Wing chun and Kiu sau!

[Chango]

I wanted to bring a productive thread to the forum concerning kiu sau. HFY aside from having Chi sau training has a distinct and focused Kiu sao training dealing with understanding the realatonship of Time,space,and energy. I also find that chi sim has kiu sau as well dealing with this realationship. Both address combat from the different ranges as well as proper energy and position. I would like to open a discussion on kiu sau and what roll it plays in WCK. I personally believe that it is the starting point for learning how to use the bridge against the grappler, kicker etc.... with the use of the bridge with out entering into the proper conditions for "chi sao" offering the elements of real "live" energy reactions and interaction with an opponent or classmate. What do you think?

[Wingman]

Hi Chango,

Please provide more information about kiu sau for the benefit of those who are not familiar with the term.

How do you start kiu sau?
Does it start with the 2 practitioners already in contact? or non-contact?
What techniques are allowed (or not allowed) during kiu sau?
Are the techniques limited to WC techniques? or do you incorporate techniques from other martial arts?
What is in kiu sau that is not found in chi sao (and vice versa)?
Does kiu sau have an equivalent English translation?

These are just some of my questions. I hope you will be able to answer them.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Chango,

I am wrestling with Kiu Sau a little in my Hung Gar training. It seems for us it is a basic hand for dealing with an oponent in a similar maner as mun sau may be for wing chun. This is not completly ture, but the best that I can describe it. It goes out and feels the way, often it will bridge the opponents hand. If it enconters something it will be grabed and pulled back witha punch shooting out to meet the opponent.

I am currious about the kiu sau in HFY and if it is at all related to the Hung Kuen. For those playing at home, Kiu Sau in hung gar is the hand you see with the one finger pointing upwards.

TOm
________
SHOWER WET (http://www.****tube.com/categories/991/wet/videos/1)

[planetwc]

So Kiu Sau would be the HFY term for bridging both pre contact and establishment of the bridge with an opponent?

There is indeed the concepts of structure, position, forward motion, timing and sensitivity involved in those stages.

There are also differences in approach in terms of how the bridge is "deployed" for lack of a better term.

[yuanfen]

Bridgework is important in most nan chuan. And the bridge and its uses is very important in good wing chun.

Tan, bong and fok is not just about the hands-

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by planetwc
So Kiu Sau would be the HFY term for bridging both pre contact and establishment of the bridge with an opponent?


From my limited experience my understanding of kiu sau is that through forearm contact it serves as a buffer or safety zone, using structure and energenics sensitivity, between you and the opponent. It allows a time to safely and defensively gather knowledge about your oppenent

From kiu sau you could flow to chi sau (if needed) or to chum kiu (if needed).

[reneritchie]

Is Kiu Sao being used here similar to or encompassing of San Sao, or as transition between San Sao and Chi Sao (the transition between free and sticking arms)?

[yuanfen]

Repackaged wc concepts in new bottles.
Kiu is important in good old wing chun...
the second form is chum kiu-
its about the bridge....among other things.

[canglong]

Rene,
To answer your question though, no, kiu sau is not a transitional phase. To some it might be seen as chi sau without the use of strinking point technology used to keep an opponent under control before chi sau range. Going back to the thread about ranges you might think of it in these terms. Long kick range>> short kick range>>long arm/backhand range>>short arm/front hand range>> close quarter combat range all weapons deployable and grappling range>>. If we dissect close quarter combat range for the purpose of defining time and space moving back from chi sau range for the purpose of this discussion we have kiu sau which defines all things possible in close quarter combat range after short arm/front hand range but before chi sau/strinking point range, thus the distance is such if someone moves to engage in chi sau before kiu sau the person using kiu sau with proper structure would have a time and space advantage using the kui sau. This is my own personal fau kiu understanding at this time and space in my early stages of HFY training. :)

[Rolling_Hand]

William E,

It's my pleasure to see a real Martial Artist like you here!

Looking forward to learn more about the HFY and Chi Sim Kiu Sao from you.

Roger

[Mckind13]

Very sad indeed.


My observation of Kiu Sau from my personal training is that all bridges are kiu sau. Any time I make contact, this is in essence Kiu Sau and affords me the benefits of creating a bridge with my arms. As a note, I have used the Kiu Sau term here because it is the topic, not because it is a commonly used phrase in my training.

My observations of the HFY Kiu Sau are that it is very structured and deliberate in the exact techniques that can and cannot be deployed. It also seems to not only be outside the Chi Sau range of application but operate at a very different distance. A distance where I might be rushing in or sinking the opponent’s bridge. This is of course my view and I did only get to see it during a weekend seminar in Dayton. For those more familiar with Andreas Hoffman’s (sp) Weng Chun, I practiced a drill at his seminar that was more akin to this. He used, in that drill, both hands simultaneously. In the HFY KS drill it seems there is a different focus on angles and well as a dominant hand and subordinate hand in the drill.

Please understand this is my take on it.
Peace and don't feed the trolls or trollops


David

[tparkerkfo]

OK, I am getting lost. Before we go on, lets define some stuff for those of us that are having a hard time.

Kiu Sau
Chi Sau
Chum Kiu

What are these in reference to HFY? Are they hands? Are they actions, verbs, motions? Are they ideas and concepts?

Kiu sau to me is a hand that is like a feeler. Chi Sau is both an excercise (doing sticky hands) and a concept (sticking). Chum Kiu for me is mostly a sinkning and searching bridge. It seems these defineitions are not congruent with the discussion above. Can some one fill me in?

Thanks
Tom
________
Marijuana Medical (http://medicalmarijuana.us/)

[yuanfen]

Tom-

Chum kiu--- asa a form has many functions--- but in the context of this thread---"the searching for the bridge" meaning should be noted..the name "bridge" is symbolic-- and shows up in the kuit-- if you dont find the bridge- make one!!

The business of sistinguishing between chi sao and its range is
short sighted. Good chi sao --- not the quick mechanical rolling or eagerness for striking that some folks do- is not chi sao at its best
and leads to all kinds of aberrations on "fixes" and claimsabout the alleged limitations or insufficinecncy of wing chun.

Good chi sao teaches auto reaction to pre contact and contact
and post contact anywhere.

Bridge work and bridge contact work is there in wing chun.
Remember- soft cotton belly(ahem!!No comment invited), glass head and IRON BRIDGES- feet like mountains, hands like lightning are all part of wing chun lore. Structurally in statics the part of the forearm past the wrist to the beginning of the forearm muscle
bulge is the bridge. Dynamically- any contact becomes the bridge.

There are wing chun bridge drills for hand and foot bridges
and timing drills..

Wing chun has extensive so called hand motions--- but the right bridging makes them all possible. So if you allow someone to control your bridge- it makes the hand motions that much more difficult.

So kiu can have several levels of inter-related meanings.- as a specific part of the body, asa foundation for hand mudras and shapes, as a pathway to the gates or metaphorically for contact or linkage.

Nothing new under the sun. Wing chun 102.

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by yuanfen

Good chi sao teaches auto reaction to pre contact and contact
and post contact anywhere.


I always thought that chi sau (from a Yip Man perspective) taught how to understand energies at a bridge. By practicing chi sau you become more sensitive once contact is made and you are able to exploit your enemies structure and energic distortions. If this definition is correct (and it might not be- that is why I am asking) then how can you have "chi sau" before or after contact? Wouldn't these time frames (pre and post contact) be more like bai jong and wui mah?

Thanks!

[yuanfen]

When one understands lat sau, bai jong and chi sao as a
interrrelated dynamic phenomenon where the body acts as a single but not frozen unit that is Ip Man wing chun 102.

Many folks dont get past 101.

If I move towards "you" in any way (different stances, steps and looks), I am seeking and expecting contact-anywhere.

Whiole chi sao sunchronizes bon-tan-fok-- the result is that it synchronizes everything else too including fak , biu, gan etc-
the plants that grow out of the seeds.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Joy,

Thanks for your response. I understand, somewhat, what your saying. However, I was more interested in HFY's usage of the terms as to me it seems differnt from my understanding, which I think overlaps with yours. You and I may have some slightly differences, but most is probably just from my lack of indepth knowledge. However, I am confused by what Chango and JK Walz are talking about. My definitions were simple and gerneralizations, and not all inclusive. I used them simply to establish some common ground. Not quite 101, maybe elementry.

Now, as for that cotton belly, I may not yet be a master, but I am well on the way. LOL.
________
Home made vaperizer (http://vaporizers.net)

[Rolling_Hand]

<<My observations of the HFY Kiu Sau are that it is very structured and deliberate in the exact techniques that can and cannot be deployed. It also seems to not only be outside the Chi Sau range of application but operate at a very different distance.>>David

Hello David,

"at a very different distance"

Can you explain a little more about that?

Roger

[black and blue]

Yuanfen says:


Whole chi sao synchronises bon-tan-fok-- the result is that it synchronises everything else too including fak , biu, gan etc-
the plants that grow out of the seeds.

Love that quote. Everything we do is connected. The more I study the more I realise Wing Chun is too clever an art for the likes of me. :)

[yuanfen]

Tom P sez:
Now, as for that cotton belly, I may not yet be a master, but I am well on the way. LOL.
---------------------------------------------------------

I have a head start on you Tom on this one.
Lots of chi! <vbg>

As Madden- the ex Raider coach sez--- for blocking you gotta have stuff,<vvbg>

[Savi]

Hung Fa Yi’s Kiu Sau (as a level of learning) is based on 3 principle stages of development in the beginning, e.g. SNT-level Kiu Sau. These stages are a part of a philosophy, Saam Mo Kiu, which also has a specific Hou Kuit per ‘category’ of Kiu Sau...

i.e. Fau Kiu Kiu Sau vs. Deui Yeng Kiu Sau (being categories).

As an example, we will look at the practitioner’s first introduction into HFY Kiu Sau. This first stage is called Fau Kiu Kiu Sau, meaning ‘Wandering/Floating Arm Methods’. The Hou Kuit which is applied to Fau Kiu Kiu Sau is called Mo Ying Da Yeng, meaning ‘No Shape Hit Shadow’.

This level of development focuses on how to respond to a scenario where you are at a disadvantage. The disadvantage being that you are not in a position to face your opponent (see no shape), and the attack is coming from the side in 3 different ways:

1. from a long bridge grab: contact
2. short bridge grab: contact
3. or an attack already launched: pre-contact

The goal is to find the most efficient way to establish/recover your facing and maintain it (‘hit’ the shadow). That ‘way’ must be the most simple and most effective in eliminating any and all “What if?” scenarios. This then also means that there are only 3 specific techniques which are appropriate in addressing each attack: Fut Sau, Gahn Sau/Da, Biu Da. Of course by naming these techniques we must be of the understanding that the applications are from a HFY point of reference, which are different in form/structure and usage from other lineages (per HFYWCF). How each are used is a more technical discussion which could be addressed later.

Of the above listed in #1-3, factors of time, space and energy are all addressed within the guidelines of the idiom Mo Ying Da Yeng, in accordance with the WC Formula, and Saam Mo Kiu.

This is just an example of how Kiu Sau is approached in the HFY family at the beginning stages of SNT, as I understand it. The context of Kiu Sau is not that it is just a forearm technique, but an entire level of development within the HFY. This precedes the Chi Sau learning stages. I'd like to add more, but it's getting late for me.

[William E]

Savi,

Great Post. I was going to follow-up with the next category but since your content was so extensive I figure I'll give people a day to digest and ask questions.

Thanks again sharing this unformation. Since this is only the first categpry of four it is clear that the information is very in-depth. Communicating it is over the internet is another story and you've done it very well.

William E.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Savi,

Thanks for taking the time to try to explain Kiu sau. You spent a lot of effort trying to describe it. However, I am no closer to understanding it. You have talked ABOUT kiu sau, but never really said what it was. LOL. You gave great examples. however they are lost on me as I cannot put it into any reference. Unfortunatly you used many other terms, which I and others are not familiar with, to describe kiu sau. Lets dumb it down abit and see if I can follow along.

The idea of Kiu Sau is 3 stages, which are collectively called or are part of Saam Mo Kiu (3 something bridges). Each stage has something called Hou Kuit that is applied to the Kiu Sau. Maybe like the element and animal shapes in Hung Gar? Fire, gold, water, wood, earth can combine with Tiger, snake, dragon, crane, lepoard.

I envision it as:
1. Saam Mo Kiu
_A. Kiu Sau
__i. Fau Kiu Kiu Sau (Kiu Sau level1)
___a. Mo Ying Da Yeng-?No Shape Hit Shadow?(Hou Kuit)
__ii. Kiu Sau level2
___a. Hou Kuit
__iii. Kiu Sau level3
___a. Hou Kuit

But WHAT is kiu sau. When you use the term what are you refering to? Kiu means bridge and sau means hand. Are you talking about bridging? Bridging is crossing hands in most southern martial arts that I am aware of. So, there should be some sort of bridging.

I am hoping I can follow along so I can play at home :D

Tom
________
Jainism forum (http://www.religionboard.org/jainism/)

[Wingman]

...and the attack is coming from the side in 3 different ways:

1. from a long bridge grab: contact
2. short bridge grab: contact
3. or an attack already launched: pre-contact

The goal is to find the most efficient way to establish/recover your facing and maintain it (‘hit’ the shadow). That ‘way’ must be the most simple and most effective in eliminating any and all “What if?” scenarios. This then also means that there are only 3 specific techniques which are appropriate in addressing each attack: Fut Sau, Gahn Sau/Da, Biu Da...

Why are there only 3 specific techniques which are appropriate in addressing each attack? Is it just for simplification so that the student can grasp the idea? ...or are there other reasons for limiting to just 3 specific techniques?

[desertwingchun2]

"When one understands lat sau, bai jong and chi sao as a interrrelated dynamic phenomenon where the body acts as a single but not frozen unit that is Ip Man wing chun 102." -Joy


"Many folks dont get past [Ip Man] 101."-Joy

Thank you for the compliment Joy! :D

HFYWC 101 is all about learning the body "acts as a single but not frozen unit". This actually a good segue for my post.

For the sake of this discussion let's look at Kiu Sao as an exercise. The depth of Kiu Sao as an exercise alone is expansive. Yet, as with anything once one has an understanding it seems so simple!

Tom, the focus point of contact is the forearm.

Wingman, my sihing Savi is talking about the first stage or progression in the Kiu Sao training platform. The first progression of the exercise has three specific responses to three specific attacks. Within this beginning stage there is much information presented. The student not only grasps the idea of Kiu Sao "the exercise" but Kiu Sao and it's relation to combat, as well. I hope I answered your question. If not lemme know and I'll certainly try again.

-David

[Wingman]

Thanks for the clarification, desertwingchun2. I understand that kiu sau has many stages and what Savi was describing is just the first stage. I agree that just one simple movement can convey so much information for a beginner to grasp. That's why it's just limited to 3 specific responses.

"There are only 3 primary colors. But from these 3 colors, infinite hues can be created."

So does kiu sau progression start with just 3 specific attacks/responses; and then combine them to create infinite number of combinations?

[t_niehoff]

Savi writes:

This first stage is called Fau Kiu Kiu Sau, meaning ‘Wandering/Floating Arm Methods’. The Hou Kuit which is applied to Fau Kiu Kiu Sau is called Mo Ying Da Yeng, meaning ‘No Shape Hit Shadow’. . . This level of development focuses on how to respond to a scenario where you are at a disadvantage. The disadvantage being that you are not in a position to face your opponent (see no shape), Savi

How is this different than the principle expounded in the WCK kuen kuit: Yau Ying Da Ying, Mo Ying Da Yieng, Yao Ying Juk Lao,Mo Yieng Po Jung (see form, strike form; no form, strike shadow; have impression, continue to stay; no shadow cleave the center)?

and the attack is coming from the side in 3 different ways:

1. from a long bridge grab: contact
2. short bridge grab: contact
3. or an attack already launched: pre-contact

The goal is to find the most efficient way to establish/recover your facing and maintain it (‘hit’ the shadow). That ‘way’ must be the most simple and most effective in eliminating any and all “What if?” scenarios. Savi

Aren't you beginning with "what if scenarios"? The WCK kuit above seems to provide guidance. Once again, it seems that HFY has just "repackaged" what everyone else has. TN

Terence

[yuanfen]

Aren't you beginning with "what if scenarios"? The WCK kuit above seems to provide guidance. Once again, it seems that HFY has just "repackaged" what everyone else has. TN

Terence
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(Really true. ) note: a HFY post

This then also means that there are only 3 specific techniques which are appropriate in addressing each attack: Fut Sau, Gahn Sau/Da, Biu Da. Of course by naming these techniques we must be of the understanding that the applications are from a HFY point of reference, which are different in form/structure and usage from other lineages (per HFYWCF). How each are used is a more technical discussion which could be addressed later.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Labels without communication content. Tom P and others have really tried to draw out a comparative discussion- with not much success except for a indoor catechism recital of terms.))

[teazer]

Originally posted by Savi
The Hou Kuit which is applied to Fau Kiu Kiu Sau is called Mo Ying Da Yeng, meaning ‘No Shape Hit Shadow’.

This level of development focuses on how to respond to a scenario where you are at a disadvantage. The disadvantage being that you are not in a position to face your opponent (see no shape), and the attack is coming from the side in 3 different ways:
1. from a long bridge grab: contact
2. short bridge grab: contact
3. or an attack already launched: pre-contact

Interesting interpretation of the concept.
My interpretation of the similar kuit that Terence mentions was that the reason there is no shape is the opponent offers no fixed position that can be struck, which would've been the preferred scenario. The next best choice is that you interecept movement as you perceive it, which is obviously more difficult.
Whether it comes from the side or not wouldn't change that. If the attack is a grab, it would be a shape, and would offer itself to being struck, though you would not at that point really need to as contact had been made for you.
Thanks for sharing though. Hopefully with the other concepts, we can see how it fits together using the side attack hypothesis.

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Yau Ying Da Ying, Mo Ying Da Yieng, Yao Ying Juk Lao,Mo Yieng Po Jung (see form, strike form; no form, strike shadow; have impression, continue to stay; no shadow cleave the center)?


Terence-

Could you explain this to me using examples? Specifically the "shadow" part? What exactly is the "shadow"?

Thanks!

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Once again, it seems that HFY has just "repackaged" what everyone else has.

Actually this is sort of true! Although I think it is actually the other way around. Kiu Sau is "Truth"- therefore it is not unusual to see it appear in other styles (especially if those other styles are off-shoots of the original).

I guess one of the main differences is that the HFY notion of Kiu Sau encompasses original Ch'an philosophy where later dirivatives might not. Kiu Sau is certainly effective so it would be retained as an effective "technique" even if the Ch'an philosophy is lost.

[t_niehoff]

JKWalz wrote:

Terence-Could you explain this to me using examples? Specifically the "shadow" part? What exactly is the "shadow"? JKW

I could explain it but I won't -- I'm not your sifu and thus not responsible for your education. If you are studying WCK with a sifu that knows WCK, then he'll be able to answer your question; if he can't, then I'd find someone that can. I only posted the kuit to show that HFY's "Fau Kiu Kiu Sau" is just another example of what Victor previously posted: "But Meng was forced to end this part of the conversation rather quickly when I started to complete his sentences for him by answering back in "plain", "simple" language using the TWC explanations for the EXACT SAME PHENOMA that he was trying to be so "unique" about.....and by means of some very mysterious and highflying words and phrases". TN

Terence

[taltos]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I'm not your sifu and thus not responsible for your education.

I thought JK was just asking for your understanding based on your lineage.

I didn't see anywhere where he asked for anything else.

-Levi

[t_niehoff]

Sheldon,

If you have anything substantive to offer and think his question is worthy a response, why not answer the question yourself? . . . oh, I'm sorry -- I forgot that you really don't practice WCK and have no real understanding. I'll let you get back to stalking folks -- apparently the only thing you come here for.

Terence

[reneritchie]

JK - A problem with the theory that "off-shoots" don't maintain the "orginal" Chan theory is that it only works if one is completely unfamiliar with Chinese cultural and historical sources. To draw you an example, if someone who'd read a couple Chan books had a Mazda RX8, and could describe that Mazda RX8 in what they claimed were Chan principles, it would not mean their RX8 predated the Ford Model-T, or that the Ford Model-T had "lost" something (unless you knew nothing about the history of cars), or that an actual Chan Buddhist would find their arguments anything but bemusing.

To draw another example, it would be like going to an NRA meeting and claiming HFY had an ancestral Shaolin 9mm set, complete with Chan concepts of combat handgunning, and saying the automatic used in the US was derived from them with the Chan lost. That dog won't hunt ;)

The WCK Kuen Kuit did not appear miraculously from a dream, they are simply a step along the long evolutionary process of TCMA, and many were drawn from other sources (*not* Chan).

This reminds me of the White Tiger/Green Dragon stuff, where some people claimed it was "evidence" of a link to Shaolin, and all it was was evidence these people knew nothing about Chinese cultural symbolism.

If you're charismatic, you can probably convince people unfamiliar (most people, unfortunately) but anyone whose been there, done that, will scratch their head and wonder.

Terence,

Not big with the spirit of sharing today, eh?

FWIW, the Kuen Kuit basically describes engagement tactics. If you're being attacked, and the attack is clear, strike the attacker. If it's not clear (ie. from the corner of your eye you see something coming at you but lack the time/opportunity to discern exactly what) but only the impression (Yieng is shadow/impression), you strike that. If the impression turns out to be true (a real attack), you stay and deal with it. If its not true (a fake, feint, mistake, etc.) you cleave down the center to catch any real attacks sneaking in, or to reclaim the starting position. As with any KK, it has layers and is context sensitive, so YMMV.

[tparkerkfo]

I am not very far and I can say that I have never was taught specifically about the shadow concept. However, I have developed what I think is its meaning. It may be primitave and even incorrect. But just to get the blood flowing to the brain:

I think engaging the shadow means that when we fight we may not see everything clearly. Hense shadows.

Yau Ying Da Ying, Mo Ying Da Yieng, Yao Ying Juk Lao,Mo Yieng Po Jung (see form, strike form; no form, strike shadow; have impression, continue to stay; no shadow cleave the center)

When you see the form, being an arm comming at you, or the body of the opponent, hit it. The form is an actual object. If there is no form, things are moving fast and you have to trust instinct and conditioned responses, ie the centerline and what not. Our saying strike upon emptyness is important. So, if the hands or body is moving and we see it, we should strike out. The danger here is that we don't chase the hands and this could be the result if we shace the shadows. So there should be some qualifiers on this saying. If there is no shadow, meaning there is nothing in front of us, then you should Hit. What is holding you back?

This is a generic view point I have, and people will no doubt argue against it, or offer deeper meanings, or what not.

Tom
________
FREE X RATED VIDEOS (http://www.****tube.com/)

[t_niehoff]

RR wrote:

Terence, Not big with the spirit of sharing today, eh? RR

It depends on who is doing the asking, and why they are asking. I'm sure if they don't get substantive answers from me, they can always turn to Sheldon or Rolling Hand for answers. ;) TN

FWIW, the Kuen Kuit basically describes engagement tactics. RR

Some (and this particular one) of the KK; there are different categories of kuit. TN

Terence

[Geezer]

Rene Wrote>

To draw another example, it would be like going to an NRA meeting and claiming HFY had an ancestral Shaolin 9mm set, complete with Chan concepts of combat handgunning, and saying the automatic used in the US was derived from them with the Chan lost

Or 9mm doesn't have the stopping power of a .45 and in looking for the middle road created S&W .40.

Sheldon

[t_niehoff]

taltos wrote:

I thought JK was just asking for your understanding based on your lineage.

"Understanding based on your lineage"? ROFLOL! I'll let you in on a secret: IT'S ALL WCK! If you guys forgot about "lineage" for a second and opened your eyes, you might get a jolt of reality. TN

Terence

[Geezer]

t_niehoff Wrote>

I'm sure if they don't get substantive answers from me, they can always turn to Sheldon or Rolling Hand for answers.

I don't know if I could because 1. I don't pratice WCK or KF according to you 2. I don't assume unlike you and aren't prepared to answer for you and 3. I haven't a clue about your collective style of WCK.


Sheldon

[reneritchie]

Some (and this particular one) of the KK; there are different categories of kuit.

I meant the KK (in question).

Good point on forgetting about lineage. Lineage can't understand for you. It can't learn for you. It can't fight for you. It can't explain for you. It's no McDonalds where you pay your franchise fee to use someone else's name. Its the Gourmet Academy where you're supposed to develop skills enough to need only your own name.

If people had more self-confidence, and less lineage-image-dependence, IMHO, much of the noise would disappear.

[desertwingchun2]

Joy and Terence - It is evident neither of you are here to further discussions only detract from them. Not that this is new but part of a continuous cycle. This reminds me of a conversation I had with Rene not too long ago.

"The problem I see is when the answers are given there is a small group ready to immediately initiate insults and challenges. Terence's comments on this thread are a prime example. There are others who are more subtle. But none the less detract from the discussion. -DWC2"

That's equally valid and I think its important, if anyone wants to move past the cycle, that we admit the fault rests with all of us, and take responsibility for our own part(s) in it. IMHO, gowing back several years now, few if any of us have much to be proud of with these long series of threads. We've all acted pretty badly at one time or another, and we seem to have trouble putting that aside. - RR

Move past the cycle and discuss. It's a shame that a few need to take away when they have nothing to add.

-David

[t_niehoff]

DW2 wrote:

Joy and Terence - It is evident neither of you are here to further discussions only detract from them. DW2

ROFLOL! Why don't I ever see you posting admonitions to your buddies Rolling Hand or Sheldon, neither of whom ever offer substantive posts but only stalk? IMHO I've "added" something substantive to the discussions: that your (HFY) "Fau Kiu Kiu Sau" is just a repackaged WCK kuen kuit -- nothing "special", no big "secret", and no big deal. And it makes me wonder why the self-proclaimed "experts" in Yip Man WCK that have become taken with HFY don't see that? Or is it that they weren't so "expert" in Yip Man WCK after all? TN

Terence

[reneritchie]

Why aren't we tense and rigid in WCK? Because its too easy to read; an opponent can tell right away when a tense, rigid attack is coming, and will adapt a defensive mindset. Relaxed and calm, on the other hand, can sometimes penetrate without setting off alarms.

This, I think, is valuable in discussion. Bitter medicine, even when strongly needed, is still bitter, and many will refuse to take it. Even if your words are true, if they're harsh, many will close their minds and ears and not even hear you. Then you're only talking to yourself, and you already know what you sound like.

Ask questions, offer information. Even if they strongly deny it in public, in private, especially if it is sensible, it will resonate, and will build within them over time.

Just my 2c.

[desertwingchun2]

Wingman, if you can hear through all the interference here's my answer to your question.

"So does kiu sau progression start with just 3 specific attacks/responses; and then combine them to create infinite number of combinations?"

The first progression is the 3 specific attacks/responses and all they encompass. When Sifu feels one understands Sifu will introduce the second progression. The second progression builds on the first and introduces more detail. The details are not only in technique but concepts and principles as well. Actually Master Gee has said on many occasions wing chun fighters are principle based not technique based fighters.

The teaching meathodology I like to refer to is:
1. Body Mechanic
2. Technical Knowledge
3. Skill Challenge
I find by following this pattern I have been more confident in my learning and understanding of material. I can clearly see where a techinique alone is truly empty.

I don't know if I understand the "infinite number of combinations" part but I do know that the latter stages of the Kiu Sao exercise are very complex. Those stages are full of challenges on every roll.

-David

[taltos]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
taltos wrote:

I thought JK was just asking for your understanding based on your lineage.

"Understanding based on your lineage"? ROFLOL! I'll let you in on a secret: IT'S ALL WCK! If you guys forgot about "lineage" for a second and opened your eyes, you might get a jolt of reality. TN

Terence

Fair enough. I'll rephrase (I'm not above actually trying to have a positive exchange and I'll revise my wording if that will help)...

I thought JK was just asking for your understanding.

Is that more of what you were looking for? I thought the purpose of this forum was to see what other people thought. I don't think anyone is asking you (or anyone else) to teach them. No one implied that. The original statement of intent was "I would like to open a discussion on kiu sau and what roll it plays in WCK," so I think JK was asking for clarification to see where you were coming from. That's all.

-Levi

[desertwingchun2]

"IMHO I've "added" something substantive to the discussions: that your (HFY) "Fau Kiu Kiu Sau" is just a repackaged WCK kuen kuit" - TN

Um not very substansive. Espescially since my sihing Savi stated ...

"The Hou Kuit which is applied to Fau Kiu Kiu Sau is called Mo Ying Da Yeng, meaning ‘No Shape Hit Shadow’."

You have not added anything, you have only attempted to detract from this discussion. Like all your attempts in the past this one is again stillborn.

The exercise, amongst other things, is a physical expression of the kuen kuit. Experience is the greatest teacher.

Some guys talk kung fu,
Kung fu guys do kung fu.

-David

[Rolling_Hand]

>>ROFLOL! Why don't I ever see you posting admonitions to your buddies Rolling Hand or Sheldon,>>Terence

This is America, a free country, did you get it T-man?

>>neither of whom ever offer substantive posts but only stalk?>>Terence

It must be a joke! Unlike you, I don't spread rumors to attack other WCK families.

>>IMHO I've "added" something substantive to the discussions:>>Terence

"Terence's substance posts"="rumor + gossip + personal attacks to other WCK families"

>>that your (HFY) "Fau Kiu Kiu Sau" is just a repackaged WCK kuen kuit -- nothing "special", no big "secret", and no big deal.>>Terence

That's interesting! Dude, please explain to us how your sifu Robert Chu repackaged the Chi Shim WCK -"Robert Chu's 14 points Chi-Sao".

>>And it makes me wonder why the self-proclaimed "experts" in Yip Man WCK that have become taken with HFY don't see that? Or is it that they weren't so "expert" in Yip Man WCK after all?>> TN

You once said Chi Shim IS NOT WCK, then, could you please explain why its ok for your sifu Robert Chu to steal the Chi-Shim WCK to repackage his Chusauli Wing Chun. Now, you're such a WCK expert in your little world and you couldn't even tell what's Robert Chu WC????? Btw, FireHwak got that on Tapes to prove it. Instead of making your personal attacks to the HFY and Chi Shim families, why don't you let our WCK brothers to share their experiences with us?

[reneritchie]

Jar Jar wrote:


It must be a joke! Unlike you, I don't spread rumors to attack other WCK families.

LOL! Good one!


That's interesting! Dude, please explain to us how your sifu Robert Chu repackaged the Chi Shim WCK -"Robert Chu's 14 points Chi-Sao".

ROFLMAO!! Another!!

0-100, Fred Ettish lives!

[Rolling_Hand]

Rene,

Thanks!

[reneritchie]

BTW- If anyone's actually interested in Robert's 14 Chi Sao methods and their derivation, in a nutshell, during the time Benny Meng was learning from Robert, Robert became frustrated that he couldn't quickly enough impart his Chi Sao methods and so wrote out 12 core concepts to express his ideas (I don't know if he ever passed these on to Benny in person, rather than just email, as they parted ways around this time). Robert later added 2 more points, and brought the number up to 14.

Since that time, various uninformed, politically motivated people have made nonsensical attempts to say these 14 have come from one source or another, but since they're different in kind from anything offered, needless to say, they've only shown a profound lack of WCK knowledge.

(And to nip the inevitable in the bud, I have copies of email between Robert Chu and Benny Meng and if the record needs to be set straight, I'll be more than happy to post them so that there is *no* more confusion where Robert's material came from, and what *exactly* went on during that time.)

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I could explain it but I won't -- I'm not your sifu and thus not responsible for your education.

Jesus, Terence!

I was asking with the true spirit of trying to gain knowledge about your interpretation of "shadow". The only interpretation I know of is our own here at our Kwoon. I am looking for a fundamental difference in the interpretation of the Kuit to prove that perhaps the HFY understanding is NOT simply a re-packaging of established WCK theory.

I oppologize for trying to use you as a source of expert knowledge- I'll know better in the future!

[reneritchie]

For clarity's sake, here's a cut and paste from David McKinnon's old posting of both Robert Chu's 14 points, and the methods of Chi Sim...

(with difference so apparent, any claims of connection would have to be deliberately false).


These 14 methods are posted on the VTM site and are associated with Chi Shim
http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/...sim_history.php

1 Tiu (Pick up "with a stick")
2 Buot (push aside)
3 Da (hit)
4 Pun (fold)
5 Juar (grasp)
6 Lai (pull)
7 See (shear)
8 Tshai (quick pull)
9 Bik Force (cornering someone)
10 Hup (continue to put pressure on - "overpowering")
11 Taan (swallow)
12 Tuo (spit)
13 Buort (taking change - "gamble")
14 Saat (stop - "kill/subdue totally")

These are the ones I learned from Sifu Robert Chu
http://www.chusaulei.com/martial/ar...les_chisao.html
Mun Fa/ Yin Fa - Asking/inquiring and enticing
Jou Fa – Running
Jeet Fa - Methods of intercepting
Tao/Lou Fa - Methods of leaking and stealing
Jiu Fa - common methods of Gor Sao
Sim Fa - Methods of evasion with steps, body displacement, dodging, hand movement
Dai Fa - Methods of guiding, leading
Jie Fa - Methods of borrowing an opponent's power and energy
Fou - methods of floating, unbalancing, uprooting an opponent
Chum - methods of collapsing a person's structure or sinking
Tun - methods of swallowing an opponent's force and dissolving it
Tou - methods of expelling force in contact with the opponent
Tuen Fa – methods of breaking and delinking the body connection in an effort to preserve the body structure
Jip Fa – methods of linking up the body connection once the connection is broken

[JK Walz]

In non-HFY lineages is there a difference between kiu sau and chi sau?

I ask because I am interested in knowing for myself! Maybe we can recognize a core difference or similarity.

[reneritchie]

Hi JK,

I don't believe most use the term Kiu Sao in the manner of your frame of reference, so it might be more productive over all to leave the terms behind and just explore how various methods work towards developing "bridging" skills, regardless of what they call it?

The way I learned, we started with simple San Sao, 1 attack, from 1 step, at one angle. We drilled the heck out of it, then did another attack and drilled. Then did patterned combination (1-2, 1-2, 1-2), then random (1-2, 2-2, 1-1, 1-2). Then a 3rd, etc.

(interupted by work, will continue tomorrow if there's interest).

[Rolling_Hand]

For clarity's sake, here's a cut and paste from David McKinnon's old posting of both Robert Chu's 14 points, and the methods of Chi Sim...

(with difference so apparent, any claims of connection would have to be deliberately false).

---------------------------------------------

Rene,

Thanks for your input.

Repackage is repackage.

Chi Shim WCK people all know about this "repackage deal"

I'm sure the VTM could also offer you a second opinion about this.

[Savi]

When reading this information, let’s all be on the same page that the only references I am about to share only acknowledge the HFY system. Whether other lineages of WCK have it or not is not the issue I am addressing…

Mo Ying Da Yeng; it is translated as No Shape Hit Shadow.

The leading interpretation thus far on the thread is that when you can’t get a fix on a subject you strike at it. The understanding from the HFY knowledgebase is not about hitting an object at all. The underlying meaning behind Mo Ying Da Yeng is that of “No facing, find facing” which is more strategic in nature. For a more modern-day analogy I like to use the similarity of a fighter jet which scans the sky for its target, once found it locks on to it. In a more hand to hand combat relationship, it addresses the scenario of starting from a bad position and how to recover your space and facing before any counterstrike is even considered by a simple arm motion.

With regards to philosophy, the philosophy is about understanding reality and how to harmonize with it. In order to deal with reality, you must first find the way to face it.

Kiu Sau; it is translated as Bridge Hand.

If we only go by the literal translation, then everyone in the world has a Kiu Sau. Why? By the simple translation, any motion of the arms (regardless of style – what some refer to as packaging) can be called a ‘Kiu Sau.’ The question is “What is Kiu Sau?” Kiu Sau is a means to protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures. In other words, be more concerned with protecting yourself before you become concerned with hitting someone else. Historically, Kiu Sau was already recognized as a method to interact with energies long before the Weng Chun Tong in the mid 1600’s. Around the time the Weng Chun Tong was established, a shift of thought occurred, which in turn influenced the use of Kiu Sau (bridge techniques) along many other things. That paradigm addressed the matter of efficiency. From my understanding, what provoked this new train of thought was the Saam Mo Kiu philosophy: the 3 levels of reality… what is less efficient, more efficient, and most efficient. This philosophy drove a new approach to human combat, which according to my family’s current research gave rise to Wing Chun.

With this in mind, a more precise question to ask would be “What is HFY Kiu Sau?” HFY Kiu Sau is not addressing an arm technique. HFY Kiu Sau addresses Risk Management above the desire to destroy the opponent. It is structured within the framework of the WC Formula, and serves as a means to maintain one’s personal harmony. If in the event the offender persists, we then proceed to assist in their destruction. Not to say we did not give the opponent the opportunity to back-off first.

“Why 3 approaches?” someone asked. This is because of the 3 levels of reality. What is the most efficient response to employ is dependent on the “level of lethality” of the attack.

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by Savi

With this in mind, a more precise question to ask would be “What is HFY Kiu Sau?” HFY Kiu Sau is not addressing an arm technique. HFY Kiu Sau addresses Risk Management above the desire to destroy the opponent. It is structured within the framework of the WC Formula, and serves as a means to maintain one’s personal harmony. If in the event the offender persists, we then proceed to assist in their destruction. Not to say we did not give the opponent the opportunity to back-off first.


A friend of mine defined it as this today:

"It is a way to get to know the other guy".

Through the Kiu Sau forearm bridge you get to know your opponent safely. This allows you to do the right thing- it gives you the range (and structure among other things) to decide and act correctly.

What other options do have other than to assess the situation from a safe, bridged range? What are the possible results if you mis-understand the reality of the scenario?

[Wingman]

Originally posted by Savi
“Why 3 approaches?” someone asked. This is because of the 3 levels of reality. What is the most efficient response to employ is dependent on the “level of lethality” of the attack.

It was I who asked that question.:) desertwingchun2 answered this question; but it was different than your answer above.

I have more questions, if you don't mind:

1. You said that the 3 "levels of reality" are: what is less efficient, more efficient, and most efficient. Why not concentrate on the most efficient response? Why do you have to consider the first 2 responses if you only use the 3rd (most efficient) response to deal with the attack?

2. What are the "levels of lethality"?

[Savi]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Aren't you beginning with "what if scenarios"? The WCK kuit above seems to provide guidance. Once again, it seems that HFY has just "repackaged" what everyone else has. TN

Terence
To find what is the most efficient answer, there must be a question. However vague or precise that question may be, there must always be one most correct answer, preferrably one that answers more questions with the same answer. In truth, we always begin with a "What if?" so the answer to the first sentence in the quote is Yes. The goal is to eliminate any rebirth of the "What if?"

The last sentence in the quote above is questioning the issue of "Which one is older?" However, it is qualified with the phrase of "it seems..." So I'd like to clarify that the last statement can only be an opinion, which does not require an answer.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Wingman
1. You said that the 3 "levels of reality" are: what is less efficient, more efficient, and most efficient. Why not concentrate on the most efficient response? Why do you have to consider the first 2 responses if you only use the 3rd (most efficient) response to deal with the attack?

2. What are the "levels of lethality"?
What I said is really not that different than what Desertwingchun2 said. There are 3 basic "levels of lethality" that can be encountered. One meant to bruise, another meant to knock-out, and lastly one with the intent to kill. It is not that the response being given is a less, more to most efficient. It is that your response is the MOST efficient one in relation to how lethal the attack is. Could be similar to the USA's terror alert system?

Example of responses per level of intent:

Fau Kiu Kiu Sau:

Less serious - Fut Sau
More serious - Gahn Sau/Gahn Da
Very Serious - Biu Da

How these are executed would be a very technical discussion, for which at the current moment I do not have time to do! Maybe tomorrow, or some of my other brothers/sisters can address if they have the time.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Wingman
"There are only 3 primary colors. But from these 3 colors, infinite hues can be created."
I really do like what you said here, and I think it's pretty much on target to what we are discussing. I can relate to your example being that I have an interest in the art realm.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Savi,

Finally some sanity!!!! Lets see if we can get this thing on target again. I am really confused, so lets see what you wrote.



Mo Ying Da Yeng; it is translated as No Shape Hit Shadow.
The leading interpretation thus far on the thread is that when you can?t get a fix on a subject you strike at it. The understanding from the HFY knowledgebase is not about hitting an object at all. The underlying meaning behind Mo Ying Da Yeng is that of ?No facing, find facing? which is more strategic in nature.


OK, I think I can handle that. THough I am confused how the term relates to facing. I dont see any correlation between any of the words and the concept of facing your target. Oh well, atleast I know what this means. I can accept that.



Kiu Sau; it is translated as Bridge Hand.
?What is Kiu Sau?? Kiu Sau is a means to protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures. In other words, be more concerned with protecting yourself before you become concerned with hitting someone else.


Again, not sure how this applies to bridging or hand. There doesn't seem to be any logic that creates an analogy here. But I can run with it. To me, this is just an attitude or an apporach to fighting, but not tied to the fighting itself. In other words, this is about simple compasion. How does it apply to HFY applications and why do other arts use the term very differently?

Getting back to what Chango posted, how does the concept "protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures" tie into "understanding the realatonship of Time,space,and energy" and "learning how to use the bridge against the grappler, kicker etc...." as mentioned by Chango? I get the facing and using a measured response to protect yourself. But how is it related to bridging as Chango seemed to initialy imply.

So why do you need Kiu Sau? What does it buy you?

Tom
________
Masturbation fingering (http://www.****tube.com/categories/750/fingering/videos/1)

[Mckind13]

Hi
Savi Says "there must always be one most correct answer."
This is a poor way to express it I think. When punched there are many different combinations that not only achieve the same results but involve every different combination of timing and distance possible.
How does "one most correct answer" apply to dealing variables encountered in a combative situation?
David

[desertwingchun2]

"HFY Kiu Sau is not addressing an arm technique. HFY Kiu Sau addresses Risk Management above the desire to destroy the opponent. It is structured within the framework of the WC Formula, and serves as a means to maintain one’s personal harmony." - Savi

Excellent point. I like that we are moving away from "Body Mechanic" POV to more of a "Technical Knowledge" POV.

In application is where the nature can be experienced.

Speaking of which, anyone care to share on their experience with Chi Sim Weng Chun Kiu Sao and Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kiu Sao?

I found CSWC Kiu Sao tends to flow to grappling and Kum Na applications. I had very limited exposure so I don't know if this is the norm or not. I would be interested in hearing more. If anyone cares to share.

-David

[t_niehoff]

DW2 wrote:

I like that we are moving away from "Body Mechanic" POV to more of a "Technical Knowledge" POV. DWw

IME it is the "mechanics" that produce the "techniques" **if** the mechanics are correct. TN

----------------

McKind13 wrote:

Savi Says "there must always be one most correct answer."
This is a poor way to express it I think. When punched there are many different combinations that not only achieve the same results but involve every different combination of timing and distance possible. . . How does "one most correct answer" apply to dealing variables encountered in a combative situation?

Good point, Dave, about the number of variables. I'd also add that we must realize that any action we take can only be based on what "we bring to the table", i.e., our present skills, experience, knowledge, etc. and likewise what our opponent brings to the table -- and that we need to balance the two. For example, your answer to my jab may work agsainst me but will fail against Lennox Lewis (his skill, attributes, etc. are better than mine); thinking your answer to my jab is "the most correct answer" will only lead you to disaster against Lennox (you may need a different answer). Similarly, thinking that there is "one correct tan sao" that will always work is simply misguided -- it is not the punch we are dealing with but rather it is that particular opponent's particular punch we are dealing with. WCK is based on feeling (sensitivity) and not on fixed answers or responses. TN

----------------

Savi writes:

“What is Kiu Sau?” Kiu Sau is a means to protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures. In other words, be more concerned with protecting yourself before you become concerned with hitting someone else. S

This is not WCK's way IMO. In WCK we "link defense to bring in offense" and "use defense as offense, use offense as defense" so that the two blend together into one (as I call it, "offensive defense and defensive offense") -- the mindset of WCK is to protect ourselves *as* we hit not before we hit (not protect then attack -- that loses the timing). TN

Terence

[Geezer]

Rene Wrote>

Robert became frustrated that he couldn't quickly enough impart his Chi Sao methods and so wrote out 12 core concepts to express his ideas (I don't know if he ever passed these on to Benny in person, rather than just email, as they parted ways around this time). Robert later added 2 more points, and brought the number up to 14.

Do you know what the original 12 were??and was it while he was training under GM hawkins Cheung that he came up with this??

Sheldon

[canglong]

"Good point, Dave, about the number of variables. I'd also add that we must realize that any action we take can only be based on what "we bring to the table", i.e., our present skills, experience, knowledge, etc. and likewise what our opponent brings to the table -- and that we need to balance the two. For example, your answer to my jab may work agsainst me but will fail against Lennox Lewis (his skill, attributes, etc. are better than mine); thinking your answer to my jab is "the most correct answer" will only lead you to disaster against Lennox (you may need a different answer)." Terence

Interesting point of view Terence and Dave. I think you may have misread the point my sihings were trying to make. In our kwoon we train as if we were going in to battle against Lennox Lewis so that in the event we only have to battle you we would still be prepared. Train for the best you would be prepared for the rest hence....
"the 3 levels of reality… what is less efficient, more efficient, and most efficient." Savi here we see the path from unreal to real same as we might see the path from Terence to Lewis. What your suggesting is that your jab is not real which is not the concern of those that train for what is real.

"...(as I call it, "offensive defense and defensive offense") -- the mindset of WCK is to protect ourselves *as* we hit not before we hit (not protect then attack -- that loses the timing)." TN Terence

Again, in this discussion at this point we are only talking about a blind side attack where the first response is to regain facing, time, space and structure through the use of your kiu sau thus regaining time and space to counter correctly.

[reneritchie]

I'm sure the VTM could also offer you a second opinion about this.

Anyone can have an opinion. It takes nothing. No fact, no work, no morality. I offer *proof*, but what do you care, however it turns out in the end, you're safely anonymous and succeed in tarnishing someone *else's* reputation. Pretty sad.


Do you know what the original 12 were??and was it while he was training under GM hawkins Cheung that he came up with this??

The original twelve were, not strangely, the 14 minus the last two (Tuen/Jip). Robert's still a student of Hawkins Cheung sifu, so technically yes, but as I said, it was while trying to give Benny Meng a digestible method for learning his Chi Sao that he wrote the first list and emailed it to Benny and I.

[Mckind13]

Rene Wrote:
BTW- If anyone's actually interested in Robert's 14 Chi Sao methods and their derivation, in a nutshell, during the time Benny Meng was learning from Robert, Robert became frustrated that he couldn't quickly enough impart his Chi Sao methods and so wrote out 12 core concepts to express his ideas (I don't know if he ever passed these on to Benny in person, rather than just email, as they parted ways around this time). Robert later added 2 more points, and brought the number up to 14.


Geezez Wrote:

Do you know what the original 12 were??and was it while he was training under GM hawkins Cheung that he came up with this??

Sheldon

Hi Sheldon,

Sifu Chu has maintains a relationship with Cheung ever since he moved to the west coast. I do not have the original 12 but as they were added I think they were added to the end of the list. I believe Robert felt a certain amount of consternation in the inability of some visiting students to easily pick up his Chi Sau concepts and so at the request for the "concepts," by that student, he first compiled the list.



Thanks, Peace

David

[reneritchie]

David is correct.

[t_niehoff]

canglong wrote:

Interesting point of view Terence and Dave. I think you may have misread the point my sihings were trying to make. In our kwoon we train as if we were going in to battle against Lennox Lewis so that in the event we only have to battle you we would still be prepared. Train for the best you would be prepared for the rest hence.... C

First, you missed my point completely. There is "no best" for which to prepare; such thinking is misguided. Every punch is different, every opponent brings different things to the table, etc. While there are different skill levels, within those levels there are individual differences. Thus, we must deal with each opponent differently based on what we bring to the table, what they bring to the table, and the moment. Fixed thinking -- like "if I can deal with Lennox's jab, I can deal with any jab" -- shows at the very least inexperience (any boxer will recognize the silliness of that proposition). Second, the only way to train "for the best" is to train with the best (folks at that level) -- and I doubt any of your training partners can punch at the level of a Lennox Lewis. Being able to deal with one of your sihings, or even your sifu, does not in any way equates to being able to deal with a world-class fighter. If you think so, try it. TN

Again, in this discussion at this point we are only talking about a blind side attack where the first response is to regain facing, time, space and structure through the use of your kiu sau thus regaining time and space to counter correctly. C

Well, Savi wrote: “'What is Kiu Sau?' Kiu Sau is a means to protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures. In other words, be more concerned with protecting yourself before you become concerned with hitting someone else." To me it looked like was explaining what HFY's kiu sao was . . . TN

Terence

[Ultimatewingchun]

Am I missing something here?

Chango started this thread about "kiu sao".
In the very next post Wingman asked Chango to define what he means by "kiu sao".

It is now 70 posts later and still no reply from Chango!

THIS IS LAUGHABLE......What is up with you, Chango?

[t_niehoff]

Robert's chi sao methods are basically strategic/tactical in nature (why he calls them his "mental methods") as opposed to a drill progression (like Benny's) -- so comparing Robert's 14 and Benny's 14 is like comparing apples and oranges. The concern addressed by Robert's methods is IMHO to learn different elements like "running" or "linking" and then through practice to discover the conditions that make it most effective to use, how to best implement it, when it is not effective, how to defeat it, etc. And FWIW, these are nothing new, they are just WCK -- only Robert's organization of the material is new.

Terence

[Geezer]

Mckind13 Wrote>

I believe Robert felt a certain amount of consternation in the inability of some visiting students to easily pick up his Chi Sau concepts and so at the request for the "concepts," by that student, he first compiled the list.

Was this something he had been toying around with for a while and at that moment of time made it a reality???
Also prior to it becoming a reality do you think he was influeneced by other styles of WCK that had similar ways of teaching and how successful they were.

Sheldon

[reneritchie]

Sheldon,

You still haven't shared with us your own sifu's methods, and how they've been evolving? Since you're asking so much of others, perhaps extending a little as well would help keep the good faith?

[canglong]

"First, you missed my point completely. There is "no best" for which to prepare; such thinking is misguided. Every punch is different, every opponent brings different things to the table, etc. While there are different skill levels, within those levels there are individual differences. Thus, we must deal with each opponent differently based on what we bring to the table, what they bring to the table, and the moment. " Terence

So what your saying is that those persons that win gold medals in the 100 meter sprints in the olympics aren't really the best it's just that those finishing behind them are just at a different skill levels. So don't train to be the fastest just get an entry list of those competing and just train/run fast enough to beat them....hmmmm like I said very interesting point of view. To this point I have learned WCK teaches us how to overcome speed with structure, how to overcome power with structure, how to overcome more with less and how to overcome ego with humility and yes it teaches us that each of us will have different attributes at which we are more proficient and some with which we are less but I have yet to hear that you have to learn all these things differently for each apponent nor do I expect to, maybe that is why I missed your point completely.

[t_niehoff]

canglong wrote:

So what your saying is that those persons that win gold medals in the 100 meter sprints in the olympics aren't really the best it's just that those finishing behind them are just at a different skill levels. C

The difference is that running a sprint doesn't involve what fighting does -- as you'll see from experience: fighter A may beat fighter B, B may beat C, but A may lose to C! The problem is that you look at a jab as a certain type of punch and think it you can deal with that, you can deal with any jab; in reality, however, while a jab is a punch with certain general characteristics, it also has certain individual characteristics of the person using it. You also must take those into account in your "answer." TN

So don't train to be the fastest just get an entry list of those competing and just train/run fast enough to beat them....hmmmm like I said very interesting point of view. C

Apples and oranges. You can't train to be a fighter the same you you train to be a sprinter or weightlifter. With weightlifting or sprinting, it's what you can lift or how fast I can run -- I don't care about what the other guy is doing. In fighting, it is all about what the other guy is doing. That's why there is no "best" strategy or no "best" technique -- only what is best for the moment. TN

To this point I have learned WCK teaches us how to overcome speed with structure, C

Can you do it? Against anyone? TN

how to overcome power with structure, C

Can you do it? Against anyone? TN

how to overcome more with less C

Can you do it? Against anyone? Theory is great. But that's all it is if you can't make it work. And if you say that you can make it work, then pay a visit to a NHB gym and see. TN

and how to overcome ego with humility C

LOL! Most people that talk about humility simply use it to disguise their ego ("I've overcome my ego but you haven't!" LOL!). Folks with real humility don't even mention it. TN

and yes it teaches us that each of us will have different attributes at which we are more proficient and some with which we are less but I have yet to hear that you have to learn all these things differently for each apponent nor do I expect to, maybe that is why I missed your point completely. C

WCK is based on feeling; feeling (sensitivity) is what guides us. We can deal with individuals only by taking an individual approach to fighting -- letting the opponent tell us how to defeat him. If you aren't training to do that, then you won't be able to. TN

Terence

[reneritchie]

If we imagine achievement to be a line, each individual will have part of their line composed of nature (their genetic potential in attributes such as speed, endurance, will, determination, etc.) and part of their line composed of nurture (trained skill like mechanics, insights gained through experience).

Some very gifted individuals will trump highly trained less gifted individuals because their line, due to the nature element, is just real darn long. It ain't fair, but its life. (Carlos Newton, for example, despite not being a full time MAist (I believe he's in or going into medicine) no steady martial training (he goes from teacher to teacher because he learns so quickly he gets bored staying with any one teacher for any length of time) has competed at the highest levels of grappling (ADCC) and NHB (UFC, Pride) and beaten people with consistent, full time MA training, with established teams.)

[Mckind13]

Sheldon

I would love to talk about this but from past experience it usually goes nowhere or ends up being distorted for someone elses argument. I am going to go with Rene here and wait till there is more sharing on your part.

Thanks for understanding.

David

[Geezer]

Rene Wrote>

Sheldon,

You still haven't shared with us your own sifu's methods, and how they've been evolving? Since you're asking so much of others, perhaps extending a little as well would help keep the good faith?

I realize my question probably seems political in someway and there's some hidden motive behind it......on this(not too many) occasion it was a honest question and I understand if you do not wish to give any answer to it.

As far as sharing myself, I only ask questions about things that are put out there for us to see, abit like Centcom where Brigadier General Vincent Brooks would answer questions put to him on current events( in Operation Iraqi Freedom )or things that had come to the public eye.
You never found that he would question the reporters.

Again I fully understand, and I will share when my Sifu is quite happy with me doing so or if the situation changes.

Sheldon;)

Does that mean I can't ask questions:)

[black and blue]

Hi Sheldon,

Your Sifu doesn't want you to discuss his Wing Chun methods?

Do you take private lessons? Are you allowed to say what lineage you study from (I ask in order to get a generic idea of where you're coming from)?

Dunc

[reneritchie]

Sheldon,

If you won't share, its hard to understand why you expect everyone else to (often repeatedly asking questions already answered, like in this case, or quoting back text you misunderstand because you think it will trip someone up), and whine when they don't.

Communication is a two-way street. Many of us have written long, well researched, time-intensive answers to your questions, and our time is every bit as valuable as yours.

And that's not taking into account the obvious political slant of some of your posts.

You want people to answer your questions, answer theirs. How has your sifu (and please note, I *have* respected his privacy by not yet using his name) been changing the Leung Ting methods, and what do you think of these changes compared to what else you've seen?

[black and blue]

Ah... Leung Ting lineage.

I must have missed that posting. Yes... lets here it on the method changing.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Wingman
Why are there only 3 specific techniques which are appropriate in addressing each attack? Is it just for simplification so that the student can grasp the idea? ...or are there other reasons for limiting to just 3 specific techniques?

Originally posted by Desertwingchun2
Wingman, my sihing Savi is talking about the first stage or progression in the Kiu Sao training platform. The first progression of the exercise has three specific responses to three specific attacks. Within this beginning stage there is much information presented. The student not only grasps the idea of Kiu Sao "the exercise" but Kiu Sao and it's relation to combat, as well. I hope I answered your question. If not lemme know and I'll certainly try again.

Originally posted by Wingman
Thanks for the clarification, desertwingchun2. I understand that kiu sau has many stages and what Savi was describing is just the first stage. I agree that just one simple movement can convey so much information for a beginner to grasp. That's why it's just limited to 3 specific responses.

Originally posted by Savi
There are 3 basic "levels of lethality" that can be encountered. One meant to bruise, another meant to knock-out, and lastly one with the intent to kill. It is not that the response being given is a less, more to most efficient. It is that your response is the MOST efficient one in relation to how lethal the attack is.
After discussing the above quotes with my sidai, I think that I caused some undue confusion. From memory I had a different recollection of your question Wingman. After rereading your post, I see you were referring to the "body mechanics" of the exercise. Desertwingchun2’s answer was about the necessity of not drowning the student in too many details. My answer was geared more towards the "technical knowledge" point of view. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

I can see that in trying to bring us all to a common understanding, it will be near impossible without a common ground of a specific experience. Nevertheless, I will try to do my best as it seems we are getting somewhere in a positive direction! Mo Ying Da Yeng is about facing. What method do we use to gain the type of facing that puts us in a position more superior to the opponent? That method is Kiu Sau itself. When you are grabbed from the side, that area in relation to you can be referred to as Fau Kiu, or the shadow area. At the beginner level, it is one of the worst positions to be attacked from while still having a chance to recover. A Kiu Sau, i.e. an arm which reacts to a stimulus like a grabbed shoulder, serves more as an antenna to give you more input on the situation at hand….


Originally posted by JK Walz
A friend of mine defined it as this today:

"It is a way to get to know the other guy".

Through the Kiu Sau forearm bridge you get to know your opponent safely. This allows you to do the right thing- it gives you the range (and structure among other things) to decide and act correctly.
Based on the received information, specific technical knowledge and trained reactions will then guide you to what is more realistic for you… Like a superior position where you exist in your opponent’s ‘shadow area’, as opposed to them existing in yours. Depending on the type of grab, long arm energy or short arm energy, your response should balance itself/yourself with the reality at hand. A long bridge stimulus requires a long bridge response, and short bride to short bridge; keeping in mind that the end result of your response must destroy your opponent’s ability to counterattack (no more “What if’s”). Should you be successful in this, you then have achieved that 'superior position' against your opponent.

[canglong]

"Good point, Dave, about the number of variables. I'd also add that we must realize that any action we take can only be based on what "we bring to the table", i.e., our present skills, experience, knowledge, etc. and likewise what our opponent brings to the table -- and that we need to balance the two. For example, your answer to my jab may work agsainst me but will fail against Lennox Lewis (his skill, attributes, etc. are better than mine);" Terence

Here you seem to be in conflict with your own position when saying there exist an atrribute no maybe a combination of attributes that can not be foreseen or accounted for until they magically appear on the battlefield itself, but then go on to say...

"WCK is based on feeling; feeling (sensitivity) is what guides us. We can deal with individuals only by taking an individual approach to fighting -- letting the opponent tell us how to defeat him. If you aren't training to do that, then you won't be able to." Terence

Now you are advocating the position of myself and my sihings who clearly stated...
"Through the Kiu Sau forearm bridge you get to know your opponent safely. This allows you to do the right thing- it gives you the range (and structure among other things) to decide and act correctly." JK or "In application is where the nature can be experienced." desertwingchun2 and what I would add to this is through cultivation of (for the purpose of this discussion) the kiu sau, you prepare in advance for different and distinct attributes of individuals whether they be the least proficient or the most proficient at what it is they might do in a fight.

Also in your transmission of sensitivity will you be communicating to your advisary your ability to be beaten or the fruiltessness of their struggle?

There is "no best" for which to prepare; such thinking is misguided. Terence

When you assume you know how we train what we train and for what we train you assume too much. The most basic WCK principle is 2 objects can not occupy the same position at the same space at the same point in time. We practice and extrapolate on this principle position to gain position, strategy, structure, space, time and energy in all that it is we do. So "best" may be a relative term used in context with our discussion that isn't the case when in real time you have a time space and energy advantage over your apponent.

[Geezer]

Rene Wrote>

like in this case, or quoting back text you misunderstand because you think it will trip someone up

Not trying to trip anyone up, again this question was sincere and upon closer inspection found there was already an answer given.

Rene Wrote>

And that's not taking into account the obvious political slant of some of your posts.

Rene....please re-read my post because I have already admitted what your saying???!!!!

Rene Wrote>

How has your sifu (and please note, I *have* respected his privacy by not yet using his name) been changing the Leung Ting methods, and what do you think of these changes compared to what else you've seen?

Please....seeing as your sharing for me.....why not continue, and if you like "YOU" can use my Sifu's name!!!

Rene....as I said this wasn't a political question, I was just trying to find out and clear up any misunderstood understandings of where Robert Chu came about with the 14 Chi Sao methods!!


Dunc Wrote>

Yes... lets here it on the method changing.

I believe Rene is sharing for me.....as he does so well with everyone else's family!!!???

Sheldon

[Savi]

I must say that your last post was an excellent post.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Mckind13
Hi
Savi Says "there must always be one most correct answer."
This is a poor way to express it I think. When punched there are many different combinations that not only achieve the same results but involve every different combination of timing and distance possible.
How does "one most correct answer" apply to dealing variables encountered in a combative situation?
David
We all have a limited range of motion. In HFYWCK the six gate concept has a specific dimension in time and space relative to the human skeleton. Within this confined dimension (space), which is symmetrical around the centerline of the body (from left to right), there are specific positions within this 'box' for which any attack MUST pass to reach the defender. It is those positions which address all of those percieved "infinite" variables, and answers how they all can be challenged so long as your six gates are appropriately facing your opponent. Whether the attack is to the head, torso, or leg area, left or right side of the body, each area has been defined and measured in size and shape into six zones of combat.

Would you agree that the center of a circle is the most efficient place to occupy in order to get to any part of its surface with minimal time, distance, and use of energy? If so, then you should be able to see how this idea is applied to each of the six gates. This example is an expression of maximum efficiency, and is consistently applied to every part and use of the human body. Efficiency can be synonymous with balance, symmetry, or center.

[reneritchie]

Would you agree that the center of a circle is the most efficient place to occupy in order to get to any part of its surface with minimal time, distance, and use of energy?

This is true provided you know omnisciently exactly where the center of the circle is. If not, it will take you time and energy to precisely measure it, likewise, it will take time to precisely calculate the exact (potentially changing and adaptive) paths of attacks coming at your from any other position (be they divided into 4, 6, 8, 9, 12 or whatever number of gates).

This puts an entire thought process into effect before any attack can be engaged. Now, I can see the value of this in a lab under controlled conditions with zero stress and no time constraints, but surely if its to be applied to stressful, chaotic, real-world conditions there needs to be something far more streamlined, robust, and error-tolerant in place to cope?

If its just a tool to help beginners get an idea of what to do when (like some make useful bites of "8 kicks" or "12 Interceptions") where you program some basic reflexes and then transcend the mechanical/theoretical models, I can see it being helpful for certain types of learners. If not, are there other elements we haven't touched upon yet that minimize the potential drawbacks?

[Savi]

This is exactly what the HFY tracks of learning address. Have you read the article on HFY Two-Track approach (SNT and SLT)? The desired expressions/results of utilizing the idea of maximum efficiency can be attained with a teacher who knows all the details, but teaches a student the idea AND the body mechanics to acheive those results. We follow this process:

1. Body Mechanics: internailzed reflexes through repetition
2. Technical Knowledge: mental reinforcement of specific details
3. Skill Challenge: stage of testing and refinement against live, uncooperative partners

Whether a student does or does not have all the technical details, their bodies can be trained to precision without the ability to reproduce that specific knowledge in others. In other words, they can fight, but can't teach the precise science behind the movements.

[t_niehoff]

canglong writes:

Here you seem to be in conflict with your own position when saying there exist an atrribute no maybe a combination of attributes that can not be foreseen or accounted for until they magically appear on the battlefield itself, but then go on to say...C

A boxer's jab can be a push, a slap, a tap, a paw, a palm, a jolt, a stiff-arm, etc. It can go out fast and back slow, it can go out and stay out, it can go out fast and back fast, etc. It can change angles and elevations. It can be fired singly or in combinations, One can be stationary or step; the step can be straight or angled, it can be deep or shallow, etc. It can be done with a shoulder whirl or not. The intent behind it can vary -- to set up different things, to pester, to off- balance, etc. All these different variables can be mixed to make quite different jabs. And we haven't even begun to deal with individual differences. There is no one answer for every jab; what works against one thing will not work against another. Only experience can teach you that. Apparently you don't have that experience. Go to a gym where they box and tell them you can stop any jab. Then we'll talk again. TN

Now you are advocating the position of myself and my sihings who clearly stated..."Through the Kiu Sau forearm bridge you get to know your opponent safely. This allows you to do the right thing- it gives you the range (and structure among other things) to decide and act correctly." JK or "In application is where the nature can be experienced." desertwingchun2 and what I would add to this is through cultivation of (for the purpose of this discussion) the kiu sau, you prepare in advance for different and distinct attributes of individuals whether they be the least proficient or the most proficient at what it is they might do in a fight.

It is not "the kiu sao bridge forearm" that does these things, it is sensitivity (feeling) -- and not just in our arm -- that permits us to do "the right thing", i.e., let the opponent tell us how to defeat him. You're mistaking the finger for the moon. TN

Also in your transmission of sensitivity will you be communicating to your advisary your ability to be beaten or the fruiltessness of their struggle? C

What the hell are you talking about? "Transmission of sensitivity"? Sensitivity is not transmitted! LOL! TN


So "best" may be a relative term used in context with our discussion that isn't the case when in real time you have a time space and energy advantage over your apponent. C

LOL! Stop! The funniest part is you really believe this junk. Do yourself a favor and go to a gym where they fight. Show them how you "extrapolate on the principle of 2 objects can't occupy the same space at the same time". You guys are too funny. TN

Terence

[Rolling_Hand]

Rene....as I said this wasn't a political question, I was just trying to find out and clear up any misunderstood understandings of where Robert Chu came about with the 14 Chi Sao methods!!>>Sheldon

----------------------------------------------------------

Sheldon,

GM Hoffman is at the VTM now, and I'm sure the VTM should have some information in the subject of Chi Sim Kiu Sao and Robert Chu's 14 Chi Sao methods.

I don't think you can win any game point at Robert Chu's backyard, but the moral victory is his-**Chi Sim family**. I wish FireHawk could share his Chi Sim WCK tapes with some of us. (one of the forms there is a guy that looks like Sifu Hoffman teaching a guy a form and this guy looks like Robert Chu--FireHawk).

[Geezer]

Roger Wrote>

GM Hoffman is at the VTM now

I know.....I wanted to go check out the seminar but had other commitments:(.....I've been real interested in Chi Sim for some time now, they'll be other opportunitys I'm sure...I'm just looking forward to when they publish their book in English:D

Roger Wrote>

I'm sure the VTM should have some information in the subject of Chi Sim Kiu Sao and Robert Chu's 14 Chi Sao methods.

I'm sure they do....and I think Rene is just playing on the fact that he know's I have no intention of going against my Sifu's wishes.
So using that to his advantage he is trying to paint me in a bad light but at the same time isn't doing Robert Chu any good because they still haven't cleared anything up as far as where Robert came up his 14 Chi Sao Methods;)

Sheldon

[t_niehoff]

Geezer wrote:

they still haven't cleared anything up as far as where Robert came up his 14 Chi Sao Methods . . .

I don't know who "they" are, but if you had any knowledge of WCK, you'd understand that Robert's chi sao methods are nothing new -- it's just plain old WCK. As I already told you, he just organized them for teaching purposes. Where did mun come from? or chum come from? or tun come from? or tao come from? or jou come from? or etc.? Does Chi Shim have them? If it is WCK it does. After all WCK is WCK. TN

Terence

[desertwingchun2]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
DW2 wrote:

I like that we are moving away from "Body Mechanic" POV to more of a "Technical Knowledge" POV. DWw

IME it is the "mechanics" that produce the "techniques" **if** the mechanics are correct. TN
----------------

:D LOL !!!! Terence you're funny !!!! Your post and my post are not addressing the same things.

-David

[reneritchie]

Sheldon,

No offense, but I have to ask, are you really not understanding the replies so far, or do you not care and just want to ask the same question over and over again to cause trouble?

What about my question regarding your sifu's changes to Leung Ting's system?

Rolling_Hand,

Since the lists of Robert's 14 and Chi Sim's 14 are *completely* different, you're *obviously* just trying to deliberately mislead people and cause problems for Robert and Andreas. Disgusting. But, since you persisted, later I'll post the emails between Benny, Robert, and myself. Congratulations. Hope everyone appreciates the fruits of your trolling.

(And yes, that is Robert learning the Sam Pai Fut from Andreas during Andreas' visit to LA. Andreas has also visited Dayton, so now Benny's Siu Nim Tao must be a repackage of Fa Kuen???!!!)

BTW- as a proud member of the Leung Bik TWC family, what's your opinion on your Grandmaster, William Cheung's belief that HFY, for whom you troll, comes from his books and videos?

Terence,

If someone doesn't know music, and you list C, C, A, B, they'll think you can't spell.

[reneritchie]

BTW- Aside from David, Levi, and Savi's valiant efforts, the resident trolls have once again succeeded in totally derailing the thread and making it about everything else other than Kiu Sao. Proud achievement, fellas...

[KPM]

Originally posted by reneritchie
BTW- Aside from David, Levi, and Savi's valiant efforts, the resident trolls have once again succeeded in totally derailing the thread and making it about everything else other than Kiu Sao. Proud achievement, fellas...

---I've been trying to follow this thread and actually learn what it is that HFY calls "Kiu Sau" training. I have to second Rene's post. Thanks David, Levi, and Savi for taking the time to actually explain things. Sheldon and Rolling Hand.....you guys need to get a life! In most of the threads I've followed you guys do nothing but cause trouble.

Keith

[Savi]

To be honest and clear, aside from my Sibak Chango's topic, Roger and Sheldon have made attempts to clarify their intentions when asking questions which I can see on this thread. I think that the history of communication between them and others gets in the way of finding the answers from either side. No need to "rub in" something that may be perceived as going stale.

I do not enjoy certain people's remarks when arisen, but I can still let those things go for the benefit of us all and answer the question being asked to the best of my ability. I find particular discussions very enjoyable when I don't focus on the negative posts inbetween. We are all people who like to express our personalities, and through this understanding I can respect everyone here.

[Geezer]

Rene Wrote>

No offense, but I have to ask, are you really not understanding the replies so far,

None taken.....seeing as you answered a question with a question....I don't see any replies from you that have been 100%. now David's was spot on;)

Rene Wrote>

What about my question regarding your sifu's changes to Leung Ting's system?

Seeing as you know so much about me and my Sifu please, go ahead or did you not understand my reply to you earlier???

Rene Wrote>

the resident trolls have once again succeeded in totally derailing the thread and making it about everything else other than Kiu Sao. Proud achievement, fellas...

Rene.....you're the one that brought up Robert's 14 Chi Sao Methods and I just asked the question referencing something you brought up???!!!!

Again my question was a sincere one but "YOU" had to turn it into something else!!!


Sheldon

[Geezer]

Savi Wrote>

Sheldon have made attempts to clarify their intentions when asking questions which I can see on this thread.

I've advised Rene more than once that my questions were sincere the same with my question to Rene or Hendrik about when GM Cho On took WCK to Malaya or what affect did the Communist guerillas uprising have on GM Cho On, if any???

Sheldon

[tparkerkfo]

Verious responses

Sheldon,


Originally posted by Geezer
but at the same time isn't doing Robert Chu any good because they still haven't cleared anything up as far as where Robert came up his 14 Chi Sao Methods;)
Sheldon [/B]

I don't recall the 14 Chi Sao methods off hand. I recalled that they are a nice list that works well for people like me that like discrete answers, or atleast a base to build on. His methods, in my opinion, are nothing new and are in most if not all wing chun methods. All he did was to fomalize them...for his family. I can see them in mine, and I am sure others have also itemized them. Some are actually quite common if I remember correctly and not even tied to wing chun specifically.

I took your comment about Robert as honest and sincire, unlike many other posts. But you can't expect others to play games and know when your trolling and when your serious. Reputation says a lot. I deal with people primarily based on how they are currently acting, but I do take into account previous actions. I am sure others are as well.

Rene,

I think most of us are guilty of side tracking the discussion. LOL. You and I included.

What and when did Cheung sifu say this? I heard about a private conversation that was posted publicly elsewhere. Would that be the source, or is there an offical type statement, or perhaps one made in passing in an artical? I am currious to hear Cheung sifu's comments.

HFY People,

I know I am slow, but I still feel like I have no concrete explanation about Kiu Sau. I am seeing touchy and fleety concepts with a lot of "buzz" words. But you does it work when you need to use it? I don't think it needs to be as complex as it is written about. Heck, Einstine could discuss the highest levels of physics with mere mortals.
________
Interracial pregnant (http://www.****tube.com/categories/714/pregnant/videos/1)

[reneritchie]

Hi Savi,

If that's the article in new IKF, it wasn't out here in the frozen north last time I checked. When I'm next at the magazine store, though, if they have it in, I'll check it out for sure.


1. Body Mechanics: internailzed reflexes through repetition
2. Technical Knowledge: mental reinforcement of specific details
3. Skill Challenge: stage of testing and refinement against live, uncooperative partners


Okay, that sounds pretty darn good. I very much agree with the idea of different phases in teaching (teaching people to be applicants vs. being teachers, for example). Training someone to teach has to be different than just teaching them to do (not that the latter is easy by any means). Many MAists aren't trained teachers even though they teach, and you can usually tell the difference.

As we discussed on previous threads, in the "old days", it wasn't uncommon to have several levels of martial teachings. One for general students, one for disciples, and one for successors. Each received a different quantity and quality of information (sometimes even completely different sets).

Do you find this conceptually different from you YMWCK learning, or is this just something HFY lays out in more detail for you?

BTW- I think you're being disengenous WRT the merits of Sheldon and Roger's posts. Anyone as bright as you can certainly see where people (a wide range) take offense at their antics. You stating that would be akin to me stating that I didn't understand why people react they way they do to Terence's posts.

Sheldon,

Please see the thread I made just for you. We can discuss this there in whatever level of detail you like. BTW- It was Roger, as usual, who brought Robert into this, not I.

[Savi]

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
I envision it as:
1. Saam Mo Kiu
_A. Kiu Sau
__i. Fau Kiu Kiu Sau (Kiu Sau level1)
___a. Mo Ying Da Yeng-‘No Shape Hit Shadow’(Hou Kuit)
__ii. Kiu Sau level2
___a. Hou Kuit
__iii. Kiu Sau level3
___a. Hou Kuit
Tom
You know Tom, this is not too bad at all. Just based on the information you had to go by here, and coming up with what you did, I don't see anything wrong here. Using your 'model' I made a few changes for communication's sake...

A. Kiu Sau

__i. Fau Kiu Kiu Sau (Kiu Sau level 1)
___a. Mo Ying Da Yeng-‘Without Facing, Establish Facing’ (Hou Kuit)

__ii. Deui Yeng Kiu Sau (Kiu Sau level 2)
___a. Yau Ying Da Ying-'Have Facing, Maintain Facing' (Hou Kuit)

[Savi]

Originally posted by reneritchie
BTW- I think you're being disengenous WRT the merits of Sheldon and Roger's posts. Anyone as bright as you can certainly see where people (a wide range) take offense at their antics. You stating that would be akin to me stating that I didn't understand why people react they way they do to Terence's posts.
I do not give stock in preferential treatment. Recognize the nature of your fellows and adversaries, then harmonize with it without losing yourself.

[canglong]

"A boxer's jab can be a push, a slap, a tap, a paw, a palm, a jolt, a stiff-arm, etc. It can go out fast and back slow, it can go out and stay out, it can go out fast and back fast, etc. It can change angles and elevations. It can be fired singly or in combinations, One can be stationary or step; the step can be straight or angled, it can be deep or shallow, etc. It can be done with a shoulder whirl or not. The intent behind it can vary -- to set up different things, to pester, to off- balance, etc. All these different variables can be mixed to make quite different jabs. And we haven't even begun to deal with individual differences. There is no one answer for every jab; what works against one thing will not work against another." Terence

Terence, I think it is you that have mistaken the finger for the moon. The point here is the one thing that remains constant in your post is that a human fist/hand will have to enter into one of the six gates in order to inflict any punishment You protect the gate over the different manner of punches and not the other way around.

[Savi]

Originally posted by reneritchie
Hi Savi,
Okay, that sounds pretty darn good (WRT HFY's 3-step learning approach). I very much agree with the idea of different phases in teaching (teaching people to be applicants vs. being teachers, for example). Training someone to teach has to be different than just teaching them to do (not that the latter is easy by any means). Many MAists aren't trained teachers even though they teach, and you can usually tell the difference.

Do you find this conceptually different from you YMWCK learning, or is this just something HFY lays out in more detail for you?
This 3-step approach of drilling, study, and experiment are a reflection of the Saam Mo Kiu philosophy. Do I find this conceptually different than my Non-HFY WC studies? It all depends on the teacher, in which teaching methods will vary. Is this 3-step approach unique? I personally can't say, but I know of no other method of teaching based on Saam Mo Kiu which exists outside of the HFY family - unless you can see the progressional relationship of SNT/SLT to Chum Kiu to Biu Jee as something akin to the SMK philo as well.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Terence
Savi writes:

“What is Kiu Sau?” Kiu Sau is a means to protect oneself from harm, without having to go to extreme measures. In other words, be more concerned with protecting yourself before you become concerned with hitting someone else. S

This is not WCK's way IMO. In WCK we "link defense to bring in offense" and "use defense as offense, use offense as defense" so that the two blend together into one (as I call it, "offensive defense and defensive offense") -- the mindset of WCK is to protect ourselves *as* we hit not before we hit (not protect then attack -- that loses the timing). TN

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
To me, this is just an attitude or an apporach to fighting, but not tied to the fighting itself. In other words, this is about simple compasion.... So why do you need Kiu Sau? What does it buy you?
Tom is right on the money. Kiu Sau is not about fighting. It's about harmony and self-preservation. It's about compassion. Kiu Sau techniques (i.e. Kwan Sau, Bong Sau to name a couple) exist as a form of communication between you and the other person. Master Benny Meng told me once, you are only fighting when you lose your center. Kiu Sau applications are designed to protect your center. But the moment you lose control of your space and your opponent can infiltrate your center, then you have no choice but to fight.

Kiu Sau, as a form of Risk Management, is designed to establish (or buy yourself) two things:

1) Space - in that the technique being used sweeps your personal space (battlefield) from one side to the other, allowing you to reposition your body in a better (for you) position relative to the offender (them).

2) Time - by re-establishing your personal space you have also given yourself more time to assess the situation. This is a bit like an "intel-gathering" stage at a bridging range.

In essense, by one simple motion of hand and body you have recovered your Time and Space without hurting anyone in the process. It is at this time when you can decide what is the correct thing to do next. Who knows, it could be your grandma or a cop coming from the side. My first instinct would not want to be to strike right a way... preservation first.

------------------------

Terence's POV is that of, in words more familiar to me, simultaneous offense and defense. As I understand this, there is only one most efficient range in combat where all your tools (limbs) are in range for deployment. Range determines the weapons (techniques) we use, not what is our 'favorite move' or what we like to do when we feel like it.

The desire is to operate at the distance where you can establish a simultaneous offense and defense. But there can only be one proper time and place for that in combat. That is a different 'timeframe' or moment seperate from the Kiu Sau 'timeframe'. Both have their place in combat, but one has to know when is the appropriate time to do which one.

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Savi,

Thanks for what may be more clarification. I think I am beginning to see Kiu Sau. But I am still carrying other monkeys on my back and have issues with the term Kiu Sau. Bit that is OK.

I am a bit currious about your perspective of restraint. I agree it is fullish to turn and strike as chances are it is a friend rather than an enemy. But that instinct can be the difference between life and death. If you have the luxury of time (inheirent or created through "Kiu Sau"), then this is fine. But there may be times when you will not have time or be able to create it.

An interesting story was about what I guess I would call my sibak (or maybe my sisuk) was when someone cameup from his rear and tapped him on the shoulder. His reflex caused him to turn and almost knock the other guy out. LOL. It was quite funny and scary at the same time. When we do wing chun, we try to have intent and focus. This intent and focus can be a life saver when you really need it. But then you don't want to knock out the waiter/waitress who delivers your drinks. LOL.

Hmmm....
Kiu Sau=gaining the center and preservation/harmony.
Kui Sau Techniques- kwan sau and bong sau.

Tom
________
California dispensary (http://california.dispensaries.org/)

[Mckind13]

Savi Wrote: Would you agree that the center of a circle is the most efficient place to occupy in order to get to any part of its surface with minimal time, distance, and use of energy?

I would agree with that, but my circle expands and contract, it flattens, streatches and flows like water. Your examples still seem inapropriate from the standpoint of dealing with the outside force of a non-compliant opponent.

Maybe you can draw a clearer picture. When you and your training prtners describe HFY you do so only in HFY terms. Pretend that HFY is a language like french and that YMWC is another language. Try to explain it to us either in YM language or plain english if you can because right now it sounds like rhetoric or your just quoting the same stuff over and over.

Thanks

David

[Mckind13]

RH Wrote: I don't think you can win any game point at Robert Chu's backyard, but the moral victory is his-**Chi Sim family**. I wish FireHawk could share his Chi Sim WCK tapes with some of us. (one of the forms there is a guy that looks like Sifu Hoffman teaching a guy a form and this guy looks like Robert Chu--FireHawk

(Davis writes full of sarcasm): Dear lord! Robert Chu learned a form from Andreas Hoffman! Maybe that was after Andreas invited him to Germany to teach a seminar to his students, or where they compared forms on the occasions that they met. Maybe they taught each other a thing or two as might happen between accomplished martial artists that are open and friendly. Wow, who knew.

As for the contention of the 14 Chi sou methods compare them side by side with Chi Sim all you want they are different. Of course you might want to understand them before commenting on them.

David :p

[canglong]

hello David,

I would agree with that, but my circle expands and contract, it flattens, streatches and flows like water. Your examples still seem inapropriate from the standpoint of dealing with the outside force of a non-compliant opponent. Mckind13

1. how does all that change the center of the circle?
2. can you expand on a more efficient and or appropriate use of kiu sau?

[Savi]

Originally posted by Mckind13
When you and your training prtners describe HFY you do so only in HFY terms. Pretend that HFY is a language like french and that YMWC is another language. Try to explain it to us either in YM language or plain english if you can because right now it sounds like rhetoric or your just quoting the same stuff over and over.

Thanks

David
Sorry David, other than the phrases:

"Fau Kiu Kiu Sau"
"Deui Yeng Kiu Sau"
"Saam Mo Kiu"
"HFY Six Gate Concept"
and the HFY context of "Kiu Sau" along with a few names of techniques that weren't discussed (only mentioned to a minimal extent)

I did not know I was using explicit language that you can't relate to. Please let me know if there is something in particular that I can rephrase for you.

[Savi]

Originally posted by Mckind13
I would agree with that, but my circle expands and contract, it flattens, streatches and flows like water. Your examples still seem inapropriate from the standpoint of dealing with the outside force of a non-compliant opponent.

David
It's really the IDEA of the circle, and not the circle itself that I was trying to communicate to us. This idea of maximum efficiency was in reference to the space encompassing the body, and not two people.

While the space between you and your opponent contracts and expands, and while even the space between your own parts may expand and contract, the space itself is bound to the upright posture of your centerline. The dimensions of the six gates are fixed measurements of heigth, width, and depth. If your parts and self-awareness are not dynamically attuned to these dimensions, then your opponent can invade your space.

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by Mckind13
RH Wrote: I don't think you can win any game point at Robert Chu's backyard, but the moral victory is his-**Chi Sim family**. I wish FireHawk could share his Chi Sim WCK tapes with some of us. (one of the forms there is a guy that looks like Sifu Hoffman teaching a guy a form and this guy looks like Robert Chu--FireHawk

(Davis writes full of sarcasm): Dear lord! Robert Chu learned a form from Andreas Hoffman!

Still, the question remains- where did he get them from or did he make them up himself?

[Mckind13]

Savi -

Your last post was very clear thanks.

The one that starts sorry though-

The terms you use are, I am sure, very clear. But in the context of what you are saying it sometimes seems if you are defining words with words. When you use the term Kiu Sau I understand it in my own language but not yours. So when I ask questions and you answer we speak past each other.

For instance If I chose a concept from my Wing Chun, there might be a hundred ways to describe one simple idea (Think Eskimo and their several hundred word vocabulary for snow). I can see how you may feel like you are supplying a very clear picture but often times it is not.

Can you describe the language of Kiu Sau as it relates to multiple variables and multiple energies imposed by an outside force?

Thanks

David

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Savi,


Originally posted by Savi

Sorry David, other than the phrases:

"Fau Kiu Kiu Sau"
"Deui Yeng Kiu Sau"
"Saam Mo Kiu"
"HFY Six Gate Concept"
and the HFY context of "Kiu Sau" along with a few names of techniques that weren't discussed (only mentioned to a minimal extent)

I did not know I was using explicit language that you can't relate to. Please let me know if there is something in particular that I can rephrase for you.

I have been shouting in the wind..... LOL. Your phrases are not clear nor concise and are difficult to relate to. I have been asking for clarification. Kiu sau means bridging the arms to most people, but to you guys it means self preservation, facing, recovery and some other things. Tan Sau, Bong Sau are clear terms. They mean palm up and wing arm. Not fancy buzz words. Most wing chun lineages did away with fancy names long ago, and maybe for good reason :p LOL. Just kidding.

Yes your speeking greek. Can you dumb it down for us playing at home?

Tom
________
Marijuana vaporizers (http://weedvaporizers.org/)

[Mckind13]

JK: Still, the question remains- where did he get them from or did he make them up himself?

I thought that was very clear.

The truth: Benny Mung came from out of town to meet with and learn from Robert Chu. Benny was having trouble grasping Roberts’s method of Chi Sau. Robert Chu then compiled a list of FAAT (methods) that he thought would best explain it. Some but not all come explicitly from the methods of Wing Chun faat as seen in the Gu Lao and YKS systems. Some others include the four basic energies. Try really really reading his article and seeing if his concise method of explaining it makes immediate sense.

My imagination:

He stood before a Coy pond and saw all the fish swimming in the clear water. He thought how wonderful, all the fish are like the methods, each unique and separate but still they swim together in one pond.
Anyone can see Wing Chun is like this.

Read the **** article and I will answer questions directly from it.

No more free lessons :P

David

[Wingman]

Originally posted by desertwingchun2
...I don't know if I understand the "infinite number of combinations" part but I do know that the latter stages of the Kiu Sao exercise are very complex. Those stages are full of challenges on every roll.

-David

In the WC that I practice, we also have drills which have 3 specific attacks/responses. We practice these drills repeatedly so that they can be executed properly. After we are proficient with the drill, we dissect & analyze it so that we can understand the idea behind the drill. Once you understand the idea, you will find out that there can be infinite possibilities/combinations. You are no longer limited to the 3 specific attacks/responses. This is what I meant by, "infinite number of combinations".

[desertwingchun2]

Hey Wingman, thanks for the clarrification. If you don't mind could you clear up one thing for me. This will help to ensure we are on the same page. Also I won't be making any assumptions in my answer. Thanks in advance.

1. ".... we also have drills which have 3 specific attacks/responses."

Can you give a brief description of these drills? Are they related to Kiu Sao and/orChi Sao ?

-David

[man in blue]

[ When you use the term Kiu Sau I understand it in my own language but not yours. So when I ask questions and you answer we speak past each other.]

[Think Eskimo and their several hundred word vocabulary for snow]

. . . and words that sound the same in different languages, are written exactly the same in those languages, but mean something completely different . . .

In my day-to-day activities I'm continiously in situations where those 'different language'-things are causing confusion, misunderstanding etc.

Perhaps that's one of the things that is going on in many discussions on this forum.

In my experience it is worthwhile to stop (temporarily) a discussion when you notice that there is confusion etc. and first agree with each other that you seriously want to get rid of that confusion . . . and spend efforts to bring everybody on the same page (and yes, this takes time and can sometimes be 'frustrating').

Man in Blue

[Chango]

Hello,
I wanted to help more people understand what the purpose of kiu sau is in HFY and in chi sim. I find that it is very much the same thing in terms of understanding the relationship between yourself and the opponent.

The bridge is made when one has found his/her identity in relationship to one's space relivant to the other person's position. One's identity is challenged on contact! This time frame offers the person with the proper time and space the clear advantage. At that point there is no real challenge for centerline control so chi sau is not a need for chi sau. If the person does not have his/her identity they cannot possibly defend themselves or attack the opponent with out readjusting first. As a matter of fact chi sau in this time frame would prove to be less effiecient! why bring the guy in your living room when you can kick his but on the front porch! LOL!

[Wingman]

Originally posted by desertwingchun2
...Can you give a brief description of these drills? Are they related to Kiu Sao and/orChi Sao ?

-David
Drills (examples):
1. tan, fook, bong
2. tan, fook, pak
3.bong, tan, chum
4. tan, gan, biu
5. etc....

These are relatively simple drills. One partner throws 3 punches/attacks and the other counters with 3 specific responses listed above. These drills are introduced at beginner's level. They don't involve "feeling/listening" to your opponent. Beginners just follow the 3 combinations stipulated in the drill.

Then the student "experiments" with this drills. Example: changing the sequence of the combinations or flowing from one drill to the next. At this stage the number of combinations has greatly increased; but the number of possible combinations is not yet infinite.

When the student starts learning chi sao, he tries to "forget" about the combinations in the drills. In chi sao, you execute a technique because it is the best technique in a given situation, at that particular instant. This is the reason why we try to "forget" the drills. At chi sao stage, the number of possible combinations are infinite. This is how the drills are related to chi sao.

Quite a paradox! No combinations = infinite combinations

You asked, "How are they related to kiu sao"?
This has been a long thread; and there are many definitions put forward. The simplest definition (and one that I can relate to) is Savi's, "A Kiu Sau, i.e. an arm which reacts to a stimulus like a grabbed shoulder, serves more as an antenna to give you more input on the situation at hand…."

If this is the definition of kiu sao, my answer would be, "It depends upon the level of understanding of the practitioners". If he is in the beginner level, then there is no kui sao involved. If he is at chi sao level, then definitely kiu sao comes into play.

Whew... that was a long post!:)

[desertwingchun2]

Wingman - It was a long post but a big help, thanks! :) I definetly have a better understanding of your original question which was ......

"So does kiu sau progression start with just 3 specific attacks/responses; and then combine them to create infinite number of combinations?"

*Keep in mind for the purposes of this disscussion I am speaking on the progressions of Kiu Sao as an exercise.*

To answer the first portion of the question sucinctly I will refer to my original answer.

"The first progression is the 3 specific attacks/responses and all they encompass." DWC2

And for the second part:

" The second progression builds on the first and introduces more detail .... the latter stages of the Kiu Sao exercise are very complex. Those stages are full of challenges on every roll."

This is similar to:

" ... you execute a technique because it is the best technique in a given situation, at that particular instant." - Wingman

From my perspective the drills seem similar. And give us a common ground from which to have future discussions.

-David

[t_niehoff]

Chango wrote:

The bridge is made when one has found his/her identity in relationship to one's space relivant to the other person's position. C

ROFLOL! It amazes me how you can obfuscate such a simple concept. TN

One's identity is challenged on contact! C

<headshake> "Identity"? LOL! TN

This time frame offers the person with the proper time and space the clear advantage. C

<headshake> Talk about circular logic! "Proper time and space", i.e., those that give you the advantage, will give you the advantage. Thanks for letting us in on the blatantly obvious. TN

At that point there is no real challenge for centerline control so chi sau is not a need for chi sau. C

What? TN

If the person does not have his/her identity they cannot possibly defend themselves or attack the opponent with out readjusting first. C

"Identity"? TN

As a matter of fact chi sau in this time frame would prove to be less effiecient! C

Once more you state the obvious as though it is a profound revelation. TN

Terence

[KPM]

Now here is a perfect example of what Tom, Dave McK, and others have been saying about terminology. I would venture to guess that this whole post made no sense at all to anyone outside of the HFY circle. "Identity"? If you guys were not so tied up in your technical terms we might be able to make some progress here. Lets see, how about I take several of the standard WCK concepts, apply new terms to them, spice it up with some modern technical-sounding descriptions, and then wonder why all you other guys can't figure out what I'm talking about. :-) Then I could say that my personal lineage is so much more "scientific" than everyone elses.

Keith



Originally posted by Chango
Hello,
I wanted to help more people understand what the purpose of kiu sau is in HFY and in chi sim. I find that it is very much the same thing in terms of understanding the relationship between yourself and the opponent.

The bridge is made when one has found his/her identity in relationship to one's space relivant to the other person's position. One's identity is challenged on contact! This time frame offers the person with the proper time and space the clear advantage. At that point there is no real challenge for centerline control so chi sau is not a need for chi sau. If the person does not have his/her identity they cannot possibly defend themselves or attack the opponent with out readjusting first. As a matter of fact chi sau in this time frame would prove to be less effiecient! why bring the guy in your living room when you can kick his but on the front porch! LOL!

[t_niehoff]

For me the concept of "bridging" (as in kiu sao) is fairly simple and can be explained simply (doing it is very difficult however!). The WCK fighter first seeks to control the opponent -- since if he controls the opponent, he controls the fight, opportunities open for him, and he is most protected. If he doesn't control the opponent, it becomes a crap game. To control the opponent requires contact (btw, contact is one of the *factors of control*; you should *know* the other factors) -- hence why "dap" is the first method (faat) of WCK. But contact alone does not mean control. To have control means we have cut-off the opponent's ability to mount an offense (or defend himself), i.e., jeet, and break his body-structure (balance, alignment, etc.), i.e., chum. A "bridge", kiu, is a connection to the opponent's center. Without that level of connection, I can't break my opponent's body-structure. The "ideal" is to jeet and chum -- CONTROL -- the opponent on contact (dap); if we can't get the ideal, then we go for jeet then chum. (An edifying activity is to look at various "examples" of WCK 'techniques" on websites or magazines -- or your own practice -- and see if you can find control. And by control, I mean CONTROL.). With this in mind, one can use san sao or dap sao -- or we can call the exercise kiu sao as the HFY people do or call it mun sao as the Ho Kam Ming people do or label it whatever we like -- to *investigate* how to do this (dap, jeet, chum) from non-contact to contact. It's just WCK 101. TN

Terence

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Chango,

Although I have been mislabled as an wnemy of HFY, I am still quite interested in what your speaking of. Again, I think you and your peers are using fancy vocabulary that needs to be dumbed down. It might help others to understand what your talking about. Any way, I have several questions in regards to your post.

Chi Sim and HFY share the same concept for kiu sau?
What is meant by identity?
What is the differece from space and position?
What is meant by "identity is challenged on contact"? I can understand that structure and maybe center line position is.
Is Time frame a mere moment in time, a snapshot perhaps?
what do you mean chi sau is not a need for chi sau? Sounds zenish. Are you saying that sticking is not for sticking sake? Ie, don't chase the hands? or is this something else?

Before I can understand what you wrote, I think the above neds to be cleared up. I am confused by how this connects to the earlier statment that Kiu Sau is about mercy, self preservation, and facing?

Thanks for taking the time and posting.
Tom
________
Soldering iron vaporizer review (http://vaporizerinfo.com/)

[tparkerkfo]

Hi Terence,

THanks for clarifying this a bit. Perhaps if others are interested in bridging methods they might want to look at Hung Gar's 12 bridges. There are some great articals on the net. This doesn't relate specifically to wing chun except that it shows the complex nature of bridging and how it can be done. some overlap and some are unique.

What I heare about Kiu Sau beeing a feeler is more of what we use Maan Sau for in wing chun. Kiu Sau has many roles, and seems to be just a simple term that is not tied to a specific type of bridging. We can move to any one of the number of bridging techniques you mentioned.

I wish HFY could remove the obsfication and discuss it clearly.

Tom
________
OLD MAN TWINK (http://www.****tube.com/categories/792/twink/videos/1)

[reneritchie]

One thing that should be pointed out is a lot of the terms being used are English, and while Chinese can be deep, English can be far more semantically complex. Perhaps, since we're dealing with Chinese terms/ideas, if we used simpler translations, and didn't elaborate on them until mutual understanding is closer, it would be helpful.

[t_niehoff]

Tom Parker wrote:

I wish HFY could remove the obsfication and discuss it clearly. TP

My experience has taught me that there is a great difference between "knowing" -- which can be "believing" or simply repeating what you've been told or what you've read, etc. -- and "understanding" -- which is personal, something no one can give you, and demonstrates that you've made the knowledge your own. If you are merely repeating dogma or what you've been taught, that doesn't show understanding, and it makes discussion rather limted ("my sifu says so therefore it is true"). If you understand something, you should be able to explain it to a complete novice. Reliance on "buzzwords" IME shows at best mere "knowledge", i.e., you can remember what you've been told, but not understanding (and tends to show lack of understanding -- that you can't explain it and hide behind the "buzzwords"). TN

Terence

[tparkerkfo]

Yes I agree Terence. I recall a statement were Einstine was quoted as saying something to the effect of, If you cant explain your topic to a 6 year old, you don't know the subject clearly enough. I tried to find the exact quote but could not. Maybe someone else said it. But I think it stands. Complicated physics has been discribed rather simplistically to laymen by Einstein, Hawkins, and Feynman.

I am interested in their views and concepts. I just wish they could explain it with out the detailed complicated verbage.

Tom
________
Free gift card (http://bestfreegiftcard.com/)

[yuanfen]

Tom P sez:I am interested in their views and concepts. I just wish they could explain it with out the detailed complicated verbage.

Tom
---------------------------------------
Tom- You expect too much. If you look at real time in the art- we expect too much for relative newbies to explain the gobbledegook.
Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Fermi- all irrelevant to the gobbledegook on these threads.
Gobbledegook on science, chan and history..
If you take them at their word that Gee's art is different from regular wing chun- they should try their hand in the Southern forum or one of the other forums....rather than clogging up this forum with team trolling.... even more than what is normal for a wing chun forum

[dfl]

Originally posted by tparkerkfo
I recall a statement were Einstine was quoted as saying something to the effect of, If you cant explain your topic to a 6 year old, you don't know the subject clearly enough. I tried to find the exact quote but could not. Maybe someone else said it. But I think it stands. Complicated physics has been discribed rather simplistically to laymen by Einstein, Hawkins, and Feynman.


I don't remember reading about Einstein saying this, but Feynman (whose birthday is this Sunday) has been known to espouse that sentiment.

[reneritchie]

Dan wins the golden pocket protector! Sorry, Tom, hand it over, you've been 0wn3d!

[reneritchie]

Joy,

The gobbledegook is separate and apart from HFY; the result of one group of people's attempts to transpose HFY from its original Cantonese culture, to their own modern quasi-science culture. Please don't confuse the two, or allow problems with the messenger to affect your opinion on HFY proper. If you or anyone else has any questions, we can sidestep all the gobbledegook and address the on my thread.

(Championing HFY)

[planetwc]

When a TV reporter asked him if he could explain in three minutes what he won the Nobel Prize for: "If I could explain it to the average person, It wouldn't have been worth the Nobel Prize. "

As to pseudo science, here is a great speech by Feynman on the subject. Enjoy!

http://www.physics.brocku.ca/etc/cargo_cult_science.html

Hopefully, your identity won't be challenged by it, nor will your place in the four dimensions.



Originally posted by dfl


I don't remember reading about Einstein saying this, but Feynman (whose birthday is this Sunday) has been known to espouse that sentiment.

[reneritchie]

Grendel,

Perhaps you could post this on my HFY Q&A? All questions will be respectfully addressed.

[desertwingchun2]

Grendel says:

"When was HFY revealed to Garrett Gee? Before or after John O'Connell high school in San Francisco in the 1970s?"

What does this have to do with Kiu Sao? Even after Sandman cleans up one mess you attempt to make another. You attach your psuedo-name to HFYWC by continually detracting from every discussion whenever possible. What is your agenda? Your continued insults deeply reflect upon your character or lack there of.

You have asked these questions before and have been given answers by me and by William as well. This is the third and last time I will discuss this with you. These references to high school mean what? Oh I know ...... Nothing at all!! Who's your sifu? your sigung? Where did they go to high school? College? Who were their teachers? Who taught the teachers?

Actually if not so insulting, I might find your comment sort of humorous. You talk about Master Gee and high school, one of the first conversations I had with him was about college. He was asking where I was from, if I had family in the area, my education and such. I told him after high school I seriously considered attending Golden Gate University in S.F. Unfortunately, due to family issues it was not feasible. Thats when I found out he was once a Phys Ed. instructor there. As a matter of fact, many of his students were professors at GGU!! Funny how paths cross. But I digress .....

Let me ask .... did your Sifu or Sigung attend GGU? Maybe they were in one of Master Gee's classes? Hmmm ..... ;)

-David

[Rolling_Hand]

You have asked these questions before and have been given answers by me and by William as well. This is the third and last time I will discuss this with you.>>D2

-----------------------------------------

Grandel is just another troubled maker from Ken Chung's school. Don't feed this troll.

[anerlich]

That Feynman speech was excellent.

He was truly a gem of a human being.

[kj]

Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
Grandel is just another troubled maker from Ken Chung's school. Don't feed this troll.

Please Roger, don't make such a mistake. Grendel is not a student in Ken Chung's school. He distinctly does not represent Ken or Ken's other students in such matters as this.

You are correct about his trolling, and I would urge you and others not to fall prey to it. Despite what others do or say, we always have our own choice of higher ground.

Rather than reflecting Grendel's behaviors on others of us even so slightly, please allow him the privilege to stand on his own and accept full responsibility for his own choices, as we all must.

It is true that we too easily forget our sometimes inadvertent and unwarranted impact on others.

Thanks for considering,
- Kathy Jo

[kj]

Originally posted by Grendel

Boo. Hiss. All right, I'll behave. Sheesh, you higher beings just don't appreciate how hard I try to get along. :rolleyes:

Those of us who've paid pounds of flesh and more on behalf of others' fun and games in the past tend to be a tad sensitive about these things. :mad:

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[reneritchie]

David,

Please do not respond to further HFY questions and instead direct them to my new thread where they will be handled with grace and tact.

KJ,

We are now answering all questions, even those from potential trolls, on my new thread, please stop in if you have time.

[desertwingchun2]

Rene,
You do not need my help in redirecting trolling posts to "your" thread. You seem to be doing just fine.

Choose your words carefully, Rene. The end of your comment "... where they will be handled with grace and tact" may be interpreted as another of your veiled insults. I would hope that was not your intent. While it may have appreared to you as graceful, that portion of you comment was not tactful.

While I appriciate the sentiment, you are not in a position to offer such advice to me.

-David

[Mckind13]

They can't even be nice when you try and help em!

David

[canglong]

Mckind13,

It is your use of the words they and 'em that betray you not just your lack of insightful dialogue.

[desertwingchun2]

David - I am not a " 'em", I am not a "they". I never asked for Rene's "help". In fact, I was speaking directly to Rene, not you. My post was simple, direct and efficient. Sound familiar? I am not interested in having a semantic arguement with you or anyone else. Mend your ways, keep your nose clean and mind your business.

-David

[desertwingchun2]

KJ - In the past we have had very pleasent discussions. Your manner, education and personality resonate from your post. They are often thoroughly enjoyable. This last post raises questions and I must ask them. If you respond, hopefully it is in the manner I described above. If you choose not too, for whatever reason, I hope in the future we will again enjoy productive or enlightening discussions.

KJ says:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Rolling_Hand
Grandel is just another troubled maker from Ken Chung's school. Don't feed this troll.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Please Roger, don't make such a mistake. Grendel is not a student in Ken Chung's school."

But ....
Grendel says:

" …. you give your attacker only one side (your front) to attack, which is what we train to receive. As I understand what Ken teaches, we walk into our opponent's range; __________________
Grendel "

And ....

"Try Planet Wing Chun http://www.wingchun.com/ for listings of more schools than you can shake a stick at.

Click "the location of our schools and class times" or the BayWC link.

Regards,
__________________
Grendel "

And ....

"The photo of Ken with two men doing chi sao is probably of him feeling for the right degree of relaxation in the wrist of the man on the left (Yoda). :)
http://www.wingchun.com/img/camp98_9.jpg

BTW, the two men in the photo have very good elbow positioning and distance by my reckoning as a student of Ken's.
__________________
Grendel"

1. If he is not a student why does he continuously claim to be?
2. If not Ken, then who is his sifu?

"He distinctly does not represent Ken or Ken's other students in such matters as this. - KJ"

3. If not in matters "such as this" then in which matters does he represent "Ken or Ken's other students"?
4. What are "manners such as this"? Trolling? Internet forums? Insults to Wing Chun families? Insults to Wing Chun masters?

"Rather than reflecting Grendel's behaviors on others of us even so slightly, please allow him the privilege to stand on his own and accept full responsibility for his own choices ...- KJ"

KJ, I along with others have asked him to share his true identity. He has not. Actually I am aware of the other screen name he posts under on this forum. I have not disclosed this to the forum. In affect I have been allowing him the privilege you speak of. I am not interested in doing others housekeeping. That task is his or that of his sihingdai.

"It is true that we too easily forget our sometimes inadvertent and unwarranted impact on others. - KJ"

Many need to hear these words!

-David

[tparkerkfo]

Hello David,

Ken's group is not an organized association where people ban together to assult others. It is not dictated by a head person. Each and every person runs their own life as they see fit. As far as I know, Grendal is NOT a student of Ken. I could be wrong as I haven't been around for a while. He does seem to know things about Ken's school though, as you have identified. But even if he was a student, he is acting on his own and his lineage really doesn't matter. His posts are what matters. As your lineage doesn't matter, but your posts do. The posts are the representation of oneself.

I find it funny that you don't like Rene's turn around. I suppose it is a bit uncomfortable. But no matter. Many of "em" and "they" have complained about our actions and such, so what the heck, lets play nice and try to get along. But some of you still don't like it. No pleasing you is there? LOL.

OK, your turn to attack me, my lineage, my kung fu, my financial situation, my loyalty, and my dog. LOL

Tom
________
Vapor Buddy Review (http://vaporizerinfo.com/)

[desertwingchun2]

Tom,
seeing as how I was talking with KJ and not you, I will tell you the same as I told David McKinnon ....

"Mend your ways, keep your nose clean and mind your business."


"I find it funny that you don't like Rene's turn around. I suppose it is a bit uncomfortable." Tom Parker

Never said I didn't like it. I'm not uncomfortable in the least. Don't resort to putting words in my mouth.

"But some of you still don't like it. No pleasing you is there?"

I try not speak for others. What pleases me is not your concern.

"OK, your turn to attack me, my lineage, my kung fu, my financial situation, my loyalty, and my dog.- Tom Parker"

Nah .... I've already pointed out some of your inconsistantcies once. Obviously it didn't help. I've attempted to hold technical discussions with you. It didn't help. In the most sincere manner I say to you ....

"Mend your ways, keep your nose clean and mind your business."

-David

[kj]

Hi David.


Originally posted by desertwingchun2
KJ - In the past we have had very pleasent discussions. Your manner, education and personality resonate from your post. They are often thoroughly enjoyable. This last post raises questions and I must ask them. If you respond, hopefully it is in the manner I described above.

Grendel has made no secret that he learns the technical aspects of Wing Chun from one of Ken's students; he is not a direct student under Ken.

Who he studies under has zero relevance to the stirrings he sometimes makes on this forum. In anything but technical matters, he represents himself alone in both content and tenor, as we all do and must. That was and is my sole point.

I am very big on being analytically critical, yet I am definitely not an advocate of "us" and "them" games. Too easy a trap to fall into, and reeks too much of wider forms of prejudice for my taste.

This is all I have to offer on the matter, and it has already taken far too much toll on my time, energies, and interests.


If you choose not too, for whatever reason, I hope in the future we will again enjoy productive or enlightening discussions.

I see no absolutely no reason why we shouldn't.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[kj]

Originally posted by reneritchie
KJ,

We are now answering all questions, even those from potential trolls, on my new thread, please stop in if you have time.

Are you implying that I am a troll?

J/K!!
- kj

[reneritchie]

KJ if the massive spike studded club and hidy hole beneath the ancient stone bridge fit...

Nevermind, scratch that, I don't want a beating...

[William E]

I would like you to know that I have enojoyed your posts in the past. Like most of us, it appears you are very loyal to your sifu and your wing chun brothers and sisters. With more mature and serious people like yourself we can someday find a common ground to communicate.

Rene, from my perspective I think your being open and honest with your current thread. The answers that you've provided recently seem sincere and I hope have put an end to some of the repetitive questions. It appears, unfortunately, that there will still be a small few that will bogg things down but let's hope we can get past it.

William E.

[Mckind13]

Desert Wing Chun Wrote: Tom,
seeing as how I was talking with KJ and not you, I will tell you the same as I told David McKinnon ....

"Mend your ways, keep your nose clean and mind your business."


Or What?

David

[reneritchie]

William,

Thank you. I'm trying to provide a small example, that's all. As part of that, all glasses will be half full, and any bogging will cheerfully be regarded as just another chance to share.

David M.

Please place desertwingchun on ignore and head over to my thread for a more pleasent HFY experience!

[kj]

Thank you William. Likewise.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[desertwingchun2]

Originally posted by Mckind13
Desert Wing Chun Wrote: Tom,
seeing as how I was talking with KJ and not you, I will tell you the same as I told David McKinnon ....

"Mend your ways, keep your nose clean and mind your business."


Or What?

David

LOL !!!!

Follow your leader and .......

"David M.
Please place desertwingchun on ignore and head over to my thread ... ! - RR"

-David

[tparkerkfo]

desertwingchun2,

Yes sifu, Thank you sifu, may have another?

Sorry, I didn't realize this was a private list, esecially when it talks about groups in general. I'll head your words and mend my words as you just spanked me and put me in my place.

[tail between the legs]
Tom
________
Toys Extreme (http://www.****tube.com/categories/1094/extreme/videos/1)

[reneritchie]

Tom.

Change and progress are always difficult for some and thus sabotage, concious or unconcious, may result in order to maintain the status quo. And always remember, some few, like arms traders, only thrive when there is disagreement and discention. Please ignore these people and their half-empty glasses and head over to my thread for an empty cup of starbuck's finest!

[tparkerkfo]

Rene,

<homer-mode>
mmmmm....cooooffeeeee
</homer-mode

Tom
________
CHEVROLET CORVETTE (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette)

[Mckind13]

Careful John,

They are like a pack of trained monkey's that know Tae kwon do.
Small sweaty hairly little...No wait.
They like to jump up and down and make funny noises.

Maybe we should head over to Rene's post instead.

I have met several of Chris Chan's students. Nice guys.

At any rate I see the humor in canlong's posts. When I met some of the HFY people in person they were very nice and fun to work with. When they get on the internet they go rabid and start quoting from the fortune cookie manual.

My hopes for all of us is that we could explain our positions clearly, take comments without getting offended, and like my hero Rene work toward friendship and understanding.

Thanks :P

[reneritchie]

David,

For those who wish to be commercially successful in martial arts, Tae Kwon Do, kids Karate, and Cardio-Funk-Do for the moms are the ways to go! You fill up valuable Dojo time, increase your revenue base, and create steady/stable cash flows to ensure your success.

Monkeys might also be good for attracting attention, but might be a lot of overhead. At least you'd get to test your skills against the PETA ninjas!

And thanks for recommending my thread, the most presitigious and successful thread in HFY history. All are welcome.