What do we make of this?

[black and blue]

http://www.sifuchowwingchun.com/newsbonu.html

Half way down the page Sifu Chow shows how he's made some modifications to Wing Chun's first form, namely to the practise of fook sau and wu sau.

Do his changes make sense to readers on the forum? If so, or if not, why?

Duncan

[Ish]

When you say make sense, what do you mean?

I can understand why he might want to make those changes but i don't necissarily agree and im certainly not gona change my first form because of it.

[black and blue]

... is what he's saying valid?

Does it make Wing Chun sense for us to train our fook retracting rather than extending in SLT? Does it make sense for us to train our wu sau extending rather than retracting?

Does this practise make more sense in terms of practical application of fook and wu sau? If so, why do we train the reverse?

If not, is Sifu Chow a deluded fella? :)

Has anyone else 'played' with mixing the 'traditional' direction of motions in forms?

That's all!

[Ish]

It doesn't make sense to me why you would want your fuk to retract like that but mabe its just cos i've done it the other way round so much it feels very wierd doing it. I can understant the wu extending tho it feels a lot like a jam sau to me.

It definatly doesn't make more sense to doit this way, as you say we'd already be doing it. i guess thats not really the best of reasons tho, i'll have to give it a bit more thought.

[yuanfen]

Chow sifu hasa right to do what he wants. For me- I see no real "improvement" in his changes. Quite possibly he didnt understand the reasons for Yip man doing the way that he did.
I noticed that he seems to think that the motions are applications..he misunderstands in my opinion the developmental reasons for the motions and their directions and again he is depending on the literalist meanings of the terms rather than the real motions for which they are just labels.
Just one example and I will let it go. When people do the fok
many pull their elbow back which will collapse the fok structure
when there is a strong incoming force... By moving the fok forward
you build up the "brain" in the elbow to control the line.Complimentarity !There is more to it... but I dont want to sound too critical.

[hunt1]

Just because a movement is done in one direction in the form doesnt mean you cant use the same movement in any other direction.No need to change the form. I agree with yuanfens comments too.

[reneritchie]

Dave's discussed this many times. I'll just restate my own personal (often uninformed) opinion - we have both the withdrawing and extending Wu Sao in our sets. As long as you have both, it's probably okay. If you get rid of one, I think you're missing out.

Joy - Yip Man probably did it that way because he was taught it that way. One of the broadest constants in our art ;)

I also think, in addition to training and conceptual import, the moves are quite applicable the way they are.

RR

[Nat from UK]

The Wu Sau is played with forward energy within Chum Kiu, at least the way I do it.

But I have no knowledge or experience of the fook retracting, I can see a possibility if it redirects incoming energy, but this is not really my understanding of the intended force of Fook Sau as the motion of the fook will bring my weapon (my fist) further from my intended target (your chin).

My sifu always drums into me that good Wing Chun has only two positions. Attacking or about to Attack. Any motion that does not allow the first or enable the second could perhaps be improved, from a Wing Chun point of view.

Nat from UK

[Lindley57]

Lets make sure we understand what we hope Sifu Chow is presenting. Like Rene mentioned, all practioners (including Yip Man) perform the form sets the way they learn them. The forms serve as a method to gain a foundation for ideas and principles of the system, which is why one should not seek application for the movements through the form. Remember that the forms are a guide, not an absolute. One size does not fit all.
As you play and understand the forms and your kung fu matures, you can use these principles and ideas studied in the forms to support the techniques of the system. At an even higher level, many of the form movements can be adjusted and varied for discussion where you can more clearly "see" the realistic application. This does not change the original form set, but now gives you a valuable training tool to use for analysis.
The wording here should not be that Sifu Chow is "modifying" the SLT form (or saying it is traditionally wrong), as he is giving an (his) interpretation of how a variation in movements can be linked from the system to practical application. Don't be alarmed or confused. Focus on what you learn and then, at the appropriate time, you can intelligently discuss whether what other Sifus demonstrate is beneficial or bs.

Good Luck in your Kung Fu

[mun hung]

I don't agree with eliminating the sideward fat sau either.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't see any justifiable reasons for any changes to the SNT all.

[reneritchie]

Nat - I also have the forward Wu Sao in Chum Kiu. You can fook while retracting, don't think of it as bring your hand away from their chin, but on bringing their chin closer to your hand ;) (I personally find you need both the extension and retraction to really manipulate another person's balance in any refined manner).

Mun Hung - Yip Man made some changes, as did Sum Nung and I imagine others over the generations. I don't see anything inherently wrong with the concept of changing it (developing it) or keeping it the same, as long as the focus (successful application of WCK principles under current conditions) is there.

[S.Teebas]

I dont like it. Seems application baised to me.


. A perfect move to intercept opponent's strike.

[yuanfen]

Ip Man economized here and there...adjusted forms here and there. Changes do happen. Buta change should be an improvement at least in teaching- i dont think this one is.
But then, i didnt learn in his (Chow) line.

[mun hung]

reneritchie - yes, some slight changes have been made to the SNT in the past, but changing the energy and intention of some of the hands in the form would need much justification IMO.

I'm sure SiFu Chow has his reasons.

[reneritchie]

Joy & MH - Agreed.

RR

[EnterTheWhip]

Change is essential for growth and development (of course). However, when a change is made one needs to examine not just the new and adapt, but also the old way. The comments on the site don't suggest he's done that.

For example, regarding the vertical vs. horizontal punch, he's right, but only because the horizontal punch is being done wrong. In both cases the elbow should be down, and in both cases, done correctly, they are strong.

(Actually, the vertical punch is also wrong for a different reason.)

[reneritchie]

EtW - I hadn't actually looked at the website. I can understand Chow sifu having his own opinion, but in mine, I agree with you that the so-called "traditional" way, as presented, isn't "wrong" because it's traditional, but because its presented technically off (at least from how I understand it).

Done traditionally, the extending Fook both listens and deflects (if you train it), the retracting Wu protects, (I didn't learn a horizontal fist in SLT so I'll skip it but agree with your points on elbow alignment and on wrist alignment), and the sideways movements follow the WCK principles.

Chow sifu might have a point that some things are difficult for beginners, but shouldn't they?

RR

[mun hung]

ReneRitchie - the horizontal fist I believe SiFu Chow is talking about is after the huen sau (which BTW is supposed to be a grab).

vertical grab? :confused:

[TjD]

the traditional way has a horizontal fist?? :confused:


as to the wu sau extending, and the fook sau retreating, if siu lim tau is practiced properly, retreating and extending are trained by both; we call this jarn di lik (however i think lim lek or nim lek refers to something similar by people here, if not the same thing)

we train the forward energy by the natural relaxed extension of our arm a sorta "it does so on its own", and then slow it down with our intention, training the opposite motion - kinda an internal dynamic tension mabye? :)

so either extending or retreating, your accomplishing the same goal with these; however, i'd like to note that extending the fook, and retreating the wu would do a better job stretching and loosening up the beginners wrist and forearms


as to the changing of the double chop to being forward, i think some valuable upperbody mechanics are being left out; i dont have a good word to describe them, mabye opening and closing energies?

if i'm to the side of my opponent, and i lap sau one arm, and chop to his throat with the other, utilizing the outward (opening?) of my upper body, not only does this follow the center line theory, its economy of motion, and using your opponents energy against him (if he resists he'll only get hit harder)

then theres the closing from the double chops to lan saus which would also be left out



however, mabye sifu chow is trying to streamline his wing chun? mabye he feels the opening and closing mechanics aren't needed, or can be done without, or that training in other ways one could better utilize their time?

[reneritchie]

MH - 'Rene' is fine 8) In the system I learned, we rotate the opposite way (Lap Sao) and thus end up with the back of the fist facing down.

RR

[mun hung]

TjD - a fist is formed in a horizontal position after the grab.

Extending the fook (besides it's application, which is very important) trains the elbow and it's intention to cover.

Wu sau back also trains the elbow to cover. It also trains forward intention in the hands - even while traveling backwards.

"rene" is fine for me also. :)

[TargetAlex]

One thing is for sure, Chow SiFu's adaptations to the SLT have certainly started a very good and educational thread here! Way to go guys and gals!