Interviewer:
Sifu, you don’t seem to believe a person can study more than one martial art at a time.
Sifu Zopa:
Generally speaking that’s true. Some people may be able to do so. I did so - for twenty five years, in fact. But it’s unusual to be able to do so and to do so well and to a high level. In the end I found it was pointless learning any other art as well as my Wing Chun. Now, I simply do Wing Chun.
Interviewer:
How did you manage it, sifu?
Sifu Zopa;
I was told by several teachers, including Sum Num, that I had a natural talent for learning martial arts. I kept a lot of aspects of each art compartmentalised so there was little cross-fertilisation - if any. What I did notice though, once I became proficient, was I used Wing Chun to win in karate sparring a lot. And, on the other hand, the Hong Kong Wing Chun people I encountered in tests of skill could not stop my karate kicking skills. I had far more spare time than the average person had back then and, indeed, far more than the average person has today. I was time rich for most of my life. Now, I’m busier. It’d be very difficult for me to spend the time required now to learn another martial art - even if I wanted to or thought I needed to. Of course, I don’t.
Interviewer:
I’ve heard it said that we need to learn a hitting art and a grappling art, an internal art and an external art. What’s your view on this?
Sifu Zopa:
My view is that’s silly. If you choose a quality, comprehensive art - of which there are a limited few - this is encompassed in the art. If you had only studied judo then I think you’d need to also train a striking art. I don’t see Tae Kwon Do as having good hands - great kicks but limited hands - so, if you studied that you’d need to study an art with better hands. Do you realise how long it takes to really master only one art? How can anyone master several? No, that’s a silly thing for anyone to think. Look, it’s really basic mathematics; you learn two arts and you spend 50% less time training each; three arts and you spend two thirds less time training each; four arts, you spend three quarters less time on any one and so on. Logically, it’s a huge investment of time - not to mention money. To what end? If it ends up like the technique hunters and gatherers you’re no better off. I do know some people who’ve learnt karate and judo. This was reasonably common when I was young. But, if the person had simply learnt a good karate style, they’d have learnt sufficient throws to function more than adequately.
Interviewer:
What advice would you give someone wanting to learn more than one art sifu?
Sifu Zopa:
I’d ask where and why they saw an inadequacy in their art. Maybe it’s not so much a matter of learning two arts but of finding one better art! You can’t put two saddles on the one horse and ride both or sleep in two houses at the same time! Why be mediocre in two arts when you could master one? The right one? I know it has been common for many Chinese to dabble - in a number of arts in several arts. Then they can then list several arts they’ve “studied”! This might impress the shallower thinker but not the deeper thinker. One should not think when encountering someone who has learnt a little about a lot that they are learned. They’re simply restless and incapable of dedication, loyalty and the longer term application required to attain real gung fu. Having said that, yes, I have studied two arts - in great depth. Karate and Wing Chun. When I was young I dabbled a little in some others. So I do know the downside of dabbling - shallow knowledge! I’m told that I know a lot about a lot of arts. I think that may be true - but it is only that I know about those arts. It isn’t that I know those arts!
Interviewer:
Sifu, what’s the main difficulty with learning more than one art?
Sifu Zopa:
Well, I think it’s that it could lead to spending less time on your main art and therefore being less skilful than you would if you spent more time on it. Confusion can also be a problem too. But I think one main problem may be that you have your arts in your conscious mind not in your reactions. It might be you have to put yourself in the position of choosing which art you’ll respond to a situation with. This will lose you valuable time. When you ask me about “learning” an art I wonder does it mean completely learning or just learning a bit? A bit of knowledge is dangerous! You have to learn a lot, not a little. I often get silly people asking me to teach them aspects of Wing Chun or a “bit of Wing Chun”. This is like asking someone to blow a bit of a bubble! It’s an integrated whole. One bit is potentially dangerous in that it can be easily misinterpreted or misapplied. ! You can’t put two saddles on the one horse and ride on both!
Interviewer:
Sifu, are there arts you’d consider compatible with your Wing Chun?
Sifu Zopa:
There are some that might interfere less or contribute a little to powering theory, yes. I think that although they take too long to learn and finding a good teacher willing or able to teach fighting applications is very difficult that the internal trio of Tai Chi Chuan, Ba Qua and Hsing I would be most compatible. Yet they are too technique dense in their modern forms. You’d need to strip them to the fundamentals. Yi Chuan has good powering methods for sure but they aren’t as attractive in terms of technical skills from my perspective. I’ve gained some knowledge on Brazilian Ju Jutsu principles from friends and some - but not all - of their theory is quite compatible with Wing Chun. Again, however, I think there is too much in their technical arsenal. This is not to criticise any of these arts, it’s simply my take on them. Any form of Sil Lum would be incompatible with Wing Chun, I think. When I say this I’d definitely include the modern re-invented wushu-based Sil Lum but also the older arts like Hung Gar which derived from Sil Lum. The Hong Kong Wing Chun teacher, Wong Shun Leung held the opinion that judo was compatible with Wing Chun. Maybe in its original form judo was, but today where size, weight and sheer brute strength seem to reign, I’d have to disagree.
Interviewer:
Thank you, sifu.