Of the three ving tsun “empty-hand” forms, the third one, ‘Biu Ji’, is the most misunderstood. It has been touted as a “deadly” form with which one can become invincible in combat. It has been said to have been so treasured by the ving tsun clan that it was rarely seen and never taught to “outsiders.” The ‘Biu Ji’ form has also been said to contain the secrets of dim mak, the so-called “delayed death touch” with which one can dispose of their enemy with one touch, depending, of course, on the time of day, and so on.

Sadly, all of the above claims are missing the point of the ‘Biu Ji’ form altogether. The name of the form is a contraction of an expression from the Buddhist sutras which in Cantonese reads as ‘Biu Yuet Ji’, a “finger pointing to the moon” and this best sums up what the ‘Biu Ji’ form is all about. Just as Bruce Lee said in the movie ‘Enter the Dragon’ when he, too, quoted this sutra, “Don’t concentrate on the finger or you’ll miss all that heavenly glory.”

Keep reading »

From what I have seen in the ‘UFC’ matches, in my own training, and various other situations, it is clear that standing right in front of the attacker and expecting to “blow him away” with the deadly ferocity of our counter-attack is simply not realistic. Meeting his/her force head-on in that manner is crazy. One or two (even if well-timed) attacks from such a position will not take care of what is the main problem, …the momentum of such a committed attack, as this will be more than enough to carry the enemy on through our own position, not only taking us to the ground, but giving them ample opportunity to recover their senses and continue with their attack which, if they are using such an strategy as the “rugby tackle-style” technique, suggests that they are grapplers who would be more than able to make use of this range and position than we would.

Even the Gracies talk about the fact that they are expecting to get hit on the way in, but that this is an acceptable and necessary part of the grappler’s strategy. What I have found to be a more useful method of dealing with such attacks is borrowed from the ‘Baat Jaam Do’ (“eight-slash knives”) form, namely the exaggerated retreating footwork found within this form. The type of defensive (“side-stepping”) footwork normally employed against stand-up fighters (‘Tui Ma’) works fine against upright attacks, allowing us to avoid the attack with the smallest amount of movement, remaining in such close proximity to the attacker that we can virtually trap their body from top to bottom (arms and legs). What I need to do against a lunging/diving attack, however, is exactly the opposite – I want to totally avoid contact (short of landing whatever striking techniques I can along the way), so the footwork from the “knives” form, which deliberately takes the front leg further back (as it needs to be when a “knife-wielding” exponent faces an opponent with a long pole or similar weapon, whereby the legs must be kept out of harms way), thus allowing me to draw the attacker further forward and off balance, while my hands can ward off the upper body or arms and literally “encourage” his/her forward momentum so that they are keep out of position. This then provides the option of either making my escape, or else pressing the counter-attack from a safer angle whereby I can force him/her to the ground or into the wall, etc., using kicking as the main weapon because reaching down to employ hand techniques would put me back in the grappler’s domain.

Keep reading »

It goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway!), that ‘Chi Sau’ without footwork is like fishing without a rod. Unless one has a “delivery system”, how can one expect to “take one’s goods to the market place”?

Of course, beginning ‘Chi Sau’ as a stationary exercise is crucial, in order to firstly make sure that the basic shapes & structures are correct, in much the same way that the ‘Siu Nim Tau’ form is practised standing still. What I teach my students, as a “bridge” between the basic “single-hand” drill (‘Dan Sau’) and the more complex “double-hand” drill (‘Poon Sau’) is a “moving/stepping” variation of the first exercise. This follows various footwork drills whereby the students learn both attacking and defensive footwork, both with and without partners, and consists of the following: the person in the ‘Taan Sau’ position steps in with their ‘Jing Jeung’ (“vertical palm”) attack, to which the person in the ‘Fook Sau’ position responds by applying ‘Jam Sau’ (“sinking arm”) deflection, supported by ‘Tui Ma’ (“side-stepping”) away from the attack. From here, the “defender” then attacks with a punch as he/she uses ‘Seung Ma’ (“forward-stepping”) to advance towards their partner’s position. In response, if the partner feels (and I emphasise, “feels”) that their “Centreline” position is not overly threatened, they can respond by “shuffling” away to the side (a simple variation on the basic ‘Tui Ma’, whereby the stance remains in the same configuration, but is shifted slightly backwards and away from the attacker) and convert their ‘Jing Jeung’ attack into a ‘Taan Sau’ defence. At this time, they can also “counter-attack” with a fist or palm attack if they wish. Alternatively, if the initial “attack” is felt to be too strong and in control of the “Centreline”, a defence is created by “long-stepping” ( the opposite variation to the basic ‘Tui Ma’, whereby the forward leg retreats backwards and to the side, becoming the rear leg of the stance, while the body is now placed on the opposite side of the attacking limb), accompanied by a ‘Bong Sau’ deflection. Two very important points to note here are:

Keep reading »

January 28th 1997 was a very sad day for the martial arts and, indirectly, for fans of Hong Kong cinema – specifically, for fans of the legend that is Bruce Lee. On that day, Wing Chun Kung-Fu Master Sifu Wong Shun Leung, 61, teacher and friend of the late martial arts superstar, lost his fight for life following a massive stroke and ensuing coma that had befallen him some sixteen days earlier. Considered by many to be a fighter and instructor of unparalleled skill, Sifu Wong was renowned for earning the title of “Gong Sau Wong” (King of talking with the hands) after surviving countless “beimo”, or “comparison of skills,” throughout the 50s and 60s, emerging every time as undefeated and undisputed champion.

These were not tournament fights as conducted in the West, with rules, protective equipment or time limits. Instead, they were full-on fights between representatives of the various schools of combat in Hong Kong, and Sifu Wong is said to have “let his hands do the talking” by winning the majority of these “contests” within just three punches! In one such match, arranged by a reporter working for a prominent Hong Kong newspaper of the day, Wong (who stood barely 5ft 6in tall and weighed in at around 120lbs) easily defeated a visiting Russian boxer named Giko, a giant of a man who weighed over 250lbs and stood some twelve inches taller than the dynamic Wing Chun exponent.

Keep reading »

Following what doctors in Hong Kong described as a ‘subarachnoid haemorrhage’ and lapsing into a coma lasting 17 days, wing chun’s “King of the Challenge Match”, sifu Wong Shun Leung, passed away peacefully on January 28th, 1997… he was just 61 years of age. Wong had been with a group of friends at the “Wing Chun Athletic Association” on Sunday January 12th, enjoying a few games of cards and Mahjong when he complained of feeling unwell. Soon afterwards he collapsed into a coma from which he never awoke.

Known as Gong Sau Wong in Cantonese (literally the “King of Talking with the Hands”), Wong Shun Leung demolished dozens, some say hundreds, of opponents during the ages of 17 and 32, testing his skills and knowledge on the streets and rooftops of Hong Kong. He faced opponents of many disciplines, from kung-fu, karate, Western boxing and many other fighting styles, and it was said that he never took more than three punches to finish a fight. Wong sifu, it has been stated by all who knew him, never lost a fight in all his years of beimo, or “comparison of skills”.

Keep reading »

Trained by the late grandmaster Yip Man, teacher to the great Bruce Lee, Wong Shun Leung is perhaps best-known as the wing chun man who routinely challenged anyone of any style and lived to tell about it.

Hong Kong-based Wing Chun instructor, Wong Shun Leung, has been called many things by people in the martial arts world. England’s ‘Fighters’ magazine called him, “…a communicator and teacher of Wing Chun par excellence”; Jesse Glover, the first American student of the late Bruce Lee, wrote in his book ‘Bruce Lee’s Non-Classical Gung Fu’ that Wong Shun Leung “…is one of the greatest Wing Chun teachers in the world”; Bey Logan, editor of the British martial arts magazine ‘Combat’ wrote that “…Wong Shun Leung is far more important as a Wing Chun teacher in his own right than just a figure in the life of Bruce Lee. He deserves better than to be in anyone’s shadow”; America’s ‘Black Belt’ magazine simply called him “…a Wing Chun phenomenon.”

Which ever way you want to look at it, there is no denying that Wong Shun Leung is possibly the greatest living representative of the dynamic Chinese fighting art of Wing Chun, the man who put Wing Chun on the map in the late ‘fifties and early ‘sixties in his well publicised challenge matches against representatives of all the major combat arts in Hong Kong. He is the man who can rightly claim to have been the late Bruce Lee’s teacher, and to have influenced the development of Lee’s personal art of combat, Jeet Kune Do. His ego is such, however, that Wong Shun Leung prefers to be known simply as a teacher, a sifu, and he refuses to accept accolades such as “master” or “grandmaster”, terms which he believes are worthless because they have been abused so readily in recent years.

Keep reading »

There are, it seems, many interpretations or styles of the Chinese martial art known as Wing Chun being taught throughout the world. Within these variations, like in all martial systems, there are inherent strengths and weaknesses, good and bad points, subtle and not so subtle differences. If what a particular school or instructor teaches is to meet the requirements of what is generally considered to be Wing Chun, a system whose origins are said to be an amalgamation of the most effective combat theories and techniques of several Chinese systems some two centuries ago, then it must meet certain criteria, namely it must reflect three distinct qualities – SIMPLICITY, DIRECTNESS and EFFICIENCY.

At the Melbourne Chinese Martial Arts Club, all aspects of our training emphasise and refine these three qualities. Our basic philosophy is that if something requires excessive movement, strength or effort, then it is not something we wish to waste time practising if a more practical method exists. In the words of our Hong Kong-based leader, Sifu Wong Shun Leung, “You can always replace money, but you can’t replace time.” Sifu Wong believed that if a student is allowed to, or worse, made to spend time on something which is unlikely to be of any use, the instructor is not only deceiving his/her students, but also him or herself as well.

Keep reading »

With an almost monotonous regularity, readers of the many martial arts books, journals and magazines are constantly confronted by version after version of the “legendary history” of the various Chinese combat systems. Each tale seems to begin with some chance encounter between a warrior, monk, nun or peasant with an animal or insect engaged in mortal combat with some other creature. Invariably one of the creatures, by one means or another, manages to become victorious over the other and the observer is able to go off and create a “new and improved” method for fighting their fellow man based upon what they have noted in the “battle”.

The “creator” usually has some kind of connection with the now famous Shaolin Temple, the one that still stands in Henan province that is, or the one which is said to have existed in Fujian province. This relationship established, the authenticity of the system is therefore not in question because we all know that “If it’s Shaolin, it must be good”. If one was to believe every story told about Chinese martial arts, one would be forced to accept that virtually every system extant in China is a so called “Shaolin” style, or a derivative thereof.

Keep reading »

There are many people claiming to teach Wing Chun, and as many different “versions” of Wing Chun as there are teachers, or so it seems. The reasons for these variations are many and complex, one factor which immediately springs to mind being that there are at least three or four different systems of Chinese boxing which take the name Wing Chun (though the Chinese characters may differ). At least two of these appear to have originated in or around the city of Fatsaan (Foshan in the Mandarin dialect), the southern Chinese city where Grandmaster Yip Man of the Hong Kong-style first studied the system under his teacher, Chan Wa Sun, who in turn had learnt from the most celebrated of Wing Chun “ancestors”, Leung Jan, the undefeated “King of Wing Chun”, a man who was very protective when it came to passing on his skills.

Herein lies just one of the many causes of today’s confusion, that Leung Jan in fact seems to have taught two interpretations of the same art, one to his own sons (whom he hoped would inherit and pass on his skills), and a somewhat less sophisticated method to “Chan the money-changer”, the man under whom Grandmaster Yip Man began his Wing Chun training. If we are to believe the stories handed down through history concerning Leung Jan and his attitude to teaching “outsiders”, it is fair to assume that Leung (who was an intelligent, educated man) did in fact “simplify things” for his not so bright, but physically powerful student Chan, who was a far more gifted fighter than he was a thinking man. What Chan learnt and made use of was a cruder, less sophisticated, but nevertheless very effective form of Wing Chun.

Keep reading »