Anyone use Rattan Rings? [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Mr Punch

05-30-2006, 05:17 AM

I am totally in the "They are cr&p department, the only way to stop them falling off your arms is to use the wrong energies in preparing for Chi Sau, you need to educate forward energies in the arms NOT outward ones that the rings propagate, I am sure that if you only have 1 student and you cannot be bothered to Chi Sau with them that they are a great method to keep them occupied while you go get a cup of tea.

I prefer to work on correct Tan Sau and Bong Sau positions and awareness of those as separate arms, especially in the early learning process rather than distract a student with a useless, though absorbing toy!

Watch them being demonstrated and observe the position of the arms and the direction of the energies of the elbows and wrists in relation to the centreline, then make your own mind up.

Take care and keep :DI've never had them taught to me. Have you?

I do think that the way they are used is horizontally not vertically, to train snappy forward energy and snappy withdrawing energy, and so little to do with tan/bong and certainly no outward energy.

I don't remember anyone in Samuel Kwok's lineage ever saying anything about the use of the rings or even their existance so I'm afraid, unless you can tell me a bit more about who showed you and what they showed you and the pedigree of their knowledge in that particular (and not mainstream) training aid, I'm afraid I'm going to have to politely conclude that someone just made up whatever they were playing with, and that you fit into the 'people who have never used them' blh blah blah category! :) Seriously no offence, and as I started in Sam's lineage I'm genuinely interested.

reneritchie

05-30-2006, 07:28 AM

Second try replying to this:

"A screwdriver is cr@p at pounding in nails"

Rattan Ring is a specific isolation equipment to develop specific Geng. It's not for rolling with or anything like what most people have shown publically.

If you want to train with it, find someone with generational experience in using it and learn it properly.

AmanuJRY

05-30-2006, 08:22 AM

I've never had them taught to me. Have you?

I don't need to have someone 'teach' me how to use the 'ab-doer' for me to believe that it's a bunch of cr@p.

I'm with tj. I believe the rings train very improper energy (and I mean that in the kinetic, where-your-elbow's-going sense, not the mystical, internal sense), all the while the student is thinking they are developing correct positioning or whatever they are supposed to be 'designed' for, then you touch hands with them and it's nothing but holes (because they are chasing contact with your hands - like the ring - instead of your center).;)

It only takes someone with an understanding of correct intent (and to simplify, that is chase center not hands) to figure that rings are useless.:o

...unless, say, you're setting up a ring toss game.;) :D

The best training aid is a live partner.

reneritchie

05-30-2006, 09:25 AM

The Wooden Dummy also teaches the bad habits of using strength-against-strength since all you do is hammer-fist strikes, pounding on the arms...

Zhang Yong Chun

05-30-2006, 09:50 AM

"Rings...

[pause for effect]

don't fight back. If you concentrate on the finger pointin to da moon, yew will miss all da heavenwy gwowy."

Chi sao is fun, but is overrated by many WC people as a fighting skill. It is only one of many things you need in your arsenal. The overemphasis on chi sao skill has made many a "master" embarrassed in an unstructured situation.

k gledhill

05-30-2006, 09:55 AM

rene how do you use the ring ?

reneritchie

05-30-2006, 10:08 AM

Not for luk/poon sao or any repetitive rolling.

We use it to develop 'splitting power', or the ability to separate the bridges.

k gledhill

05-30-2006, 10:10 AM

in what manner ? what would be the catalyst ~ application ?
thanks

Vajramusti

05-30-2006, 04:11 PM

No. Prefer cat naps.

joy c.

Liddel

05-30-2006, 04:37 PM

in what manner ? what would be the catalyst ~ application ?
thanks

Ive seen a few uses but never being taught, but i have an open mind and can think for myself, and with this in mind im no big fan of the 'training tool'.

Ive seen it used while doing Poon Sao - and i agree with the wrong energy call, IMO it encourages users to have to much energy at the wrist and not only that but to bend the wrist to stop it from falling away which in my lineage is a no no, we want a fists energy to fall away so we can follow up and catch the target :D .

Ive also seen it used for elbow position for things like Gaun Sao, the touch point of the ring is at the elbows this time and makes you concentrate more on waist power related to the action, but the improper energy is also at work here.

My conclusion - if i was stuck on a desert island it would be a great "Last Resort".

AmanuJRY

05-30-2006, 05:15 PM

Not for luk/poon sao or any repetitive rolling.

We use it to develop 'splitting power', or the ability to separate the bridges.

I can see that application, but I still wouldn't invest...as for the dummy, I see your point, but that's a bit facetious.

Mr Punch

05-30-2006, 07:14 PM

...as for the dummy, I see your point, but that's a bit facetious.And this isn't?
I don't need to have someone 'teach' me how to use the 'ab-doer' for me to believe that it's a bunch of cr@p.
I go to so many MA boards where people who have never done karate knock karate, or worse yet the six mth to one year orange belt (Orange Belt Syndrome!) knock his ex karate school. I go to many boards where nutriders are knocking wing chun based on a couple of things they've seen, or a couple of lessons, or whatever when they've never been shown it.

I did karate for three years. I practised it hard, I used it in sparring against other styles. I got to ikkyu or nikyu or whatever. I still wouldn't say I'm qualified to talk about any but the rawest basics.

So why do people with no experience of a training tool feel the need to spout on about it?

Having said that... ;) :p as I said in my second post and Rene said: it's not for training poon sao, so anybody complaining about it giving you the wrong kinetic energy for poon sao is barking up the wrong tree.

To reiterate:

We use it to develop 'splitting power', or the ability to separate the bridges....Which is kind of what I was thinking when I wrote the second paragraph of my second post... tho, as I said, I may be barking up the wrong tree too!

AmanuJRY

05-30-2006, 08:28 PM

And this isn't?

IMO, no, it's not.

I go to so many MA boards where people who have never done karate knock karate, or worse yet the six mth to one year orange belt (Orange Belt Syndrome!) knock his ex karate school. I go to many boards where nutriders are knocking wing chun based on a couple of things they've seen, or a couple of lessons, or whatever when they've never been shown it.

I did karate for three years. I practised it hard, I used it in sparring against other styles. I got to ikkyu or nikyu or whatever. I still wouldn't say I'm qualified to talk about any but the rawest basics.

So why do people with no experience of a training tool feel the need to spout on about it?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yawn.

Having said that... ;) :p as I said in my second post and Rene said: it's not for training poon sao, so anybody complaining about it giving you the wrong kinetic energy for poon sao is barking up the wrong tree.

To reiterate:

...Which is kind of what I was thinking when I wrote the second paragraph of my second post... tho, as I said, I may be barking up the wrong tree too!

I said I can see the application of the training tool with that outcome in mind. I just wouldn't invest much in the use of 'splitting energy' in that sense as I believe it results in chasing hands, against an individual whose energy is chasing your center it would leave your poon sau full of holes.

Are there concepts other than this or teaching poon sau??

Mr Punch

05-30-2006, 09:45 PM

I said I can see the application of the training tool with that outcome in mind. I just wouldn't invest much in the use of 'splitting energy' in that sense as I believe it results in chasing hands, against an individual whose energy is chasing your center it would leave your poon sau full of holes.

Are there concepts other than this or teaching poon sau??There could now follow a useful discussion about splitting energy (a concept found in many branches of wing chun) and how it does or doesn't lead to chasing hands, how it can be useful in creating openings esp in the clinch and for setting up a dropping levels for the takedown... etc with input from the ring users on how it might help them...

But since you're not interested in discussion...
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yawn.end of chat.

tjwingchun

05-31-2006, 04:23 AM

The Wooden Dummy also teaches the bad habits of using strength-against-strength since all you do is hammer-fist strikes, pounding on the arms...

Only when taught wrong, might be an idea to start another thread on the dummy and that will open up a whole bag of worms!

Have I used the rings? No! Should I have an opinion? Why not? I have read over the last 32 years several articles on the rings and have never been convinced that they offer anything else than a interesting toy.

Wing Chun forms teach you about yourself, how your body moves, the energy that it can generate and the isolation of muscle groups using exaggerated abstract movements to develop self awareness of personal body mechanics related to confrontational situations.

Chi Sau teaches how you interact with an opponent, developing sensitivity and twitch responses. How to control and manipulate in defence and attack.

The Dummy teaches movement, stance change, sticking and understanding reactant energies along with the wallbag to focus beyond the point of impact.

Over the years my greatest learning device are my students they all react in different ways, have various sizes and shapes and mental outlooks on fighting.

My time alone is for my form/dummy/wallbag/weapons practice, with a partner I train Chi Sau/entry/application, what does the rattan ring offer that I don't already have, I am open to suggestions not just " find someone with generational experience in using it and learn it properly."

Since being a child I have always asked "WHY" if I don't get a legitimate answer I am not convinced, even if you said Yip Man used them I would question it! unfortunately I never had the opportunity to train with GM Yip Man, which is a shame as I have loads of questions where I disagree with my Sifu and Sigung as well as a quite a few others!

Am I right? In my mind I am until otherwise proven so, though I am open to genuine discussion. Can I be wrong? I have been on many occasions in the past, I am far from perfect. Who do I think I am? A person not a sheep to be led, I believe in the development of self and with that standpoint I have to be educated as to why things work, not just told that they do.

How many threads to find the truth? How many threads in a string? How many strings in a rope? How many ropes to uphold the truth?

Heres to many more discussions and take care and keep :D TJ

Mr Punch

05-31-2006, 06:57 AM

Have I used the rings? No! Should I have an opinion? Why not? I have read over the last 32 years several articles on the rings and have never been convinced that they offer anything else than a interesting toy. So if I said I'd read loads of articles about wing chun over 32 years of some other martial art and then said 'I don't need it, what could it offer me?' you'd respect that as a reasonable and legitimate position?

My time alone is for my form/dummy/wallbag/weapons practice, with a partner I train Chi Sau/entry/application, what does the rattan ring offer that I don't already have, I am open to suggestions not just " find someone with generational experience in using it and learn it properly."Since I've never trained it I'll go out on a limb and guess it helps you to use two opposing energies (nothing fancy - splitting energy being kinetic force, one arm going one way while the other goes the other) in solo practice on a tool that moves about and is therefore harder to control and more like a human than a dummy in that one respect...?

Since being a child I have always asked "WHY" if I don't get a legitimate answer I am not convincedIf the legitimate answer in this case as with many other MA egs, is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, to which your answer is still why... you are still asking in a childish reductionist form. A four-year-old asks why to everything without discrimination or adjusting to experience or lack thereof. And your criteria for 'legitimate' appears in this case to be 'agrees with you'! ;)

... I believe in the development of self and with that standpoint I have to be educated as to why things work, not just told that they do.And the answer is again: if you don't try it, no-one has a chance to educate you; they only have a chance to tell you that it does.

It's the chicken and the egg but with proof and experience! It can't be proved to you unless you experience it, and you won't let yourself experience it until it's proven to you!

Anyway, thanks for the discussion. I'm gonna bow out at this point as I don't use the rings myself and never have, and the argument is as circular as the subject! Although I must say I can't understand your complete opposition to something that you don't understand!

AmanuJRY

05-31-2006, 07:35 AM

There could now follow a useful discussion about splitting energy (a concept found in many branches of wing chun) and how it does or doesn't lead to chasing hands, how it can be useful in creating openings esp in the clinch and for setting up a dropping levels for the takedown... etc with input from the ring users on how it might help them...

But since you're not interested in discussion...end of chat.

Oh, I'm interested in discussion. I'm not interested in reading you wax on about how you're tired of going to these boards and listening to people profess they know something and you don't agree so you throw a little tantrum...you're just as guilty as anyone elese in this thread, hypocrite.

As for splitting energy. In my mind, there is, no doubt, a place for using splitting energy. Is it soooo important or hard to train that I need a rattan ring...

...I don't think so. Poon sau does just fine (better actually).

Mr Punch

05-31-2006, 07:38 AM

Oh, I'm interested in discussion. I'm not interested in reading you wax on about how you're tired of going to these boards and listening to people profess they know something and you don't agree so you throw a little tantrum...you're just as guilty as anyone elese in this thread, hypocrite.

As for splitting energy. In my mind, there is, no doubt, a place for using splitting energy. Is it soooo important or hard to train that I need a rattan ring...

...I don't think so. Poon sau does just fine (better actually).:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yawn

AmanuJRY

05-31-2006, 07:59 AM

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yawn

your so cool!:cool:

reneritchie

05-31-2006, 10:21 AM

I see the "yawn" and raise a "sigh"

The rattan ring is bogus, don't waste any time on it. Please.

(Now *thats'* facetious!)

Steeeve

05-31-2006, 12:19 PM

Howdy Rene

Does U or Sifu teach the Sun Nung WC in Montreal again....

Steeve

tjwingchun

06-01-2006, 05:10 AM

So if I said I'd read loads of articles about wing chun over 32 years of some other martial art and then said 'I don't need it, what could it offer me?' you'd respect that as a reasonable and legitimate position?

If you had sound arguments of course I would respect your right to free thought. I have read many things from different arts that were interesting and I could see how they could work, but in my mind Wing Chun techniques covered the same scenario so why change something that works? Personal choice selects many things at varience with others, personal viewpoints cause many conflicts, should we stop questioning? I don't think so.

Since I've never trained it I'll go out on a limb and guess it helps you to use two opposing energies (nothing fancy - splitting energy being kinetic force, one arm going one way while the other goes the other) in solo practice on a tool that moves about and is therefore harder to control and more like a human than a dummy in that one respect...?

I understand kinetic energy= half the mass multipied by the velocity squared, how is that "splitting ", as to opposing energy, you need to develop INDEPENDANT ENERGIES in the arms that act on their own to the situation that they are faced with, not when this arm does this the other does that. If one arm is reacting to the feeling it is getting from the opponents arm the other has to be sensitive to what energy is being expressed in the opponents other arm.

When working on the Dummy you can express opposing energies and understand reactant energies which becomes important when understanding what happens in the reality of physical confrontations.

If the legitimate answer in this case as with many other MA egs, is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, to which your answer is still why... you are still asking in a childish reductionist form. A four-year-old asks why to everything without discrimination or adjusting to experience or lack thereof. And your criteria for 'legitimate' appears in this case to be 'agrees with you'! ;)

If the pudding looks a horrible mess and unappetising why should I taste it? If the question is "WHY?" and the teacher won't answer, what does that say about the teacher. Just because it is a child who asks a question do you patronise them with a pat on the head and a "One day you will understand".

My criteria for legitimacy is for me to see the truth and value in something, when studying microbiology I read books and attended lectures and made my own experimentation, when qualifying as a science teacher, I read books went through teaching practice and was pleased to find that many of the learning strategies that I had developed independantly were reinforced.

When talking about a subject that I have some knowledge about I need more information to change my way of thinking than saying that I have to try it.

And the answer is again: if you don't try it, no-one has a chance to educate you; they only have a chance to tell you that it does.

I don't need to try coprophilia to know it is not for me, just because Hitler was an advocate.

It's the chicken and the egg but with proof and experience! It can't be proved to you unless you experience it, and you won't let yourself experience it until it's proven to you!

No it is not the chicken and the egg, if you cannot legitimise through sound argument then don't get all huffy when you are not taken seriously.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion. I'm gonna bow out at this point as I don't use the rings myself and never have, and the argument is as circular as the subject! Although I must say I can't understand your complete opposition to something that you don't understand!

Again you are making assumptions that I have no knowledge and that I am closed to new ideas, I understand Wing Chun as it was related to me, how it relates to me and how I relate it to others, I have been teaching professionally for over 20 years and training for the aforementioned 32 years, yet I am still open minded to be persuaded by discussion but not dogma.

Take care out there and keep :D

Mr Punch

06-01-2006, 07:40 AM

Fair enough.

You've expressed yourself quite well there.

It appears I didn't as both you and Amanu seem to think I was 'huffy' or 'having a tantrum'... I thought we were just having a normal discussion, and certainly was neither of the above. In fact, most people who know me would probably agree that I don't actually get in huffs or have tantrums. I'll take more care with the way I write in future.

It also appears that you've missed the bits where I say I too don't know what I'm talking about! I'm not making an argument in favour of the rings, because I've never trained them, but I do really wonder about people who are so critical of others' methods without having tried them. That was all.

It really doesn't matter to me either way, so as I said before I'm gonna bugger off now.

:)

AmanuJRY

06-01-2006, 08:17 AM

Don't bugger off just yet.:D

Just to clear the air a bit, I only stated how I feel about using the rings for myself;) , my opinion for others' use of the rings would be this;
If you use the rings, and believe that you impart some knowledge, development, exercise, etc. from them, by all means ring away! I have used drill at work as a training tool for developing my footwork, I imagine most of you are bewildered as to how, but that would take waaayyy to long to type out. So, I'm not beyond developmental tools.

If you haven't tried them, check it out, maybe you'll like it, maybe not!?!:o

oh, and try crack too. I've heard stories that it's cool.:cool:

reneritchie

06-01-2006, 09:20 AM

Steeeve,

He still teaches, constant as the northern star.

I still don't teach :)

Steeeve

06-01-2006, 04:27 PM

Rene

Sifu teach at the same place....in the weekend too? the sunday morning ?

Thank

Steeve:)

reneritchie

06-02-2006, 08:05 AM

Same place, only Thursday nights as far as I know.

Steeeve

06-02-2006, 03:45 PM

Rene

Thank .....for the info....feel fre to send me a email to give me a contact with sifu
to know the exact time of his class Thank

Do U keep training with sifu or?

Steeve

anerlich

06-03-2006, 05:23 AM

I don't need to try coprophilia to know it is not for me

OTOH, coprolalia seems really popular in this forum :p :p :p

We have a supply of rings at my school, and I've fooled around with them a bit. I think there are better ways to spend training time but YMMV.

while the jury is out in the rattan rings, IMO there is no doubt that gymnastic rings are excellent for developing functional strength.

bcbernam777

06-04-2006, 04:48 PM

There have been a few short arguments about this in the past on this board... usually along the lines of people who have never used them complaining about how they train the wrong things... :rolleyes:

That's probably because they do

yylee

06-04-2006, 07:28 PM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-782591661034110252&q=wing+chun

tjwingchun

06-05-2006, 03:04 AM

Well thanks for the video and I rest my case, the non-related energies in the arms are linked so the individuality and sensitivity to feeling and using precise directional energies that we are seeking through Chi Sau is corrupted because they of having to keep in the ring in place, but if you have a clear visualisation in your own mind of what you are trying to gain from their use and you are happy doing it, then who am I to complain.

Take care and keep :D TJ

k gledhill

06-05-2006, 06:20 AM

from what i see, it develops hand chasing , wrong slt~elbow thinking ....

Gert

06-05-2006, 11:27 AM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-782591661034110252&q=wing+chunUnbelievable what are they trying to sell us here!

Energy and pressure outward all the time. Elbows outwards. Although it looks somewhat like Ving Tsun it has nothing to do with the structure and its concepts.

Fantasy can also be an burden sometimes I think. Why always creating something new? Probably when the rest of your Ving Tsun is already perfect?

Not many people can train and appreciate a straightforward system. I have personally never been bored in a single training or felt the need to invent something. I’m still trying to master the ‘simple’ exercises we all know: chi sau, forms, weapons, lap sau, dummy, etc.

Cheers,

GJ.

reneritchie

06-05-2006, 11:56 AM

Can some one link to a really bad JKD wooden dummy video so we could all just ditch as well?

Thanksferthefish...

JLQ

06-05-2006, 12:00 PM

@ GJ

It is of course entirely possible that I misunderstand the tone in your post, however it comes across pretty aggressive and with somewhat of a condescending air...

Of course this may not be the case, it it is indeed what you intended, I suggest more reservation when commenting on things one obviously doesn't have any idea about - unless of course you wish to be perceived as an arrogant person...

I think good explanations about the tang huen (rattan ring) have been provided by a no. of people participating in this discussion, but these have been been scoffed at by people with lack of vision. Just because your system hasn't preserved this training method (which incidentally is a traditional training method of the wing chun styles originating in mainland China, i.e. that predate the wing chun Yip Man taught in HK), doesn't mean that it is a waste of time - just consider the opposite, what if you are really missing out on a great tool that can enhance your wing chun skills, just because you are too arrogant and ignorant to try to understand it's merits... Where is the open mind, guys? ;)

To reiterate some of the points that have been made, the rattan rings are NOT for practising chi-sau - and no, the "energy", doesn't go in the wrong direction at all if you use it as intended. But as was suggested previously, the best thing to to if you want to learn about the tang huen and it's proper use, would be to seek out somebody who knows this training method.

However, I tend to agree with the general sentiment that the presentation of the use of the ring demonstrated is ...less than optimal... however for other reasons than the one mentioned thus far.

JLQ

Gert

06-05-2006, 01:34 PM

Sorry if I have offended you or anybody else, didn’t mean to. To me none of the reasons mentioned in this discussion I think have good enough arguments to use the rings. Regardles to what other martial arts have expirienced.

I guess I am not that open minded then.

...less than optimal...
100 % agree here.

Regards,

GJ.

JLQ

06-05-2006, 02:02 PM

Hello GJ,

thank you for responding :)

You are not offending me with your opinions, each person has his/her own and are perfectly entitled to those - opinions are subject to knowledge and experience and change as we grow (hopefully) ;)

If you think no argument poignant enough to change your mind has been put forth, fair enough - however is it because the arguments are bad or is it due to the fact that you have no desire to really change your opinion? If the latter is the case, then why enter a discussion?

And no... it seems you are not open-minded... ;D

Anyways, I care not whether or not people believe the tang huen to be useful or not (it is your loss ;)), but I just wanted to comment on the negative tone of certain peoples' statements (not yours exclusively) in this and other threads.

regards,
JLQ

Edmund

06-05-2006, 05:52 PM

I'm just so glad we have experts on the Rattan rings subject.

Let's talk about the bamboo dummy next please.

Fantasy can also be an burden sometimes I think. Why always creating something new? Probably when the rest of your Ving Tsun is already perfect?

bcbernam777

06-05-2006, 09:47 PM

no matter how you cut the cake it still comes out the same...

...Rattan rings train incorrect energy, end of story. Proper energy development is key to success or failure in Wing Chun, anything that detracts from that development is useless and best avoided. This rattan rings (and yes I am familiar with them) train the energy incorrectly due to the nature of the use of the arms in keeping the ring in position. And do not target the area of true energy development i.e. the stance. For these simple yet compelling reasons, it would be my advice for anyone lookiing at supplementing their Wing Chun training with the Rattan, to not use it.

Edmund

06-05-2006, 10:22 PM

Maybe you could correct the mainland WC forms as well.

Those ignorant yokels need some real teaching. It's all the same right?

no matter how you cut the cake it still comes out the same...

JLQ

06-06-2006, 12:29 AM

bcbernam777,

another one post hinging on arrogance - you make bold statements based on what? You say you are familiar with the use of the rattan ring, yet you make these silly claims about how it is condtradictory to "proper" energy. Your very statements shows that you know much less than you think about the tang huen it's use and the benefits training with it yields. May I inquire as to from whom (lineage) you have learned the usage of the rattan ring?

Anyways, the rattan ring is a supplementary exercise just like the excercises for the long pole. Speaking of which, how do the movements of the pole form correlate with chi-sau, btw? Saying that training with the kwan yields benefits for wing chun but in fact the rattan ring doesn't is rather ...ignorant.

Granted both the tang huen - and the pole - are supplementary excercises, you don't have to do them to learn wing chun, but training with them develops attributes that can make your wing chun much better. It is your loss if you can't or won't recognize the worth of the rattan ring as that.

On a final note, consider that the mainland China styles of wing chun, that predate Yip Man's version of VT, consider the rattan ring an important training tool and have used it for generations to hone their skills - yet you have the audacity to say all these people don't have any idea about "chi-sau" energy? That is rather arrogant, indeed.

Ah... just one more thing. What then is your opinion about the use of iron rings, like the ones typically used in Hung Kuen? You probably think that they develop "wrong" chi-sau energy as well - and yet Yip Man used them, based on a picture that is floating around, I don't think he was merely posing for the pic... At any rate even the "hung kuen"-rings don't develop "wrong" energy as I believe you might argue, but that is another discussion entirely...

Regards,
JLQ

k gledhill

06-06-2006, 06:34 AM

I have to agree with the fact that rings dont develop the right energy for vt fighting ~lin sil di da, the whole system [mine anyway] is based on keeping ones elbows on or near the centralline as we attack/counterattack using cutting angles and tactics to achieve these goals. :D
Now..... if you made the ring the size of a doughnut and tried to keep it BETWEEN YOUR ELBOWS AND FOREARMS WITOUT DROPPING IT as you went through the same thing as the guy in the video , I and many who follow this system would be impressed ....;)

Gert

06-06-2006, 07:16 AM

Now..... if you made the ring the size of a doughnut and tried to keep it BETWEEN YOUR ELBOWS AND FOREARMS WITOUT DROPPING IT as you went through the same thing as the guy in the video , I and many who follow this system would be impressed ....;)

:) Now that would impress me!

GJ.

JLQ

06-06-2006, 08:14 AM

Mr. Gledhill,

how does the poleform fit in with lin sil di da, or the elbows in position, that you advocate so adamantly?

As to your description about how the rattan rings should be used to make more sense to you - even though the statement seems to have slightly of a sarcastic inflection - who says that this way isn't in fact one way of using the rattan ring?

With regards to your opinion about pressure going the wrong way... sure, that is your opinion, but what is this opinion based on? Practical experience or correct learning, or perhaps something else? ;)

regards,
JLQ

k gledhill

06-06-2006, 08:42 AM

....The purpose of the SLT is to develop the 'young idea', new thinking, taking time to bring our elbows in and training this key idea for fighting... We never spend time in our day to day activities doing this odd thing .....why do you think the rings will promote my elbow in or jumsao in ? when you can see it just makes one support the ring by spreading the elbows out so it doesnt fall off ? Ive messed around with a ring 20 years ago and know its wrong , Im not guessing . Im telling you. trying to be humble gives peopel the impression your not sure....:cool:

The very 'basic' idea is to angle 'oneself' using the elbow lines of SLT [that stay on or near the cl] with Chum Kil ...rings dont help this simple thing, in fact would make it worse ...I can show you and anyone in a few seconds the mistake it develops that will leave you vulnerable to being hit , it involves a simple feint ~ testing developed to show your target focus~elbow line is right or wrong no gray area ;) . You either hit the target using the technique or you chase hands and dont hit the target.... if wrong an arm easily goes into your center removing your elbow from the line even further......developing 'chicken wing syndrome' of flapping an arm back and forth trying to block an endless stream of simple hits....that can be thwarted by a simple fixed elbow that just sits there calmy if you know to do SIMPLE.
The pole uses elbows in as well to drive the force from our body keeping the elbows in BEHIND the pole not elbows out ...everything in vt is to maintain the elbow line in.

Your rebuttal seems more to have a go at an individual, rather than to address your lack of understanding of a root concept.

AmanuJRY

06-06-2006, 08:46 AM

Anyways, the rattan ring is a supplementary exercise just like the excercises for the long pole. Speaking of which, how do the movements of the pole form correlate with chi-sau, btw? Saying that training with the kwan yields benefits for wing chun but in fact the rattan ring doesn't is rather ...ignorant.

Granted both the tang huen - and the pole - are supplementary excercises, you don't have to do them to learn wing chun, but training with them develops attributes that can make your wing chun much better. It is your loss if you can't or won't recognize the worth of the rattan ring as that.

The pole has far greater developmental ability, to put rattan rings are equal as far as training tools go is, IMO, laughable. By it's weight alone, to hold and move it correctly forces the student to develop good hip/elbow connection. This is known, even outside WC, where the 'dragon pole' practiced.

To avoid being ignorant :rolleyes:, I'm not saying that you couldn't 'yield benefits' from practicing the rings, I just believe that it's yields a very low percentage compared to other means.

To me, the only 'training tools' that are critical to WC development are (in order of importance);

A partner
The long pole
Heavy bag/Focus mitts (a tie)
Wooden Dummy

Anything else, for the most part, is facon de parler.;)

Edmund

06-06-2006, 03:26 PM

What makes you think that mainland WC styles have the same approach to WC as that modified HK WC that you do?

The majority don't even do the useless poon sao exercise. It develops the wrong energy for wc fighting and ruins the perfection of the WC system.

Why always creating something new and so incorrect?

bcbernam777

06-06-2006, 08:05 PM

JLQ

06-07-2006, 01:41 AM

@ K Gledhill
You wrote:
....The purpose of the SLT is to develop the 'young idea', new thinking, taking time to bring our elbows in and training this key idea for fighting... We never spend time in our day to day activities doing this odd thing

- I am very familiar with this idea, and even this reasoning, Phillip Bayers students use it extensively in a lot of the European martialartsforums.

.....why do you think the rings will promote my elbow in or jumsao in ? when you can see it just makes one support the ring by spreading the elbows out so it doesnt fall off ?

- let me ask you a question... how do your elbows go into the required position and how do you keep them there?

Ive messed around with a ring 20 years ago and know its wrong , Im not guessing . Im telling you. trying to be humble gives peopel the impression your not sure....

- LOL - or it gives the mpression that you are a stubborn, arrogant fool ;D Anyways, if you are trying to impress me and/or lend more substance to your position by slipping out the fact that you have been involved in the game, I am afraid it works quite the opposite: A man with that much experience should have developed enough maturity and humbleness in the sense of realizing that one doesn't know all... You speak with the zeal and conviction of a newly converted, if you feel your previous experience has been all wrong, and that you have found something better (for you), who says there isn't something even better than that - just because you are ignorant about it, doesn't mean it isn't there... Phillip Bayer has been around for a loooooong time, and until you met him, you probably were equally zealous about your "old" method... As far as your experience with the rattan ring, you failed to inform me of your source and also the time spent training with it.

you wrote:
The very 'basic' idea is to angle 'oneself' using the elbow lines of SLT [that stay on or near the cl] with Chum Kil ...rings dont help this simple thing, in fact would make it worse ...

- Really, now? Why would that be ( other than you are "telling" me ;) )?

I can show you and anyone in a few seconds the mistake it develops that will leave you vulnerable to being hit , it involves a simple feint ~ testing developed to show your target focus~elbow line is right or wrong no gray area .

- how about trying to describe it? Although, it is much easier to demonstrate stuff in real life than via this medium, a description can still provide some insights.

you wrote:
You either hit the target using the technique or you chase hands and dont hit the target.... if wrong an arm easily goes into your center removing your elbow from the line even further......developing 'chicken wing syndrome' of flapping an arm back and forth trying to block an endless stream of simple hits....that can be thwarted by a simple fixed elbow that just sits there calmy if you know to do SIMPLE.

- eh... ok, and this insight you just gained recently, after learning from Phillip Bayer? What have you been doing in the 20 years before that? ;p Seriously, this is basic stuff, I know many people are saying the same but doing it differently...

you wrote:
The pole uses elbows in as well to drive the force from our body keeping the elbows in BEHIND the pole not elbows out ...everything in vt is to maintain the elbow line in.

- Thank your for the explanation, although it is not very convincing, to say the least. By it's nature and the position from which the pole is used, the body mechanics change from the way you do things unarmed - it is not me saying this, but this is dictated by physics and anatomy. Now, I believe the pole to be an awesome training tool, but if the fundamental purpose of the poleform is to learn how to bring in the elbows - supposedly translating to empty hand fighting -, then that would indeed be a complete waste of time - tang huen would be much better for that purpose. ;)

you wrote:
Your rebuttal seems more to have a go at an individual, rather than to address your lack of undersnding of a root concept.

I am very sorry if that is indeed the impression my post made - it was by no means my intention. As hominem attacks are immature and don't belong in a good discussion - consequently, it is not a practice that I like to engage in. Also, I know none of you guys personally, I am sure we might get along most excellently in real life, and I don't have any beef to grind with anybody, so my apologies to anybody who feels this way. As I wrote, I just commented on certain's peoples' ways of expressing themselves and their views - especially when not providing any arguments for their position. To round this of, the last sentence is a rather pathetic attempt, for discussions you could do much better :D

Peace
:)

@ AmanoJRY
As I wrote to K Gledhill, I think the pole is a most excellent tool for developing certain attributes useful for wing chun. However, claiming it has a more direct "translation" value to the unarmed boxing than the rattan ring is rather non-sensical. The way the body moves when using the pole is way different than in the unarmed boxing. A keyword in this context is "specifity of training"... The pole develops certain attributes, the wallbag, or hitting pads, other attributes - i.e. the training method is designed to promote certain, specific things. Consequently, each tool is designed to be most suitable to develop particular aspects, as is each drill found in wing chun - so, your position about the tang huen isn't wrong from the perspective that your training doesn't emphasize the qualities that are promoted by this training tool. But that is another discussion ;)

@ bcbernam77
am I arrogant because, A) I am arrogant B) I fail to see your point of view so I am Arrogant C) I have no idea what I am talking about so I am talking out of my a###? Look with someone like you there is no telling them whats what, I could have trained in the rings for 20 years and you would still not listen to mine or anyone elses opinion So I dont waste my time talking to brick walls.

- Based on the way you presented your opinion about tang huen, yes I think you come across in the fashion mentioned. You boldly state your opinion but yet there are no solid argument backing that opinion. The problem is not that you don't share my point of view, I think everybody is entitled to their own opinion and I have no desire to convince you otherwise - I am no missionary. I just enjoy good discussions and for that a "healthy" attitude is just as needed as solid arguments. Your last sentence is a rather silly statement considering that you don't know me and that you haven't in fact provided any substantial arguments for your point of view... I am more than willing to listen - and to be convinced to change my position, if I learn more.

Oh by the way; my exposure to the rattan comes from my tie in Shaolin and from exposure from the RW line (i.e. Augustine Fong)

- very well, in that case I understand your resentment against the tang huen. As I wrote previously, if you are really interested in learning about the rattan ring, it's use and function, seek out some of the wing chun styles that use this training instrument as an integral part of their training. The guy demonstrating the rattan ring in the clip above is a student of Randy Williams...

Regards,
JLQ

k gledhill

06-07-2006, 05:37 AM

Your rebuttal seems more to have a go at an individual, rather than to address your lack of understanding of a root concept.

still waiting for your reasons for the ring .....:D

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 05:57 AM

@ AmanoJRY
As I wrote to K Gledhill, I think the pole is a most excellent tool for developing certain attributes useful for wing chun. However, claiming it has a more direct "translation" value to the unarmed boxing than the rattan ring is rather non-sensical. The way the body moves when using the pole is way different than in the unarmed boxing. A keyword in this context is "specifity of training"... The pole develops certain attributes, the wallbag, or hitting pads, other attributes - i.e. the training method is designed to promote certain, specific things. Consequently, each tool is designed to be most suitable to develop particular aspects, as is each drill found in wing chun - so, your position about the tang huen isn't wrong from the perspective that your training doesn't emphasize the qualities that are promoted by this training tool. But that is another discussion ;).

Claiming that the pole has more direct 'translation' value than the 'ring' is 'non-sensical??:confused:

If the ring has as much 'value' as the pole, how come it isn't more popular??:rolleyes:

And don't go saying it's one of WC's 'secrets'....that's retarded.:mad:

@ bcbernam77
am I arrogant because, A) I am arrogant B) I fail to see your point of view so I am Arrogant C) I have no idea what I am talking about so I am talking out of my a###? Look with someone like you there is no telling them whats what, I could have trained in the rings for 20 years and you would still not listen to mine or anyone elses opinion So I dont waste my time talking to brick walls.

bcbernam77, your not any more arrogant than anyone on this board. Besides, in cases like this I would rather be considered arrogant than retarded...;)

JLQ

06-07-2006, 06:00 AM

K Gledhill,

That's why I posed the question about how you bring the elbow in to the "correct" position...

:D

regards,
JLQ

JLQ

06-07-2006, 06:16 AM

AmanoJRY,

you wrote:
bcbernam77, your not any more arrogant than anyone on this board. Besides, in cases like this I would rather be considered arrogant than retarded...

- ... petty and immature...

you wrote:
Claiming that the pole has more direct 'translation' value than the 'ring' is 'non-sensical??

- what is it you don't understand about this. It should be rather obvious...

If the ring has as much 'value' as the pole, how come it isn't more popular??

- do you really think popularity is a measure of "value"? ;D Training with the tang huen is nothing secret, a rather standard training method imployed in many of the mainland China wing chun styles. As to why it is left out in HK (derived) wing chun, I cannot say... Don't you think it is strange that the older version of wing chun use it and the hong kong style doesn't? Maybe not, because Yip Man "improved" the system, right? ;D

- BTW non of you guys ever bothered responding to my question about the picture of Yip Man training with the iron rings around his wrist... :)

And don't go saying it's one of WC's 'secrets'....that's retarded.

- indeed :D

regards,
JLQ

Gert

06-07-2006, 07:03 AM

AmanoJRY,

you wrote:
bcbernam77, your not any more arrogant than anyone on this board. Besides, in cases like this I would rather be considered arrogant than retarded...

- ... petty and immature...
The Wing Chun people are well known for there arrogance and it isn't build on nothing!:)

If the ring has as much 'value' as the pole, how come it isn't more popular??
Very good queastion! No . . . this is THE question!!!

- do you really think popularity is a measure of "value"? ;D Training with the tang huen is nothing secret, a rather standard training method imployed in many of the mainland China wing chun styles. As to why it is left out in HK (derived) wing chun, I cannot say... Don't you think it is strange that the older version of wing chun use it and the hong kong style doesn't? Maybe not, because Yip Man "improved" the system, right? ;DA history lesson, true or not, has for me nothing to do with arguments to use 'the ring'.

- BTW non of you guys ever bothered responding to my question about the picture of Yip Man training with the iron rings around his wrist... :)

And don't go saying it's one of WC's 'secrets'....that's retarded.

- indeed :D

regards,
JLQ You have an obsession with rings? :)

Okay seriously. I don't think anything Yip Man taught has anything to do with secrets. I don't think its also worth to loose a night sleep. Maybe he used the rings because Yip Man wanted to train the forward power even though his arm has to deal with a strong downward pressure? Or maybe he just used them this single time for a photo or he want to mix people up who don’t think and just copy everything they see without having good arguments to back them up? :rolleyes:
I personally don’t use something like that because I think it will influence me wrong and I might develop upward pressure.

Have a nice day,

GJ.

Vajramusti

06-07-2006, 07:21 AM

" Oh by the way; my exposure to the rattan comes from my tie in Shaolin and from exposure from the RW line (i.e. Augustine Fong)"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way 2-
no comments on RW.
A correction-
Augustine Fong and his regular students do NOT use the rattan rings in their wing
chun training..
No comment on other users of rattan rings.

joy chaudhuri

Vajramusti

06-07-2006, 07:27 AM

k gledhill

06-07-2006, 07:36 AM

LOL your evasion is its own answer ...have a good ring session, send us a video of your ring form. ;) so we may learn your "secrets" :rolleyes:

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 07:36 AM

AmanoJRY,

you wrote:
bcbernam77, your not any more arrogant than anyone on this board. Besides, in cases like this I would rather be considered arrogant than retarded...

- ... petty and immature...

Well....when your dealing with an immature arguement...;)

To try to 'mature' it...

Why are we considered arrogant because we believe there is little value in rattan rings?

Do you assume we have no understanding because we don't agree with you...or some other reason?

You have not touched hands with anyone in this arguement, are you assuming their chi sau is poorer than yours because they don't train the rattan rings?

Your arguement for the rings is weak and yet you continue to debate that our position is non-sensical and without reason...

Who's petty and immature???

you wrote:
Claiming that the pole has more direct 'translation' value than the 'ring' is 'non-sensical??

- what is it you don't understand about this. It should be rather obvious...

It isn't...try explaining.:o

If the ring has as much 'value' as the pole, how come it isn't more popular??

- do you really think popularity is a measure of "value"?

To a degree...yes.

BTW non of you guys ever bothered responding to my question about the picture of Yip Man training with the iron rings around his wrist... :)

Old school wristweights.;)

JLQ

06-07-2006, 07:51 AM

GJ,

good ****ur - as I said, I am sure we would get along fine in real life :D

And good points about secrecy, Yip Man and the pics. I agree completely :)

But it is a wrong assumption that heavy rings such as the ones Yip Man poses with on the picture develop excessive upwards pressure - they actually develop isometric strength, i.e. more power for the position. As I am not sure you understand what I mean, I will try to illustrate the point with a simple example: If you carry a heavy object and somebody suddenly removes it, will your hands "fly up"? They won't... Anyways, anytimes you are raising your arms you are engaging your deltoids lifting up the arm. Is this lifting power also wrong as it doesn't go in the proper direction in accordance with your understanding? I don't think you will say yes to this... Or to make it even more explicit: The added weight of the pole should call for even more power when doing the biu kwan-movement. Is this extra power also wrong? Again, I don't think you would say yes to this.

It is really simple anatomy and biomechanics...

Alas, we all have different perspectives and opinions and I see nothing wrong with this as long as it is presented in a civilized, respectful manner.

A very good day to you as well :D

JLQ

Mr Punch

06-07-2006, 08:27 AM

The Wing Chun people are well known for there arrogance and it isn't build on nothing!:) Oh, but most of the time, it is built on precisely that!

Thanks everyone for a civil argument and especially JLQ for you alternative PoV. I'm gonna stay on the fence until I (if ever) get a chance to learn the ring, tho I don't feel my WC needs it, and indeed if it'S primarily from mainland wc it wouldn't be much use to me without learnin ga mainland wc system (and that's not to say i think my fighting is better).

BTW Joy, it was K Gledhill who said that about Fong and the ring, not JLQ. The latter was just quoting.

Vajramusti

06-07-2006, 08:47 AM

BTW Joy, it was K Gledhill who said that about Fong and the ring, not JLQ. The latter was just quoting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Mat- for the correction.
Still no ring.

Joy Chaudhuri

JLQ

06-07-2006, 09:27 AM

K Gledhill,

no evasion - you are so proud that you can explain things in a SIMLPE fashion... you should be able to answer my question then...

With regards to the rest of your comment - childish and immature, what can I say? Is this really how a grown man with such experience in the MA handles himself in a discussion?...

Is it really so difficult to understand what I am writing - there are many things that you chose to neglect... As for secrets, you might read again what I wrote about that topic...

my my...

I see we have a case of a "brick wall" here...

;D

regards,
JLQ

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 09:32 AM

JLQ

06-07-2006, 09:54 AM

Well....when your dealing with an immature arguement...

To try to 'mature' it...

- that is what I have been trying to do... In vain, it seems

Why are we considered arrogant because we believe there is little value in rattan rings?

- please read what I write rather that speculating on the meaning behind the words. I never said you were arrogant because of your belief - it is about your reasoning. You keep talking about chi-sau, but it has been pointed out on several occasions that it isn't a training tool for chi-sau... and yet you (the naysayers in general, not you in particular;)) persist in using this as a point of reference. Dissing something when you have no practical experience with it is arrogant, IMO. It would be like a thai boxer saying chi-sau is useless after having spent a few lessons working on it in a JKD school... Wouldn't you say such a statement is arrogant?

Do you assume we have no understanding because we don't agree with you...or some other reason?

- again, where did the inflection come that I think you are arrogant because you don't have the same opinion as I have? I have mentioned this on many occasions now, I don't know how to express it more clearly. My sentiment that you don't have any knowledge and understanding about the training with the tang huen is based on an observation of your arguments, developing wrong energy for chi-sau, etc. Since none of you guys dissing it have any "proper" background for learning it, how can you dismiss it so casually - if you had learned through an "authentic" (bad word, but I can't think of any better right now) source, and found the training method is bad, your arguments would be different.

You have not touched hands with anyone in this arguement, are you assuming their chi sau is poorer than yours because they don't train the rattan rings?

- I am very sorry, but it really seems like you are not paying too much attention to what I am writing: once again - the tang huen has NOTHING to do with chi-sau how often does this has to be repeated??? Where did I make any assumptions about anyones chi-sau skills? Please don't be too creative when interpreting my words, just read what I am writing. It is not about anybodys fighting/chi-sau skills or whatever, rather the discussion is about the value about the rattan ring as a training tool and how people present their arguments. I wrote already that the tang huen is a training implemet that focuses on developing particular attributes, it is supplementary and can enhance your wing chun skills - you can learn wing chun without it, obviously. The same goes for the pole-training...

Who's petty and immature???

- projections... ;)

Regards,
JLQ

k gledhill

06-07-2006, 10:06 AM

Im waiting for the JLQ ~ VT RING SECRETS 1 & 2 revealed for $49.99 or 3 easy payments of... LOL
...come on dude, cough up ! show us the ring and how to do it ....pick up the camera.

:D

JLQ

06-07-2006, 10:19 AM

AmanoJRY,

I never wrote that I didn't respect your opinion - in fact the opposite. But perhaps it wasn't clear. My apologies - after all English is my third language...

:)

And yes, it would be very interesting if AndrewS would voice his opinion with his background and humble matter of fact attitude towards things - you might consider that there are others on this forum that have educations or work in similar fields or even specialize in this stuff... ;)

As for the pole vs. ring, I will try to elaborate on what I am talking about: In motor learning there is the concept of "specificity of learning", stipulating that the best learning experiences are those that most closely approximate the movement components and environmental conditions of the target skill and target context. The mechanics for using the pole are specific for using the pole, consequently training the pole makes you better at using the pole. In that sense there is no "transfer of learning" as the way you use and move the body with the pole is different than when in you standard "facing" wing chun position. However, the pole, especially if it is heavy builds of certain muscles that are useful in the weaponless system on a general level, not specific for chi-sau. The same for the rattan ring, as it has nothing to do with chi-sau, there won't be any transfer to that area of skill. However. the tang huen develops "splitting" power, flexibility and strength, conditioning of kiu sau, all stuff that can improve you wing chun.
More clear now?

:)

regards,
JLQ

JLQ

06-07-2006, 10:21 AM

K Gledhill,

I think, I would like you in real life, too ;)

Cheers,
JLQ

JLQ

06-07-2006, 10:23 AM

oops...

considering all the talk about rings and poles - my last post may have come across a little differently than intended...

;D

No innuendo, though

:D

Vajramusti

06-07-2006, 01:09 PM

My apologies - after all English is my third language...
((JLQ is directing it elsewhere-but FWIW English is my third language and there is more...))

As for the pole vs. ring,
((Versus? Sic?)))
I will try to elaborate on what I am talking about: In motor learning there is the concept of "specificity of learning", stipulating that the best learning experiences are those that most closely approximate the movement components and environmental conditions of the target skill and target context.
((Importing interpretaions form another field without sufficient nalysis of comparability))

The mechanics for using the pole are specific for using the pole, consequently training the pole makes you better at using the pole.
((By proclamation??))
In that sense there is no "transfer of learning"

((Ip Man. leung Jan and others would have been shocked to learn this))

as the way you use and move the body with the pole is different than when in you standard "facing" wing chun position.
((I sincerely doubt that someone who lnows pole usage ata good level has taken you through pole usage and its development stages))
However. the tang huen develops "splitting" power, flexibility and strength, conditioning of kiu sau, all stuff that can improve you wing chun.
More clear now?
((If the ring helps you float your boat- more power to you. I am NOT trying to be sarcastic BTW.Internet posting does not always do justice to nuances of conversations))))

joy chaudhuri

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 02:06 PM

More clear now?

Yes and No.

The mechanics for using the pole are specific for using the pole, consequently training the pole makes you better at using the pole. In that sense there is no "transfer of learning" as the way you use and move the body with the pole is different than when in you standard "facing" wing chun position. However, the pole, especially if it is heavy builds of certain muscles that are useful in the weaponless system on a general level, not specific for chi-sau.

To each their own, but it is my firm belief that charachteristics of the pole form and it's exercises develop the body's connection between the hip and the elbow - a major component in generating force from your stance/footwork - and this, to me, transfers to my chi sau ability.

As for the pole vs. ring, I will try to elaborate on what I am talking about: In motor learning there is the concept of "specificity of learning", stipulating that the best learning experiences are those that most closely approximate the movement components and environmental conditions of the target skill and target context.

And what is the 'target skill' and 'target context' that the ring addresses?

This?

The same for the rattan ring, as it has nothing to do with chi-sau, there won't be any transfer to that area of skill. However. the tang huen develops "splitting" power, flexibility and strength, conditioning of kiu sau, all stuff that can improve you wing chun.

How is this not part of chi sau???:confused:

And, as I stated before...

earlier...[/I]]I'm not saying that you couldn't 'yield benefits' from practicing the rings, I just believe that it's yields a very low percentage compared to other means.

...I was refering to them being used as chi sau tools or for developing 'splitting force/energy'.

And yes, it would be very interesting if AndrewS would voice his opinion with his background and humble matter of fact attitude towards things - you might consider that there are others on this forum that have educations or work in similar fields or even specialize in this stuff... ;)

But I know I can trust AndrewS's insight, at least, more so than others...:o

please read what I write rather that speculating on the meaning behind the words.

I ask the same...:mad:

I never said you were arrogant because of your belief - it is about your reasoning. You keep talking about chi-sau, but it has been pointed out on several occasions that it isn't a training tool for chi-sau... and yet you (the naysayers in general, not you in particular) persist in using this as a point of reference.

If you read back, my sentiments concern all views expressed so far...chi sau, splitting force/energy...that's it so far right?:confused:

Dissing something when you have no practical experience with it is arrogant, IMO. It would be like a thai boxer saying chi-sau is useless after having spent a few lessons working on it in a JKD school... Wouldn't you say such a statement is arrogant?

That would depend on his view and personal strategy. Being 'raised' as a Thai boxer would give you a different fighting strategy than an WC pugilist. So, I could easily understand why he would say something like that and discount it as arrogance and count it as differing experience...

But, hey, that's me and I'm an arrogant ba5tard.:D
(sorry, that was a bit sarchastic...):o

again, where did the inflection come that I think you are arrogant because you don't have the same opinion as I have? I have mentioned this on many occasions now, I don't know how to express it more clearly. My sentiment that you don't have any knowledge and understanding about the training with the tang huen is based on an observation of your arguments, developing wrong energy for chi-sau, etc. Since none of you guys dissing it have any "proper" background for learning it, how can you dismiss it so casually - if you had learned through an "authentic" (bad word, but I can't think of any better right now) source, and found the training method is bad, your arguments would be different.

How about in this (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=681021&postcount=39) post of yours where you suggest Gert is sounding arrogant because he described his discontent with the video in terms of how it relates to his WC.

Was that because you didn't agree with his comment?

Using terms like 'proper' and 'authentic' (if you knew this was a bad term, why did you use it?), leads me to think you are the one who comes across as arrogant.

I am very sorry, but it really seems like you are not paying too much attention to what I am writing: once again - the tang huen has NOTHING to do with chi-sau how often does this has to be repeated??? Where did I make any assumptions about anyones chi-sau skills? Please don't be too creative when interpreting my words, just read what I am writing. It is not about anybodys fighting/chi-sau skills or whatever, rather the discussion is about the value about the rattan ring as a training tool and how people present their arguments. I wrote already that the tang huen is a training implemet that focuses on developing particular attributes, it is supplementary and can enhance your wing chun skills - you can learn wing chun without it, obviously. The same goes for the pole-training...

noted.;)

as for me, I'm not leaving out the Pole...

-

k gledhill

06-07-2006, 02:58 PM

'splitting' seems to be the word renee threw out there but never answered, and jsl uses the splitting bridge use by doing rings....so my question, what and how are you, when you split the bridge in this scenario you keep refering to ?

JLQ

06-07-2006, 03:22 PM

Vajramusti,

you wrote:
((JLQ is directing it elsewhere-but FWIW English is my third language and there is more...))

I am sorry, I do not understand what you are trying to say? Directing? I was merely pointing out, that as English is not my native tongue and that I am not surrounded by English-speaking people such as you - consequently, I may not understand inflections of humor or sarcasm and hence my commenting on the general atmosphere of the discussion. If seems I wasn't too far of the mark with my initial assumption...

((Versus? Sic?)))

The language thing...

((Importing interpretaions form another field without sufficient nalysis of comparability))

Mr. Chaudhuri, I have the utmost respect for your accomplishment in the various academic fields, very impressive indeed and always enjoy your input on various discussions, however I believe motor learning and sports science isn't one of the fields of your expertise? I may of course be wrong, and will gladly stand corrected on this matter. If this is they case, I would really appreciate if you could provide a an analysis which lives up to the criteria you just established. Does your statement infer that wing chun is not a physical skill, and that it is not learned according to "rules" that every other physical discpline abides by, in essence saying that sport science isn't really applicable to sports?
Granted, my comparison is rather general, superficial and simplified but I don't think going into more detail would really be more beneficial in this forum...

((By proclamation??))

According to scientific research done in the fields of motor learning and sports science - if you are interested, I will be happy to direct you to reference material on this.

((Ip Man. leung Jan and others would have been shocked to learn this))

What are you trying to say with this? Are you also trying to use a little sarcasm to belittle my posts? If that is the case, I would be most disappointed - definately, you can do much better. If there is something in my posts that you disagree with or that offends you, then there are other ways of expressing this.
As for the skill transfer of the pole to unarmed, I suggest you read it again... I never said that the pole is useless, just that the body mechanics are different and the real benefit of training with the pole is the functional strength that it develops.

((I sincerely doubt that someone who lnows pole usage ata good level has taken you through pole usage and its development stages))

Of course you do... :D

Well, then please enlighten me... I would consider it a priviledge hearing your opinion on the usage of the pole and what makes the development stages so special.

((If the ring helps you float your boat- more power to you. I am NOT trying to be sarcastic BTW.Internet posting does not always do justice to nuances of conversations))))

Indeed :D

respectfully,
JLQ

JLQ

06-07-2006, 04:07 PM

AmanuJRY

Yes and No.

- ok

To each their own, but it is my firm belief that charachteristics of the pole form and it's exercises develop the body's connection between the hip and the elbow - a major component in generating force from your stance/footwork - and this, to me, transfers to my chi sau ability.

- what is this belief based on? It would be interesting a more specific argument than mere belief - however bad ;) A statement such as "hip connected to the elbow" is a mental image in the best of scenarios, how is this connection made? Which muscles are art work, what kind of force generation are we talking about, linear or angular momentum, etc., stuff like this...

And what is the 'target skill' and 'target context' that the ring addresses?

This?

Quote:
The same for the rattan ring, as it has nothing to do with chi-sau, there won't be any transfer to that area of skill. However. the tang huen develops "splitting" power, flexibility and strength, conditioning of kiu sau, all stuff that can improve you wing chun.

How is this not part of chi sau???

- yes, for example... they don't translate per se, i.e. such as they are trained with the rattan ring (although tan- sau- bong -sau, boon tan bong, etc. are used) but the attributes gained from the training will of course influence you chi-sau in terms of power, positions, and also in your fighting. The crux of the matter is that it is inderect - I understand you have difficulties seeing it, but it is similar to skipping rope in boxing, or lifting weights for judo, there is no direct transfer from the exercises you are using other than building up some general attributes such as conditioning and power, attributes that fuel and boost your technical performance so to speak. The concept shouldn't be so hard to understand...

...I was refering to them being used as chi sau tools or for developing 'splitting force/energy'.

- Splitting energy as I understand it is not something that is explicitly use in chi-sau...

But I know I can trust AndrewS's insight, at least, more so than others...

- Sure - your loss... ;D

I ask the same...

- of course!!! As reading between the lines is not one of my strong points in a foreign language, I can only do that...

If you read back, my sentiments concern all views expressed so far...chi sau, splitting force/energy...that's it so far right?

- I don't understand what you are trying to say? If it is something important, please elaborate....

That would depend on his view and personal strategy. Being 'raised' as a Thai boxer would give you a different fighting strategy than an WC pugilist. So, I could easily understand why he would say something like that and discount it as arrogance and count it as differing experience...

- haha... nicely put ;) Let me rephrase my question, if a person only had 1 month of experience with wing chun and then told you that the wooden dummy, the pole, etc. is utter waste of time. What would you say that opinion is based on and how would your think of a validation based on a statement such as "well in my experienc" or "I believe"? (Bear in mind that the person only has had minimal exposure to the system).

But, hey, that's me and I'm an arrogant ba5tard.
(sorry, that was a bit sarchastic...)

- Sure, if used appropriately such as now, I can appreciate it :D

How about in this post of yours where you suggest Gert is sounding arrogant because he described his discontent with the video in terms of how it relates to his WC.

Was that because you didn't agree with his comment?

- I think voicing an opinion, good or bad, is perfectly alright - if it is supported by solid arguments. In that particular post of Gert, he did just that and I appreciate it - however I was - once again - pointing out that one should be a little more modest in ones way of critiquing thinks. Especially when one has no experience with it... Gert said in another post that he wouldn't want to trainin with weighted rings like Yip Man suppesedly did on the picture I mentioned. That position I can respect, although I don't agree with the reasons Gert provided, as he stated his opinion without any derogatory or condescending air...

Using terms like 'proper' and 'authentic' (if you knew this was a bad term, why did you use it?), leads me to think you are the one who comes across as arrogant.

- that was why I put the comment in about not knowing better words... ;)

as for me, I'm not leaving out the Pole...

- well neither am I!!! ;) It is a great tool for functional strength development, and I train with as often as possible myself :D

regards,
JLQ

JLQ

06-07-2006, 04:11 PM

K Gledhill,

splitting' seems to be the word renee threw out there but never answered, and jsl uses the splitting bridge use by doing rings....so my question, what and how are you, when you split the bridge in this scenario you keep refering to ?

- I will oblige you, if you oblige me... ;D

regards,
JLQ

Liddel

06-07-2006, 04:50 PM

Mr. Gledhill,
How does the poleform fit in with lin sil di da, or the elbows in position, that you advocate so adamantly?

Good question.
This i find an interesting point based on ones understanding of the purpose of elbow position.
The elbows are held 'in' with regard to hand forms for a few reasons.
One being support, another being seperate gates for close body protection.

However this changes with regard to the pole IMO. The connection point of where the hands meet the pole become the 'elbow point' with regard to the poles use as an extension of the body.

Ultimatly they are different senarios, but i would say the pole is a better (more direct) taining tool because you CAN use it to hit someone and defend yourself, where as i believe the rings are not intended to be used in this reagard.
This is like discussing apples and pears.

With regards to your opinion about pressure going the wrong way... sure, that is your opinion, but what is this opinion based on? Practical experience or correct learning, or perhaps something else? ;)
regards,
JLQ

My "opinion" is based on practical experience with the rings, correct learning in a VT style and the 'something else' which is my own ability to think for myself and outside the square :eek:

I believe the rings to develope the bad habbit of having to much force at the wrist by making you bend the wrist / OR press the ring with the wrist, to maintain contact with the tool / to stop it from falling away.

When your training with the ring, you want the ring to stay, by applying a little force (however little it may be), or bending your wrist (which is the factor i have a problem with).
When i fight, i want the punch to GO ! by using gravity and having it fall away -
If i trained in the rings too much i could create a habbit action that would stop the gravity effect (or at least lesson it) holding forces and actions on my bridge instead of away from my body.

Some schools train to bend the wrist freehand with regard to certain actions (i.e Bong Sao) in which case this would be fine, but for me its a no no.

Training Splitting power seems reasonable - but i question what the rings can do that the dummy or Chi Sao / Gor Sao / Luk Sao cant - perhaps just isolatiing that trainning ???

JLQ - I think people want to hear your opinion on how to use it properly if you think others "dont have a clue" or "are on the wrong track" about the right way to use this tool.
I am one who wants to hear if your way - circumvents the points ive outlined, so far i cant see that it does, and although you make other compelling arguments it doesnt change my opinion (not that your trying).

Lets just make this a proactive discussion instead of arguing guys :rolleyes:

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 04:56 PM

But I know I can trust AndrewS's insight, at least, more so than others...

- Sure - your loss... ;D

This is because of familiarity...I am more familiar with AndrewS's understanding of anatomy and physiology. This is not meant as an insult to you or whoever else may have such an understanding, but theirs remains to be seen.;)

haha... nicely put ;) Let me rephrase my question, if a person only had 1 month of experience with wing chun and then told you that the wooden dummy, the pole, etc. is utter waste of time. What would you say that opinion is based on and how would your think of a validation based on a statement such as "well in my experienc" or "I believe"? (Bear in mind that the person only has had minimal exposure to the system).

Are you suggesting that I or Gert have only one month of experience?

If not, I don't see the relevance in your analogy.:(

I think voicing an opinion, good or bad, is perfectly alright - if it is supported by solid arguments. In that particular post of Gert, he did just that and I appreciate it - however I was - once again - pointing out that one should be a little more modest in ones way of critiquing thinks. Especially when one has no experience with it... Gert said in another post that he wouldn't want to trainin with weighted rings like Yip Man suppesedly did on the picture I mentioned. That position I can respect, although I don't agree with the reasons Gert provided, as he stated his opinion without any derogatory or condescending air...

His statements were no more derogatory or condescending than your response. As I interpet it, they were observations regarding WC as Gert knows it (however long or well he has trained), not how you know it.

So the question is, what puts you in the position to judge wheather or not someone else's WC is...shall we say, correct?
And how do you juge or test this?

Using terms like 'proper' and 'authentic' (if you knew this was a bad term, why did you use it?), leads me to think you are the one who comes across as arrogant.

- that was why I put the comment in about not knowing better words... ;)

That's because there are no other words...unless you're looking for a colorful euphamism to disguise it. Your statement speaks for itself. Saying that a person like me can't use my experience and reasoning to deduce that the rings aren't that practical and can't know the 'truth' about them unless I actually train them is like saying that I can't judge that crack or heroin is bad for me unless I try it myself.

They are both true, I can't know for sure.

I don't do crack or heroin, never have, this is because I have a sneaking hunch that it's bad for me and could destroy my life...does that mean if I tried it, it would destroy my life...it's a matter of percentages right?

I believe the same of the rings, they may improve certain attributes involved in WC, but other exercises and more desirable training tools (the dummy) are better and I will devote my time to those.

Here's what I'm seeing, you are suggesting we (who oppose ring use) are arrogant because you think we don't understand and refute it in ignorance.

Vs.

I (since I can't speak for others opposed to ring use) believe you appear ignorant because you seem to deny us our intelligence (IOW, you think we don't know what we are talking about).

So, no good-guys/bad-guys here, just serious differences in opinion I guess...:(

JLQ

06-07-2006, 05:48 PM

Liddel,

thank you very much - that is the most sensible post in this thread yet. As it is getting late (or should I say earlier) at my part of the world, please forgive me for not giving you a more decent reply until tomorrow.

:D

AmanuJRY,

This is because of familiarity...I am more familiar with AndrewS's understanding of anatomy and physiology. This is not meant as an insult to you or whoever else may have such an understanding, but theirs remains to be seen.

- as I said, fair enough, I didn't take it as an insult (I always try to think the best of people unless the wording leaves no doubt :D)

Are you suggesting that I or Gert have only one month of experience?
If not, I don't see the relevance in your analogy.

- in that case, my point is lost on you :( But as for relevant experience of training with the rattan ring, would it be unfair to assume that you don't have that much experience? Keep in mind I am not questioning your competency/experience in other matters - if you remember, I said that the tang huen is merely a supplementary training instrument and you can have great wing chun without it... :)

His statements were no more derogatory or condescending than your response. As I interpet it, they were observations regarding WC as Gert knows it (however long or well he has trained), not how you know it.

- how many times do I have to repeat myself? The issue is about HOW you present your idea - regardless of experience. I was pointing out that one should be careful in voicing strong opinions about something one doesn't really have so much knowledge about... But you don't seem to understand this...

So the question is, what puts you in the position to judge wheather or not someone else's WC is...shall we say, correct?
And how do you juge or test this?

- Again, please don't be too creative when interpreting my words - I never said anything about anyones wing chun being correct, I have seen too many good people of various lineages and been in the MA world far too long to be so arrogant as to make such a statement or something to that effect. What I said was that I found it arrogant to make bold statements about the merits and uses of a certain training implement, when one hasn't learned how to use it. As it isn't used in any HK lineages (afaik), what kind of experience do guys like Gert of Kevin Gledhill have? There hasn't really been any precise info forthcoming from neither of them about this... Other than this, they may have the best wing chun skills in the world - I'd say there is good basis of that, considering that they both are/were students of Phillip Bayer, who is probably one of the most impressive wing chun (Ving Tsun) guys in Europe. Although I haven't had any direct exposure to his skills as of yet, I have heard from many very reliable sources about his skill level - only good things :)

That's because there are no other words...unless you're looking for a colorful euphamism to disguise it. Your statement speaks for itself. Saying that a person like me can't use my experience and reasoning to deduce that the rings aren't that practical and can't know the 'truth' about them unless I actually train them is like saying that I can't judge that crack or heroin is bad for me unless I try it myself.

They are both true, I can't know for sure.

I don't do crack or heroin, never have, this is because I have a sneaking hunch that it's bad for me and could destroy my life...does that mean if I tried it, it would destroy my life...it's a matter of percentages right?

- do you really think this is an appropriate allegory? Is a person with one month of experience qualified to make decision as to whether or not chi-sau training or lap-sau training is relevant or not. Or competent to "change" things because his common sense tells him that punching with the elbow out (f.ex.) feels more more natural to him than the elbow in position?

I believe the same of the rings, they may improve certain attributes involved in WC, but other exercises and more desirable training tools (the dummy) are better and I will devote my time to those.

- I understand. And based on your views I can see why you would think so :D

Here's what I'm seeing, you are suggesting we (who oppose ring use) are arrogant because you think we don't understand and refute it in ignorance.

- no, not because you don't understand it - because in the manner you are refuting it, even dissing it (waste of time) etc. Compare the post of Liddel with those of others who don't think the rattan ring is a good training tool. A huge difference...

Vs.

I (since I can't speak for others opposed to ring use) believe you appear ignorant because you seem to deny us our intelligence (IOW, you think we don't know what we are talking about).

- From the perspective of how the rattan ring is used by the lineages that actually have it as a part of their curriculum apparently you don't. I am not denying your intelligence (otherwise you wouldn't do wing chun ;)), I am merely pointing out that you don't have the right information to make relevant connections - it has nothing to do with intelligence or lack of it. It is just that your premise is... different.

So, no good-guys/bad-guys here, just serious differences in opinion I guess...

- You are absolutely correct!!! No good or bad guys, that wasn't really the problem - the presentation was. Although K Gledhill's was terrible, I think he is a good guy, with a sense of humor I car relate to, after all ;D
And there is nothing wrong with differences in opinion, even serious ones - in fact, the more difference there is, the better for discussion and the greater the potential to actually learn something from it. ...as long as people are civil and respectful towards each other and their respective opinions, IMO of course :D

Peace :D
JLQ

Vajramusti

06-07-2006, 05:57 PM

I am sorry, I do not understand what you are trying to say? Directing?

((Your remarks were in response to Gledhill or someone else.I am an infrequent participant on thread in this forum these days. Internet forums have their limits in serious discussions on serious subjects.))

I was merely pointing out, that as English is not my native tongue

((Where are you. Who are you. How much wing chun have you learned-from where and whom? Anonymous posting is quite a problem in serious discussions.
I dont post anonymously- there is always a tag on who I am and where I am))))

and that I am not surrounded by English-speaking people such as you -

((A quote from My fair Lady- in America they havent spoken English in years. But seriously in my part of the Southwest-the diversity is considerable- with the Vietnamese cashier at the grocery store- I spoke sign language. My neighbor speaks almost no English-goes back and forth across the Mexico border regularly. My tech friend speaks more Farsi than English. I speak with my sister in law almost daily in an American indian tribal langiage,. Have you seen the Acedemy Award movie Crash? One of the last lines..."Doesnt anyone speak American around here?"" There is ahuge debate on English only in many states))

consequently, I may not understand inflections of humor or sarcasm and hence my commenting on the general atmosphere of the discussion. If seems I wasn't too far of the mark with my initial assumption...

((I would not characterize most internet forums in martial arts as friemdly places-
generally they are a waste of time.. Though your point of view appears to be quite differnt from mine- I sense a combination of dogma and some curiosity- so I reply briefly addressinga point or two))

Mr. Chaudhuri, I have the utmost respect for your accomplishment

((On the net I ask not for respect but mutual civility))

Does your statement infer that wing chun is not a physical skill, and that it is not learned according to "rules" that every other physical discpline abides by, in essence saying that sport science isn't really applicable to sports?

((Wing chun is not reallya sport- it is not modern wushu. Sports "sciience" is an applied foeld and has done well in areas that it has attended to-many but not all Olympic sports. But it is still a ways away from improving wing chun asa martial art.
But of course opinions are dime a dozen on anything in forums))

Granted, my comparison is rather general, superficial and simplified
((Iy seems to be))
but I don't think going into more detail would really be more beneficial in this forum...
((Unfortunately many of the regulars will be asleep. Attention spans in forums are not known for their duration))

As for the skill transfer of the pole to unarmed, I suggest you read it again... I never said that the pole is useless, just that the body mechanics are different and the real benefit of training with the pole is the functional strength that it develops.

((I dont know - what you know about good body mechanics in wing chun or good pole usage. Before we go too much further, I would like to know you background in wing chun-specially Ip man wing chun and pole usage))

Well, then please enlighten me... I would consider it a priviledge hearing your opinion on the usage of the pole and what makes the development stages so special.

((That would be a dissertation-I would put forum members and porobably you to sleep. Efficient wing chun power is directed at points. Pole training when properly done teaches very focussed coordinated power delivery. Pole training is best done when certain stabilization(ygkym)and mobilization (Chor ma, biu ma etc) skills are well acquired- otherwise the pole contols the individual rather than the other way around. Biu kwan and biu gee skills have parallel development.))
jpy chaudhuri

Edmund

06-07-2006, 06:19 PM

Are you suggesting that I or Gert have only one month of experience?

You never been taught what the ring is for or learnt any mainland WC style.
But you are happy to give your expert opinion.
You actually have zero experience not one month.

You even said earlier you understood the application of splitting energy that Rene mentioned then talked about poon sao being better for training it.

They don't go together. Wonder why Rene just gave up explaining?

The ring won't help your all important chi sao so just forget it.

The thing is not some miracle device (like the pole :rolleyes: ). And no one is selling them for $99 each. It's honestly fine if you never touch it.

It trains a few specific applications that won't work in chi sao because you can't really do it standing square in front of your opponent with your hands joined left-on-right.

It's for any split move: One arm going one direction, other arm going opposite direction. You can't do that standing in front of the opponent.

It's not going to help for straight punches. You're meant to press outwards on the thing. That's why it's springy.

Hence HK WC can't use it :). It just don't fit. It's against your rules.

yylee

06-07-2006, 07:41 PM

a training video clip from some mainland WC people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkaV8DpUjww&search=wing%20chun

the attached pages are from an old mainland MA magazine.

enjoy!

AmanuJRY

06-07-2006, 11:23 PM

Are you suggesting that I or Gert have only one month of experience?
If not, I don't see the relevance in your analogy.

- in that case, my point is lost on you :( But as for relevant experience of training with the rattan ring, would it be unfair to assume that you don't have that much experience? Keep in mind I am not questioning your competency/experience in other matters - if you remember, I said that the tang huen is merely a supplementary training instrument and you can have great wing chun without it...

...how many times do I have to repeat myself? The issue is about HOW you present your idea - regardless of experience. I was pointing out that one should be careful in voicing strong opinions about something one doesn't really have so much knowledge about... But you don't seem to understand this

I may not have any experience with the rattan ring, but I do have a measurable amount of understanding and experience with the techs that are allegedly beeing developed.

I have never been 'trained' to use a Thighmaster, but I can understand it's function.

If you have an understanding of the goal of the instrument are you not able to impart the use of the instrument?

do you really think this is an appropriate allegory? Is a person with one month of experience qualified to make decision as to whether or not chi-sau training or lap-sau training is relevant or not. Or competent to "change" things because his common sense tells him that punching with the elbow out (f.ex.) feels more more natural to him than the elbow in position?

Again, I may not have any practical experience with the ring, but I do with the attributes it affects.

no, not because you don't understand it - because in the manner you are refuting it, even dissing it (waste of time) etc. Compare the post of Liddel with those of others who don't think the rattan ring is a good training tool. A huge difference...

Fair enough, so Liddel is better able to put it in words. My first comments were of that notion, just not so well put.

Training Splitting power seems reasonable - but i question what the rings can do that the dummy or Chi Sao / Gor Sao / Luk Sao cant - perhaps just isolatiing that trainning ???

JLQ - I think people want to hear your opinion on how to use it properly if you think others "dont have a clue" or "are on the wrong track" about the right way to use this tool.
I am one who wants to hear if your way - circumvents the points ive outlined, so far i cant see that it does, and although you make other compelling arguments it doesnt change my opinion (not that your trying).

I would also like to hear more. I'm not closed to your point of view, just, as Liddel stated, although you make compelling arguements I doubt it will change my opinion.

tjwingchun

06-08-2006, 01:29 AM

It trains a few specific applications that won't work in chi sao because you can't really do it standing square in front of your opponent with your hands joined left-on-right.

It's for any split move: One arm going one direction, other arm going opposite direction. You can't do that standing in front of the opponent.

It's not going to help for straight punches. You're meant to press outwards on the thing. That's why it's springy.

Hence HK WC can't use it :). It just don't fit. It's against your rules.

Stayed out of this thread for a while after putting the "The rings are cr&p" comment into the works, and the whole argument is going around in circles and getting personal which is fine as with any format of conflict, there is no real problem when both combatants have mutual agreement of the lines of battle!

However for me to find out that what I have been doing for over 15 years I don't do is a bit of a mystery (as I am from Sifu Kwok, Sigung Yip Chun, Di Sigung Yip Man and therefore HK so can't use it!), if it cannot be used in chi sau then it cannot be used in the reality of a fight, even when I am standing square with both arms in contact I constantly use opposite energies to distrupt and confuse the stance and structure of my opponent. These energies are fired not just from the arms but also the stance, creating lines of strength in person being faced then using lateral energies to confuse the balence while their brain is trying to analyse the situation, I am getting into a position to offload a destructive strike.

I normally fire these twitch energies at a rate of around three pairs of opposite/split energies in a second, to be a little more precise they are not actually done together but a 'split' second (not energy lol) apart to allow the energy to have its effect before the opposing energy is added into the equation.

I continually re-assess my understanding of the mechanics of 'collisions' the moment of impact of techniques, the process leading up to the point of contact, the relevant energies involved and which training tool is the of the most benefit in developing and perfecting its usage and where in the forms I can find a movement that I can use to visualise it in isolation, how I can get to that position in Chi Sau via an 'entry' technique to make the knowledge applicable in the reality of violent confrontations.

My only rule is one I have already indicated in this thread, "Teach me to understand, don't expect me to believe your words."

I think we have all got one thing from this thread so far, and it is what kept me out of the school scene for so many years, we all have personal views but some take the politics to extreme to belittle rather than than discuss rationally.

OK I may not seem totally rational at times but that is more to do with my wicked sense of humour (www.sphincterman.co.uk) , my outlook on Wing Chun is as a science not an art, art cannot be argued as it is totally personal choice, science is dictated by reason, sound argument and repeatable experimentation, there are many things from Mainland China that are best left there, unless you are partial to sucking on tigers testicles, or have a special place for a rhino horn!

My mind works with simplicity as it has to! the pole form has a great value in teaching a student to appreciate visualising energy outside the limits of their bodies, apart from weight training using the mechanics of punching and pulling, keep it simple and it has many uses, think of it as application and you will never use it, personal philosophy on all of the forms.

The forms are for concept and principle not strict application.

As far as the rings are concerned after all the deliberation that has gone on throughout this thread I must admit I have changed my mind on their use!

"THEY ARE REALLY CR&P" LOL

Take care and keep :D TJ

Edmund

06-08-2006, 02:51 AM

I think we have all got one thing from this thread so far, and it is what kept me out of the school scene for so many years, we all have personal views but some take the politics to extreme to belittle rather than than discuss rationally.

LOL. That's the pot calling the kettle black.

You belittled with your first post. I simply put the shoe on the other foot to illustrate how pathetic 99% of the posts on this thread are. I wasn't serious.
Yip Chun is my sigung also. But I have also trained in a few mainland styles of WC.

The HK and Mainland styles of WC are different. Their applications and concepts are not all the same as each other and your "twitch energies" are not related to the applications that the rings train. If you want to twitch your arms out when your opponent is right in front of you, be my guest but that is NOT really one of the applications that the rings are for.

I explained the types of applications. (e.g. left side forward vs right side, left arm v. left, right v right. 2 arms opening type moves.) They are not done in HK WC because it's against the philosophies of HK WC. Hence I knew you would belittle them and the mainland styles of WC. It's your nature. The more I explain the more you will do so. You can't help it.

tjwingchun

06-08-2006, 04:21 AM

LOL. That's the pot calling the kettle black.

I admit I can get as petty as the next guy, but generally speaking my tongue is firmly in my cheek!

You belittled with your first post. I simply put the shoe on the other foot to illustrate how pathetic 99% of the posts on this thread are. I wasn't serious.
Yip Chun is my sigung also. But I have also trained in a few mainland styles of WC.

Though I deny the belittling charge, "to consider or speak of as less valuable or important than it really is", I made comments relating to the rings and incompetant instructors, that "I think they are cr&p!" and have not heard any argument to give them any more value and incompetant instructors from whatever lineage will always have my disdain. Your comments throughout the thread have generally been personal attacks without substance. Is it pathetic to make people think while still trying to keep a some humour going, well then I am that black pot!

If you still have contact with Sigung ask him what he thinks of Trevor Jefferson's chi sau?

The HK and Mainland styles of WC are different. Their applications and concepts are not all the same as each other and your "twitch energies" are not related to the applications that the rings train. If you want to twitch your arms out when your opponent is right in front of you, be my guest but that is NOT really one of the applications that the rings are for.

Don't deny the differences, I have vcd's of the Foshan system and though I can see the similarities, I consider its Wing Chun to be a 'martial art', where I think of the way I teach Wing Chun as a 'martial science' and as such I have strict a rule to follow which I expounded earlier.

I have to be able to explain, define and justify everything that I teach with sound, straightforward, commonsense, related to the realistic application of personal body mechanics to violent confrontations. If not then I am putting my students at risk if they are faced with a life threatening situation, and the quicker I can give them the knowledge to be able to defend themselves the better, it has taken me 32 years to get to my level of understanding myself, I have been down a lot of blind alleys that my students don't have to waste time and effort going down.

These 'twitch energies' you 'belittle' through not knowing what I am referring to, are co-ordinated energies that are linked to the floor and are generated in the muscle groups operating through the heel, knee, hip, stomach/back, shoulder, elbow and wrist, so that when in place and aligned when I 'twitch' the whole of my body is working together generating energy into my opponent within a time frame that does not allow them to avoid the strike.

I explained the types of applications. (e.g. left side forward vs right side, left arm v. left, right v right. 2 arms opening type moves.) They are not done in HK WC because it's against the philosophies of HK WC. Hence I knew you would belittle them and the mainland styles of WC. It's your nature. The more I explain the more you will do so. You can't help it.
I must belittle myself here as I don't understand what you are saying
(e.g. left side forward vs right side, left arm v. left, right v right. 2 arms opening type moves.) what does this mean in English, what do they not do in HK WC understand using their arms independantly? I do, but then again I disagree with quite a few things that come out of Hong Kong, no apologies for having my own mind.

I don't belittle other Martial Arts only false claims, as I have already stated ARTS cannot be judged as the are subjective, when we talk about SCIENCE as it is objective it has to stand up to greater criticism and rely on definitive answers and explanations rather than well they have been doing it for centuries in mainland China, WHEN YOU EXPLAIN SOMETHING THEN WE CAN DISCUSS IT!

And you are right about one thing that I cannot help and that is when I am asked a question I give my opinion, you say I cannot help it, its my nature, yes it is in my nature not to suffer fools gladly.

Edmund

06-08-2006, 05:16 AM

Your comments throughout the thread have generally been personal attacks without substance.

As I said before they weren't serious. Only mimicking the posts of others from the opposite perspective (if you read them properly).

AND I posted some actual info in them somewhere as well.

If you still have contact with Sigung ask him what he thinks of Trevor Jefferson's chi sau?

Not sure who that is but I guess whenever I'm back in HK I can ask.

These 'twitch energies' you 'belittle' through not knowing what I am referring to, are co-ordinated energies that are linked to the floor and are generated in the muscle groups operating through the heel, knee, hip, stomach/back, shoulder, elbow and wrist, so that when in place and aligned when I 'twitch' the whole of my body is working together generating energy into my opponent within a time frame that does not allow them to avoid the strike.

Nothing belittling from me concerning the twitch energies. I think it's a fine idea. I merely stated that it's not what the rings are generally used to train.

what does this mean in English, what do they not do in HK WC understand using their arms independantly?

No. I mean the left side of your body close to right side of opponent, left hand holding their left hand, right hand holding their right hand or any other variation with that side-on angle. You can be holding or not.

The point is your hands are going in opposite directions. It's more applicable when you are in that side by side position. You pull one way and push the other for instance.

GungFuHillbilly

06-08-2006, 07:20 AM

JLQ,

I have listened to the thread go round and round (;) no pun intended) and it seems to be stagnant.

People have addressed the ring and yet you seem to assume that many here do not understand its use because we haven’t been indoctrinated properly into its deeper training methodology.

Well body mechanics are the same for most people (unless you have some mutant third arm that you use in your training:D ) and a lot of people here have the tacit knowledge necessary to understand martial development. (This is not to say that development and attribute training is always the same and can’t vary considerably.)

However, I have still yet to hear you answer the question as to why ‘splitting’ energy is so important and why the training with the ring is a superior way to develop this.

Here are some major problems with the ring and why I see no (important) skill development that translates to martial application with the ring. And since you accuse other people of not reading your posts, please follow this next bit very carefully…

The ring needs to be suspended by your own force. This action, no matter how slight, is going to create the energy of chasing hands.

This is because the ring (unlike a dummy or a live partner/opponent) DOES NOT HAVE A CENTER MASS.

The ring is a suspended bridge – not connected to anything but your own mass.

In WC the bridge is important because it is a bridge TO something.

I want to affect someone’s center of gravity – whether that is through strikes, locks, or throws.

AmunuJRY (Justin) has already pointed this out and yet you still accuse him of not have relevant experience with the ring.

Also, in a previous post you stated

A statement such as "hip connected to the elbow" is a mental image in the best of scenarios, how is this connection made? Which muscles are art work, what kind of force generation are we talking about, linear or angular momentum, etc., stuff like this...

Anyone who has experience with good pole work will know what it means to have the upper and lower body ‘connected.’ Also, IF you have this experience you will know that it is much more than just muscles at work. Just some of the following (to name but a few):

*CNS coordination between core muscle groups of the hips, low back, and abdominals
*The use of inertia and timing to overcome the weight of pole and connect it to your structure
*Maximizing the transfer of force to the end of the pole without upsetting your COG

Beyond this it would take a text book to explain all of what is going on with the pole (or the dummy).

However in closing I might remind you that the cult of sports science has yet to develop a better form of yoga, taiji, gung fu, jujitsu, or kali/escrima/arnis.

All of these disciplines were created and developed by cultures without the benefit of western anatomical and physiological analysis. So the argument of the ‘profound insights of sports sciences’ and its need in understanding martial motion and development is greatly exaggerated and yet to be shown.

-GFH
(Stephen in Arkansas)

k gledhill

06-08-2006, 07:51 AM

LMFAO ...those pictures ~! I rest my case :D

JLQ

06-08-2006, 09:16 AM

GFH,
thank you very much for your comment :)

I have listened to the thread go round and round ( no pun intended) and it seems to be stagnant.

- indeed so...

People have addressed the ring and yet you seem to assume that many here do not understand its use because we haven’t been indoctrinated properly into its deeper training methodology.

- I don't think a word like indoctrination is a fitting one to use, unless you wish to imply something. In that case why not do it directly? It would be much easier. In any case it has nothing to do with indoctrination, or anything deep - the rattan ring is a very SIMPLE traning tool that beginners and advanced studens alike use as a part of their. Training, it is a supplementary thing, not something "deep" or "special" - I never claimed such things...

Well body mechanics are the same for most people (unless you have some mutant third arm that you use in your training ) and a lot of people here have the tacit knowledge necessary to understand martial development. (This is not to say that development and attribute training is always the same and can’t vary considerably.)

- Exactly, and yes many people may have that knowledge - unfortunately, it seems that the major players in this discussion don't... ;)

However, I have still yet to hear you answer the question as to why ‘splitting’ energy is so important and why the training with the ring is a superior way to develop this.

- "splitting" is just one aspect amongst others, I ventured to explain something, but I never received the requested information. Why should I bother explaining my position in detail, when all of the counter-arguments are of equal substance? And anyways, certain people have already bluntly stated that however the arguments I might put forth, they would not change their view... Do you think such an attitude warrants any efforts of explanation of my part? Also, consider that I alreade stated that I have no desire to pursuade anybody of anything, people are free to believe what they like - the thing I was commenting on initially was merely that one shouldn't slight things one doesn't know of. With regards to your argument above, to use your own reasoning, a MMA fighter who has good knowledge of application skills, strength training and conditioning telling you that your wing chun sucks because you spend an awful lot of time training in useless exercises (from his perspective). Would you really feel that such a person's condescending talk about you style is relevant. He has the knowledge about how the body works and experience, but does that qualify him to really have a relevant opinion from your perspective?

Here are some major problems with the ring and why I see no (important) skill development that translates to martial application with the ring. And since you accuse other people of not reading your posts, please follow this next bit very carefully…

- sure :)

The ring needs to be suspended by your own force. This action, no matter how slight, is going to create the energy of chasing hands.

- do you start chasing hands just because somebody applies pressure on your bridges? Or do you chase hands in a movement such as the bong wu + turn from chum kiu form. If your answer is no, then this applies to the rattan ring as well as it simple "sits" on your arms (because of gravitiy, as it hardly more than a pencil or two, there is no danger of excessive upwards energy). Now, that very statement indicates that you really don't have an idea about what is going on... I am very sorry that you have a hard time excepting this.

This is because the ring (unlike a dummy or a live partner/opponent) DOES NOT HAVE A CENTER MASS.
The ring is a suspended bridge – not connected to anything but your own mass.

- so is the pole...

In WC the bridge is important because it is a bridge TO something.

- and what are you training in the Chum Kiu form?

I want to affect someone’s center of gravity – whether that is through strikes, locks, or throws.

- yes, of course but again, the rattan ring is not for that so why bring it up all the time. I tell you again, your assumption about it is wrong, and as long as you fail to realize this, you can never understand it.

AmunuJRY (Justin) has already pointed this out and yet you still accuse him of not have relevant experience with the ring.

- I am not accusing, it is a fact. He quantified his training experience himself, which amounts to... well, nothing really.

Anyone who has experience with good pole work will know what it means to have the upper and lower body ‘connected.’ Also, IF you have this experience you will know that it is much more than just muscles at work. Just some of the following

- Now, I asked for for a description of what is going on inside the body, your throwing out the term "connection" is conveniently vague...

*CNS coordination between core muscle groups of the hips, low back, and abdominals

- what muscle chains/synergies are at work here, how do they work, what is their purpose in this?

*The use of inertia and timing to overcome the weight of pole and connect it to your structure

- "connecting" it to structure, what does that really entail, how do you do this. Is the way you move the pole the same as in punching for example?

*Maximizing the transfer of force to the end of the pole without upsetting your COG

- Is your COG the same when lifting a light object or heavy object, is it affect by movements of the extremeties. If yes, how so?

Beyond this it would take a text book to explain all of what is going on with the pole (or the dummy).

- no need... :)

However in closing I might remind you that the cult of sports science has yet to develop a better form of yoga, taiji, gung fu, jujitsu, or kali/escrima/arnis.

- ah... so you were already biased the instance the word sport science came up. Sport science is not neccessarily about improving things (the ancestors did a great job finding out what is good or not), but also about explaining things, facilitating the identification and hence rectification of mistakes.

All of these disciplines were created and developed by cultures without the benefit of western anatomical and physiological analysis. So the argument of the ‘profound insights of sports sciences’ and its need in understanding martial motion and development is greatly exaggerated and yet to be shown.

- as I said, not neccessarily for improvement but understanding. Sports science has a proven track record so to speak when it comes to enhancing the performance of athletes in various fields, so to dismiss it like you do, is equivalent to what initially sparked this whole debate... ;) (maybe you don't you think wing chun is a physical discipline?)

JLQ

@ K Gledhill
Why doesn't that response surprise me... ;)

GungFuHillbilly

06-08-2006, 11:01 AM

JLQ,

I don't think a word like indoctrination is a fitting one to use, unless you wish to imply something.

Yeah, I wish to imply teaching…:o

From Merriam-Webster: Main Entry: in•doc•tri•nate
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: probably from Middle English endoctrinen, from Middle French endoctriner, from Old French, from en- + doctrine doctrine
1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : to TEACH

As you have admitted that English is not your first language, please read a dictionary before correcting me on vocabulary or usage.

If the usuage of the ring is so “SIMPLE” then why do you assume that none of us know what we are talking about?

"splitting" is just one aspect amongst others, I ventured to explain something, but I never received the requested information. Why should I bother explaining my position in detail, when all of the counter-arguments are of equal substance?

Ditto. Why should I venture to go into a detailed analysis of the kinesthetics of pole motions when you have demonstrated not one iota of understanding of its development?

Take a class.

do you start chasing hands just because somebody applies pressure on your bridges? Or do you chase hands in a movement such as the bong wu + turn from chum kiu form.

No you chase hands when another object is present and in contact and yet the action is localized at the bridge, instead of being transferred to the other person’s/object center.

And your statement tells me that you can just as well do the motion in the air without a RING and develop the same energy? Please be consistent. Either it is an important training tool that develops something motion by itself does not or you are contradicting yourself.

I am sorry you need a RING to develop an energy that you could just as well develop by yourself.:rolleyes:

”The ring is a suspended bridge – not connected to anything but your own mass.” - so is the pole...

Yes, but you aren’t using the ring to attack someone…or are you? :confused:

and what are you training in the Chum Kiu form?

How to move and retain your center of gravity for one - and few hundred other things. So are you saying that the ring is a continuation of the development of chum kiu?

yes, of course but again, the rattan ring is not for that so why bring it up all the time.

Because keeping our center and affecting someone else’s center is what we train to do. If you are not training this, then you aren’t training wing chun. And if that’s the case then why bring up the ring at all?

Now, I asked for for a description of what is going on inside the body, your throwing out the term "connection" is conveniently vague...

And I find your dodging of the questions of development and application conveniently habitual. If you don’t know what is described by saying ‘connect’ your lower and upper body…then please go practice and come back when you have something to impart.

what muscle chains/synergies are at work here, how do they work, what is their purpose in this?

Again, why should I expend the time and energy to explain something to you when you have not demonstrated to me that you know anything of wing chun mechanics?

It would be like explaining jazz improvisation to a 3 year old. :cool:

"connecting" it to structure, what does that really entail, how do you do this. Is the way you move the pole the same as in punching for example?

No. A higher degree of structure adjustment and more sophisticated timing are required for good pole work. Not as much for the punch. In regards to your first comment…take a class.

Is your COG the same when lifting a light object or heavy object, is it affect by movements of the extremeties. If yes, how so?

You can learn this from any physics text book. However, more than likely it won’t help your wing chun and someone with no knowledge of physics, anatomy, kinesiology, etc. will still be able to beat your @ss.

ah... so you were already biased the instance the word sport science came up. Sport science is not neccessarily about improving things (the ancestors did a great job finding out what is good or not), but also about explaining things, facilitating the identification and hence rectification of mistakes.

Not biased. I was a personal trainer for 9 years and find many aspects of the science of training helpful. However, like all things it has its limits and its place.

as I said, not neccessarily for improvement but understanding. Sports science has a proven track record so to speak when it comes to enhancing the performance of athletes in various fields, so to dismiss it like you do, is equivalent to what initially sparked this whole debate... (maybe you don't you think wing chun is a physical discipline?)

Who said I dismissed it? I merely stated that the kind of analysis we find in sports science has yet to prove necessary to the development and application of martial motion. To quote you, “please don't be too creative when interpreting my words…”

Perhaps it is you who need it ‘explained’ to you so you may understand. If so that’s okay, but most of us here know how to develop body unity and motion without an in depth analysis.

Theory has it’s place. However, I have known hundreds of great jazz musicians who could play but couldn’t analyze their music. But they could play!;)

-GFH

k gledhill

06-08-2006, 11:04 AM

JLQ ~ one day a cricket [ someone who knows more than you] may fall into your well and explain to you that all you see above you in that small 'ring' of sky is just a small window to the view available if you just swallow your ego [not the cricket] and let go of what you have filled your cup with....take the crickets hand and start climbing.... the views pretty nice . :D

JLQ

06-08-2006, 01:38 PM

GFH,

my, my...

I really did offend you, since you find it neccessary with such mature display of decorum and non ad hominem attacks. My sincerest apologies, it was by no means intended.

Again bold statements, indeed considering you have no idea about me and my background both educational and in terms of training experience...

But I guess it makes you feel good... :D

Let me point out something to you that you apparently fail to grasp, the reason I am asking questions is to see how much knowledge you have and to learn how you see things with the purpose of using it as a reference for discussion, not because I need you to teach me anything about it...

Perhaps you got too emotional to see this point?

You wrote:

Theory has it’s place. However, I have known hundreds of great jazz musicians who could play but couldn’t analyze their music. But they could play!

Very true, I never said something to the contrary... As for the rattan ring, I stated on multiple occasions that it is merely a supplementary training tool - it is not a crucial determinant of your wing chun skill, but has the potential to enhance it. It really is as simple as that, you may not agree, which is fine (I also said that on many occasions). It seems that the real issue is that people feel offended because I had the audacity to point out that I feel it is rather ignorant to dismiss something when one doesn't really know about it. Does it hurt your Ego when your are told you may not understand something? Apparently, so...

Anyways, as long as you have to go to that level displayed in your latest post, there isn't really any purpose in taking this any further now, is there?

Peace :D

JLQ

@ K Gledhill
What a surpise!!! - you DO in fact have the capacity of expressing yourself in a more philosophical manner... Not all is lost, I see... ;D

GungFuHillbilly

06-08-2006, 03:11 PM

JLQ,

Don’t go away so soon.:( Unless you are threatened by discourse and/or are not able to state your position.

You didn’t “offend” me in the slightest; so there really is no need to apologize.:)

considering you have no idea about me and my background both educational and in terms of training experience...

I am merely using your standard - that is analyzing your arguments and judging your knowledge by what you are posting. You have not shared who you studied with or what your real name is.

Let me point out something to you that you apparently fail to grasp, the reason I am asking questions is to see how much knowledge you have and to learn how you see things with the purpose of using it as a reference for discussion, not because I need you to teach me anything about it...

And you expect to learn all of that from a single thread? Why is it that you assume you can learn how I see things or how much knowledge I have. That is quite presumptuous on your part.

Perhaps you got too emotional to see this point?

On the contrary, I wasn’t at all emotional. Merely discussing the issue. Perhaps, you are too judgmental to see other people’s points of view and to enter into authentic debate. Why don’t you stick to the topic?

As for the rattan ring, I stated on multiple occasions that it is merely a supplementary training tool - it is not a crucial determinant of your wing chun skill, but has the potential to enhance it.

To what skill are you referring? How does it enhance it?

It seems that the real issue is that people feel offended because I had the audacity to point out that I feel it is rather ignorant to dismiss something when one doesn't really know about it.

“Know” about it. What do you mean by this? How do you “know” something? It would be nice if you would not use such vague terms and tell us by which epistemology your concept of knowledge comes from and what methodology you are using to attain said knowledge.

Does it hurt your Ego when your are told you may not understand something?

Not in the slightest. Does it hurt yours when someone tells you to practice and go to class? Apparently so…

Anyways, as long as you have to go to that level displayed in your latest post, there isn't really any purpose in taking this any further now, is there?

Oh, you mean the level of addressing the issue? Of course if you don’t want to address the issue then I suppose there is nothing more to say.

Regards,
GFH

JLQ

06-08-2006, 03:48 PM

GFH,

Don’t go away so soon. Unless you are threatened by discourse and/or are not able to state your position.

- You are a stubborn one... You should read again what I have written on many occasions. If you fail to see my intention, I guess it is because you have no desire to...

You didn’t “offend” me in the slightest; so there really is no need to apologize.

- Fair enough, but in that case I fail to understand the tone of your last post and this one, for that matter...

I am merely using your standard - that is analyzing your arguments and judging your knowledge by what you are posting. You have not shared who you studied with or what your real name is.

- if you really want to know, just ask.. PM would be a good start. Anyways, I don't think I have slightest anyones experience or intelligence EXCEPT as pertains to the use of the rattan ring, have I now? Let me try ONCE AGAIN, I do not care whether you believe one way or the other, anything is really fine. I have no desire to convince you otherwise - arguments have already been stated, primarily by others than me. You don't appreciate those, fine nothing more to be said!!! I just don't appreciate how certain people go about presenting their views, that's really all there is to it...

And you expect to learn all of that from a single thread? Why is it that you assume you can learn how I see things or how much knowledge I have. That is quite presumptuous on your part.

- again, you just don't seem to want to understand my words in the way they are intended, eh. I don't think it is too diffucult to understand what I was trying to say...

On the contrary, I wasn’t at all emotional. Merely discussing the issue. Perhaps, you are too judgmental to see other people’s points of view and to enter into authentic debate. Why don’t you stick to the topic?

- ad hominem attacks is merely discussing the issue? Which issue would that be? If you are not emotional, why these rather crude attempts at "attacking me"? :) I have explained my position many times - maybe you have a different understanding of what the actual topic is than I do?

To what skill are you referring? How does it enhance it?

- based on your recent posts, would you really appreciate it? Anyways, it has already been stated many times - and again, I have no desire to change your opinion...

“Know” about it. What do you mean by this? How do you “know” something? It would be nice if you would not use such vague terms and tell us by which epistemology your concept of knowledge comes from and what methodology you are using to attain said knowledge.

- again, is it really so difficult to understand what I mean? I think the problem is somewhere else...

Not in the slightest. Does it hurt yours when someone tells you to practice and go to class? Apparently so…

- now that is really an impressive counter LOL

Oh, you mean the level of addressing the issue? Of course if you don’t want to address the issue then I suppose there is nothing more to say.

- you know what I mean, why the games? :D

Regards to you as well (no sarcasm, just to make sure :D)
JLQ

GungFuHillbilly

06-08-2006, 07:26 PM

JLQ,

You are a stubborn one... You should read again what I have written on many occasions. If you fail to see my intention, I guess it is because you have no desire to...
Your first post on this thread was criticizing someone for stating their opinion. You used such words as “arrogant”, “condescending”, and “ignorant.” You also suggested that someone use “more reservation” when sharing their opinion and those who do not subscribe to the use of the ring had a “lack of vision.”

I’m not one to suffer hypocrites well.

Fair enough, but in that case I fail to understand the tone of your last post and this one, for that matter...
Merely giving you a taste of your own medicine. And apparently you feel that I am emotional and offended. Perhaps this is how people perceive you. :rolleyes:

By this I mean, that it appears that you have some emotional investment in the use of the rattan ring. For me, if you could give me valid arguments as to why it is important or more specifically in your own words:

what if you are really missing out on a great tool that can enhance your wing chun skills, just because you are too arrogant and ignorant to try to understand it's merits...
Perhaps there are those of us on this board, like myself, that spent a good deal of time considering the benefits of training with the ring and decided that it was not a good tool for development. AND HAD VERY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR MAKING THIS DECISION.

I am not going to adopt a training tool or methodology because the dogma of tradition dictates it.

again, you just don't seem to want to understand my words in the way they are intended, eh. I don't think it is too diffucult to understand what I was trying to say...
And I honestly believe that you should understand when someone says “connecting the hip and the elbow” or “unifying the lower and upper body.” If you have been studying wing chun (or any martial art for that matter) in depth then you should know what they mean without asking for a detailed kinesthetic analysis of this connection.

- ad hominem attacks is merely discussing the issue? Which issue would that be? If you are not emotional, why these rather crude attempts at "attacking me"? I have explained my position many times - maybe you have a different understanding of what the actual topic is than I do?

You may want to re-read where you stated that people that didn’t agree that the ring was a valid tool had a “lack of vision.” Your words…not mine. So who is it that is interested in attacking people?

you know what I mean, why the games?

To specifically point out to you that you yourself are engaged in the EXACT behavior you are accusing others of. :)

So please next time you suggest someone “reserve” their comments regarding “things one obviously doesn’t have any idea about” you may want to ask a few more questions before passing judgment.

Sincerely,
Stephen (a.k.a. GFH)

AmanuJRY

06-11-2006, 05:27 PM

...there isn't really any purpose in taking this any further now, is there?

Not with you.

JLQ, it is my disheartening observation that you are exactly what WC doesn't need.:mad:

JLQ

06-12-2006, 02:26 AM

GFH,,

sorry for responding this late - but I was tied up working the whole weekend...

You wrote:

Your first post on this thread was criticizing someone for stating their opinion. You used such words as “arrogant”, “condescending”, and “ignorant.” You also suggested that someone use “more reservation” when sharing their opinion and those who do not subscribe to the use of the ring had a “lack of vision.”

I’m not one to suffer hypocrites well.

- that is fair enough, except you STILL seem to miss the point I was making in my intial post (and have explained SEVERAL times during the numerous follow-up posts): I did NOT criticize anybody for stating an opinion - it was the HOW, and my reference to "lack of vision" didn't refer at all to the fact that people wouldn't accept the rattan ring as a great tool - the words referred merely to the fact that people state a strong opinion on things without really knowing about the subject matter (for you, KNOWING implies having learned it's purpose and methods from a source who actually uses this, not some autodicact person who came up with his own ideas - but I wrote this before already).
I fail to see how I can be a hipocrite, considering that I am not the one making bold statements about the merits of this or that training method. I may not agree with certain things, based on my experience however vast or not that may be, however I would listen what people had to say who actually use this tool - but apparently, you guys aren't interested in this... Rather you insist on your views to be the correct ones. The least one could do is ask, provided one is genuinely interested in learning more... Your comment will be something along the line of "well, you didn't provide an argument that would convince me otherwise", but - once again - I didn't enter this discussion with the purpose of changing your mind (that was a hopeless endavour from the outset) but would have been willing to provide my point of view, if you had bothered to answer the questions I posed, with the purpose of establishing a point of reference - but you didn't... The point was completely lost on you, instead you started your petty ad hominem "attack" strategy. In spite of your claims, it does indeed apear your ego was offendend - otherwise the kind of postings you have made make no sense, to me at least.
Once again I suspect either that you just don't want to get my meaning or that you don't read my words thoroughly...

Merely giving you a taste of your own medicine. And apparently you feel that I am emotional and offended. Perhaps this is how people perceive you.

- a taste of my own medicine? As far as I see it, I am not the one "going for the man", of course if you feel that pointing out that you may not know enough to really have a good opinion on the merits of something is a personal attack, then I am truly sorry. In my book, it is not. If the situation had been reversed, you would find me curious to know exactly why you think so - and I wouldn't be offended by somebody asking some questions first - but apparently that is not how you handle such things... Emotional and offended? What exactly would I be offended about? That you don't think the rattan ring is a necessary or particularly training tool? If that is the case, ONCE AGAIN I suggest you read my posts more thoroughly - I have gone to great lengths to explain my position on this... To make it simple for you, though: The rattan ring is just ONE of many training tools/methods used in wing chun. Like any SUPPLEMENTARY training instrument, your wing chun skill doesn't ultimately depend on whether you use it or not... However, it does enhance certain attributes and skills that can help your wing chun. If you agree or not is of no importance to me. Did that clear things up for you as to my emotional attachment to it? :)

By this I mean, that it appears that you have some emotional investment in the use of the rattan ring. For me, if you could give me valid arguments as to why it is important or more specifically in your own words:

- see above

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLQ
what if you are really missing out on a great tool that can enhance your wing chun skills, just because you are too arrogant and ignorant to try to understand it's merits...

Perhaps there are those of us on this board, like myself, that spent a good deal of time considering the benefits of training with the ring and decided that it was not a good tool for development. AND HAD VERY SPECIFIC REASONS FOR MAKING THIS DECISION.

- as I said before, I don't have any problem whatsoever with this. Let me try to formulate my meaning in another way, that is more palateable to your sensibilities: I am suggesting that your conclusions MIGHT be different, if the premise were different, ie. if you have learned it from a source which has this training method in it's curriculum. Maybe they wouldn't, but at least you would be able to make a more fair assessment as to the reasons for it. Just because I think it is a great training tool, doesn't mean that you have to agree with me - so once again, it was never about the actual opion...

I am not going to adopt a training tool or methodology because the dogma of tradition dictates it.

- if you are implying that this is the reason for my thinking that the rattan ring does indeed have merits for development of wing chun skills, you are once again interpreting too much stuff in my words, stuff that isn't there. Please don't assume too much :)

And I honestly believe that you should understand when someone says “connecting the hip and the elbow” or “unifying the lower and upper body.” If you have been studying wing chun (or any martial art for that matter) in depth then you should know what they mean without asking for a detailed kinesthetic analysis of this connection.

- did you notice that I already pointed out in my previous post my reasons for those questions? Just in case you didn't, and you don't have the inclination or desire to do that, you can also just see above ;)

You may want to re-read where you stated that people that didn’t agree that the ring was a valid tool had a “lack of vision.” Your words…not mine. So who is it that is interested in attacking people?

- see above

To specifically point out to you that you yourself are engaged in the EXACT behavior you are accusing others of.

- once again, you assume to much... I am not being personal with your or anybody else for that matter.

So please next time you suggest someone “reserve” their comments regarding “things one obviously doesn’t have any idea about” you may want to ask a few more questions before passing judgment.

- So it is indeed the words that seem to be the problem... Anyways, with your experience as a personal trainer if somebody told you that he thinks a biceps curl is a bad exercise to develop the biceps because his forearm tends up and impinges in a negative way on his performance (his experience, not that it actually does, heck it may even be better because of irradiation ;)), how much credence would you give to the opinion of such a person? Do you really need to ask any questions to such a person? Are you being arrogant and presumptious when pointing out to him that his opinion may be ...not so well founded? Just an example... so don't read too much into it.

Regards,
JLQ

JLQ

06-12-2006, 02:31 AM

AmanuJRY,

you wrote:

Not with you.

JLQ, it is my disheartening observation that you are exactly what WC doesn't need.

- LOL!!! thank you very much for letting me hear your "expert" opinion on this :D

AmanuJRY

06-12-2006, 07:23 AM

- LOL!!! thank you very much for letting me hear your "expert" opinion on this :D

Anytime...and thanks for your 'expert' opinion on the rings.;)

JLQ

06-12-2006, 08:13 AM

AmanuJRY,

LOL

...OK...

:D

regards,

JLQ

Gert

06-16-2006, 08:40 AM

I don't read many opinions here of people pro the rings. How about this article:

http://www.discountmas.com/attachmate.html

The only one move possible to do without making the bag turn in circles is shown in the picture. Again a move where the power of both hands must go to outside directions. As it is probable the case with the rings also. Some wrote I have no experience with the rings and that’s true. I have only learned by observation. In November I saw a demonstration with the rings in China and I was certainly not impressed . . .

Cheers,

GJ.

JLQ

06-16-2006, 01:03 PM

Hi Gert,

you are right, not too many advocating the use of the rattan ring in this discussion...

But then again, the ones that did decided trying to discuss the merits of the ring as a training tool very quickly realized the folly in trying to pursue this discussion...

Also, you might wish to consider that Wing Chun from mainland China is rather rare in the Western world, especially when compared to the availability of HK wing chun.

Just alternatives to the reason you are implying... ;D

The training apparatus to which you provided a link is designed to be used as a substitute for a dummy, I would think, however the designers apparently didn't consider that a dummy needs to be stable to resist the impact it is subjected to when practiced on. I agree with your analysis of the problems with this training tool - it would spin, yes. I also understand your reasoning about how the power has to go in separate directions to keep the thing from moving. Actually, I think the guy is just posing, so there isn't really any energy going in any directions and he doesn't need to hold the thing in place :)

As I said, the real problem with the training tool is that it is supposed to double for the wooden dummy, but it doesn't have the essential features as the jong - immovability, stability. The rattan ring serves a completely different purpose, it doesn't need that kind of stability to be used - so you can't really draw any parallels here, I am afraid.

Generally you don't have to press the ring in any directions, it will stay where it is by itself - does the dummy have to do anything, push in any directions, to hold a ring, put around it's arms? Of course the dummy is not moving, so you would argue that the ring would fall of when moving the hands from position to position, but it doesn't it is supported by gravity, and the position/movement of the limbs. The trajectory of the movement (the energy) is the same whether you do a movement with or without the ring. And before you will argue that force is indeed going in the wrong direction because you have to defeat gravity, please note that the rattan ring weighs ...well... almost nothing. If you front such an argument, you might as well say that any movement where you lift your arms from a side hanging position would make your energy go in the wrong direction. ;)

Speaking about the dummy, where is the energy going when you perform it? I am sure you would say "to the center" or something to that effect, but how about in such situations as the bong sau on the "diagonal" arm after the neck pulling hand or high and low gang sau? Or the pak saus? Or kwun sau? What I am really after is not necessarily an answer or explanations to all of these questions, I am just curious as to whether or not your method employs movements where energy goes in different directions...

You were not impressed with what you saw - I say that is fair enough. We all have our own, subjective standards and opinions on what is impressive or not. How does the saying go? ...one man's gold is another man's... something :D
I would never question you on that account - although, I have a difficult time understanding how one could be "impressed" (or not) with a training tool. Is a long pole impressive? Or a wall bag? I believe we are talking about how the rattan ring is used, and you state now that your experience is based on visual impressions - but you, as a ving tsun exponent, should know that there are many things that you can't see when watching from the outside, especially "energy" or "intent", wouldn't you agree? :)

Anyways, to make something clear - just in case the point got lost somewhere along the line - the rattan ring is just a complementary/supplementary training method, best used when at home when you have no training partners or perhaps you are the odd man out in class - if you have people to do partnerwork with, I think this is the preferable thing to do.

Cheers to you as well :D
JLQ

Meklorien

06-16-2006, 11:02 PM

I use the 26" occassionally around the biceps to keep the elbows in and train the shoulders during solo chi sao. Haven't used it beyond that. I definitely wouldn't use it over the forearms.

Turiyan

06-18-2006, 02:02 AM

I've never actually used them but plan to start so that I have something to practice with during lunch. Anyone use them - how do you find they help you progress?

I do not believe they were originally for kung fu. They are just as effective if not more with yoga. Esp. the virabhadrasana set which is the quitessential "kung fu" set of yoga. Lots of hidden meaning there and not "combat application" sillyness. They sell these as pilates rings but ironically much more expensive. There are steel ones which are totally insane because they are smooth chrome and weigh 9 pounds. I'd definitly coat those with plastic and or use them with sticks gripped in the hands. They are called body circles by the pilates folks and show the traditional training with them. You need two and twirl them in the arms. It develops the same muscles for punching and does a great job of developing both hardness while retaining your speed. At advanced levels the arms hardly move. But you can add more arm if you want but you'd need heavyer rings. They do toughen the forearms. Not as much as the steel ones would (the big loop not the hung gar rings). The only limit is your imagination. Just more excuses from "tradtionalists" who by nature cant come up with any creative ideas and are eaither bored to tears doing the same thing over and over or too dumb to stay perpetually mystifyed by some rather antiquated weapons and conditioning drills. There are also stretches you can do with them. But the real importance is energy. Its not about fighting or even calistenics. Its energy. Real shaolin training combines exercises with qi. As cliche as that sounds no one seems to get it. You learn more from a line drawing of a guy in a old book than a lifetime with a teacher. There's more there than meets the eye. The energy is hidden in the structure of the stance. Not in movement. What kind of bad habit are you going to learn from twirling them on the arms? Is that a fighting stance? Of course not. Its silly. Even water boxing has training for taiji balls and these rings. They are so amazing that its no wonder people keep them a secret. The best things are the simplest. They are for developing mainly 'dividing water skills' but there is also some crossover to other skills. Whip skills, iron forearm, iron shirt, ect. Probably one of kung fu's best kept secrets.