staff

[whippinghand]

How is it important to the Wing Chun System.

(And please, no history lessons.)

[reneritchie]

Five. I'm saying it's important to the degree of five. (Of course, I'm not providing the scale.)

Rgds,

RR

[Gluteus Maximus]

So true.

Max

Yooby Yoody

[whippinghand]

How is it important to Wing Chun?

not

How important is it to Wing Chun?

(This explains the confusion on the Bat Jam Do thread).

[reneritchie]

Yup. To the degree of five is *how* it is important. ;)

Rgds,

RR

[joy chaudhuri]

When the structure, hands and footwork are
properly developed then the pole enhances
the power of the stance, the footwork and the hands. Pole work enhances both long and short
power and issuing them. The skills can also be used to working with long weapons. :cool:

[Roy D. Anthony]

In Cantonese, it is to the degree of 4, in Mandarin to the degree of 5.

[reneritchie]

Wasn't Mandarin to the degree of 4 and Cantonese 7-9?

Rgds,

RR

[whippinghand]

How does the staff improve your footwork?

[joy chaudhuri]

To control the pole you have to adjust your steps.

[whippinghand]

Which stances do you use with the staff?

[jameswebsteruk]

How is the staff important in your particular lineage?

The chalice from the palace has the pellet with the poison,
The vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true!

[joy chaudhuri]

You asked about stances I use in pole work. On another thread someone asked about variety of stances. If you go to Master Augustine Fong"s website you will find a wealth of information. The
info. is quite extensive on a through wing chun curriculum and terms. If you click on "definitions" you will see the way he has organized stances among other things. Stance work is increasingly built up in each of the forms when
they are taught and practised in a sensible evolutionary way.Kwan/Pole work and knife/do work
utilize the full repertoire of stance and footwork. But each have their little individualities- thus with the pole one can practice a mini jum step which is not normally necessary
with the shorter bot jam do.The Fong site is at


http://www.fongswingchun.com/

PS: PC gremlins! I almost sent you a long post on the South Asian crsis which has nothing to do
with this site. I hope that I have erased it correctly. Many different hats- same head!

[HuangKaiVun]

I never thought that the 6 1/2 pole set was truly representative of the WC system the way the butterfly swords are.

Compare the jing of the rolling fast butterfly swords to that of the rooted horse stance back-leg jing of the Pole set. There's no deep horse stance in WC, yet it's the hallmark of the WC Pole set.

Supposedly "Gee Shim Sinn See" introduced this set into the WC system - and Gee Shim was linked to Hung Ga.

I feel that the pole set is more representative of Hung Ga's deep rooted stances than it is Wing Chun's standup philosophy.

[joy chaudhuri]

I do not think that your post shows understanding of wing chun kwan work. Your past posts seem to indicate a somewhat general interest in wing chun. After the pole was adopted by wing chun it's usage was transformed
by wing chun structure and dynamics. The low horse stance is an auxiliary strengthening exercise only. The real wing chun pole usage uses wing chun principles and body usage and footwork.

[HuangKaiVun]

Right on, yuan fen.

Explain.

[hunt1]

The low stance is not just an exercise although based upon your teacher I understand why you think so.The pole form teaches extremely important combat techniques and concepts.The low horse blends with the low line line attckes introduced by the kneeling horse punch.This technique was taught by Yip Man to his early students and is present in most other WC families.
the weapons are the key to truly understanding combat usage of WC not the dummy.(Dummy helps but is not the be all end all).Without complete understanding of pole and Do you(general you)will never truly utilize WC to its fullest.
The fact thay your Sifu perfoms the pole in an upright stance does not mean it is correct.You have missed several important concepts.How do I know,because the only art I have studied is WC and I have been very successfull against all styles. If you dont understand the pole you will have great difficulty dealing with grapplers,Silat and monkey styles among others.
The fact that so many have found the need to supplement their WC with other arts suh as grappling speaks to the general lack of understanding of WC fighting principles as taught in the forms.
Nothing In WC is 'just an exercise'and I am surprised that with your education and years of training you would not have looked for the deeper meaning of the pole form or why others do a form different from yours and use a low horse stance.

[joy chaudhuri]

"yuen fan you couldnt be more wrong
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The low stance is not just an exercise although based upon your teacher I understand why you think so.The pole form teaches extremely important combat techniques and concepts.The low horse blends with the low line line attckes introduced by the kneeling horse punch.This technique was taught by Yip Man to his early students and is present in most other WC families."
--------------------------------------------------
1. Firstly you distort what I said and its intent.
2. Secondly, your gratuitous point about what I supposedly learned and what my teacher supposedly teaches/taught is underinformed and therefore misinformed.
Wing chun families have many kinds of auxiliary exercises and they ALL contribute to the persons development.The low horse helps in the development
of both hand techniques, pole work and leg development. In an real fight all kinds of strange positions can result and one must adjust- the more time spent in development- the more the ability to adjust.There are many wing chun answers to low line attacks including the kneeling horse and even lower attacks.The concepts are even in the hand forms. Wing chun forms are not organized with specific defenses against specific attacks in mind.That is more of a karate kata mind set.I dont carry around dogmatic or limited ideas about a limited set of attacks. The next one may be from a musketeer hanging/swinging from a chandelier. I will pass on practising a fixed defense against that.

[Watchman]

>>>The next one may be from a musketeer hanging/swinging from a chandelier. I will pass on practising a fixed defense against that.<<<

Yeah, but if you played your cards right, you could market a whole series of videos on Wing Chun defenses against Musketeers swinging from chandeliers.

Once the videos are ready to be released you get an article published stating that you are the sole inheritor of a secret Wing Chun lineage from southern France that dates back to 1500's.

This revelation will spark Wing Chun research trips to France that will document the new family branch, and also record a new Bot Cham Do form that uses weapons curiously similar to a rapier and buckler.

:D

[joy chaudhuri]

You didnt have to give my HFC treasures away!
Hung From Chandeliers is indeed a special wing chun family art which
wtll be unveiled before the first year of this
New Millenium is over. The art was born when the southern hands on junks encountered the folks with the hanging horse on the SS Beaujolais when it sailed into Canton from Cam Ranh Bay.Nostradamus predicted it would be so.Back to bed. The research is exhausting. :D :D :D

[HuangKaiVun]

"The low horse stance is an auxiliary strengthening exercise only" vs. "There are many wing chun answers to low line attacks including the kneeling horse and even lower attacks."

This is confusing, yuan fen.

I remain unenlightened about how the pole reflects Wing Chun principles, yuan fen and hunt1.

[kj]

Yuan Fen [still getting used to that] - you crack me up!!! :D
- kj

[old jong]

As the narrow stance of wing chun may be derived from the narrow boat people,why the wide stances from the staff should not have been taken from the wide boat guys?....Nahhh,just kidding! :D O.K. I'll shut up! ;)
Yuan Fen, I'm working on a specific defense against pirates swinging from cables!... :eek:

Les paroles s'envolent.
Les écrits restent!...

[joy chaudhuri]

"I remain unenlightened about how the pole reflects Wing Chun principles.."
--------------------------------------------------
I recall from other posts that wing chun may not be your primary art.
While the pole is used in other styles- wing chun
adapted it to use wing chun principles in its usage. You first develop a wing chun body and a wing chun mind before you get into the pole. Structurally you use wing chun hand and elbow relationships in holding the pole. Ditto on control of the center line. Ditto on the wing chun ma-ygkym wc version- adjusted for the weight of the pole.The footwork is wc footwork-not hung ga. The strategies are wc- "the pole does not make more than one sound". The tactics-targets
are wc preferably into tagets on the line.
You dont have any tension except the minimal for the motions. ETC! :rolleyes:

[hunt1]

Joy ,perhaps you went to the Bill Clinton school of language manipulation.You wrote quite clearly"The low horse is an auxiliary strengthening exercise only".How did I distort? By pointing out that it is not only an exercise but has direct application to hand to hand combat?
As for my comments about what you do and do not know.If you understood the empty hand applications then you never would have said exercise ONLY.Then you do what you acuse me of doing.You do not know me and I doubt you know anyone that does.You have no idea what I know or who trained me yet you say I am uninformed about what Fong Sifu teaches.Perhaps I am an old student of his how would you know?Because I dont kiss the ground he walks on like you do?Because I have spent years seeking out how others approach and apply WC?
To go one further for practical purposes pole training is one big exercise. I doubt anyone reading this forum will ever get to put Chi Gwun to the test in real life.Putting the empty hand concepts to the test however is a much more real possibility.Therefore these concepts should be understood and taught.
Perhaps I am wrong about the general knowledge taught in your system.So I ask the forum how many have been taught direct appplication of the empty hand concepts contained in the pole form and what are these concepts.Hint for practical purposes there are 5 main concepts to be applied.Note I say practical as in ease of use in a fight.This is a martial art after all not just an art.With all the Fong people on this forum I am sure you will make me eat crow.

[whippinghand]

"How did I distort? By pointing out that it is not only an exercise but has direct application to hand to hand combat?"

Joy pointed out the same thing. You just have to read between the lines.

Subtlety is a dangerous thing.

[joy chaudhuri]

Also he says:
Joy ,perhaps you went to the Bill Clinton school of language manipulation.
((Strange that you chose to be personal. I try to use language carefully))
You wrote quite clearly"The low horse is an auxiliary strengthening exercise only".
((It is auxiliary. But auxiliary does not mean
irrelevant))
How did I distort? By pointing out that it is not only an exercise but has direct application to hand to hand combat?
(Lots of things can have application.))
As for my comments about what you do and do not know.If you understood the empty hand applications then you never would have said exercise ONLY.
((See above- everything in wing chun can enhance the hands.))
Then you do what you acuse me of doing.You do not know me and I doubt you know anyone that does.You have no idea what I know or who trained me yet you say I am uninformed about what Fong Sifu teaches.
((I didnt make the slightest claim that I know you.))
Perhaps I am an old student of his how would you know?
((Again I dont know and not relvant to the discussion at hand))
Because I dont kiss the ground he walks on like you do?
((You demonstrate your own unfortunate choice of language and I am knowingly into ground kissing))
Because I have spent years seeking out how others approach and apply WC?
((Again, i have made no comment on your individual background- I have limited to responding to your comments on mine))
To go one further for practical purposes pole training is one big exercise. I doubt anyone reading this forum will ever get to put Chi Gwun to the test in real life.
((You may be wrong-there are chi gwun equivalencies in real life-already used))
Putting the empty hand concepts to the test however is a much more real possibility.
((of course-again evrything in wc training can strengthen hand usage)
This is a martial art after all not just an art.
((Obviously so. I have not stated otherwise))

With all the Fong people on this forum I am sure you will make me eat crow.
((I have no interest in doing that or your diet. It is ok for you to have your own point of view.))

[HuangKaiVun]

yuan fen, thanks for the enlightenment - but not the :rolleyes:. I am trying to LEARN something from you.

I accept your centerline and hand things, though I'd obviously have to SEE you doing specific examples to know exactly what you're talking about. That's a limitation of the Internet, admittedly.

Thus far, you have not given a single concrete example other than the "centerline" theory that the pole espouses. You also should know that other styles protect the centerline too, including Hung Ga and my Seng Men style that has a pole set that looks much like your 6 1/2 pole set.

How is the footwork of the 6 1/2 pole "not Hung Ga"? I've studied a bit of Hung Ga too, and the side horse stance with its accompanying steps and shuffles was a hallmark of that system.

I STILL remain unclear on which quote is more representative of what you believe. First you said that the stance was "an auxiliary strengthening exercise only", then you tell us that the kneeling horse can be an "answer to low line attacks". I'm inclined to guess that you believe in the LATTER statement, judging on what you've posted thus far.

I also would like to know where that stable side rooted horse stance is contained elsewhere in Wing Chun. Which set features such a move, and is it also contained in the butterfly sword set?

[joy chaudhuri]

yuan fen, thanks for the enlightenment - but not the . I am trying to LEARN something from you.
(OK)
I accept your centerline and hand things,
((Are you sure you understand enough about wing chun center line theory? The devil is in the details))
though I'd obviously have to SEE you doing specific examples to know exactly what you're talking about. That's a limitation of the Internet, admittedly.
((True- even pics are no subs for touch and see))

Thus far, you have not given a single concrete example other than the "centerline" theory that the pole espouses. You also should know that other styles protect the centerline too,
((Again the devil is in the details))
including Hung Ga and my Seng Men style that has a pole set that looks much like your 6 1/2 pole set.
((Dont know anything about Seng Men-what is it?
My sense of Hung ga is second hand and only for wing chun illustration purposes. Hung ga has many stances including one version of ygkym- but the wc version is different from hung ga in the details of axis alignment, muscle relaxation and hip and knee usage. This carries over to the differences in footwork and motion. Wing chun is
not as low in key stances and depends also more on the knees and less on the hips than hung ga-
it seems to me and accounts for wc mobility.There is more dynamic tension in hung ga than in wc and the wc circles are smaller IMO. The wing chun pole usage is to a significant extent an extension of the 3 hand forms of wing chun with the the right accomodation for the weight of the 8 foot or more hardwood pole.))

How is the footwork of the 6 1/2 pole "not Hung Ga"? I've studied a bit of Hung Ga too, and the side horse stance with its accompanying steps and shuffles was a hallmark of that system.
((Hung ga has many forms. Wing chun focuses on the 3 and its interrelationships. Parsimony and economy informs the wc system. The win chun side horse is a knee based turn of the front stance.
Hung ga uses the hips more in the turns and the punches))

I STILL remain unclear on which quote is more representative of what you believe. First you said that the stance was "an auxiliary strengthening exercise only", then you tell us that the kneeling horse can be an "answer to low line attacks". I'm inclined to guess that you believe in the LATTER statement, judging on what you've posted thus far.
((Some confusion here...you missed some detail apparently. The kneeling horse is a low line attack and the regular hung type of horse would not be my preferred or automatic response. The low horse is useful for leg strength development and gives additional insurance in certain cases.
Delayed response due to power outage. Even the list apprently was down a bit for differnt reasons.!! ))

I also would like to know where that stable side rooted horse stance is contained elsewhere in Wing Chun. Which set features such a move, and is it also contained in the butterfly sword set?
((Chum kiu has the chor ma- the turning horse-
so does the biu gee- so does the bot jam do set.
Trust that clarifies things a bit... atleast its a good faith attempt to communicate and answer your questions. Good wishes))))

[HuangKaiVun]

Good enough for me.

The next step will be for me to actually see this stuff.

[hunt1]

In a forum such as this precision with language is key.Yaun clearly used the limiting adjective "only".This is very clear and allows only one meaning to the statement the fact that in the second post Yuan attempts to talk around his statement does not make it go away and there is nothing subtle about it.
Yuan you accused me of distortion and being less than informed.To me that is a personal attack.So it should not be a surprise that I respond in a personal way.
Responding by using the ever popular fall back position of 'everything is an exercise and helps the hands etc does not demonstate any specific knowledge at all.The problem with all martial arts is how to turn concepts into practical applications.To fall back on WC exists in the ephemeral mists type of answer provides no substance from which to structure a practical usage. I clearly stated the pole form has direct unarmed combat applications not just concepts to be pulled from the air but application as real and trainable as tan da etc.Just as a tan sau is more than a concept,it exists as a real trainable technique the concept provides the many possible uses for the technique.So to the pole form provides concrete usable techniques to be used and are trainable.Concepts provide the multitude of potential uses however we still start with a basic technique that is usable as it stands.If you do not know these usages it does not make them any less real.We would not be having this discussion if you did.
My comment about chi gwan should be clarified ,you are correct, however the majority of self defence situations that arise are either empty hand or empty hand vs. weapon.It is a rare thing for both parties to be armed.My comment was made with this reality in mind.

I do apologize if any religous or personal belief slights were inferred they were not intended.

[joy chaudhuri]

yuan and whip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a forum such as this precision with language is key.Yaun clearly used the limiting adjective "only".
(( I always strive for precision and context is part of precision. I used the term "auxiliary" in realitionship to "only; Note the primary meaning of auxiliary, to wit"additional, supplementary:reserve"(Websters) ))

Yuan you accused me of distortion and being less than informed.
]((Only: Regarding what I know and learned.I was speaking to fact about me-and not an invidious comment on your background, your lineage or personal loyalties and qualities. I dont know you and you dont know me. You chose to refer to some alleged tendency on my part to kiss the ground that Fong sifu walks on.rather presumptuous, intemperate and personal. Again I did not bring in Fong, your sifu or any ground kissing by you into the discussion. I gave my opinion on low pole stance and you gave yours-why not leave it at that)))).
To me that is a personal attack.

((Not at all-see context-above)))

So it should not be a surprise that I respond in a personal way.
((I am not surprised, just disappointed about intemperate remarks about ground kissing etc. I never used my teacher's name or argue on the basis of my relationship with any one. I stuck and still stick to the subject matter of the low horse stance in kwan work))
Responding by using the ever popular fall back position of 'everything is an exercise and helps the hands etc does not demonstate any specific knowledge at all.
(???!!!You are entitled to your opinion, as I to mine))
))
The problem with all martial arts is how to turn concepts into practical applications.

(I dont presume to talk about all martial arts))

To fall back on WC exists in the ephemeral mists type of answer provides no substance from which to structure a practical usage.
(Ephemeral mists? I live in the desert where ephemeral mists are easily burned away))
I clearly stated the pole form has direct unarmed combat applications not just concepts to be pulled from the air but application as real and trainable as tan da etc.
((Lots of auxiliary things are important for development.Thus: The low horse stance for punching is also auxiliary but not part of regular wing chun hand forms))

If you do not know these usages it does not make them any less real.We would not be having this discussion if you did.
(Again your opinion))
My comment about chi gwan should be clarified ,you are correct, however the majority of self defence situations that arise are either empty hand or empty hand vs. weapon.It is a rare thing for both parties to be armed.My comment was made with this reality in mind.
I do apologize if any religous or personal belief slights were inferred they were not intended.

((Apologies in the context you describe not needed as the points I made on this thread are not particularly tied with any religious/personal beliefs.My prefernce is that this is my last post to you on this thread. Ther must be better things to talk about on the list))

[HuangKaiVun]

hunt1 and yuanfen, your longwinded unrelated personal war is spaceconsuming and utterly unreadable.

Please stick to the DISCUSSION, gentlemen.

[whippinghand]

So. What are the direct appplications of the empty hand concepts contained in the pole form?