Hi. You are reading an archive of the legendary Bullshido forums, from 2002-2020. Please visit our NEW and (arguably) improved forums at https://forums.bullshido.net.
(Or don't, this is just an announcement and nobody's holding a gun to your head.)
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Wing Chun? hard style. Wing Tsun? softer than Aikido. Flipside? practically limp.
... some movements are simplified thus becoming less effective.
So, by inference from the above statement, more complicated movements means more effective.
Gotcha.
Calm down, it's only ones and zeros.
"Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ
"Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken
No, just different ways depending on the situation.
But that's not what you said. What you said was, "I meant that in the wing tsun of Keith Kernspecht some movements are simplified thus becoming less effective." Which asserts that the more complex movements are thereby more effective. This very well may be the case. Lord knows, if someone simplified a standard punch to the point where nothing but the elbow was providing the mechanism of the attack, it wouldn't be anywhere near as effective as a strike with good hip rotation and proper form.
However, overly complex maneuvers tend to be terribly ineffective. If your typical shoulder-lock requires eight steps when a similar or equivalent technique in another style requires only three, yours will obviously be the inferior in practical application. There's simply much more that can go wrong in those extra steps, given the unpredictability of a resisting fighter.
So, are you saying that Keith Kernspecht watered-down techniques which were already efficient, or are you saying that he culled some of the more grandiose maneuvers from his teaching?
But that's not what you said. What you said was, "I meant that in the wing tsun of Keith Kernspecht some movements are simplified thus becoming less effective." Which asserts that the more complex movements are thereby more effective. This very well may be the case. Lord knows, if someone simplified a standard punch to the point where nothing but the elbow was providing the mechanism of the attack, it wouldn't be anywhere near as effective as a strike with good hip rotation and proper form.
However, overly complex maneuvers tend to be terribly ineffective. If your typical shoulder-lock requires eight steps when a similar or equivalent technique in another style requires only three, yours will obviously be the inferior in practical application. There's simply much more that can go wrong in those extra steps, given the unpredictability of a resisting fighter.
So, are you saying that Keith Kernspecht watered-down techniques which were already efficient, or are you saying that he culled some of the more grandiose maneuvers from his teaching?
--Joe
An example: in the second form, Kernspecht teaches a three times the same bong, while in that of Allan Fong (also a student of leung ting) we have a bong, a striking bong and a bong coming from below. Depending on the situation you can use the one that fits the most.
An example: in the second form, Kernspecht teaches a three times the same bong, while in that of Allan Fong (also a student of leung ting) we have a bong, a striking bong and a bong coming from below. Depending on the situation you can use the one that fits the most.
It's a fucking form, dude. It's called Choreography!
If you honestly think any of those bongs yer smokin' are specifically referring to an application, you are mistaken.
Forms don't point to application. Application points to form.
"Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ
"Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken
It's a fucking form, dude. It's called Choeography!
If you honestly think any of those bongs yer smokin' are specifically referring to an application, you are mistaken.
Forms don't point to application. Application points to form.
That's what I tell you, in a certain situation you can refer to the one of three bongs of the forms. Isn't that aplication pointing to the choreography of the form?
Hello, Flipside.
Welcome to Bullshido.
So, do you consider joining the upcoming Dutch Bullshido Throwdown in February?
CLICK & WATCH: I got BULLSHIDO ON TV!!!
"Bruce Lee sucks because I slammed my nuts with nunchucks trying to do that stupid shit back in the day. I still managed to have two kids. I forgive you Bruce." - by Vorpal
That's what I tell you, in a certain situation you can refer to the one of three bongs of the forms. Isn't that aplication pointing to the choreography of the form?
No, not specifically.
Regardless you just changed your position by flipping it over. You were previously implying you use the form to practice a specific movement you then try in application.
And, even if you disagree with my interpretation of what you said, I will point out that if your bong is any good or useful, there are A LOT more variations and nuances to BongSao than just three. Therefore, clearly the BongSao in a form is already an abstraction - unless you have a gazillion different BongSao in your form. (Don't bullshit me, I KNOW you don't.)
As long as ANY abstraction is left in the form you can interpret it any way you want. Your comment implying that something was made too simple because there is only one variation repeated three times instead of any number of variations each performed once is thus invalid.
This is getting into the nature of the forms purpose, but a rule of thumb for Chinese MA:
- Three repeats = Important in some way.
- Performed once = Not so much.
"Your calm and professional manner of response is really draining all the fun out of this. Can you reply more like Dr. Fagbot or something? Call me some names, mention some sand in my vagina or something of the sort. You can't expect me to come up with reasonable arguments man!" -- MaverickZ
"Tom Kagan spins in his grave and the fucking guy isn't even dead yet." -- Snake Plissken
Making a wing chun thread is like propping up a box with a stick with a string tied to it, and putting a copy of Atlas Shrugged under it as bait. Making a _un sucks thred is the real wing chun trapping.
Rep Lee, the undefeatable scourge of the Internet...
CLICK & WATCH: I got BULLSHIDO ON TV!!!
"Bruce Lee sucks because I slammed my nuts with nunchucks trying to do that stupid shit back in the day. I still managed to have two kids. I forgive you Bruce." - by Vorpal
Comment