I have some questions about wing chun. Is it considered internal or external and does it have any grappling and ground fighting techniques?

It is considered external - but as Tim points out in one of his articles it is often the instructor, not the style per se that is internal or external.

I think Wing Chun is a good example of this because I have known some practitioners who really emphasized breathing and were "soft" - so, more internal than you might expect.

I don't know about their ground techniques.

I would say it has about as much groundfighting as Hsing-I!
That said, tactically speaking, in WC, you don't deliberately go to the ground with someone so you can finish them there.
You can draw a lot of principals from the system that can be applied in many situations though.

As to the in/ex debate? has there been some kind of conclusion I'd missed on the definition!?

The only kind of conclusion to be drawn is that some masters like to describe Wing Chun as an internal style in order to elevate the status of their art.

One interesting point and I only found this out recently. In a lineage chart for the White Crane system that I saw in Taiwan Wu Lin magazine awhile back, the chart shows Wing Chun as being an offshoot of White Crane.

And White Crane has a reputation as being one of the most "internal" (I put that word in quotes because that word has multiple meanings) of the shaolin derived systems.

take care,
Brian

Is white crane taoist?

I think wing chun should be internal? Its methods of developing power seem to be (the one inch punch) and its moves are mostly snake and crane, both of wich are internal.

Mango Monkey,

Not necessarily. I've seen crane practiced as external -- with a certain stiffness (Uechi-Ryu Karate); effective, but definitely practiced as external.

Any art can be practiced with internal or with external methods/strategies (& of course, doing so may change the art).

As I understand internal practices more, the more I feel that external arts are internal arts gone astray over the years; but who knows for certain? It may just be two different ways to skin a cat so-to-speak.

I just get more & more appreciative of internal practices as I study them; but I still have a deep respect for those who can pull off external methods (example: an internal stylist, using his whole body to generate power, might loosely slap an assailant into next week with the palm of his hand & allow the ground to crack the falling assailant's head; an external stylist, after much conditioning, & using several parts of his body with coordination & with snap, & perhaps some tension, may crack an assailant's skull with his well-developed knuckles & allow the ground to further crack the falling assailant's head; both methods effective, but in my opinion the internal method is more efficient for a variety of reasons that I won't get into right now).

Mango Monkey, The way i learned WC was very internal with a lot of emphasis on short range fighting, grapling, sticking hands and never using force against force. Very very effective. But i've never seen it taught like in public, especially the schools that originated from hong kong seem very external, no grapling - only punching and a lot of force. But, on the other hand, if if you read about Yip Man's training methods, they seem pretty internal. So I guess its it's the teacher again..

I once saw a film of an elderly Yip Man demonstrating the Wing Chun forms. He had a beautifully executed stretch-rebound whole body power.

Ah! But is that because as he got older and weaker he had to use whole body power to keep up with his young students, or is it because that's the way it should be?

I guess we'll never know!

I've never seen a Wing Chun guy use whole body power *all the time* , there's always plenty of 'arm only' movements.

My experience is that as the whole body power becomes more refined, movements can seem more 'arm only'.. I've never seen a skilled Wing Chun guy not use whole body power, this is essential for making short range techniques flexibel as well as powerfull

As i was thought, one of the main points of the siu nim toa is to learn to sink, so when you start moving you can use whole body power (athough it might seem as if it's just the arm).

Since you mentioned first form of Wing Chun - Siu Lim Tao - just look at it! The body stays stationary while the arms move. Can you explain how that is 'whole body power'?

Sinking is the basis for whole body power, sinking is always learned in fixed stances, in basically every internal style. First you learn how to stand, than how to move. Look at some of the basic exercises of taiji that in the old days practictioners had to do for a long time before they started on forms; fixed stands, waving the arms up and down. Siu nim tao doesn't show you how you should fight, it teaches you the basics of sinking and arm position, gives you a foundation.

Interesting perspective, thanks.

You're welcome. I'me still interested in the first question though, How is Wing Chun similar to Xing Yi? Does anybody have an idea of how these styles compare in their application?

OK, here's my take on the differences & simularities -
Firstly, there are some obvious complications, in that the way WC is interpreted varies a bit depending on the predilictions of instructors & lineages. Leaving that aside, I'll put a couple of wild generalizations out, under the assumption that there are plenty of exceptions to each side -
Both systems use both hands productively simultaneously, as do other styles. H-I tends to focus more definition upon the striking side, WC on the defending side.
Both tend to advance forward towards the opponent - WC when there is some form of gap to close, H-I to break the opponent and drive through. WC has some circling options at that range closer to a bare bones Bagua.
Strikes are treated a little different - H-I's are designed to be powerful, requiring the opponent to commit themselves in their defense. WC's uncommitted until they are fairly certain of success.
Stepping and kicking are very similar on the whole, though San Ti is a bit more oriented to faster advance than Bik Ma.

Thanks Alex, especially your comment on strikes is usefull to me.

Both wing chun and xing-i teach immediate and applicable mechanics that can be applied by the talented student. Many teachers who taught thte military in China were of a shuaijaio and xing-i background and these skills were easily transferrable. Even the Public Security Bureau in some aspects utilized baquazhang as personal protection regimen.

Is whole body power the measure of internal martial arts, really? I live in Thailand and see these little skinny guys that can strike with whole-body power. There is absolutely no doubt that that are relaxed and deal tremendous blows with whole body power. But that doesn't make them Internal Stylists. They are more relaxed than you might imagine being 17 years old with 200 fights under their belt. Very relaxed so you might call them Relaxed Stylists. They couldn't generate that power without being relaxed. In my opinion it has to be a combination of whole body power with the ability to deal with your opponent's attack without opposing his force. If the Wing Chun fighter fights like this then he's an Internal fighter. If the Xing Yi figher cannot do this then he's lost the plot and is not an Internal fighter. Just an opinion. Cheers.