Bong Sau's on the dummy

[Paul T England]

Hi All,

Teaching my students the other day and we started discussing the Dummy form and the large number of Bong Sau's....

The dummy version I teach (close to Ip Chun version) has losts of bongs and I used to hear that Bong Sau was an emergency technique and should rarely be seem!

For me I take the majority of the Bongs in the dummy as contacts that could be replaced with many other shapes like tan, pak or jam.

Any opiniions?

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[namron]

a lot of working from inside to outside i suspect

:)

[Jeff Bussey]

Hi Paul,


Hi All,

Teaching my students the other day and we started discussing the Dummy form and the large number of Bong Sau's....

The dummy version I teach (close to Ip Chun version) has losts of bongs and I used to hear that Bong Sau was an emergency technique and should rarely be seem!

For me I take the majority of the Bongs in the dummy as contacts that could be replaced with many other shapes like tan, pak or jam.

Any opiniions?

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

I personally think bong works best in an emergency sit. and at really close quarters.
I have a hard time using it the way you usually see it depicted with your hands far away from the body. I would rather use something else if my hands are that far away.

Again, it's just my opinion, but it is effective when your close to someone, and they try to grab you when your hands down at your side.

J

[YungChun]

Close off facing, to fold them over.. Change lines, going with his force, conversion to elbow.. Got to have energy present, power applied/received to make it work. I also have used it when the attack was unexpected, it's faster to get the elbow up, than the hand when the arm is down. Otherwise the bong is not my preferred tool for intercepting..

[Alan Orr]

Someone please tell me, why people teach wing chun when they do not understand the system?

Regards

Alan

[YungChun]

Someone please tell me, why people teach wing chun when they do not understand the system?

Regards

Alan

By all means... Teach us bong...

I'm sure there is more than one valid use.. Folks need to use it as it works or not for them in application..

I don't always agree with other folk's chi sao and use of tools therein. To each his own..

[YungChun]

bongs are all the same on dummy and the system ....just trained on the low arm for jing [displacement force] slap !! to remove laterally any arm that has xed 'spatialy' your line to the target..in other words it doesnt need contact [wrong chisao thinking] to ballisticly remove an arm as we attack..
You mean it doesn't need pre-contact I assume?

I see bong mainly as a way to let force go and then help it leave the line, (elbow as third limb) close their facing, jam them, take the flank more often but not always and help convert back to offense--retaking the line--filing space.

I also see it as part of a WCK flinch response..

And forward energy is what powers bong..

And of course there are three different bongs in the system, which have different apps.

[LoneTiger108]

Someone please tell me, why people teach wing chun when they do not understand the system?

Regards

Alan

Maybe it's been this way for so long that people just generally do not notice anymore Alan. How do you judge peoples understanding?

IMO 'Bong' was referred to as a 'search' or 'seeking' arm, theoretically. And this is in relation to elbow positioning more than hand/palm position but both are equally important. With reference to the 'Dummy' training, it may help if its clear what we're talking of here, 108/116 or set drills or something else?

"I used to hear that Bong Sau was an emergency technique and should rarely be seem!" (seen?)

I think what Paul is referring to here is an old saying the 'Bong Sau never stays still', which implies that the whole body moves during Bong Sau, which also relates to another comment on 'inside to outside' drills.

Strange post though by you Alan, all the same. Directed at anyone in particular?

[Alan Orr]

Maybe it's been this way for so long that people just generally do not notice anymore Alan. How do you judge peoples understanding?

IMO 'Bong' was referred to as a 'search' or 'seeking' arm, theoretically. And this is in relation to elbow positioning more than hand/palm position but both are equally important. With reference to the 'Dummy' training, it may help if its clear what we're talking of here, 108/116 or set drills or something else?

"I used to hear that Bong Sau was an emergency technique and should rarely be seem!" (seen?)

I think what Paul is referring to here is an old saying the 'Bong Sau never stays still', which implies that the whole body moves during Bong Sau, which also relates to another comment on 'inside to outside' drills.

Strange post though by you Alan, all the same. Directed at anyone in particular?

I judge peoples understanding from what I see, feel and hear. On this forum I am tried of hearing such a lack of anything.

emergency technique?? Why would we use it all the time in Chi Sao if that was the case? It is a close range extension of our body structure. You should be able to use your bong to feel, press, stick, flow in close range. Without the body control behind bong it is dead. It is a bridge that can be crossed my me but not my opponent. It is a conductor of force via the centre of the body. The dummy teaches flow in close range not applications ...Much more...

Regards

Alan

www.alanorr.com

[YungChun]

I judge peoples understanding from what I see, feel and hear. On this forum I am tried of hearing such a lack of anything.

emergency technique?? Why would we use it all the time in Chi Sao if that was the case? It is a close range extension of our body structure. You should be able to use your bong to feel, press, stick, flow in close range. Without the body control behind bong it is dead. It is a bridge that can be crossed my me but not my opponent. It is a conductor of force via the centre of the body. The dummy teaches flow in close range not applications ...Much more..
I think that was clearly expressed..

Additionally, in modern combatives, you have something called a flinch response, a primal reaction to a sudden threat. In my personal experience, when folks have tried to sucker punch me I found that my elbow often came up in a bong as a flinch.. Seems logical my body chose this move because the elbow does come up fastest to cover IME.. No question in my mind bong can also serve this function since it did. :)

Also IMO anything you do real-time is an application.......

[sihing]

I think that was clearly expressed..

Additionally, in modern combatives, you have something called a flinch response, a primal reaction to a sudden threat. In my personal experience, when folks have tried to sucker punch me I found that my elbow often came up in a bong as a flinch.. Seems logical my body chose this move because the elbow does come up fastest to cover IME.. No question in my mind bong can also serve this function since it did. :)

Also IMO anything you do real-time is an application.......

David Peterson talks about this exact usage in his Chum Kiu DVD, it is one of the 3 usages of Bong for the WSL line. If the hands are down by your side, your elbow is the closest, and most useful tool to use to avoid a direct hit from someone sucker punching you. In the DVD he talks about the english translation of Bong from chinese, and in essence it means "upper arm", not wing arm as some follow.

James

[Alan Orr]

Hi Jim


I think that was clearly expressed..

Additionally, in modern combatives, you have something called a flinch response, a primal reaction to a sudden threat. In my personal experience, when folks have tried to sucker punch me I found that my elbow often came up in a bong as a flinch.. Seems logical my body chose this move because the elbow does come up fastest to cover IME.. No question in my mind bong can also serve this function since it did. :)

Also IMO anything you do real-time is an application.......


Yes, anything in real time is an application but not alway the best one.

A sucker punch is just that, therefore if its done well you will get hit. I don't like the flinch response, I train martial arts to train my response to the best reaction and understanding. Modern combatives are good for people how don't train that much. The best is Tim Larkin TFT for that, as they use basic body methods and an understanding of primal reaction. But, it is limited as it is all based on the guy not countering not on something going wrong. To me martial arts training is about taking control of the opponent not reacting to them, thats to late.

Lifting the bong is the manner talk about is bad body structure, it will have no power and if the opponent is throwing punches rather that one punch then you will have problems. Also you lift you arm like that and your body is open. Bong should be after you have bridge contact to have good effect.

Regards


Alan

www.alanorr.com

[sanjuro_ronin]

The best is Tim Larkin TFT for that, as they use basic body...
Wasn't Tim part of SCARS ?
With Jerry Peterson ?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Bong sao can be a very useful defensive/redirective maneuver against parallel (matched/mirrored lead) straight stiff lead punches (not jabs) when you're on the outside of his arm - or even against a rear cross when not in matched/mirrored leads) - and an extended bong/wu into lop and hit or lop/gum and hit can also be used from the parallel position as an aggressive attack move against the guy with his hands held back - at a moment when he's not throwing punches (if you're close enough)...

and there are indeed many transitions that can come from bong sao.

As long as ALL OF THE ABOVE are done while moving into the opponent's space - albeit at a slight angle and not exactly head on.

If you're not doing that - you're asking for trouble by using bong sao. It's a move that needs pressure, angle, and immediate transition to something else.

[t_niehoff]

David Peterson talks about this exact usage in his Chum Kiu DVD, it is one of the 3 usages of Bong for the WSL line. If the hands are down by your side, your elbow is the closest, and most useful tool to use to avoid a direct hit from someone sucker punching you. In the DVD he talks about the english translation of Bong from chinese, and in essence it means "upper arm", not wing arm as some follow.

James

If your hands are down, you won't have time to raise your elbow to cover a "sucker punch" (you still need to raise your hand to chin level). And, this is a very poor way to cover (as you will be knocked off balance).

"Bong", according to my chinese-american dictionary, represents "side of flesh" and means shoulder or wing.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Bong means somethign quite different to me :D

[t_niehoff]

I don't like the flinch response, I train martial arts to train my response to the best reaction and understanding.

That's right.

[t_niehoff]

Bong means somethign quite different to me :D

Ah, Cheech-and-Chong Fu!

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ah, Cheech-and-Chong Fu!

Relaxness like that, any taiji master would envy.

[sihing]

If your hands are down, you won't have time to raise your elbow to cover a "sucker punch" (you still need to raise your hand to chin level). And, this is a very poor way to cover (as you will be knocked off balance).

"Bong", according to my chinese-american dictionary, represents "side of flesh" and means shoulder or wing.

Your objection is duly noted and will be given the attention that it deserves:p

James

[Liddel]

Someone please tell me, why people teach wing chun when they do not understand the system?
Regards
Alan

Jeez Alan, this is niether the time or the place for sensible opinoins !

People refer to "common sence"...i prefer to refer to the concept as "uncommon sence"

Lets be honest...it aint so common :o

LOL
DREW

[Liddel]

I agree with the ideas put foward by Alan and YungChun.

As far as the action and dummy is concerned, when trying to take a concept from it and to apply to other actions.

Bong's On the dummy teaches me how to let force go, as well as the obvious blocking, clearing structure based uses.
Moreover, to me it teaches that while letting force go you can apply your own force back at the same time.

Note : My Dummy actions are all defencive, In my mind the dummy is the first action and i am reacting, this is how i was taught to approach it.

When the Dummy punches and i apply the Bong, the 'Form' dictates you let it go by way of transitioning to Tan, Dropping the elbow, turning the forearm using your stepping and turning...therefore letting any and all pressure present fall away.

This would be due to the punches force pressing your bong, because if the punch was retracted youd have no time to transition, the touch would not be there anymore...so another action/behaviour would be warrented.

So you could think about how it lets force/pressure go, and try to think about how that applys to other actions...

Letting force go (as best you can) is a major part of VT IMO.

DREW

[k gledhill]

bong is not a second response or flinch...we train to be the attacker, to strike the strike ..lin sil di da.. bong and vu are done together ..why ? not as a 2 armed block ....to understand , the chum kil must be seen as a simple way of facing your intended line of attack..not turn away from it or allow the guy to command your actions by thinking ...reaction..slow......once you attack, either of the guys arms can come over yours, either side in proximity of a functioning distance to deliver lin sil di da....you x my lead arm's path ..low ,high, mid , doesnt matter giving it a label and tag ..you cant think that way in a fight ..you have to do the same bong in a blink and be hitting attacking again seamlessly..faster than the guy can at you..attack his attack.. attack , sounds easy..conceptualy directed but rarely accomplished

the only thing that matters is the spatial relationship your strike has to my intended path ..I do what i need to clear it using chi-sao ..not to stick but to not think about what happens next.

[Alan Orr]

Good post Drew.

k gledhill - I agree

Terence is right. I notice people don't react well to the truth. It seems common in Wing Chun right now. I hope this will change. Keep up the good fight T.

My best

Alan

[Edmund]

bong is not a second response or flinch...we train to be the attacker, to strike the strike ..lin sil di da.. bong and vu are done together ..why ? not as a 2 armed block ....to understand , the chum kil must be seen as a simple way of facing your intended line of attack..not turn away from it or allow the guy to command your actions by thinking.


You know, in YKS Chum Kil, the bong and vu are done square to your body. Not to the side.

[Alan Orr]

You know, in YKS Chum Kil, the bong and vu are done square to your body. Not to the side.

That is correct. Turning you bong breaks your own structure, you must turn you opponent.

Best

Alan

[Matrix]

INote : My Dummy actions are all defencive, In my mind the dummy is the first action and i am reacting, this is how i was taught to approach it.Hey DREW,
I'm trying to understand this point-of-view.
The dummy is a piece of wood, and when it takes an action, or even what action it would take is only limited by your imagination. I've often been told that we should not leave our wing chun on the dummy, nor should we let the dummy play us - we should play the dummy.

Just a thougt.

Bill

[Alan Orr]

Bill

Drew has the right idea. You should be ahead of your opponent, therefore with the Dummy you are feeling the next change of movement to stay ahead of the opponent.

If you play the dummy you are playing the hands

Regards

Alan

[Matrix]

Bill

Drew has the right idea. You should be ahead of your opponent, therefore with the Dummy you are feeling the next change of movement to stay ahead of the opponent.

If you play the dummy you are playing the hands

Regards

AlanHey Allen,

I agree with the point you're making. I was just thinking you can play the dummy several ways.

Thanks for the reply.:cool:

Bill

[Alan Orr]

Hey Bill

Of course, it can just be used and abused lol

regards

Alan

[Edmund]

Hey DREW,
I'm trying to understand this point-of-view.
The dummy is a piece of wood, and when it takes an action, or even what action it would take is only limited by your imagination. I've often been told that we should not leave our wing chun on the dummy, nor should we let the dummy play us - we should play the dummy.

Just a thougt.

Bill

I believe Drew is alluding to the dummy form which, in a lot of sections, initiates combinations with contact to the dummy arms first before striking the dummy body. So you're getting past the opponent's arms in one way or another (in your imagination of how the techniques would apply).

[Matrix]

Of course, it can just be used and abused lol
Point taken. :)

[anerlich]

I notice people don't react well to the truth.

I think people react well to the truth.

It's getting continually bombarded with derivative opinions that they've already heard that tends to annoy them.

[Alan Orr]

I think people react well to the truth.

It's getting continually bombarded with derivative opinions that they've already heard that tends to annoy them.

Like your post:) lol

[YungChun]

bong is not a second response or flinch...we train to be the attacker, to strike the strike
Yes we do..

However the flinch response is not a theory or tactic it's a hard wired primal response.. We can train to flinch forward however the primal brain does not always allow us to..

I have experienced the bong popping out under a fllich condition and it helped me.. Since it's not in the book/theory I guess I'll have to have a serious talk with my bong and straighten it out.. :rolleyes:

[anerlich]

Like your post lol

And some of yours, Alan.

[k gledhill]

I meant that its not as a flnch, sure you can flinch :D think attack not defense...think dummy is not a body to attack but arm points in rotation using one arm moving from a displacement / defense , while the other becomes an attacking action/punch ie a tan or jum...not blocks ... if you see the dummy as delivering blocks , you will never develop the attack, but be a responder in 1/2 measures ,using arm positions ,not to strike from' but as redundant sequences that WONT be used in a freefight...there are 2 invisible dmmys either side of the center one ..when you do actions like 'kwan' it isnt a low bong and a tan combo block/turn away from an attack....its pointing your tan [tan 1/2 strike ~outside /bridegate relative to cneteline] and bong [ done low to allow 'SLAP'! to clear te lne]

vusao is not on the centerline it X 's just like we do every opening move in the systaem's forms...where the wrists X the imaginary plane and where they X in front of chest..the rear X ..take one away make another bong and the fingers are by your bongs bi-cep not on the center...this simple position is the foundation for a freefighting, no think fighting system...a self clearing, no thinking strike zone infront of us , each arm traveling it as it strikes ...arms /elbows positioned to 'spear' into targets
umimterupted by force, angled to allow this , and displacing actions using ballisitc force ..bong ...to clear the lines attack path...repeated in chi-sao so its perfect and not deformed upon 'rea;' contact...amongs other things...:D


the dummy is a combo of SLT in rotation as a strike clear strike sequence of our idea in rotation ..the chumkil makes the aim of our centers point to the intended attack line...when you turn its to face the angle of attack ...not to turn away from the center dummy body, and try to make it work like chisao sticking turning energy and refacing....this of course can be done , like a lot of things can be done IN CHISAO but not freefighting

[Liddel]

Hey DREW,
I'm trying to understand this point-of-view.
The dummy is a piece of wood, and when it takes an action, or even what action it would take is only limited by your imagination. I've often been told that we should not leave our wing chun on the dummy, nor should we let the dummy play us - we should play the dummy.

Hey Bill, not sure what you mean by "leaving your VT on the dummy".
Its in me and is only expressed by me. Could you elaborate ?

Heres and example -

Like most i hold a Bi Jong type pose when doing the dummy form. For the most part these days my hands are just up around my head. But for this discussion well keep it formal.

Take the first action - Sip Sao (SP?) or raising your Wu to intercept. Before even applying the neck pulling hand....

Id never just raise this action for the hell of it, during fighting or form.
Its raised in relation to what im given. Hence the dummy is the first action. I raise the action, gain the touch and go from there...we all know the dummy moves in order....

When i apply a Bong or a Pak during the pre arranged form, im imagining the comming action and applying my actions accordingly.

The dummy is dead the training is fairly dead - no resisting opponent nothing spontaneous - unless you imagine it.

IMO, to make the best of 'dead' situation :D, you can use your mind to liven it up....

So when you take it to sparring or a live setting, your body and mind should have a good starting platform for when and of course how to react. (one of many :rolleyes:)

Someone enters your space, throws some leather - you react. Thats one side of the coin.

Of course i also use the dummy for free style use. But again im picturing the dummy giving me things to respond to.

Besides no fighter walks around with thier arms fully extended like the dummy - so the dummy is fixed in an 'Action' state if you will :rolleyes:

The point at which an attackers punch is in your space, or hes stepped foward with his lead leg in your horse (or thereabouts).

I vary rarely beat on the dummy like ive seen others do - I save that for my sparring partners LOL

This has always been the way my Sifu taught me to think of the Jong.
Hope you get my POV :)

DREW

[LoneTiger108]

Interesting developments in this thread I see. Very good analysis of the old Bong Sau, but I'm thinking that it aint all over yet.

There seems to be many that express what I'm thinking, especially in this thread as the subject matter is so common. But I also have a question:

Is the 108/116 Form the first and only practice most people do on a Wooden Man?

It's just that we trained other sets at a very early stage and I'm wondering if other branches also do this...

[LoneTiger108]

I recently saw your site and have to say I was impressed, especially with your developments in the Competition arena. I see that you've re-started the Seni08 thread, which is a good idea. Nice alterations to some rules too. I'm genuinely looking forward to watching! ;) I only wish we still had some guys to compete, but we'll have to see how the new year goes.

Compliments are due also on one major innovation of yours, the 'POWERCLUB'! I was so glad to see someone actually develop this kind of tool, as I've used them since I started training. Albeit not as nice looking as your designed ones, but all familiar exercises I would think.

Moment of inspiration? Or a given idea?

[Paul T England]

wow, I did not expect so many repsones! Good comments from everyone. You can see why some people don't post comments questions though! Bong sau must be close to peoples heart. lol

I don't think you can discuss the meaning of Bong from the written word in english, you would need the chinese character.

Alan I liked your comment about being a step ahead of your opponent, thats an interesting mindset for the dummy which I have not thought about in relation to the dummy before. I should have though as in chi sau I aim to do that.

I don't have a problem with saying I don't know everything in wing chun, I have found that teaching helps you analysis and think about what you are doing more. As with everything in life the questions are easy if you know the answer.

all the best
Paul

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Alan,
Bong is used a lot in chi sau, you're right it's used every second movement. But how often do you use it in fighting? I have a very limited view of bong sau (which I'm sure is because of my bullheadedness [how's that for a word:D], and for that matter a limited view of ving tsun. I have a really hard time seeing bong sau as a practical technique in a bar room fight

I can easily be proven wrong because my brain is limited as well :p

J

[YungChun]

Bill

Drew has the right idea. You should be ahead of your opponent, therefore with the Dummy you are feeling the next change of movement to stay ahead of the opponent.

If you play the dummy you are playing the hands

Regards

Alan
I agree that we are trying to stay ahead of him, issue force into him, and use his and our energy to take position, control and the line.. Controlling him and using our and his energy and tools to do this is something I have posted ad infinitum here--a power delivery system.. To use body movement and body power is "structure" that's standard WCK *theory*.. I see lots of agreement here in what most folks seemed to say..

But it seems to me that we have to also look at bong or any of these things from a recovery angle or from under less than ideal conditions as well as conditions where we are in control.. IMO we are either in attack mode or in recovery mode, or out of the fight.. In addition to addressing pure offense--stealing the timing and so on some of these tools can also help us, cover, flinch, recover, we may not always be in control, we may--flinch, have a brain f a r t. If the flinch is a common human trait then there have to be tools to work with it.. If bong (actually quan with wu) worked for me then that in and of itself makes it valid, since experience is the real teacher.. I would be interested to hear what anyone else thinks might fit better in with the flinch responce.. It was commented that in the Jong form bong contact 'just happens' ... If so then I submit "just happend", can happen any number of ways of which some will certainly be less than the ideal..

The primal flinch is very interesting..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuA17VoJgNo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--74CtXS6Y4

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Paul
Whenever you try to explain anything you know, you'll find out how much you don't know about it :D

That's why I find it funny whenever you hear anyone say that in wing chun it's done this way, that's a limited view, you can only share your own views. Your sifu's, sigung's etc may all be slightly different. It's a personality thing.

My Sifu's ving tsun is sit back and you come to me, mine isn't, I've got ants in my pants. Who knows, maybe it's an age thing or maybe it's an experience thing, but it's also a personality thing.

[Alan Orr]

I recently saw your site and have to say I was impressed, especially with your developments in the Competition arena. I see that you've re-started the Seni08 thread, which is a good idea. Nice alterations to some rules too. I'm genuinely looking forward to watching! ;) I only wish we still had some guys to compete, but we'll have to see how the new year goes.

Compliments are due also on one major innovation of yours, the 'POWERCLUB'! I was so glad to see someone actually develop this kind of tool, as I've used them since I started training. Albeit not as nice looking as your designed ones, but all familiar exercises I would think.

Moment of inspiration? Or a given idea?

Hi Spencer

Thanks for you reply. Yes, I hope we can show Wing Chun is more that just talk. It will be good to see skills under controlled pressure as in BJJ, Judo, wrestling etc.

Powerclub is not really new, its a way of using lighter swinging clubs, I like kettlebells for power and strength and light clubs for warming up the joints. I not a fan of heavy clubs, which is more standard.

Regards

Alan

[Alan Orr]

wow, I did not expect so many repsones! Good comments from everyone. You can see why some people don't post comments questions though! Bong sau must be close to peoples heart. lol

I don't think you can discuss the meaning of Bong from the written word in english, you would need the chinese character.

Alan I liked your comment about being a step ahead of your opponent, thats an interesting mindset for the dummy which I have not thought about in relation to the dummy before. I should have though as in chi sau I aim to do that.

I don't have a problem with saying I don't know everything in wing chun, I have found that teaching helps you analysis and think about what you are doing more. As with everything in life the questions are easy if you know the answer.

all the best
Paul


Yes, Paul. This is all fine as a student of Wing Chun. But as a teacher of Wing Chun I would think your understanding of the basics should be very much tried and tested. I have taught many seminars now to other groups and am tried of seeing lots of 'teachers' with less that basic understanding. We no longer have a 'black belt' level as in BJJ for example. You can say in BJJ the standard set. If you can not roll with a blue belt then you are not a black belt as such.

I think the event I am setting up for Seni will bring some honuor back to wing chun and be the real place to test and 'ask questions' not a forum. Everyone can have a answer on a forum, but do you have the answer under pressure.

hey, this is not a persoanl attack on you. I just making a point in general for a lot of studnets of the art. You can learn from talking, but thats only one part.

Regards

Alan

[Alan Orr]

Hey Alan,
Bong is used a lot in chi sau, you're right it's used every second movement. But how often do you use it in fighting? I have a very limited view of bong sau (which I'm sure is because of my bullheadedness [how's that for a word:D], and for that matter a limited view of ving tsun. I have a really hard time seeing bong sau as a practical technique in a bar room fight

I can easily be proven wrong because my brain is limited as well :p

J

Hi Jeff

I use bong all the time. In sparring its use in the clinch, as bong a block at all. It should be soft but in control. It is powered via you body structure and sticks/ rubs and redirects.

It you can not see how or when you use bong, then I would have to say you have a limited understanding of wing chun in general. Again not a attack on you at a personal level. Bong is important to understanding the mind of wing chun and its close range use of power. Without that you do understand close range fighting.

A bar fight - depends on lots of things, range, distance, space, ie if you at long range, then no bong.

Regards

Alan

[Alan Orr]

I agree that we are trying to stay ahead of him, issue force into him, and use his and our energy to take position, control and the line.. Controlling him and using our and his energy and tools to do this is something I have posted ad infinitum here--a power delivery system.. To use body movement and body power is "structure" that's standard WCK *theory*.. I see lots of agreement here in what most folks seemed to say..

But it seems to me that we have to also look at bong or any of these things from a recovery angle or from under less than ideal conditions as well as conditions where we are in control.. IMO we are either in attack mode or in recovery mode, or out of the fight.. In addition to addressing pure offense--stealing the timing and so on some of these tools can also help us, cover, flinch, recover, we may not always be in control, we may--flinch, have a brain f a r t. If the flinch is a common human trait then there have to be tools to work with it.. If bong (actually quan with wu) worked for me then that in and of itself makes it valid, since experience is the real teacher.. I would be interested to hear what anyone else thinks might fit better in with the flinch responce.. It was commented that in the Jong form bong contact 'just happens' ... If so then I submit "just happend", can happen any number of ways of which some will certainly be less than the ideal..

The primal flinch is very interesting..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuA17VoJgNo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--74CtXS6Y4


To use body movement and body power is "structure" that's standard WCK *theory*.. I see lots of agreement here in what most folks seemed to say..

What people say and what people do are very interesting indeed. I have could to know that these are often two diferent things. That is why I am asking people to come and fight at the event in April 2008. This way people can test their basics and find real answers.

RE:
I would be interested to hear what anyone else thinks might fit better in with the flinch responce..

Alan: They get hit!

RE:
It was commented that in the Jong form bong contact 'just happens' ... If so then I submit "just happend", can happen any number of ways of which some will certainly be less than the ideal..

Alan: When the right things just happens its from a trained response ie Unconscious Competence. You can not submit someone if you never train a armbar. You don't flinch into cross body then mount and then take the arm and tap out someone.

Unconscious Incompetence
You are not yet conscious of the system therefore you are incompetent through lack of knowledge. (Thus the beginner who does not know what the system holds.)

Conscious Incompetence
You are consciously aware of parts of the system, but are still unable to apply what you have learnt. (Thus when you make mistakes, you know what they are. Also, you cannot always do the things you are aware of, in the right way.)

Conscious Competence
You are consciously aware of what you know and you competently apply it. This is generally the technicians level. This is when you have to really concentrate on the things you have learned in order for them to work.)

Unconscious Competence
You no longer have to think about what you do, as it is part of your subconscious understanding. Your competence comes from your unconscious knowledge. (This is more a conceptual level. This is when you seem to know just what to do without thinking.)

Regards

Alan

[LoneTiger108]

I use bong all the time. In sparring its use in the clinch, as bong a block at all. It should be soft but in control. It is powered via you body structure and sticks/ rubs and redirects...

...A bar fight - depends on lots of things, range, distance, space, ie if you at long range, then no bong.

Regards

Alan

I like most of what you write about Alan, but I have to disagree with the 'no bong at longrange' quote here!

Especially when you can see 'bong all the time', why have you not seen the relevence of 'biu jee' as an example for long range use? Distinctively a Bong arm movement, and devastating at long range/side body, especially once drilled with a long pole (Biu Gwan), and removed from it's 'recovery' application. We practice Biu Ma too, to get in quickly like those 'shootfighters', but I rarely hear of talk about that!

As I've mentioned earlier, Bong has many methods but the principle I was taught is about 'searching' as this is its major function. Other functions have preferred arm positioning and body structures, but why does nobody even talk of this stuff too much here except you?

We have Body Structure in our way, but we just don't use that terminology to describe it ;) We actually relate part of it to the 5 Element theories...

[Alan Orr]

I like most of what you write about Alan, but I have to disagree with the 'no bong at longrange' quote here!

Especially when you can see 'bong all the time', why have you not seen the relevence of 'biu jee' as an example for long range use? Distinctively a Bong arm movement, and devastating at long range/side body, especially once drilled with a long pole (Biu Gwan), and removed from it's 'recovery' application. We practice Biu Ma too, to get in quickly like those 'shootfighters', but I rarely hear of talk about that!

As I've mentioned earlier, Bong has many methods but the principle I was taught is about 'searching' as this is its major function. Other functions have preferred arm positioning and body structures, but why does nobody even talk of this stuff too much here except you?

We have Body Structure in our way, but we just don't use that terminology to describe it ;) We actually relate part of it to the 5 Element theories...

Hi Spencer

What your talking about is not long range. Bong is a short arm position as it is never in long range.

Body Structure in your way is not Body structure at all. I am writing an article again on what is body structure, as it is a term that is now misused so much.

You maybe thinking of something that is totally different, which is fine.

Will you enter the event in April? Good to test your method.

Regards

Alan

[YungChun]

What people say and what people do are very interesting indeed. I have could to know that these are often two diferent things.
Yes it is..

But for the sake of sanity and the forum format--If someone says they emphasize body power, or forward spring energy, body alignment, and otherwise blasting people into walls, it might be helpful to give them the benefit of the doubt that they do.. Many don't, as I have seen but this has nothing to do with the rest of us, who some love to lump together..

RE:
It was commented that in the Jong form bong contact 'just happens' ... If so then I submit "just happend", can happen any number of ways of which some will certainly be less than the ideal..

Alan: When the right things just happens its from a trained response ie Unconscious Competence. You can not submit someone if you never train a armbar. You don't flinch into cross body then mount and then take the arm and tap out someone.
I wasn't talking about when the right thing happens.. I was talking about the fact that the right thing never always happens.. We seem to be focused on the ideal in expression, something I have rarely seen in real application.

The flinch response, the hard wired one is the one that is desgined genetically to help reduce the chances of "just being hit" and hurt--that's why it's there. Training that response is not the same as training other non hard wired kinds of responses, if the flinch can be trained at all.. Point is folks may well be in a situation not outlined in the "exactly how bong is to be used book"...

For those who have been attacked without someone first saying "ARE YOU READY".. I'm sure others have experienced the flinch as well--question is how did they react--how did they recover.

Professonal tactical trainers and others are very interested in what is hard wired, how to best use it and/or how to best recover. Being aware of these kinds of human responses, can possibly help us train better and understand how WCK and our skills will work or not under different, less than ideal conditions, something I don't see being addressed wrt tools and tactics here--and yet I think the system does...

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Alan
Thanks for your response.

Alan:
I use bong all the time. In sparring its use in the clinch, as bong a block at all. It should be soft but in control. It is powered via you body structure and sticks/ rubs and redirects.
It you can not see how or when you use bong, then I would have to say you have a limited understanding of wing chun in general. Again not a attack on you at a personal level. Bong is important to understanding the mind of wing chun and its close range use of power. Without that you do understand close range fighting.


Me:
I've been taught "how" to use bong sau, but I have to say that I don't agree with the majority of it. The only way I can actually see using it is like I said initially very close and not the way it comes out in the mook jong. Like going from the inside to outside. But again I do have a limited view of ving tsun (BTW I didn't take it as a personal attack) and I am by no means saying that everyone else is wrong I'm just expressing what I see.

As far as bong being important to the mind of wing chun I just don't think about it as much as you guys. And try hard not to be to cerebral about it.

I just wanna make it work, I don't read the history, could care less where or who invented it, I haven't learned how to speak Chinese and never will, I can't do caligraphy, accupunture, or write poems.

I don't mind hearing about it every once in a while and I respect the culture, but it's not mine.


Alan:
if you at long range, then no bong.

Me:
I agree with this


J

[Alan Orr]

Hey Alan
Thanks for your response.

Alan:
I use bong all the time. In sparring its use in the clinch, as bong a block at all. It should be soft but in control. It is powered via you body structure and sticks/ rubs and redirects.
It you can not see how or when you use bong, then I would have to say you have a limited understanding of wing chun in general. Again not a attack on you at a personal level. Bong is important to understanding the mind of wing chun and its close range use of power. Without that you do understand close range fighting.


Me:
I've been taught "how" to use bong sau, but I have to say that I don't agree with the majority of it. The only way I can actually see using it is like I said initially very close and not the way it comes out in the mook jong. Like going from the inside to outside. But again I do have a limited view of ving tsun (BTW I didn't take it as a personal attack) and I am by no means saying that everyone else is wrong I'm just expressing what I see.

As far as bong being important to the mind of wing chun I just don't think about it as much as you guys. And try hard not to be to cerebral about it.

I just wanna make it work, I don't read the history, could care less where or who invented it, I haven't learned how to speak Chinese and never will, I can't do caligraphy, accupunture, or write poems.

I don't mind hearing about it every once in a while and I respect the culture, but it's not mine.


Alan:
if you at long range, then no bong.

Me:
I agree with this


J

Hi Jeff

Good post. We think along the same path. Let Functional rule over form, as my teacher taught me.


My best

Alan

[Alan Orr]

Yes it is..


Professonal tactical trainers and others are very interested in what is hard wired, how to best use it and/or how to best recover. Being aware of these kinds of human responses, can possibly help us train better and understand how WCK and our skills will work or not under different, less than ideal conditions, something I don't see being addressed wrt tools and tactics here--and yet I think the system does...

Hi Jim

Sure, but in the martial arts which is different. We train to be aware not always to be a slave to something.

My best

Alan

[LoneTiger108]

Hi Spencer

What your talking about is not long range. Bong is a short arm position as it is never in long range.

Body Structure in your way is not Body structure at all. I am writing an article again on what is body structure, as it is a term that is now misused so much.

You maybe thinking of something that is totally different, which is fine.

Will you enter the event in April? Good to test your method.

Regards

Alan

Firstly, are you entering yourself Alan?

I've highlighted the comment here because again, I don't think you're seeing what I'm saying at all. I actually see no difference in a bong sau held close to the body or outstretched, as long as the elbow/wrist/shoulder joints themselves are aligned the same way. Maybe you're just not aware of this, which surprises me.

And secondly, maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean by Body Structure but how can you dismiss my way from hearing it's based on the 5 Elelment theories? Interesting, but I'd still say that our 5 elelment knowledge 'talks the same' language I think you're trying to share.

Oh! I'd love to enter the competition by the way, probably like many on here! But Seni for me is a Business project and we're still deciding what to do. A few of our guys sound positive about the comp too, so we'll have to wait and see!

[k gledhill]

simple method to develop a bong /parry , with intent to clear aline of attack as you move FORWARDS to it....have someone place and arm at 1/2 -3/4 extended over your equally extended punch [for the exercise] no touching or pre -contact and try to raise your elbow...sharply while takeing your forearm left to right [or vversa] into bong ...

to work bong must move laterally to the line of force...not force forwards to incoming force forwards..if bong meets force it easliy moves it L<->R

their r arm over your l arm ....
instead of lop saoing ...strike into the cleared position from vusao ....

food for thought ...

dont face equally come in froman angle as dummy to use either side , either foot can lead

in chisao its just to give and recieve to perfect .

[Alan Orr]

Firstly, are you entering yourself Alan?

I've highlighted the comment here because again, I don't think you're seeing what I'm saying at all. I actually see no difference in a bong sau held close to the body or outstretched, as long as the elbow/wrist/shoulder joints themselves are aligned the same way. Maybe you're just not aware of this, which surprises me.

And secondly, maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean by Body Structure but how can you dismiss my way from hearing it's based on the 5 Elelment theories? Interesting, but I'd still say that our 5 elelment knowledge 'talks the same' language I think you're trying to share.

Oh! I'd love to enter the competition by the way, probably like many on here! But Seni for me is a Business project and we're still deciding what to do. A few of our guys sound positive about the comp too, so we'll have to wait and see!

Yes, I will be fighting at the event and I have a guy for each weight. Well more that a guy for each weight, but I hope we will have lots of people wanting to fight.


Your arm out straight would not be a bong sau.

I have not seen any other Wing Chun system use body structure in the way the Chu Sai Lei system does. Talking the same language? A lot of people say the right things, but when you see it... well its often very differenet. Maybe you can put a clip up. I can tell right away then if we are talking about the same thing. I don't think it will be the case. But I keep an open mind.

Seni - Business project? We are in the business of testing what we teach. I hope you guys can enter.

My best

Alan

[LoneTiger108]

Your arm out straight would not be a bong sau.

I have not seen any other Wing Chun system use body structure in the way the Chu Sai Lei system does. Talking the same language? A lot of people say the right things, but when you see it... well its often very differenet. Maybe you can put a clip up. I can tell right away then if we are talking about the same thing. I don't think it will be the case. But I keep an open mind.

No Bong? I think I will just have to agree to disagree with you here Alan!

I know where you have learnt this 'Body Structure' from, and I even think I know where it's originated from but that would be telling.

We all have our own ways and practices, I just can't understand why you seem to believe that you are the only one who has this type of knowledge. Have you ever researched Sifu Gary Lam and WSL Methods? A great advocate of 5 Elelments.

I already know you haven't looked into the Lee Shing Family, but that's not your fault as we're quite closed these days, as we've always been.

I came into this forum especially to see the 'reaction' to yet another new idea.

Unfortunately, everybody just wants to fight here. Shame really, as much more can be learned from the Art of Fighting rather than just the fight itself.

[YungChun]

I have not seen any other Wing Chun system use body structure in the way the Chu Sai Lei system does.
Can you elaborate?

I know that we always trained with emphasis on forward spring energy, chung chee, and how to coordinate these two dynamics, how and when to connect the body to generate this power with timing and position, body alignment, etc.

In training we used to have to pull folks out of walls; I've seen folks go flying through the air, I've knocked folks flat on their azz with a body shot and thrown people head first, upside down into bushes.. The ability to make body power and train and use this power is IMO the major component of the system once you strip away the outer layers.. IMO you are either generating or not generating this power--that's the test...

On the other hand when you meet greater force it will/can move you back.. The object then to to use that power to load your springs, move the line and counter attack..

[Alan Orr]

No Bong? I think I will just have to agree to disagree with you here Alan!

I know where you have learnt this 'Body Structure' from, and I even think I know where it's originated from but that would be telling.

We all have our own ways and practices, I just can't understand why you seem to believe that you are the only one who has this type of knowledge. Have you ever researched Sifu Gary Lam and WSL Methods? A great advocate of 5 Elelments.

I already know you haven't looked into the Lee Shing Family, but that's not your fault as we're quite closed these days, as we've always been.

I came into this forum especially to see the 'reaction' to yet another new idea.

Unfortunately, everybody just wants to fight here. Shame really, as much more can be learned from the Art of Fighting rather than just the fight itself.



I like to hear what you THINK you know.


Sifu Lam is a friend of my teachers. What he teaches is not just WSL method, once he teaches the basic method he adds 'body structure methods' from my Si Gung hawkins Cheung and my teacher via exchange. Plus his only ideas from his own training background.

I have looked at Lee Shing Family wing chun. I have student who trained in the style for 10 years, he had no structure at all. I have also friends from back in day, who trained with that line.

5 elements is not structure it is a term to explain a view, doing it a different thing all together.

Why not meet up for a friendly exchange, then we will have a view based on something real.

My best

Alan

[Alan Orr]

Can you elaborate?

I know that we always trained with emphasis on forward spring energy, chung chee, and how to coordinate these two dynamics, how and when to connect the body to generate this power with timing and position, body alignment, etc.

In training we used to have to pull folks out of walls; I've seen folks go flying through the air, I've knocked folks flat on their azz with a body shot and thrown people head first, upside down into bushes.. The ability to make body power and train and use this power is IMO the major component of the system once you strip away the outer layers.. IMO you are either generating or not generating this power--that's the test...

On the other hand when you meet greater force it will/can move you back.. The object then to to use that power to load your springs, move the line and counter attack..

Hi Jim

What you are saying sounds correct to me.

Our system of body structure has taken these principles back into the forms to cross check the system is running correctly. Most wing chun have forms that are weak and application based on incorrect positioning.

We also have mental method to understand the types of pressure you need to deal with etc

I have not seen what you do, but it sounds like you are on the right track.

My best

Alan

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey Lone Tiger,


No Bong? I think I will just have to agree to disagree with you here Alan!

I think this quote was in reference to Alan saying that you can't have a bong sau with your arm staraight. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
I agree with Alan BTW. So could you elaborate on this?

Thanx

J

[LoneTiger108]

I like to hear what you THINK you know.

Sifu Lam is a friend of my teachers. What he teaches is not just WSL method, once he teaches the basic method he adds 'body structure methods' from my Si Gung hawkins Cheung and my teacher via exchange. Plus his only ideas from his own training background.

I have looked at Lee Shing Family wing chun. I have student who trained in the style for 10 years, he had no structure at all. I have also friends from back in day, who trained with that line.

5 elements is not structure it is a term to explain a view, doing it a different thing all together.

Why not meet up for a friendly exchange, then we will have a view based on something real.

My best

Alan

Thanks for the info on Sifu Lam, I didn't know that he had exchanged with your Sigung and Sifu. Interesting.

As far a Lee Shing Family students, we are all different. As you will be different from your Sifu. I'm afraid if all you have done is look, you may have to go in a little deeper. You see, I only started in 1994 and missed the early days of Wing Chun development. I did have great help from my seniors though, as they had all trained endlessly beforehand. I'm small, and light so I was always running away! Times changed and I soon developed. I like to think that I gave it everything I had, but I know I also collected a few injuries along the way! Don't we all?

Jun Mo Wing Chun, to me, has always had everything I need. I was an over-eager kid when I started, and I'm now 33 with two kids of my own! My views on Wing Chun have had a few years to digest and I'm always willing to learn new things, new ideas and meet new people. Some of the reasons I joined here, and I hope to meet with whoever wants to meet me... to exchange of course ;)

ps. 5 Elements works for me. As does my extended Bong Sau!

[LoneTiger108]

I think this quote was in reference to Alan saying that you can't have a bong sau with your arm staraight. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
I agree with Alan BTW. So could you elaborate on this?


Hey Jeff, yep you're correct.

I was trying to explain that a Bong Sau, IMO, is a combination of the turning/angling of my three arm joints, being the shoulder, elbow and wrist. As long as my joints abide by the Bong Sau rule, to me the arm will be a Bong.

I illustrated that within Biu Jii (actually also throughout our forms) there are times that my arms are extended at full length. Using a Bong Sau. The same can be said for Fook and Tan, but then these are among the 'seeds' of Wing Chun, are they not? They fly by all too quickly these days.

Can anyone see the Bong in the opening hand set of this Form? A Fist - 2 fook, 2 bong and Huen...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BLV4ovEJNtU

[monji112000]

Hi All,

Teaching my students the other day and we started discussing the Dummy form and the large number of Bong Sau's....

The dummy version I teach (close to Ip Chun version) has losts of bongs and I used to hear that Bong Sau was an emergency technique and should rarely be seem!

For me I take the majority of the Bongs in the dummy as contacts that could be replaced with many other shapes like tan, pak or jam.

Any opiniions?

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

last time a checked Bong translates to jamming in english. It has no relation to a wing arm or leg fried wings ect.. :D

I have learned a few general ideas on the Bong sao and I have seen it used in live situations allot. One surprise to me is its use in BJJ. You can see it in the butterfly guard for example. the basic ideas that i know of in its use are redirecting and jamming. I personally prefer the bong sao. It is very effective for covering when used with the tan sao. Its called a qwan sao. I prefer the Bong sao in chi sao allot, but thats me. You can find a clip or 2 of Mr. (sifu) lee talking about the bong sao and its application. I personally think his explanation is one of the best you are going to find on the internet.

here are some I found..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kboVW5VoI4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azQRZrBTBNE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXXx01FDJIg

[k gledhill]

Hawkins Chung once complemented me on my bong sao's after a seminar I was involved in, at dinner later ...he said my left was better :D...

bong isnt jamming ...
bong is part of an attack sequence ..if the line of attack is xing over your bridge , how to recover the line or x over the bridge again...
its ballistic like a pak sao, stopping on the centerline to allow the rear hand a way through as the bong drops..all done in a heart beat....
if your training your bong to jam your simply wrestling with a vt shape....
use lan sao to jam n trap..
bong goes laterally left to right < - > realtive to our lines so clear the attack path....
if your doing bong up and down it wont work unless you adopt jamming to make it work...or use a lop sao because its non functional beyond getting in the way or 'flinching' ; ) lop is from bil gee ..we use lop if bong is not working or needs help to recover attacking again on a new line at 90 degrees to the original one ...say your fighting a really strong guy who isnt defelcted laterally by bong :o instanly lop, grab wrist and elbow after dropping bong elbow, and sping him on his axis line , dont pul just turn like closing a gate wih two hands. when he;s wondering how he got here po-pai the guy and keep attacking ...:D
it should work on its own not bong lop n hit/chop

[Alan Orr]

Hey Jeff, yep you're correct.

I was trying to explain that a Bong Sau, IMO, is a combination of the turning/angling of my three arm joints, being the shoulder, elbow and wrist. As long as my joints abide by the Bong Sau rule, to me the arm will be a Bong.

I illustrated that within Biu Jii (actually also throughout our forms) there are times that my arms are extended at full length. Using a Bong Sau. The same can be said for Fook and Tan, but then these are among the 'seeds' of Wing Chun, are they not? They fly by all too quickly these days.

Can anyone see the Bong in the opening hand set of this Form? A Fist - 2 fook, 2 bong and Huen...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BLV4ovEJNtU

Hi Spencer


I looked at the clip and your demo. I think maybe what we term as Bong Sau may be different. For once the hand is in extension it is Fak Sao -whisking hand.

I think its hard to say more with out first hand demo from each of us.

After looking at your clip I can say we do not share the same 'Body Structure'. I think again without first hand demo from both of us it will be hard to show why.

Again if you would like to meet up. I am a open and friend person. You are welcome.

My best

Alan

[Phil Redmond]

last time a checked Bong translates to jamming in english. It has no relation to a wing arm or leg fried wings ect.. :D. . . .
I really suggest that you find the character for Bong and ask a native Chinese speaker what Bong translates into. You'll see that you're wrong and the Bong means wing/shoulder, etc. I think we've gone through this translation thing before. If I were you I check out a reliable source before I posted something on a public forum. I hope you don't think Tan Sao means palm up block? ;)
Try using this next time: http://www.zhongwen.com/

[Phil Redmond]

By all means... Teach us bong...

I'm sure there is more than one valid use.. Folks need to use it as it works or not for them in application..

I don't always agree with other folk's chi sao and use of tools therein. To each his own..
Here's one example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZDkPpWYYoI

Around 20 secs into this clip you can see the bong lop performed a few times:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0dQGkPaoKA

[monji112000]

I really suggest that you find the character for Bong and ask a native Chinese speaker what Bong translates into. You'll see that you're wrong and the Bong means wing/shoulder, etc. I think we've gone through this translation thing before. If I were you I check out a reliable source before I posted something on a public forum. I hope you don't think Tan Sao means palm up block? ;)
Try using this next time: http://www.zhongwen.com/

I did all three people said yes when I said tying up. (jam , tying up like a rope ect..). I have asked many people(Chinese) if it means wing arm or anything like that. they all say NO. I don't speak the language and I am not sure if its a case of dialects or whatever. Its really not important its just a name. it wouldn't matter if tan sao means fingers in the air block or thumbs down block or who cares block. Wing arm is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If you want to call something that thats fine with me. Doesn't change how you use it. I personally prefer just giving things English names since I speak English. ;)

by the way I'm a dumb American they all look like the same thing to me. I am happy with 2 languages, I will let the next generation work on Chinese(3 possible 4 languages).

[Phil Redmond]

I did all three people said yes when I said tying up. (jam , tying up like a rope ect..). I have asked many people(Chinese) if it means wing arm or anything like that. they all say NO. I don't speak the language and I am not sure if its a case of dialects or whatever. Its really not important its just a name. it wouldn't matter if tan sao means fingers in the air block or thumbs down block or who cares block. Wing arm is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If you want to call something that thats fine with me. Doesn't change how you use it. I personally prefejust giving things English names since I speak English. ;)

According to the Yale University Romanization the Cantonese dialect has 7 tones. In other words one word can be said seven different ways and have seven different meanings. In Cantonese the verb "to be" is Haih. If I said that same word in a different (musical) tone it could mean a part of a woman's anatomy or a crustacean . . . .. Bong can mean help, or tie or the shoulder part of an animal, etc. If you asked some one in English you might get different answers. But if you show them the character for the bong refered to here you will get wing/shoulder. In the Kwan form there is a position similar to a cat stance called a diu mah which means hanging horse. If you say it in another tone it can mean **** your mother. Your saying that wing arm is dumb doesn't change that it means wing in the right tone or Chinese character. I doubt if the Cantonese language will change because of what you think.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . . Doesn't change how you use it. I personally prefer just giving things English names since I speak English. ;)
by the way I'm a dumb American they all look like the same thing to me. I am happy with 2 languages, I will let the next generation work on Chinese(3 possible 4 languages).
Actually thats one of the reason many old school Chinese Sifu think that westerners cant' really grasp Kung Fu. Of course I don't agree with that. With regards to WC hand movements you do need to know what the name means in order to understand how to apply the positions. So the name/term is very relevant.

[Phil Redmond]

About 1:47-8 into the clip he does a central line bong sao. Look closely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf64ZCYVcEI

I must add that all bong saos don't have to be in the centerline. They can also be along the central line.

[t_niehoff]

Actually thats one of the reason many old school Chinese Sifu think that westerners cant' really grasp Kung Fu. Of course I don't agree with that. With regards to WC hand movements you do need to know what the name means in order to understand how to apply the positions. So the name/term is very relevant.

Certainly the "names" of the WCK movements are descriptive and so relevant. But I wouldn't go so far as to say you need to know the names to understand how to apply the movements -- you can learn a skill without labelling it. And knowing the correct translation doesn't mean a person "understands" the movement or what it is for. It is just one more piece of info that can be useful.

[t_niehoff]

Around 20 secs into this clip you can see the bong lop performed a few times:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0dQGkPaoKA

I see the "bongs" (several times when the opponent steps in, your guy "bongs" the opponent's arm -- why? it makes no sense in that situation) but there is no "lop" performed (your guy just retracts his bong arm and throws a punch with the other hand).

[monji112000]

Actually thats one of the reason many old school Chinese Sifu think that westerners cant' really grasp Kung Fu. Of course I don't agree with that. With regards to WC hand movements you do need to know what the name means in order to understand how to apply the positions. So the name/term is very relevant.

I have full respect for the language(s) and culture. I am simple saying knowing the name doesn't translate to anything other than speaking. I think the idea of Wing arm is dumb, its just a opinion on a name not the language. I couldn't argue with the characters, becouse I don't know much. (that doesn't mean I'm not interested in learning). What I do know is that many people use different characters for the same words. They are said in a similar way but they mean different things. It makes 100% more sense to say tying up or jamming, then wing arm. Thats descriptive of the motion or basic idea. (JMO and many other people). Honestly it would make more sense to create a English name that describes the techniques. That would create more of a solid foundation. Allot of things are just called "punch" or something simple like that... its too hard to remember 6 movements that are all called the same basic name... create something that works for you.

[YungChun]

I see the "bongs" (several times when the opponent steps in, your guy "bongs" the opponent's arm -- why? it makes no sense in that situation) but there is no "lop" performed (your guy just retracts his bong arm and throws a punch with the other hand).
No offense, but I would tend to agree..

One need not lop per se, but if the bong isn't issuing some kind of force and/or allowing/helping force to leave, meaning a strong connection/contact is present, then in my view it's simply being used as a *passive* block.. In the case of the light sparring in the kwoon example. Personally I would prefer to do something in that beat, that attempts to challenge the other guy's position, balance or structure, or load a spring.. :) This kind of sparring, albeit light, appears to be more disconnected, or outside use of the tools, and IMO these tools, especially bong, is designed to be used to whack their structure..

[YungChun]

I was trying to explain that a Bong Sau, IMO, is a combination of the turning/angling of my three arm joints, being the shoulder, elbow and wrist. As long as my joints abide by the Bong Sau rule, to me the arm will be a Bong.

How does goh bong fit in with this?

[k gledhill]

boxers use a bong like forearm defelction too...we just trai tobong as parry on the line to displace the punhing /extended arm out of the way from undernesath then strike with the rear 'free' hand and drop the bong back to resume 2 hands in free striking mode...lop isnt required unless your still looking at a fist after attempting to 'bong' it....lop is from bil gee ...bong lop isnt a set piece ...
bong is a strike , brdeged by another line and our recovery to 'sink' their bridge under ours again...bil gee does this from underneath

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am so glad that the first thing I did when I left the IKO and the Kodokan, and the ITF for that matter, was to STOP using non-english names for what I do.

:D

[LoneTiger108]

How does goh bong fit in with this?

Sorry Yung Chun, but what is 'goh'?

I'm still finding all this stuff quite eye opening, yet confusing at the same time. I can see Sanjuro's point, and honestly WISH that all Wing Chun Sifus used the same English spelling AT LEAST, but we all know this is impossible.

Too much time has passed, BUT I do feel that the Chinese language holds a key to understanding this system. The mind must be prepared and once the physical motion is revised WITH the mind it tends to 'feel' right.

Of course, we then test ourselves. Mainly through fighting and competition on this forum, but this isn't the only way...

[CFT]

Sorry Yung Chun, but what is 'goh'?'High' bong I think. Or is it really 'normal' bong as opposed to low bong?

[YungChun]

Sorry Yung Chun, but what is 'goh'?

Have no idea if all or most lineage's have three types of bong.. We have regular bong, the one being shown here, more or less, as well as, goh bong sao (high bong sao) <Paul could you translate Bong into Japanese for me? :)> and also dai bong sao (low bong sao)...

In all cases I see forward energy as the key to making them work but they are structurally different, esp goh bong..

[k gledhill]

1 bong ...only the relationship of the incoming line of force and your arms and angles to the particular reality ...same use to clear a path for a following strike by ballistic displacement , very aggressive action , can damage peoples arms ...if your lucky.

[YungChun]

1 bong ...only the relationship of the incoming line of force and your arms and angles to the particular reality ...same use to clear a path for a following strike by ballistic displacement , very aggressive action , can damage peoples arms ...if your lucky.
All the tools clear the line.. But MoyYat taught three different B's, of course you're free to call them all 1.

Here's someone else doing a 'goh bong' just for positional reference..

See 4th pic..
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/kungfu/gallery/gallery99-00.html

[LoneTiger108]

All the tools clear the line.. But MoyYat taught three different B's, of course you're free to call them all 1.

Here's someone else doing a 'goh bong' just for positional reference..

See 4th pic..
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/kungfu/gallery/gallery99-00.html

Good stuff! The pic highlights what I was also trying to explain to Alan. Not only is the bong sau high/goh (although I'd say seurng/upper or goi/raised) it is also extended straight. Similar to moves seen throughout the forms and referred to sometimes as 'hok bong' or crane wing.

I also remember three levels, or heights. Seen as gates or paths by most. Upper, middle and low or 'seurng, tsong, har'. This concept can be inherited by all hand technique, in all arm positions such as tan, bong and fook. Three 'seeds' or as some say, principles to be present in all Wing Chun. Not just a name of technique, but the mind behind the method.

Therefore, three levels of arm on the wooden man.

And back to the subject of the thread... ;)

[YungChun]

Good stuff! The pic highlights what I was also trying to explain to Alan. Not only is the bong sau high/goh (although I'd say seurng/upper or goi/raised) it is also extended straight.
Well I might "extend" with forward energy but more from the body.. And I'd convert it to something else PDQ in use..

But the GBS as I know it, and as is done in that pic, has a slight bend in the arm creating a wedge angle on the forearm while the fingers/hand point straight ahead.

[LoneTiger108]

But the GBS as I know it, and as is done in that pic, has a slight bend in the arm creating a wedge angle on the forearm while the fingers/hand point straight ahead.

Understood, and seen once I looked at the pic again.

I also do this practice, during interactions. We refer to it as a 'sickle arm' or 'lim sau'.

All I'm saying is that, keeping this shape, even if I straighten fully (which is rare) as long as my shoulder, elbow and wrist are still in the same alignment, I'm still doing a bong sau. It just has another term depicting it's use; a technique.

I'm sure we're still on the same page here YungChun.

[Jeff Bussey]

Hey LoneTiger

Understood, and seen once I looked at the pic again.

I also do this practice, during interactions. We refer to it as a 'sickle arm' or 'lim sau'.

All I'm saying is that, keeping this shape, even if I straighten fully (which is rare) as long as my shoulder, elbow and wrist are still in the same alignment, I'm still doing a bong sau. It just has another term depicting it's use; a technique.

I'm sure we're still on the same page here YungChun.
As far as I know, if you straighten your arm fully, your goh (high) bong sau should turn into a biu sau with elbow down, otherwise your shoulder raises and breaks connection.

[k gledhill]

All the tools clear the line.. But MoyYat taught three different B's, of course you're free to call them all 1.

Here's someone else doing a 'goh bong' just for positional reference..

See 4th pic..
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/kungfu/gallery/gallery99-00.html



1 bong understood correctly works whatever you want do with it ;)

[Liddel]

All the tools clear the line.. But MoyYat taught three different B's, of course you're free to call them all 1.

Here's someone else doing a 'goh bong' just for positional reference..

See 4th pic..
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/kungfu/gallery/gallery99-00.html

While a still pic doesnt show enough to draw a good conclusion about a tech....
that looks more akin to a Bui Sao IMO.

How can any action be considered a Bong that has a straight (almost) elbow and doesnt have a downward angle (however big/small) between elbow and wrist ?

Man we are very different indeed. :)

DREW

[CFT]

While a still pic doesnt show enough to draw a good conclusion about a tech....
that looks more akin to a Bui Sao IMO.That's what I thought at first, but on second look, the elbow "faces" outward rather than down.

[YungChun]

That's what I thought at first, but on second look, the elbow "faces" outward rather than down.
That's correct..

Although some folks may call a similar tool biu sao..

[YungChun]

While a still pic doesnt show enough to draw a good conclusion about a tech....
that looks more akin to a Bui Sao IMO.

How can any action be considered a Bong that has a straight (almost) elbow and doesnt have a downward angle (however big/small) between elbow and wrist ?

Man we are very different indeed. :)

DREW
If your biu sao is shaped like that then I'd say we are only or mainly "different" in terms..

Those vids I shared with you Drew cover most of the basics as I know them..

Personally I can't remember the Chinese names for every single movement, only about 2/3rds.. Too many dam techs.. :o

Might be interesting to see how some use dai bong tho..

[Liddel]

That's what I thought at first, but on second look, the elbow "faces" outward rather than down.

Im fine with others being different, but heres my POV...

Elbows point in different directions for different peoples body types.

Example -Some people can put thier hand on a table, palm down and turn their forearm pointing the elbow in different directions up to 160 - 170 degrees - some call it double jointed even though its just flexibility.

My point is....

The most important aspect of my 'Bong', is the angle from elbow to wrist leading force where i want it. (which is away from my center like other actions)

A flat elbow and/or downward angle (however small) from wrist to elbow (the reverse) would be Lan Sao for me. It leads force on my elbow forearm outside my body width... The angle of my forearm is what distinguishes between the two tools.

The use or how its applied, is of course different....How you extend it / the touch point on your arm etc...BUT

Regardless of which direction the elbow is facing, the elbow to wrist angle is upwards NOT downwards which is a key attribute to my Bong.

Its just my POV, nothing more nothing less......:)

DREW

[Liddel]

Personally I can't remember the Chinese names for every single movement, only about 2/3rds.. Too many dam techs.. :o


Ive got ten odd years in VT and aint that the truth :p:o:)

DREW

[YungChun]

Regardless of which direction the elbow is facing, the elbow to wrist angle is upwards NOT downwards which is a key attribute to my Bong.
In standard bong the elbow is normally slightly higher than the wrist.. Also true for dai bong except much higher.. Goh bong's shape acts more like a wedge or shovel, because it's aiming up the wrist is higher than the elbow (different animal) but level if aimed out at 90 degrees from the body.. There are pics of Ip using the same position, if I am not mistaken, as an intercepting strike to the neck/throat..

I don't worry about exact shapes, only shapes that work.. :)

[Phil Redmond]

Have no idea if all or most lineage's have three types of bong.. We have regular bong, the one being shown here, more or less, as well as, goh bong sao (high bong sao) <Paul could you translate Bong into Japanese for me? :)> and also dai bong sao (low bong sao)...

In all cases I see forward energy as the key to making them work but they are structurally different, esp goh bong..

TWC also has high (Go), Daaih (low), and regular bong sao.

[sanjuro_ronin]

) <Paul could you translate Bong into Japanese for me? :)> and also dai bong sao (low bong sao)...


Sure, what are they in English ?
LOL !

[Phil Redmond]

I see the "bongs" (several times when the opponent steps in, your guy "bongs" the opponent's arm -- why? it makes no sense in that situation) but there is no "lop" performed (your guy just retracts his bong arm and throws a punch with the other hand).
Pardon me Terence, I should have explained. We did the bong lop drill 1000 times daily so the term is in my head. If you do a right bong to the left arm of an opponent your upper left gate is vunerable to attack. So we taught the fighters to to cover the gate with a Wu sao or potential lop. So even if you don't see a completed lop it is "implied". That's why I said bong lop. There were other fights where the bong lop is obvious. We only put up the highlights of the fights.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ah yes, Bong:

[Phil Redmond]

I see the "bongs" (several times when the opponent steps in, your guy "bongs" the opponent's arm -- why? it makes no sense in that situation) . . .

You always advocate testing things against "resisting" opponents right?
Well, we did. We had the guys do different things that we train at the school. The bong entry was one of them. It's used to press into someone limiting their options while covering your upper gates. We trained all scenarios using all types of punches and different types of "shoots". There are many different ways to attack someone. That was just one of the successful methods we used. Our goal was to use as much recognizable WC techniques/principles as possible so the fights wouldn't come out looking like kickboxing.

[Ultimatewingchun]

First of all, TWC has 3 bong saos also (low, mid level, and high bong sao). But of course it does - against punches coming at different heights. No shocker here.

And then as Phil pointed out, an aggressive bong can be used that's similar to lan sao in it's initial "jamming" effect - before the switch to lop, lop/gum, etc. Used to attack with.

So that wing chun doesn't look like kickboxing?

NO, that's not the reason. Because certain techniques work best at certain ranges and in particular circumstances...BUT since wing chun is primarily an infight - at slightly longer ranges more of a boxing "look" is in order in many circumstances. And even kind of a kickboxing look as well when kicks are being thrown at those same longer ranges.

So what?

This is just the nature of fighting.

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhifpkV7GuI

At the 3 min mark and after, does Bruce use what you guys are talking about ?

[Liddel]

TWC also has high (Go), Daaih (low), and regular bong sao.

Phil - Does each Bong Sao have a downward angle between elbow and wrist, or does it change depending on height ?

I have a high mid and low Bong, they all have a Downward angle....

Curious
DREW

[Liddel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhifpkV7GuI
At the 3 min mark and after, does Bruce use what you guys are talking about ?

I'd call that a Lop Sao....Theres no Bong though.

The downward clearing action would be the Lop, followed by the girly chest slap. :p

DREW

[Liddel]

Ah yes, Bong:

Roll that 5 h i t, Light that 5 h i t...SMOKE IT !

LOL :D

DREW

[YungChun]

Ah yes, Bong:
LOL

What is that in Japanese--something like waza pipe... :)

[YungChun]

Phil - Does each Bong Sao have a downward angle between elbow and wrist, or does it change depending on height ?

I have a high mid and low Bong, they all have a Downward angle....

Curious
DREW
The elbow higher than the wrist used for a very high bong doesn't make sense to me.. At a very high angle getting the elbow still even higher than the wrist is unnatural IMO, we/I don't use that shape, that high..

So, the wrist is seen lower in the mid and low but not high, meaning the shape of the bong is different as is it's use in what I would call high bong...

[YungChun]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhifpkV7GuI

At the 3 min mark and after, does Bruce use what you guys are talking about ?
Didn't see it at first..

At exactly 3:02 the position Bruce is in just before he lops (grabs) and pulls down is pretty close to high bong, not exact tho.. Hard to see with the frame rate what it is--looks like he is high bong, lopping and then hitting with same hand, THEN he follows up with the girly chest slaps, which Drew correctly identified... :)

[k gledhill]

memories :D

[Liddel]

The elbow higher than the wrist used for a very high bong doesn't make sense to me.. At a very high angle getting the elbow still even higher than the wrist is unnatural IMO, we/I don't use that shape, that high.. ...

Exactly my point. My high Bong obviously isnt as high as your 'high' Bong.

The moment my Bong Looses downward angle on the forearm (however slight) it becomes redundant/ counter productive.

So attacks at higher levels are met with differnt actions.

This is why i commented that the action in the photo earlier, was more akin to my Biu Sao.

Your right, its just a difference in NAMES. Because from what i can see the force is still directed away from ones center - outside of your body width.

DREW

[Phil Redmond]

. . . So that wing chun doesn't look like kickboxing?
NO, that's not the reason. . . .
Actually yes, according to our Sifu. He says too many people study an art but when under pressure they don't actually use the system they trained in but resort to wild swings and such. We tried to keep as much WC in the fights as possible. Even the round punches to the side of the head gear were TWC techniques.

[Phil Redmond]

Phil - Does each Bong Sao have a downward angle between elbow and wrist, or does it change depending on height ?

I have a high mid and low Bong, they all have a Downward angle....

Curious
DREW
I'll upload pics of all three TWC bongs when I get to a computer in Toronto. This one 's usb port is damaged.

[YungChun]

Actually yes, according to our Sifu. He says too many people study an art but when under pressure they don't actually use the system they trained in but resort to wild swings and such. We tried to keep as much WC in the fights as possible. Even the round punches to the side of the head gear were TWC techniques.
Hi Phil,

So then wouldn't you want the bong to issue force <forward energy> into the opponent, as opposed to just use it as a momentary cover? IMO all the moves, when possible are best used to gain some kind of advantage, an offensive measure--to challenge the balance, position, etc of the opponent in order to whack his ability to counter when you attack..

[Liddel]

So then wouldn't you want the bong to issue force <forward energy> into the opponent, as opposed to just use it as a momentary cover? IMO all the moves, when possible are best used to gain some kind of advantage, an offensive measure--to challenge the balance, position, etc of the opponent in order to whack his ability to counter when you attack..

I totally agree with your concept of gaining the advantage where possible.. Foward energy IMO is good.... but falls down when retreating and/or side stepping. (cause your not going foward to help that energy)

At least this is my experience :D

As long as you at least have a nice turning forearm and inch power, which is present in almost all my VT actions, you will have an inherent force present in your actions regardless of which direction you are moving...to achieve what you mentioned.

DREW

[YungChun]

I totally agree with your concept of gaining the advantage where possible.. Foward energy IMO is good.... but falls down when retreating and/or side stepping. (cause your not going foward to help that energy)

I agree you can't use real forward energy when going backward...

I am not generally looking to go backwards however, with a couple of exceptions..



As long as you at least have a nice turning forearm and inch power, which is present in almost all my VT actions, you will have an inherent force present in your actions regardless of which direction you are moving...to achieve what you mentioned.
And forward energy... Which is what gives the bong it's shape.. But without the body behind it there can be no offensive component in it, which is what I want--to be offensive, whenever possible.

[Liddel]

.. But without the body behind it there can be no offensive component in it, which is what I want--to be offensive, whenever possible.

Ving Tsun man through and through ah Jim ....

Oooh ahhh ;) :p

DREW

[Phil Redmond]

Hi Phil,

So then wouldn't you want the bong to issue force <forward energy> into the opponent, as opposed to just use it as a momentary cover? IMO all the moves, when possible are best used to gain some kind of advantage, an offensive measure--to challenge the balance, position, etc of the opponent in order to whack his ability to counter when you attack..
Exactly, we are on the same page. Forward energy is a tenet of WC accross lineages.

[Phil Redmond]

I agree you can't use real forward energy when going backward...

I am not generally looking to go backwards however, with a couple of exceptions..


And forward energy... Which is what gives the bong it's shape.. But without the body behind it there can be no offensive component in it, which is what I want--to be offensive, whenever possible.
You can use forward energy while retreating. And anyone who says a WC person never has to retreat/avoid/sidestep has never been in a real fight. I know I can make people have to retreat even if they're better than me.

[YungChun]

You can use forward energy while retreating. And anyone who says a WC person never has to retreat/avoid/sidestep has never been in a real fight. I know I can make people have to retreat even if they're better than me.
It's not about never retreating or sidestepping, I never said that........... It's what happens after that, if something happens after that.

Most folks who end up reeling backward in a real fight will find that the opponent has now gained momentum and power, and IMO will have a very tough time recovering.. Again IMO straight line reward movement is not the 'best way', and not something even seen in the forms or anywhere else in the system that I am aware of. I have used this intentionally ABD but only as a tactical sport application. In a real life threat if you can go backwards in a straight line then I would strongly suggest going backward all the way the F out of town and avoid "fighting" at all.

IMO forward energy, or chung chee, "heavy sticking" which comes from the body cannot be made while going in reverse.. We can fill our limbs with forward spring energy no matter how we move.. But if we are moving in reverse then we have reverse momentum or negative momentum.. If we are going sideways or otherwise moving without a base or ground connection or forward momentum then I would have to say that by definition we cannot generate forward energy from the body, which by definition is going/pressing forward, either with or without forward momentum.. We can indeed convert, we can change, we can sidestep, we can be moved backward but unless and until we set and connect our structure with the ground via the legs/body then we cannot generate chung chee and make real power which requires a strong ground connection, or "horse" and connection with the opponent..IMO..

[YungChun]

Ving Tsun man through and through ah Jim ....

Oooh ahhh ;) :p

DREW
As opposed to what exactly?

[k gledhill]

we go forwards , bong goes sideways/ lateraly to the centerline L<+> R

Any energy bong meets is moved laterally , sideways, as we attack forwards

guys shouldnt be able to push you back if they push the bong sao you should make their energy pointed at you go sideways as they push ..not collapsing the bong back to do it ...ergo chisao .

this allows us to maintain an attack without giving the attacker a place to put his energy on our structure, we dont use the bong to unbalance for this reason we sink our bridge , aka move the elbow down and strike, forming the line / zone clearing transfer protocol of lateral deflection and simultaneous strike ..in bong too...like a pak sao , jum sao punch tansao punch ....all have lateral energy alnog or off the line [ tansao elbow spreads off the line as it hits ] to create lateral energy . jum & tan do this lateral force development as they strike in along the line ...a perfect 1-2 combination for us

tan/jum strikes have no platform to place energy due to their angles , bong has no place to put energy because its moving sideways or will move you sideways :D

so much chi-sao makes this bong action, then dropping bong elbow, to a tan strike and again and again, to perfect it for a fight, not a sticky encounter ...althought through the training, anyone trying to stick will have a trained response, bong elbow drops, other hand strikes....

trying to use forward energy in bong is wrestling attempting to use force to unblalnce and de-stabalize through a different idea than VT ..Vt is trying to maintain a constant striking attack , through simple strikes , and rotational parry/strike, bong/strike, jut/strike, etc...while going forwards and yet our clearing actions , bong /pak/etc..go laterally relative to our centerline and our strikes as they go a-b like an ' + ' seen from above....all relative to our arms and our centerlines and the given line of force from the opponent....this is why Yip Man would say the opponent would show us how to attack...we simply take the given arm etc...and use either side of our mirror ability with either arm to work the sides given, in perpetuity [is that a word ?]

a common mistake in many is to attack with a bong like a cork screw from wrong chi-sao thinking , works for big guys ;) ... a smaller person does not learn ways to go in with a forward bong :D even large strong guys who attempt to place force on bong should have the energy go past your ears [ if they aim at your head :D] it needs close proximity to work so they come with the sudden lack of support into your strike :D
but to stop them falling forwrds we put a fist in their face :D so thoughtfull .


at high speed attack nothing slows the arms down, except a grab [bilgee] we dont stop in bong to jam [ chmkil =drop the arms after bong] we transfer arms as bil gee or senk/tutsao if the bridge is to high for normal techniques...

as Wong Shun Leung used to say " you should never see bong -sao " BLINK..student to coach "what was that ? SLAP !! dont think feeeeeeel

even if it is used it's SPEED of rotation displaces the arm from ballistic forces generated , and yet the arm doesnt go past its functional space because we do it in Chum kil to train it to move WITH our rotation of the centerline , and low on the dummy arm [not for height use specificaly] to develop the SLAP on the imovable arm ;) anything we hit after that will move if t doesnt THEN we use lop sao [bilgee]...nothing to do with a hi / lo bong ...you can put bong anywhere

1 bong in SLT, but, we train to develop several things in chum kil..not heights as application, but how we can develop displacement force without injuring ourselves by repetative actions of the upper lats on out necks [low double bongs, as attacking either side, either lead leg] ...how to use either bong with either lead leg attacking and facing , but not squarely as chi-sao........a bong moving up and down ,attacking ax'ed brideg in a parrallel [converging line, we get closer :D ] to an running opponent....a turning bong to train the unity of SLT facing and arms in harmony , can be used to flow from a bong to lan or whatever [ no set pices] ...we never open our centerlines ...except for bil gee....and then its becasue plan A & B failed for a while :o


bil gee has methods to simply regain an outside flankarm if the bridge is raised beyond our functional levels, in other words bong doesnt point at the ceiling ..bilsaos go under the arms from x our lines to the outside of the attacking raised limb....not bong jam step in lose our working space...but oh recovery keep attacking close and fast hurting the guy ...a lot of chi-sao can tae many to the controling trapping way just because they lose sight of striking and the results...because so many stand in front of them everyday they get a false reality ...ergo ass handed to them in ring fights.

my 2 cents:D

[YungChun]

I agree with most of what you said..



trying to use forward energy in bong is wrestling attempting to use force to unblalnce and de-stabalize through a different idea than VT ..


Can't agree that Bong doesn't use/need forward energy.. IMO that's what allows it to keep it's shape and turn them..

[k gledhill]

trained shape force not pushing forwards is my point ..yes it needs energy forwards no to collapse but not to use force v force by forward pressure ...in chisao the fingertips should almost touch the partners opposite biceps....words eh !? we talk the sam language but for terms and expressions ;)
Ive met and chi-saed aplenty who try to fight with the chi-sao as a force domineering method to corkscrewin with forward bong force like its a leaning in thing...thats what i mean as no forward energy to try to trap by force collapse ...trap bs ...:D

[YungChun]

Ive met and chi-saed aplenty who try to fight with the chi-sao as a force domineering method to corkscrewin with forward bong force like its a leaning in thing...thats what i mean as no forward energy to try to trap by force collapse ...trap bs ...:D
Okay..

I see that as a kind of a stage a lot of folks go through.. I agree this is not the ideal.. I was taught to make the 'heavy sticking' once you take the line.. 'flow low to high'.. But I think the over emphasis (error) may be a natural step for folks to learn how to get the body involved, the key IMO is when..

I see whatever level of energy as still very much supported by/driven by the body, even when you are just a "revolving door" or on low flow.

I do see the opportunity to close off their facing and take position with it, by adding our power to theirs to help them leave the line, if that makes sense.

How about the backward issue? Do you see this tactic (bong or other) in play while not set or backpedaling?

One of these days I'll get down there to hang.. I can't wait to hear you explain all
your stuff all in one non-stop stream of consciousness thingy. ;)

[k gledhill]

bong isnt for going back its attacking in a partnership...one xe'd attacking punch 1 rear following punch...you dont recieve with bong you attack 1st . attack his lead line of force as he presents it, so get close enought o be 'in the response area' not jumping around on the peirmiter , get in , IF that attacking engagemnt is x'ed , hours of chisao work for you, making it possible for you to recover the hit in plan b protocol as SLT teaches ...from plan a being interupted.. plan A is 2 fists firing away froma given tactcal direction of the opponents movements...like boxing only no lead legs .

If I lose the attack I go for a baseline perimiter face off again...evasive footwork in close proximity so I can still work the guy ...or he works me ;)

the X'ing of the line as senk/tut sao...is the clearing action of 'how to take my bong from under the arm and transfer it back to my otside lines without grabbing the arm as lop in a set routine [ SLOW ]....the idea of using heavy hands isnt required just back to hitting ;)
chisao can be misleading ..we are regaining our attack lines because someone has x'ed ours we dont stop or turn we keep SLT facing and sharply or whateverly :D the arm so it keeps xing more than it intended to in the 1st place ...we move it further than it wanst to go , with one lateral action coupled with vu by the bongs bicep , we then shoot in the opening to ...whatever ... as long as we are maintaining offensive inward attacks to PRESSURE the guy.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!

[Phil Redmond]

trained shape force not pushing forwards is my point ..yes it needs energy forwards no to collapse but not to use force v force by forward pressure ...in chisao the fingertips should almost touch the partners opposite biceps....words eh !? . . .
It depends on the lineage. The TWC bong sao doesn't use the "broken wing" shape. The wrist, finger tips, and forearm are in line. In the Tan the wrist and finger tips are straight so our Bong is the same. One just rotates into the other.

[k gledhill]

we are similar , but tan is just a training position for a further defelct /strike idea's in development ...tan is the process not the product..it develops a certain strike combined with jum/strike as the partnership ...

our tan + bong are similar ..our fingertips...point at the biceps as a marker to develop lateral focus....the wrist doesnt matter limp or fingers pointing as tan because its a punch..not a shape.
the idea of tan isnt the hand its how it shapes the elbow , same as jum . how it develops a certain strike from the centerline using the forearms acute angles as they strike out x ing the line at the witst BUT also starting the punches from elbows in..as SLT teaches , not as static pose /shape blocks but as the 1st 1/2 of a developing full strike.....

btw hope your sons doing better .

[Ultimatewingchun]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!


***My thoughts exactly.

[Chuan fa]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!

That exactly what I was thinking.

[Liddel]

As opposed to what exactly?

Easy tiger, as opposed to someone who does VT but squares off and looks like a kickboxer.

It was meant as a positive comment....

(in my best Pacino (sp?) voice)

Ooh Ahhh.....:)

DREW

[Liddel]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!

9 Pages of how people interprit and USE bong more like it....

Have you been listening to DRE, "Smoke weed every day"......:D

DREW

[sihing]

It depends on the lineage. The TWC bong sao doesn't use the "broken wing" shape. The wrist, finger tips, and forearm are in line. In the Tan the wrist and finger tips are straight so our Bong is the same. One just rotates into the other.

Phil,

I realized now, the keeping the wrist straight inline on Bong sau like I used to do in TWC, makes it harder to relax the forearm. Now my wrist is loose, which allows the forearm the flexibility to adapt and change the direction of the force coming in towards you, you can flow much better with relaxed wrists and make use of bong the way Kevin talks about. The old disadvantage GM Cheung talked about, regarding the bent wrist being suseptable to wrist locks and such is not the case here, since bong is never used as a first action against an attack (i.e. in non contact position, he punches and I bong, this is a no no when hands are up, only when your hands are down do you use throwing (paau) bong to catch the punch..), but rather as a helping action meant to clear the line for your attack and is felt not seen. Definetly different usage and concept than the TWC method:)

James

[YungChun]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!

About 2000 times better than 40 pages of why WCK sucks/doesn't suck..! :)

[Phil Redmond]

Phil,

I realized now, the keeping the wrist straight inline on Bong sau like I used to do in TWC, makes it harder to relax the forearm. Now my wrist is loose, which allows the forearm the flexibility to adapt and change the direction of the force coming in towards you, you can flow much better with relaxed wrists and make use of bong the way Kevin talks about. The old disadvantage GM Cheung talked about, regarding the bent wrist being suseptable to wrist locks and such is not the case here, since bong is never used as a first action against an attack (i.e. in non contact position, he punches and I bong, this is a no no when hands are up, only when your hands are down do you use throwing (paau) bong to catch the punch..), but rather as a helping action meant to clear the line for your attack and is felt not seen. Definetly different usage and concept than the TWC method:)

James
I know you've found your niche with Gary Lam and that's all good. So without being disrepectful to what you learned in the past what was taught then is not exactly what is taught now in TWC. I have actually been re-introduced to TWC. But like I always say. I can show you better that I can tell you. I mean that. In fact, I'm leaving Chatham for Toronto in the morning and I'll be there for a few days. I can clear up any misunderstandings you have about TWC if you were to meet me then. Many people who have studied TWC and left or decided to add their own touch will be very surprised on what they have missed. And again, I mean no disrespect to anyone but the truth is the truth. Also remember that I am a martial artist that happens to train in Wing Chun. Which means I'm not a blind follower of any man/style/system. I do understand that particular martial arts have their strengths and weakness. I ask grapplers what they do and how they counter other grapplers. I ask kickers, boxers, Thai fighters, etc. I listen and learn. I've seen things that Ernie does that I could use. I learned things from Duncan Leung that I could use. I'm a black belt in Aikijiujitsu and I can use things from that art. I studied Fu Jow Pai and Hung Ga and I can use things from there as well. If I "win" a fight regardless of what "style' I used did I not "win"?

[sanjuro_ronin]

9 Pages of how people interprit and USE bong more like it....

Have you been listening to DRE, "Smoke weed every day"......:D

DREW

:D
I don't know what you mean !
:D

[tjwingchun]

Holy Crap !!
9 pages of discussion about what "bong" is !!

Better not join in the discussion as it will go on for another 10 pages at least :D but what the hell.

My view is simple, the bong sau has only two uses, as already mentioned when the arms are down and the defense reflex kicks in or what I term an "oh fook!" technique, or when the wrist is taken and you still have the ability to use the forearm in a high elbow position to block an incoming attack.

The numerous bong sau in the dummy form and constantly throughout chi sau, in my view are not just bong sau, they also represent a "high elbow", by that I mean when an arm has been used either offensively or defensively and is away from the "fixed elbow" position approximately one fist distance from the chest.

After the bong has been performed and the high elbow is used to manipulate or control an opponent it is a lan sau (barrier), when it is used to put energy into an opponent, whether the arm or the body, it is a cup/gwai jarn (elbow strike). The process of getting the arm into high elbow position is the bong sau, once there it changes into whatever the situation requires in the same way as fook sau changes to tan, jum, pak, gan, gum or a strike.

There are so many bong sau's in the forms of Wing Chun simply because you must have some idea what to do next after you have used a technique, though chi sau you feel the energies in your opponents arms and the dummy teaches "from here you can do this". Also in my view there is also no real difference between a bong/wu sau and a quan sau, the only difference depends on whether the attack you are defending is high or low.

So many points to pick up on in this thread I have tried to stick just to my basic thoughts.

Not online as much at the moment as have other priorities, so if I don't get back with a reply right away I may just be tied up :eek:

[sihing]

I know you've found your niche with Gary Lam and that's all good.
Actually I've been spending the majority of my time over the last 6-8mths training in Ernie's WSL/GL method, developing more WSL basics rather than the material Sifu Gary teaches. I've found this has improved my performance immensely:)

So without being disrepectful to what you learned in the past what was taught then is not exactly what is taught now in TWC. I have actually been re-introduced to TWC.
Does that mean everything William taught before this year is useless and or not TWC as we have seen in William video's and books? For example, if I purchase William's new video on chi sau, am I getting the public version of things or is this material the real deal. And how does it feel to have to relearn things now, since you were already awarded a Master Level in TWC a couple of years ago. What does your Master Level mean, if you are relearning things now:confused:

But like I always say. I can show you better that I can tell you. I mean that. In fact, I'm leaving Chatham for Toronto in the morning and I'll be there for a few days. I can clear up any misunderstandings you have about TWC if you were to meet me then.
I agree, things are always better explain and learned when direct personal contact is achieved. Unfortunately, Toronto is about a 15hr drive from T Bay, and we have snow on the ground now and I would never make it down there with my old wreck. One of these days we will meet up for sure:)

Many people who have studied TWC and left or decided to add their own touch will be very surprised on what they have missed. And again, I mean no disrespect to anyone but the truth is the truth.
What truth are you referring to? I have an old Australian MA mag article about William, from the early 80's, late 70's, with William stating back then that he was teaching the complete TWC system, and disapproved of instructors holding information back. What are we too believe when 20+ yrs later he starts to teach the real stuff:confused:
Also remember that I am a martial artist that happens to train in Wing Chun. Which means I'm not a blind follower of any man/style/system. I do understand that particular martial arts have their strengths and weakness. I ask grapplers what they do and how they counter other grapplers. I ask kickers, boxers, Thai fighters, etc. I listen and learn. I've seen things that Ernie does that I could use. I learned things from Duncan Leung that I could use. I'm a black belt in Aikijiujitsu and I can use things from that art. I studied Fu Jow Pai and Hung Ga and I can use things from there as well. If I "win" a fight regardless of what "style' I used did I not "win"?
For me, when I fight it is me fighting, not WC. WC is a training method, which provides me with tools that I choose to use in a fight. I too learn from other methods of fighting. Ive got tons of material that is non WC related and have friends/students that have studied other MA systems. When I discuss things MA related with them, I listen to what they say and try to learn from it. If it is useful for me I will incorporate into my training and thinking, if not I disgard it. Being open minded is key, but it is still adviseable to have a base system, a body engine persay that gives you the basics that everyfighter needs, stance/stability, footwork/mobility, upper and lower body work and basic concepts and strategies to apply with in combat.
Good luck in your training Phil, and happy Birthday:)



James.........

[monji112000]

my opinion is and always will be .. if you can use whatever you think it is in a real situation then it doesn't matter if you agree with me or not. ;) I would love to actually experience some other views on the subject but I never have the time. the few occasions I did visit schools i wasn't really happy with the outcome.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"So without being disrepectful to what you learned in the past what was taught then is not exactly what is taught now in TWC. I have actually been re-introduced to TWC." (Phil)


***Does That mean everything William taught before this year is useless and or not TWC as we have seen in William video's and books? For example, if I purchase William's new video on chi sau, am I getting the public version of things or is this material the real deal. And how does it feel to have to relearn things now, since you were already awarded a Master Level in TWC a couple of years ago. What does your Master Level mean, if you are relearning things now." :confused: (James)
...............................

"Many people who have studied TWC and left or decided to add their own touch will be very surprised on what they have missed. And again, I mean no disrespect to anyone but the truth is the truth." (Phil)


***What truth are you referring to? I have an old Australian MA mag article about William, from the early 80's, late 70's, with William stating back then that he was teaching the complete TWC system, and disapproved of instructors holding information back. What are we too believe when 20+ yrs later he starts to teach the real stuff." :confused: (James)

....................................

I'M WITH YOU ON THIS, JAMES. I'm afraid my old friend Phil Redmond has taken some "new" development within William Cheung's World Wing Chun Kung Fu Association too much to heart. (Probably because he's too close to it to see it objectively).

Namely, that once again William Cheung has raised the bar. First, years ago, it was 8 level tests to the Gold Sash Instructor Level. Then he added two more tests so that it was now Level 10 that was the Gold Sash.

Then he added 4 levels toward the Red Sash Master Level. Then two more for a total of 6 extra tests after the Gold Sash to the Master level Red Sash.

AND AS OF ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO IT'S NOW "CLOSED DOOR" STUDENT. WITH KEITH MAZZA BEING THE FIRST. AND PHIL REDMOND BECAME THE SECOND PERSON WITHIN THE PAST YEAR.

And that's it - so far.

But I've been around William Cheung since August, 1983 - and I doubt very highly that Keith or Phil are learning anything "new or old" that could be termed SIGNIFICANT.

AND "SIGNIFICANT" IS THE KEY WORD.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not BUYING it, Phil. Because I've been around William Cheung long enough to know what's significant and what's a minor point. I'm not one of those guys who left years ago.

Also, James..the situation gets complicated when you realize that many years ago a number of people left BEFORE William Cheung taught a lot of significant new things...(including your first TWC instructor, Brian Newadny, btw...)

BUT - as someone who's been here all these years...I can tell you categorically that the final SIGNIFICANT pieces were shown/taught at least 7-8 years ago.

Since then there's really nothing new under the TWC sun.

ASIDE FROM THE NEW MATH.

Sorry, Phil. You know I consider you to be a good friend - but I gotta tell it like it is. I have organized and hosted some 25-30 seminars given by William Cheung through the years - and have taught his system for the last 23 years to hundreds of students - and have attended countless private seminars/private lessons with him in addition to his public seminars. And I'm still his student.

So I know what I'm talking about.

[Phil Redmond]

Like Keith and I always say. We must have taken the short bus to school cause we're still learning.

[Phil Redmond]

I'M WITH YOU ON THIS, JAMES.[/B] I'm afraid my old friend Phil Redmond has taken some "new" development within William Cheung's World Wing Chun Kung Fu Association too much to heart. (Probably because he's too close to it to see it objectively).

No need to be afraid about that I'm not objective. I'm like you Vic. I don't buy BS either.

[Phil Redmond]

James, Vic, no one said what was taught before was wrong. All I'm saying is that there is more. And that is being acknowleged by people other than myself who are not too close to be objective.

[Ultimatewingchun]

But the real questions are, what about that "more", Phil?

Specifically.....

1) What are the details of that "more"?

2) How significant to one's overall fight game would that "more" be?