Well in Wing Chun we teach principles. Centerline theory, hand replacement, hand unity, facing, conservation of motion, etc. The concepts don't change from student to student but the way it is communicated or explained must because people from different backgrounds understand things differently - Yip Man was known for his ability to explain things totally differently to different students.
As for size etc. larger stronger students they will learn or discover Chi-Sao from a somewhat harder prospective, the smaller weaker student will discover Chi-Sao from a more subtle and in my opinion a more pure prospective because he has no strength advantage to fall back on, which can hinder his growth. The smaller student will find that he will apply the concepts a little differently, with more emphasis on different points than a large or tall person will, but the concepts in our system don't change, nor do the movements vary much, save some individual stylization.
As far as innovation goes one can create or invent any 'new' technique at any time in Wing Chun, so long as it adheres to the core concepts of the system...it is said then that he has discovered a new Wing Chun technique since by definition any movement or technique that conforms to the system's core concepts is a by our definition a Wing Chun technique.
Jim
------------------
Moy Yat Ving Tsun
Rest in peace dear teacher, dear friend, dear brother, and dear father: Moy Yat Sifu
[This message has been edited by Shaolin (edited February 25, 2002).]
Molded Black Belts !
Moderator: Available
-
Allen M.
Molded Black Belts !
I like a centerline principle, Shaolin, where all strikes are aimed at designated strikes are aimed along the vertical centerline of the opponent. One can apply more strength by seeking the center rather than striking straight out.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
Molded Black Belts !
Hi Shaolin;
I've been following some your posts/replies and I've noticed something about your references to Wing Chun which I find really interesting:
They refer to the attributes of the opponent rather than the attributes of yourself.
For example, we might say "keep your hips square to your opponent..." but you refer to your placement as referenced to the opponent's position: centerline means the opponent's centerline.
This makes me think that your style (I know a little about Wing Chun) is opponent-based rather than "you"-based for lack of a better term.
Spending time defining techniques in terms of the opponent seems like a very excellent idea to me. Is this a basic in the teaching of Wing Chun, or do you have a personal slant on expressing the concepts this way?
Does anyone else think that Uechi is more oriented toward what the practitioner does rather than describing the "enemy" as a rationale for the techniques?
Bear in mind I'm a junior practitioner and Uechi is the only style I somewhat-know.
I've been following some your posts/replies and I've noticed something about your references to Wing Chun which I find really interesting:
They refer to the attributes of the opponent rather than the attributes of yourself.
For example, we might say "keep your hips square to your opponent..." but you refer to your placement as referenced to the opponent's position: centerline means the opponent's centerline.
This makes me think that your style (I know a little about Wing Chun) is opponent-based rather than "you"-based for lack of a better term.
Spending time defining techniques in terms of the opponent seems like a very excellent idea to me. Is this a basic in the teaching of Wing Chun, or do you have a personal slant on expressing the concepts this way?
Does anyone else think that Uechi is more oriented toward what the practitioner does rather than describing the "enemy" as a rationale for the techniques?
Bear in mind I'm a junior practitioner and Uechi is the only style I somewhat-know.
-
GSantaniello
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Randolph, Ma. U.S.A.
Molded Black Belts !
Allen,
I must admit, i am suprized at your responce to my "terminology" in that you feel needed an explanation as to the meanings ? I eel that the meanings were fairly obvious as to the content of their use. AS to "one night" not amonting to anything particular, it is all those "special classes" where students really grasp the material and grow that mak the diference.
Not just repeatedly going through the motions over years without understanding.
I hope others do not find my comments in need of explanation to be "examined".
Respectfully,
------------------
Gary S.
I must admit, i am suprized at your responce to my "terminology" in that you feel needed an explanation as to the meanings ? I eel that the meanings were fairly obvious as to the content of their use. AS to "one night" not amonting to anything particular, it is all those "special classes" where students really grasp the material and grow that mak the diference.
Not just repeatedly going through the motions over years without understanding.
I hope others do not find my comments in need of explanation to be "examined".
Respectfully,
------------------
Gary S.
-
Allen M.
Molded Black Belts !
Forget it, Gary. I wanted to clearly explain something without ambiguity getting in the way.
Molded Black Belts !
I love my style which is basically Shotokan. My biggest objections is the manner in which they train. Yes they train and extremely hard.
No complaints about that. I just feel it needs to be modernised along with the research that has been in the last 25 years. So rather than crumble I build my ideas into my own training.
I have rearched others schools and arts and borrowed things that I like and work. I dont believe on system suits all, but I do think that a solid grounding in the basics is critical.
Anyone who does anything well is an expert in the basics.
No complaints about that. I just feel it needs to be modernised along with the research that has been in the last 25 years. So rather than crumble I build my ideas into my own training.
I have rearched others schools and arts and borrowed things that I like and work. I dont believe on system suits all, but I do think that a solid grounding in the basics is critical.
Anyone who does anything well is an expert in the basics.
Molded Black Belts !
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 2Green:
Hi Shaolin;
I've been following some your posts/replies and I've noticed something about your references to Wing Chun which I find really interesting:
They refer to the attributes of the opponent rather than the attributes of yourself.
For example, we might say "keep your hips square to your opponent..." but you refer to your placement as referenced to the opponent's position: centerline means the opponent's centerline.
This makes me think that your style (I know a little about Wing Chun) is opponent-based rather than "you"-based for lack of a better term.
Spending time defining techniques in terms of the opponent seems like a very excellent idea to me. Is this a basic in the teaching of Wing Chun, or do you have a personal slant on expressing the concepts this way?
Does anyone else think that Uechi is more oriented toward what the practitioner does rather than describing the "enemy" as a rationale for the techniques?
Bear in mind I'm a junior practitioner and Uechi is the only style I somewhat-know.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hi 2Green!
I’m afraid I cannot take credit for that since it is Wing Chun that is 'opponent based'.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Bruce Lee said:
A good Jeet Kune Do man does not oppose force or give way completely. He is pliable as a spring; he is the complement and not the opposition to his opponent's strength. He has no technique; he makes his opponent's techniques his technique.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wing Chun, in different ways at different levels, always attempts to 'fit in' with the opponent. In this month's Black Belt magazine Tony Blauer talks about every martial artist having a favorite technique. I thought about this for a minute and realized that I do not have a favorite technique - and I think this is probably true for most Wing Chun people. Each tool in Wing Chun is designed to fit in with what the opponent is doing. I do not 'favor' a Dim Jung (palm) over a Cheung Choi (fist): The difference between the two strikes comes down to the position of the elbow during the striking movement, and determines which line or gate it controls. Of course, which line we need to control depends on what the opponent is doing or is about to do or could do. Likewise, whether we use a left or right hand is not dependant on if we are left handed or right handed, it is determined by the opponent’s actions or potential actions. Chi-Sao, for example, is an exercise in adapting to the energy of the opponent. This energy can tell you what the intention of the opponent is and dictates which technique must be used in order to maintain or gain control of the line.
In another helpful example Tony Blauer talks about styles responding to his question. 'What would you do if' scenarios. He says that styles respond to these questions by saying, "If he did that I'd kick him..." or "If he did that I'd grab his wrist..." In Wing Chun we never plan attack specific moves, we only say, "I will attack his Centerline" or "I will protect my Centerline" and we use the system to do this. This is the difference between using techniques and using concepts. Aikido uses concepts too and Aiki means 'to harmonize' in combat the ideal is to harmonize with the opponent and compliment what he does. In this way he can be rendered helpless and his energy used against him.
For example: If the opponent comes in with a low punch crossing the Centerline a possible response would be to control the center by using a Jut Sao on the same line/side as his punch. At the same time the other hand will strike. Together these movements are called Jut-Da and this means that 'Jut', which is a slight jerking motion with the hand and forearm, is used with a strike from the other hand.. The Jut Sao in keeping with harmonizing 'pulls' his punching energy inside closer to us, while deflecting downward, but adding to his energy and speeding up his attack (also off-balancing him) while simultaneously hitting him. The result is that his attacking energy is added to your striking energy, in essence you pull him into your striking hand. This is what we mean by using the opponent’s energy against him and is only possible when this harmony is achieved.
Jim
------------------
Moy Yat Ving Tsun
Rest in peace dear teacher, dear friend, dear brother, and dear father: Moy Yat Sifu
[This message has been edited by Shaolin (edited February 27, 2002).]
Hi Shaolin;
I've been following some your posts/replies and I've noticed something about your references to Wing Chun which I find really interesting:
They refer to the attributes of the opponent rather than the attributes of yourself.
For example, we might say "keep your hips square to your opponent..." but you refer to your placement as referenced to the opponent's position: centerline means the opponent's centerline.
This makes me think that your style (I know a little about Wing Chun) is opponent-based rather than "you"-based for lack of a better term.
Spending time defining techniques in terms of the opponent seems like a very excellent idea to me. Is this a basic in the teaching of Wing Chun, or do you have a personal slant on expressing the concepts this way?
Does anyone else think that Uechi is more oriented toward what the practitioner does rather than describing the "enemy" as a rationale for the techniques?
Bear in mind I'm a junior practitioner and Uechi is the only style I somewhat-know.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hi 2Green!
I’m afraid I cannot take credit for that since it is Wing Chun that is 'opponent based'.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Bruce Lee said:
A good Jeet Kune Do man does not oppose force or give way completely. He is pliable as a spring; he is the complement and not the opposition to his opponent's strength. He has no technique; he makes his opponent's techniques his technique.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wing Chun, in different ways at different levels, always attempts to 'fit in' with the opponent. In this month's Black Belt magazine Tony Blauer talks about every martial artist having a favorite technique. I thought about this for a minute and realized that I do not have a favorite technique - and I think this is probably true for most Wing Chun people. Each tool in Wing Chun is designed to fit in with what the opponent is doing. I do not 'favor' a Dim Jung (palm) over a Cheung Choi (fist): The difference between the two strikes comes down to the position of the elbow during the striking movement, and determines which line or gate it controls. Of course, which line we need to control depends on what the opponent is doing or is about to do or could do. Likewise, whether we use a left or right hand is not dependant on if we are left handed or right handed, it is determined by the opponent’s actions or potential actions. Chi-Sao, for example, is an exercise in adapting to the energy of the opponent. This energy can tell you what the intention of the opponent is and dictates which technique must be used in order to maintain or gain control of the line.
In another helpful example Tony Blauer talks about styles responding to his question. 'What would you do if' scenarios. He says that styles respond to these questions by saying, "If he did that I'd kick him..." or "If he did that I'd grab his wrist..." In Wing Chun we never plan attack specific moves, we only say, "I will attack his Centerline" or "I will protect my Centerline" and we use the system to do this. This is the difference between using techniques and using concepts. Aikido uses concepts too and Aiki means 'to harmonize' in combat the ideal is to harmonize with the opponent and compliment what he does. In this way he can be rendered helpless and his energy used against him.
For example: If the opponent comes in with a low punch crossing the Centerline a possible response would be to control the center by using a Jut Sao on the same line/side as his punch. At the same time the other hand will strike. Together these movements are called Jut-Da and this means that 'Jut', which is a slight jerking motion with the hand and forearm, is used with a strike from the other hand.. The Jut Sao in keeping with harmonizing 'pulls' his punching energy inside closer to us, while deflecting downward, but adding to his energy and speeding up his attack (also off-balancing him) while simultaneously hitting him. The result is that his attacking energy is added to your striking energy, in essence you pull him into your striking hand. This is what we mean by using the opponent’s energy against him and is only possible when this harmony is achieved.
Jim
------------------
Moy Yat Ving Tsun
Rest in peace dear teacher, dear friend, dear brother, and dear father: Moy Yat Sifu
[This message has been edited by Shaolin (edited February 27, 2002).]
