Wing Chun demo and a video on theory

In my search in the city for a new MA school, there were a few that I found, from a few karate schools to a few kung fu schools. One of the latter was a WC school associated with Sunny Tang, so I looked up a demo:



The following conversation would be academic in nature only as I'll end up selecting karate or CLF, but I was wondering how other WC folks thought about the demo, especially in case one of my friends tells me they might want to take it up.

I liked the solo staff on a basic level, but the solo knives seemed like there was a lot of up/down spine movement and head movement. The staff / knife set they did is something that I might try to avoid for a demo as the staff attacker had to freeze for the knives to close the distance so it might seem odd for an audience.

The students are wearing green sashes - is that a beginner/intermediate level, sort of like green belt?

Anyways, I happened to come across a video recently uploaded by someone else (he's since uploaded three more):



He talks about WC theory but claims that there was data loss between 1850 and 1875. In the vid he uploaded the next day he shows what he means with a bag. It looks like he's basically saying that "real" WC (to him) is to stick right next to your opponent and either hit, trip, lock, or throw them, instead of hanging out in a short distance squaring off.

Not being a WCer, I still find what he says compelling and I agree with him, but I think I've heard other WCers allude to similar practices as well. I think back even to Dominick Izzo (before he went off the deep end) who talked about constantly needing to spiral towards the opponent's center while you're going around their limbs when he was demonstrating how to do the wooden dummy, constantly pressing and invading the opponent's center. He also mentioned using the various shapes such as bong sao to wrap and trap instead of as a direct block to a punch. I think maybe Emin Boztepe might've been doing something similar but I'm not entirely sure.

I'm always a nerd for MA theory so I figured I'd share the vid above.

 

Oh no, that knife demo at the beginning of the first clip was not good
And much of the rest of the clip was uninspiring also.

 

I'll DM you the exact school; it's Chan family. The only thing I know about that is that they have many forms; forms are easy to pick up but getting really good in one takes time.
I emailed the CLF school for a drop-in but they never replied. Same deal with the Uechi ryu teacher but that just makes it easier for me to pick. I'm so far on the trajectory right towards the JKA (there's Isshin ryu but I don't agree with their kata honestly).

Exactly. It seems unreasonable to even stage it for a demo.

Your school's knives demo seems much better.

This is largely how I felt - in my own MA experience I would recommend against going to their WC school unless there's something there that I just can't see. I've seen other WC school demos that look much more real.

 

Quote "It looks like he's basically saying that "real" WC (to him) is to stick right next to your opponent and either hit, trip, lock, or throw them, instead of hanging out in a short distance squaring off."

The above is not exclusive to wing chun it's basically proper Kung Fu however I have serious doubts that modern wing chun as taught out of Hong Kong has this at its core as it has so little wrestling, level changes or foot work which is all pre requisite for close range righting and throwing

 

Yes, true; looking from the outside in it looks like one might have a better shot at becoming proficient in WC after training in one or two other martial arts already to develop a sense of martial principles like distancing, footwork, alignment, when to use what, how to use "blocks", timing (sen no sen, etc.), as well as how to condition oneself based on the skills they might want to make their WC better (i.e. core and legs instead of nothing but bench presses as a loose example), also the importance of cardio training...

I checked out some of his other videos and it looks like he's also selling books that are mostly in the $90 CAD range . The reviews say they were useful albeit with some grammatical errors, typographical errors, and plenty of repetition. He might just be a very adamant kind of person.

 

Oh my goodness I rediscovered Black Taoist's channel and he's still active! His channel has some real stuff in it - he does Bagua but in this vid he's got a WC Sifu doing a demo

Now that looks like some sweet WC

 

I love how in these demos people never pull their hands back when punching or think moving their feet and squaring up when someone is moving around their side gate...really realistic

 

I can forgive it in the other parts as by the time the opponent's moving he might move with them and punch them in the face, but what I don't like is the one at 5:52 when the opponent persists with his jammed punch leading to the sifu to pull him forward - I don't see a punch being pressed forward after jamming to be something that actually happens. It might've been better to do that in the demo with the opponent shoving or trying to just muscle him back rather than a punch.

The egregious example I saw recently was a video that looked like it was done by some influencer about how great some Shaolin monk was and the attacker would give slow-motion attacks that the monk would respond closer to full-speed to some of them, and the attacks seemed not the most sincere...



I can see much more nowadays why some level of competition or sparring is valued in MA to keep attacks and responses honest... without the right mentality it seems super easy to fall into non-realism.

 

To make it realistic be realistic the whole idea should be not to build a bridge, or react to their punch grab it etc

It should be hit them, beat them hurt them

Put so much pressure on them and through their centre that your overwhelm them they freeze and either push you away or grab you, giving you the ability to pull push break etc,

 

The Video

I will put this as diplomatically as I can. Sunny Tang has made himself a commercial success, and that's what he cares about.

I'll respond to individual points here, but in general the students look like they were struggling with weapons which were above their level of physique and skill. In Ip Man's teaching the do is taught last, and the gwan second-to-last. The way the curriculum is set up they're supposed to be for advanced students, where the foundational movements have been built through the empty handed forms, instead of the other way around. Some schools teach them early because students look at them, and think they're cool, and would get disappointed or frustrated when told they can't do that yet and I get it, but things like this are the result.

That's because it's a relatively basic weapon with a few movements. The sue mai gwan being so long limits the number of things you can realistically do with it, and it's going to look better even if the fundamental mechanics are off.

She (?) literally shrugged the do up at one point. If I had to pick something to compliment out of this it would be that the student was willing to put himself or herself on display, but that's really all.

It's very set-up but they're not exactly geared up for a HEMA match.

Wouldn't know. Traditional Wing Chun is like the rest of traditional kung fu, just two ranks of student and sifu, with a family organization structure.

The Rest

Before Ip Man, the curriculum was weapons first, empty hand second. The big knowledge loss is that people don't understand how the weapons mechanics relate to empty-hand. Many people don't learn them at all, or learn them poorly, because even among Ip Man's students, not all of them learned the weapons. Lots of people trying to ride his name to fame and money though.

But in any case, you're never meant to be "squaring off." You're meant to close, and access their central line (like the centre line of a cylinder).

The saying in Wing Chun is "others walk the bow, I walk the string. There is no "spiral." Your goal is direct access to their central line. Everything else, all the other offensive trapping, is just ripping away, jamming in, or wedging away their limbs to remove the obstacle to that, and that happens either up and down, or left and right. Wing Chun specifically avoids circles as it allows opponents to continue the momentum you'd give them.

That's a load of nonsense bourn out of ignorance. Bong sao (and high bong sao which people usually wrong think is meant as a finger thrust) is a deflection which comes directly from the do and the gwan (remember I said about people not understanding the relationship of the weapons?). In Western fencing it's equivalent to High Seconde, being used to deflect thrusts to the middle and high gates (basically head/neck and torso).

 

The striking and grappling is complimentary to the do, not empty hand and weapons as two separate streams. The things I can do empty handed I can also do with the do and the inverse is true as well. Dropping for someone's legs when you're unarmoured or lightly armoured, and they have one or more blades, and your hands are occupied with your own weapons, and you're in a group, is a pretty poor plan and a great way to get stabbed. The developmental context is important here. This is like looking at men at arms in full plate and going, "Well why not just stab him in the chest?"

As I've said before, Wing Chun is more like HEMA than it is like boxing.

Exactly, to attack the torso. The goal in Wing Chun is not to bridge on purpose, it's to hit them, the bridge is incidental. I don't want to sit there and rub my sword on my opponent's weapon, I want to stab or cut him. The fact that I make contact is incidental.

Taking a sword and just hacking at your opponent to overwhelm them is a fine strategy....until you meet someone who can fence.

 

That's so sad honestly.

Very insightful! I've never thought about Wing Chun like this before.

 

And the problem with this theory is that arts which actually were used on the battlefield in armour and which did use empty hands alongside weapon skill such as Xing Yi Quan included grappling, level changes throws etc (because they understood what happened empty hand against a weapon and what you needed to do to survive) all of which wing chun as taught by yip man does not have

They also have hard percussive full body strikes because as you say they are against people in armour, again which wing chun does not have.....

Makes you wonder what wing chun was actually developed for if it looks and acts nothing like arts we know we're battlefield weapon and empty hand arts

And no where was hacking at your opponent mentioned overwhelming him so he makes a mistake was, but to each his own interpretation


Here is an nicely written piece on what an empty hand style designed for the battle field looks like not a lot of it sounds like wing chun to me

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ground...6/tim-cartmell-on-the-xingyiquan-fighter/amp/

 

When you say "battlefield" you are making an assumption of the type of terrain and the type of armour.

The "battlefield" wing chun was developed for and in was on war junks, and in narrow streets, and when with armour, light armour.




And look at the wing chun weapons; short hangars, and long poles. Then look at photos from the interior armouries of the war junks. Hangars, and boarding pikes.



We're not talking about heavy infantry. We're talking tight quarters naval and urban fighting. Now, tight quarters + weapons in hand. How do you think you're wrestling with people in tight quarters like those shown above while trying to grip someone, without dropping the weapons in your hands?

Henan is geographically and contextually different to Guangdong. This would be like me saying that cavalry clearly wears heavy winter clothing because something something Cossacks or Mongols, and ignoring Arabian or Indian cavalry. Entirely different contexts, different geographies, different "battlefields."

And again, you're thinking like this is two different streams, empty hand alongside weapons. It's not. It's weapons and empty hand which share the same mechanics.

 

Fascinating!! :O

 

In the original video I really can't get over the first person's posture. I know nothing about WC and its stances, but she's twisting her knees horribly (I think she should work on this for the sake of her joints), and has no support from her legs when striking. Her back bent, pelvis tucked in, it looks very unstable and lacking power. I can see her falling over if pushed lightly in the middle of the chest.
I don't know how advanced of a student she is, though....

 

Yes, when she rotates her hips, her foot twists are not very consistent and it sometimes looks like her knees are collapsing inward. She also seems to struggle with changing the grip of one of the knives at one point as well. It also looks like she almost raises her shoulders out of their sockets. When I first watched it it seemed more like it was dancing of some sort.

At this point, based on the input of the others including yourself, as well as my own feeling here, it seems like either way she was taught incorrectly. I feel bad for her and potentially ST's other students.

 

poor demo for sure
the knives were bad, the hip swinging was horrible

the wooden dummy work - seriously does he even train; once a month for five minutes? (that's generous)
at the least I'd expect some fast hands and stability.

wow, that was terrible.

the state of some kung fu sometimes, is just depressing.

 

I've studied a few martials arts for a short period of time during my life but I remember only one; wing chun kung fu.