheung , then you might as well do your own research . It ' s true though we
were ' nt born when ip man was around so we have to look for true information on ng chan and his connection to william chueng . To me always people going to say they know the whole story about ip man or his entire students . If it ' s true ,
then they ' ll provide true information otherwise they ' re only making up stories .
My wc friends told me that ng chan wanted to keep a low profile on himself okay , what about videos on him i saw his picture , but what about videos of him
doing any of the wc forms . They all talk about it , but yeah ! I want to see it too .

thats true , a child ,STILL NOT ENOUGH MATURE TO UNDERSTAND PROPERLY A SYSTEM QUIET COMPLICATED ,who learned only few months and even at the beginning under the supervision of ng chan, then left after to australia continued his training by telepathy (no skype at this time) with ip man

concerning the differences about the basic movements of the leung bik version ,it was due to distortion on the line

[CFT]

詠春單頭棍,單然用拳術力量方法為基礎,即橋力,手力,打擊力.[千萬不要盡信什麼力從地起,六合,,,,等一大堆,詠春拳手腳發力獨立,最少要求.各位可以試 試,坐在椅上 ,一手兩指輕輕拿塊板,或溥磚,另一手把它打斷.如果你發不出力,那就不是詠春拳的基本力.葉問當年在大角 咀一間茶室跟蔡李佛何秋講數,就是坐著把手肘放在台上,拳頭對著何秋說,一動就一拳打死你]

Wing Chun single headed pole only uses the fist art's power methods as a foundation, that is bridge power (kiu lik), amr/hand power (sau lik), attacking power (da gik lik). [Do not believe in whatever 'power from the ground up', 6 harmonies, etc. one big pile. In Wing Chun Kuen the arms and legs express power independently, as a minimum requirement. Everyone can try this, sit in a chair, between 2 fingers of one hand gently hold a wooden board or thin tile, use the other hand to break it (board/tile). If you can't express the power (faat lik), then this is not Wing Chun Kuen's foundational power. Some time in the past Yip Man was in a Tai Kok Tsui (West of Mong Kok, Kowloon) tea house settling a conflict (gong sou) with Choy Lee Fut's Ho Chau, sitting down elbows on the table top, fist pointed at Ho Chau, saying: 'one move and I'll kill you with one punch].

[CFT]

言歸正轉.單頭棍威力特點,1為圈.圈以帶有震蕩力[搏斗,力為主,招為咐,無力一切不須講]為主,控棍尖走圈附帶震蕩有如多點[有如花,所以在起梅花之稱]這時,站在棍前的人,會感到眼花.圈在兵器接觸時,可圈走對方兵器或帶偏方向.這是最難練好的 動作和力量.

Returning to the subject. Single headed pole characteristic powers:

1. Huen. Huen primarily carries vibrational power [in a fight, power is primary, technique secondary, if there is no power then there is no point talking about anything else], controlling the pole tip in a circle carrying an attached vibration like many points [like a flower, giving rise to the term 'plum flower']. At this point, anyone standing in front of the pole will feel dazzled. When huen comes into contact with weapons, it can circle (huen) the opponent's weapon away or change its direction. This is the most difficult motion and power to train.

四十二年,我自已這方面都不滿意.

42 years, I am still dissatisfied in this area.

[k gledhill]

Returning to the subject. Single headed pole characteristic powers:

1. Huen. Huen primarily carries vibrational power [in a fight, power is primary, technique secondary, if there is no power then there is no point talking about anything else], controlling the pole tip in a circle carrying an attached vibration like many points [like a flower, giving rise to the term 'plum flower']. At this point, anyone standing in front of the pole will feel dazzled. When huen comes into contact with weapons, it can circle (huen) the opponent's weapon away or change its direction. This is the most difficult motion and power to train.

42 years, I am still dissatisfied in this area.

I'm assuming this refers to ...
'kam gwan' - "covering pole" - the action that follows 'Lau Soi' where the pole covers the opponent's weapon, knocking it downwards.

A ballistic kinetic exchange of force from one pole to the other to open a path to strike, without taking the pole/hand off the strike line to them.

Its not easy, I see many clips of guys who simply drop the pole tip a few feet down and up...thats not the intended action.

[k gledhill]

[QUOTE=Tom Kagan;1129648]Absolutely incorrect. This movement's details as contained within the Ving Tsun 3rd form are completely incompatible with throwing someone using technique instead of muscling through it (and risking back injury).



No, it is good thinking for fighting. (Hitting a person with the entire planet hurts.) It's just not part of a style whose attacks consist of punching and kicking. Thus, I agree Ving Tsun does not include this.




Without commenting on why or even what it is for, and sidestepping your alternative suggestions, Ving Tsun is full of apparent inversions of the learning progression.



This is closer to my understanding as well.



Occam's Razor would suggest it may not have been shown "outside" simply because it was ordered further into the learning progression and few people stick around that long, anyway.



I never said Kevin's Kung Fu sucked. If you reread what I wrote, I said if he couldn't explain it, then it sucked. A subtle distinction? Perhaps, but it was one he got - he essentially said what we are discussing was too verbose, boring, and/or he was too lazy to attempt to do so via forum posts. (I agreed.)


And Joy:

For the love of Ng Mui, learn to use the d@mn

syntax. I'll send you five dollars if you do.

Me too ...$5

yeah one has to experience death due to 1cm in person, words just dont do it