"If your philosophy of purity was applied to cars, we would still be driving Ford Model T's!" - addressed to me by my Wing Chun brother, T, 2009.Here we go again, my favorite debate topic with my favorite adversary, T. (Real name not mentioned because I'm not sure he wants to go public!)
Background: T is an elderly gentleman with a loooong history of martial arts, the most recent before Wing Chun being Sanshou* and Karate. Despite being elderly (same age as Sifu Yip Fook Choy) he is absolutely fit and trim, energetic and with a great sense of humor. A very intelligent, respectable man. In his opinion, a person becomes a better martial artist by combining many different arts, the more, the merrier.
But, I argue, Wing Chun and other martial arts with a similar level of integration/optimization** cannot be "mixed and matched" with other martial arts, without hurting the end result. My retort (after a few minutes of reflection) to his above comment was that you can't mix 2 different types of vehicles and the end result would be a useless compromise. In my example, I used a Volvo tractor-trailer and a Porsche 911 GT2. Each are very, very good at what they do, but mixing the two would result in a truck that cannot pull much of a load or a sports car that cannot go fast!
T's argument, as implied by his analogy above, is that all MA's are the same, and that there is no MA that is absolutely perfect. Adding techniques from other MA's would therefore enrich Wing Chun, not weaken it. In fact, in his opinion, all MA development over the years must have been from mixing and matching different styles.
But in reality, not all MA can be mixed and matched easily. Different MA, especially ones that are highly integrated, are designed for different purposes. Although they are all made for fighting, they each develop different ways of generating power, even different ways of damaging targets, and they train someone to have a body structure and movement which support such ways of striking a target.***
In other words, applying this principle to the vehicle analogy, different MAs designed for different purposes are like different vehicles designed for different purposes. The Volvo tractor-trailer and the Porsche turbocharged sports car above would not fit each other, and you wouldn't mix and match a motorcycle with a boat, or a plane for that matter. That would make the resulting vehicle a complete mess, and not suited to any of the purpose of each!
But enough of analogies. Analogies are good for illustration, but analogies are not the subject itself.
Let me try to explain, real-world, what I think would happen if you mix Wing Chun and Ju-Jitsu, both of which I have had some experience in. Wing Chun with it's philosophy of delivering chun ging, or inch power to a target, and maximising the effect of it (more explanations to come in Part 2 of Intelligent Design, I PROMISE!!!) and Ju-Jitsu, a collection of techniques and sequence of movements that are designed to result in an opponent being thrown, or joint-locked, or joint-broken. At first glance, why not? Seems like a good idea to mix a type of art specializing in strikes with a type of art specializing in grappling. Wouldn't that result in an all-rounded fighter, able to fight in either a grappling of striking encounter? (Yes, I am aware most MMA fighters are trained this way.)
Wing Chun, however, demands that you stand, and move and strike in a certain way, at all times, so that you are ready to deliver a chun ging strike any time a target becomes available. If you mix in Ju-Jitsu, there will be moments during a fight where you will not be able to deliver a chun ging strike because your body structure is wrong at that particular time when a target becomes available. Even if you try, you will probably find that your Wing Chun strike will have no power, without the Wing Chun structure that enables it. Similarly, many techniques in the Ju-Jitsu I learned depend a lot on circular blocks (with predominantly sideways movement) that end in pinning or grappling a person, and I will not be able to use the centreline principle to maximise the effect of a strike, or to attack the opponents structure. And techniques in Wing Chun require the practitioner to be relaxed completely except at the point of impact, where the sudden shock will have the desired result on the opponent, whereas in Ju-Jitsu, some muscular firmness is necessary to force the opponents limbs and/or body to go where you want it to go. From such a muscular firmness, it would be totally impossible to have the sudden tenseness required for an effective Wing Chun strike (because the difference in the soft to hard change, or yin-yang change, would be too small). It would completely mess up Wing Chun, to the point that the Wing Chun practitioner cannot effectively use it anymore. These are only three inconsistencies that I can think of off the top of my head, I'm very very sure I would find more if I were to do more research on it.
One example is a fellow student and Wing Chun brother of mine, who, on the sly, studied a different kung fu while attending Wing Chun classes at the same time. In that Kung Fu (Shaolin, I believe) one of the weapons he praticed with is a weapon which is also available for Wing Chun, the Luk Dim Boon Kwan (its called a different name in Shaolin, but its exactly the same weapon). After training in that weapon, Guan Gung noticed his body was too hard to correctly execute Wing Chun moves. He had, in fact, lost power in his strikes and he was unable to match the reflex speed of Wing Chun. It actually weakened his kung fu! (View the video below to see what a Luk Dim Boon Kwan is.)
Similarly, a weight trainer will also not be able to perform Wing Chun well because weight training trains a muscle through resistance throughout its range of movement, not a sudden application of force (and just as sudden relaxation after) at only one small part of a movement. The structure and stance a weight trainer uses while lifting weights is also different, and weight training will result in a body which is hard and tense throughout a movement - counter to what Wing Chun training produces and counter to what Wing Chun needs to be executed properly.
This brings to mind another topic. Many people, used to seeing only Hong Kong Wing Chun, (as taught by Yip Man) as the definitive Wing Chun, explain the expanded syllabus and different teaching methods of Yip Kin Wing Chun as "a mix of many different Kung Fu". As a student with some experience in Yip Kin Wing Chun, I disagree. And the reason why is this: if there were any other Kung Fu that had been mixed in with Wing Chun in the Yip Kin system, the difference would be immediately obvious. The student will notice certain portions of the art where stances or structure are different, or certain movements which feel different, or certain strikes which do not use the chun ging or any other exception and inconsistency. By contrast, every move in every form in Yip Kin Wing Chun have the same feel to them. Consistent throughout the entire system, Yip Kin Wing Chun feels the same everywhere, and different to any other martial art I have done before. More about the training aspects later.
So in conclusion: T, while I respect your vast experience in the martial arts, I (still) disagree that other martial arts should, or even can, be mixed with Wing Chun, without weakening, maybe even disastrously, Wing Chun itself. I'm sorry, T, but I must disagree with you! If I were to choose a vehicle to drive, it would be one fit for my purpose, not one which is a bit of everything and fit for nought! I do relish another conversation with you on this endless topic though, because you make me think. And for that, I am deeply grateful to you.
P.S. This paragraph is separate because while it is tangentially related to the above topic, it deals with my personal preference. Why do I prefer a single integrated art instead of one which is a mix of techniques? While it takes longer to gain proficiency in an integrated art compared to one where each technique can be learnt and memorized in a single lesson, in actual usage, I believe (based on my experience with Ju-Jitsu, Ninjutsu, et. al.) that it would be more confusing. Each technique in such a MA is a counter to what your opponent does. (e.g. if he does this, I would to this, this, then this; if he does that, I would do this, then that, etc. etc.) And even if you have learnt thousands of techniques, you would probably only depend on a few that you are comfortable with. With an integrated art, every technique feels similar enough that you don't need to plan what to do beforehand. With Wing Chun especially (since this is the only integrated art I have experienced), what happens will come naturally and automatically, and what you actually use and how you use it may even surprise you! And based on our (rare) sparring sessions, what you actually use will be devastatingly effective. Your body will know what to do, and you can just trust (even enjoy? ;) the flow of events that unfold. I much prefer this later situation.
* T's Sanshou, however, is not the same as that in the link (which is another form of kickboxing). Rather, his Sanshou appears to be a mix of a few different Traditional Chinese Kung Fu. I think there are at least some Choy Li Fut and even some Wing Chun(!) as well as other styles in there. It seems to be a specialized one-of-a-kind mix for which not much is known. It's called Sanshou (mixed hands) because that's what it literally is....freestyle!
** Wing Chun is by no means the only highly integrated or optimized kung fu. Two others that Guan Gung has mentioned to me are Chen style Tai Chi and Hung Gar. Each are highly integrated, and like Wing Chun, each cannot co-exist easily with each other or any other MA. I'm sure if I look hard enough, there would be others like this as well.
*** It's not so bad if the different MA are similar enough to each other and have the same purpose (e.g. the different types of kickboxing), or, if each of the martial arts are nothing but collections of techniques, with no central theme or philosophy that demands a synergistic combination for one purpose. But Wing Chun is not like that.
Posts
A much debated point with merits to each side of the arguement. Interesting reading.
ReplyDeleteWow! Intellectually stimulating…… I can’t help but to participate……
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it depends on whether you’re mixing techniques, concepts or mixing energies. In combining solely on techniques, I do agree one has to be very careful as different arts utilized different body structure for application of techniques.
As for the other two, you can’t have one without another, which is the basis in executing techniques and applications. Depending on the era, situation and the person, combining concepts and energies seems to be quite normal looking at so many systems we have today.
1st example - Gao Yi Sheng did Hung Gar and Xing Yi first, and those martial arts were incorporated into it. Classical Ba gua doesn’t employ close fist but Gao style Ba Gua forms always end up in a striking fist. Sun Lu Tang learnt Xing Yi first from Cheng Ting Hua and tried to keep his Ba Gua pure. Sun Lu Tang is 140 pounds, employed a tighter circle with faster and evasive movements as compared to Gao style that has bigger circles and many movements done with more explicit power.
Both are equally great martial artists that made their art alive – (FYI – both learnt from the same teacher).
Closer example – Cho Gar Ban Chung Wing Chun employed Choy Li Fut movements, techniques and stances in some forms but you never see them exerting Choy Li Fut energies. Yip Kin Wing Chun’s small five animals were not done like the five animals of hung gar. The Hakka Tiger fists I encountered come with tiger claws but using crane energy.
From what I observed, both looks different but capturing the snake (ie. Bong Sau)and crane energies (ie. Huen sau follow by palm strike).
Interesting topic to further our research as fellow martial artists :)
Hi Zazoo,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your kind comments and the very interesting reply!
In my humble opinion, techniques, concepts and energies are closely related and depend on each other, at least based on my experience in Yip Kin Wing Chun.
Different energies for example, rely on different techniques to generate. If I understand it correctly, (not having done this MA before,) Xing Yi Quan uses 5 distinct energies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xingyiquan#Five_Element_forms) and the way they are generated are different. Each energy is appropriate to certain situations in a fight and depend on different structures and techniques to generate.
According to my understanding, concepts are more higher-level, all-encompassing, or to use a term from computing, more "meta". Concepts form the basis of the entire martial art. Example from Xing Yi five elements is the idea that each element can overcome one other, therefore the Xing Yi martial artist is trained to be able to generate the correct energy to counter the energy given to him by the opponent.
In my understanding of Yip Kin Wing Chun, the concept is the use of centreline energies and yin yang change to attack the opponent, in such a way that the type of energies or techniques used by the opponent does not really matter. All energies and techniques used against us are just inputs.
But maybe it's only in Yip Kin Wing Chun that the 3 terms (concepts, energies, techniques) are so intimately connected. It may be that in other forms of Kung Fu, it is possible to separate the 3. All I know is, in Yip Kin Wing Chun, the Wing Chun techniques generate the Wing Chun energies. Change the technique, and you can't generate the Wing Chun energy, or at least, the Wing Chun energy is greatly reduced.
But this is of course my current, limited, understanding of the terms concepts, energies, techniques. I know that my understanding can change with more experience and discussion with like-minded and more informed students of the martial arts, like yourself!
I think the problem with someone like T is that he may not have gone deep enough into a system to know what will happen if he tries to mix in something from outside.
ReplyDeleteOTOH, T is not wrong because without finetuning himself to a very deep level he won't be able to feel the subtle difference and therefore feels that it is OK to do so.
Sometimes some people are too smart and that might be a problem too though the smart person might not see it that way.
Hi Mushin
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading my blog!
I should clarify though that IMHO, because of his experience, T's opinion should not be dismissed out of hand. If he has formed this opinion, it's only because he has only been exposed to the type of MA which can be easily mixed with others. In at least 1 MA he has learnt (the Sanshou mentioned in the post) it is in fact a mixture of many different styles.
Anyway, I'm not sure myself how correct my opinion is, after all, I am a relative beginner in Wing Chun, but so far everything I've experienced seem to support my theory. My opinion can, and will change if I experience something that contradicts it. That's one of the most fascinating thing about Traditional Chinese MA, it's depth and simple beauty in the entire system. Not the beauty of its movements, but the beauty of its concepts and the way it implements a theory.
For T, he has been impressed enough with Yip Kin Wing Chun that he told me he has stopped practicing other MA and started from the beginning, although it depressed him greatly at first that everything he learnt before may have gone to waste. What impressed him too was that within a few months after starting Wing Chun, some of his chronic health problems just seem to disappear! So another reason for him doing Wing Chun is that it saves him regular visits to the doctor! So in some way, he may actually agree with me, but he would probably repeat his view of mixing MA just to pull my leg!
I don't see him as too smart for his own good, it would be annoying talking to someone like that! On the contrary, I myself feel that meeting him at class and a "yam cha" session after as one of the highlights of the Wing Chun training session. He is someone I take seriously. Although I may occasionally disagree with him!
Hi Zaf,
ReplyDeleteA lot of things in MA are not as straight forward as they seem to be. Just because our experience today seems to confirm the validity of our journey at this stage of our learning, it does not ensure that the validity of our experience will continue to hold into the future.
This is like the once prevalent view in Europe that just because all swans discovered till that moment in time were white, it does not mean that there are no black swans. However, such a view would have been ridiculed once upon a time because no one has ever seen a black swan. The proponents of this view of course argued that just because one has not seen a black swan it does not mean it does not exist. And sure enough a century after the view of black swan was put forward, black swans were actually discovered in Australia!
Since I have not personally spoken to T or know him I can only form my impression based on what you have written. However, what you wrote in your reply about his chronic health problems seem to confirm my impression of his learning. In this respect T is not alone. Though this is not widely mentioned, I have encountered people who end up with health problems after learning martial arts. I know of one person who suffered from joint pains after practicing Wing Chun dummy and when he asked about it, he was told that such repetitive strain injury is actually part and parcel of mastering Wing Chun. He has also encountered an old master in China who was once a feared fighter but now could no longer practice Wing Chun due to his repetitive strain injuries.
to cont'd
Yet, I find it hard to accept that repetitive strain injuries should be part and parcel of learning a traditional martial art. After going through certain experiences I can only conclude that the design of certain arts do contribute to such injuries but sometimes it is that the art is misinterpreted or taught wrongly or that the student did it wrongly but never got corrected or that his teacher is also not aware of the wrong. In my upcoming book on taiji which I hope to publish next year I touch on a problem which is very common to taiji learners and that is suffering pain in the knees which though a lot of masters and students accept as part of the "eat bitter" culture, I don't agree with it because the pain in knees is indicative of stress which actually works to obstruct proper power flow.
ReplyDeleteBut yes, the traditional arts are beautiful in the way they are designed and thought out. Because of this, introducing external elements into it can enhance or work against the system depending on how well the elements fit into the original design of the system. Yet today there are "masters" who did not learn a system rigorously but because of their natural talent they can make what they learn work for them, tend to refute that they cannot mix and match, and express the techniques of a system in their own way. Their claim is that a body being a body etc so they tend to pooh pooh the views of a traditionalist. But if you ask such "masters" to then explain the real, intrinsic difference between two systems that they say can be mixed they might have a problem showing the difference as opposed to verbally explaining it. Thus if you see a master who has devoted his life to learning a system and you compare his performance to another "master" of the same system but who also practiced a few other systems I can bet that the flavor expressed will be different enough even for a beginner to see it.
In the learning of martial arts, many people hold strong opinions. Nothing wrong with this but it can also act against them in that when they encounter something really different their mind refuse to accept it because they are unable to fit it into their existing paradigm. I have lost count of the number of times I asked the question of "how much should one achieve in terms of relaxation before it is deemed enough" and either not getting answers or getting ridiculed for asking such a question. And yet, without knowing how much is enough how does one know if one has achieved the necessary standard. Without knowing the limits, how do we know how far a system of MA can take us. Unfortunately, in this day and age of high tech scientific advancement and knowledge such Dark Ages mentality still prevails. It is no wonder that MMA and other martial arts have overtaken the traditional martial arts and leave them looking archaic and ineffective.
OK, sudah cukup tulis hari ini. Mesti balik kerja :-)
ZMS
Hi Mushin,
ReplyDeleteI'm quite surprised that there have been cases of knee pain practicing Taiji, as well as shoulder pain practicing Wing Chun wooden dummy. AFAIK, Traditional Chinese MA usually also focuses on overall health. Perhaps the cause is, as you say, wrong implementation. More modern MA, however, may not have the same concern for overall health. Of course I'm speaking generally.
My understanding of "eat bitter" is that there are no shortcuts, and mastery of MA is only through hard work. I didn't think that it meant injury as well.
Thank you for your comment, it really sets me to thinking. Do we need quantitative measurements in Martial Arts? Do measurements even give a fair comparison of two martial arts that are different in concept? I'm thinking here of one of the "punching bag" arcade machines in which a good boxing style punch will give a good reading, but a good Wing Chun style chun ging punch will not (due to a lack of follow through). "How much relaxation is needed?" is a question that is asking for a quantitative answer, but such a measurement is elusive because every opponent we encounter is different. Or is it? So much to think about...
...and no time to really dwell on it! Just came back from a meeting and I also have a lot of work and unrealistic deadlines! Hope to chat with you some more, and please let me know when your book comes out. Based on your comments, I think I will probably enjoy reading it!
BRgds
Zaf
So in Wing Chun you have your own standard in Yip Kin WC. How do you reconcile that with say what the Yip Man people do? For example some WC folks use the Leung Jan maxims as guideline and others also have their own indoor principles. How to impose a common standard for all? Even amongst the Yip Man practitioners they are a few standards between masters. For example the majority of masters insist that having a weight distribution of 50:50 is correct but a minority say that 100:0 is the one (some may even insist on 60:40 or 70:30). A look at Yip Man's photo will show that he is standing in 100:0. Yet his son Yip Chun and Yip Ching uses 50:50. So who to follow and why?
ReplyDeleteUltimately, I don't think its ever possible to compare this way. The only real comparison is which method is more effective for the respective individual. A boxing punch has tremendous power but is it using energy efficiently? From CMA point of view, at least from taiji point of view the objective is how to use the least possible effort, in this case how to use the mind to generate force. A boxing punch by virtue of its power causes injury and as a by-product knock the person off balance. However, a taiji punch is to uproot before causing the injury. Hence, you won't see a boxer acquire uprooting skills but you see this cultivated in a taiji practitioner.
Similarly, how do you measure relaxation? The answer is again you can't. But you can evaluate it using touch. I have a friend who said that his experience with other friends is that they are not able to put a lock on him and hence based on that he is sure he has achieved relaxation. When I touched his hand I said that he has only acquired external relaxation, not internal relaxation. Some people will argue there is no difference. So in such cases only a show-and-tell will reveal the difference and the importance for the distinction. In taiji those who acquire the internal relaxation can demonstrate some interesting skills that defy the understanding of people whose only exposure is to biomechanics. Such stuff is why I enjoy doing traditional arts.
cont'd
Hi Zaf, don't be - I have even heard of famous master suffering from it and its a top gun doing the international seminar circuit. Surprising but hardly considering their method has this built in defect. Mastering MA is not just a matter of eat bitter. If one were to work hard but practicing it wrongly the only thing that will happen is one gets onto the wrong path. It is not surprising then that many people today say that the traditional arts don't work because I suspect many don't practice it long enough and probably have not overcome what they are doing wrong to uncover the real treasure within.
ReplyDeleteQuantitative measurement is good or as I call it benchmarking. The problem is that it is difficult to get people to agree on standards to be used. For example in many industries where you think machines are common and one standard can be used you can still find cases of a few standards existing side-by-side. ISO standards are supposed to be worldwide but not every manufacturer will follow it because their opinion is that they know their own products better and ISO limits are set at a conservative level. In taiji especially what I do we have a simple problem - how do you qualitatively measure "intention"?
The answer is that you can't. Not with any existing scientific tools. So then how can you tell that someone has met the minimum standard for acquiring intention? Well, the only way we do it now is by personal evaluation i.e. those of us who has acquired can take a look and feel and based on that be able to tell if someone clearly has the skill of applying force using intention (or what I call mindmechanics) or relying on biomechanics. I have had debates on this with people and most of them claim to also use intention in their taiji except when we finally met then they realized that we are talking about two different things and that what they claim to be the use of intention is really the use of biomechanics. Yet, in most taiji we use a common benchmarking standard - the Taiji Classics. But for those who have no idea about intention or when their style lacks it then they claim that they have their own benchmark standard to follow - to me its nothing but an excuse to cover up a shortcoming.
cont'd
I noticed that its been some time since you last wrote a post. You really should put something up when you have the time. I used to write a lot and ended up with a few blogs. Nowadays I think its easier to put everything in a book.
ReplyDeleteIf you like to read some of my past posts you can try this one http://singaporewingchun.posterous.com/
Hi (May I call you) abang Zaf?
ReplyDeleteThe world misses your writings. We want more! Please continue.
I open your blog every week for the past year to make sure I don't miss anything. I believe you are the best Wing Chun principles writer I have ever read. Please don't stop.
Looking forward to reading your next post!
P/S: Do you know anyone with good Wing CHun in Indonesia?