No Chi Sau??

[Wilson]

Can you do wing chun without chi sau?

Seriously?

[Mr Punch]

Yep.

Seriously!

I met a guy who was Malaysian and he said he was doing some kind of Malaysian wingchun which came from mainland lines. He had really good energy: showed me a lot of nice stuff from two person drills and me chucking some random stuff at him... then we did some chi sao and I took him apart. Bear in mind I wasn't trying: I was deliberately going slowly and controlledly as I always do with people I'm new to (at least for the first few minutes!). He then told me that he'd never done it before .

Nice guy. Very good short power.

[Vajramusti]

Can you do wing chun without chi sau?

Seriously?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing Chun is not the only martial art nor the only way of self defense--but chi sao is an integral part of the version of the art which Ip man helped develop.

joy chaudhuri

[Mr Punch]

I would agree if you're talking about Yip Man lineage wing chun but the question is just wing chun.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Chi Sao is a drill, like any other, good and bad, take the good, disregard the bad.
Like any other drill it has pros and cons.
Its like asking if you can do boxing without the Double end bag, or doing grapling without shrimping or bridge drills.
Sure, but why drop something of it serves a purpose?

[t_niehoff]

Why look at this from a theoretical POV? Or listen to opinions? Instead, look at the evidence.

First, start with your performance results (after all, that is what really matters, right?). Get together with some nonWCK guys who have some decent attributes and simply fight/spar with them while (try) maintaining contact (attached fighting) and see for yourself if you can successfully perform all those things you've "trained" to do in chi sao. That will tell you how useful your chi sao "training" has been. If you don't do this, you'll never know. As most people have never done this, they don't know; they are just talking out their @ss.

Second, ask those people who insist chi sao is necessary and useful training to show in fighting (with nonWCK people with decent attributes) what they can do in attached fighting. I doubt most people will take this Pepsi challenge (after all, they will say, I am sifu and don't have anything to prove -- particularly that I can do what I flap my gums about); they know in their heart that they won't be able to make those things work. And if they did try, you'd see that can't do it any better than you. You'd see that the "masters" and guys who have been playing chi sao for twenty years won't have any genuine contact fighting skills.

My view is that WCK is not "in" the forms and drills, like chi sao. The forms and drills are only representations of the superficial, surface movements of WCK. They don't teach or develop contact fighting skills. They can't by their very nature. WCK exists only in application, in fighting. No fighting, no WCK.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Why look at this from a theoretical POV? Or listen to opinions? Instead, look at the evidence.

First, start with your performance results (after all, that is what really matters, right?). Get together with some nonWCK guys who have some decent attributes and simply fight/spar with them while (try) maintaining contact (attached fighting) and see for yourself if you can successfully perform all those things you've "trained" to do in chi sao. That will tell you how useful your chi sao "training" has been. If you don't do this, you'll never know. As most people have never done this, they don't know; they are just talking out their @ss.

Second, ask those people who insist chi sao is necessary and useful training to show in fighting (with nonWCK people with decent attributes) what they can do in attached fighting. I doubt most people will take this Pepsi challenge (after all, they will say, I am sifu and don't have anything to prove -- particularly that I can do what I flap my gums about); they know in their heart that they won't be able to make those things work. And if they did try, you'd see that can't do it any better than you. You'd see that the "masters" and guys who have been playing chi sao for twenty years won't have any genuine contact fighting skills.

My view is that WCK is not "in" the forms and drills, like chi sao. The forms and drills are only representations of the superficial, surface movements of WCK. They don't teach or develop contact fighting skills. They can't by their very nature. WCK exists only in application, in fighting. No fighting, no WCK.

I agree with you in most of what you said.
Question though, how do you view "pummeling" ?
All grapplers drill it and yes, I know it is not chi sao, but perhaps it is what chi sao is suppose to "become" ?

[Dave P]

Simple answer....

No

[sanjuro_ronin]

Simple answer....

No

LOL, to what question Dave?
:D

[Ali. R]

LOL, to what question Dave?
:D


I’m sure he’s referring to the opening of this thread… It maybe a short post but to me, it’s the very strongest on this thread, just my opinion…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[couch]

Can you do wing chun without chi sau?

Seriously?

Can you? Yes.

Should you? No.

Should you just do Chi Sau? No. You should also perform other drills such as long-arm Chi Sau and Goh Sau to help with bridging. Then the 'rest of it.'

Best,
Kenton

[RGVWingChun]

Wing Chun without Chi Sao? According to Ip Chun, Ip Man focused on Chi Sao 90% of the time...Ip Man said Chi Sao was the genius of wing chun.

Me personally, I don't think wing chun can be done without chi sao, because the forms only make sense through the chi sao training....wing chun is close quarter combat system...it doesn't make sense apart from bridge contact..."seek the bridge"...chi sao make the forms make sense, and chi sao helps to make fighting make sense.

That's my opinion of course....

Moses

[k gledhill]

Chi sao is the soul of the system...it hones the arms to sharp razors that cut as they slide in ...rotation...2 razors v one club

developing an angle to make the razor do 2 actions , even a razor can be dragged along an arm and not cut if the angles are wide enough, you may take some hair off but we arent giving hair cuts are we :D

[Mr Punch]

So most people here think:

a) it's a matter of opinion: something to be supported or not (and everybody here has the opinion that wc can't be done without chi sao)

b) all other forms of wing chun (other than Yip Man) are worthless (possibly even more so than other MA).

Riight. More arrogance from the WC 'community'. Oh well. At least you're all agreed on this one! :rolleyes:

The answers:

a) It's not a matter of opinion; it is a fact that some non-Yip Man lines don't use chi sao. Therefore all of you Yip Manners speaking for all the lines you've never experienced and stating your opinion that you can't like it's a fact are, well... wrong.

b) You are stating your opinion as categorical based on your belief that Yip Man's chun is the strongest... on what foundation? Because quantity makes (beats?) quality? Because 'we're' all so unified in our agreement of this one point? Because of all the death matches you've had with chunners from other lines?

LOLorama. :D

[Mr Punch]

Wing Chun without Chi Sao? According to Ip Chun, Ip Man focused on Chi Sao 90% of the time...Ip Man said Chi Sao was the genius of wing chun. Which one of his many many differently taught students did he say this to?

Since we do seem to be talkign exclusively about Yip Man's chun, then I would have to say that chi sao is a useful training tool... and a good starting point for teaching some points, but 90%? Sorry, but even if this is straight from one of the incarnations of Yip Man, I don't agree.

[anerlich]

TWC requires forms, including the dummy, and chi sao.

You could have an art with similar techniques and tactics, but IMO you should call it something else.


Question though, how do you view "pummeling" ?
All grapplers drill it and yes, I know it is not chi sao, but perhaps it is what chi sao is suppose to "become" ?

The view of the "self-appointed WC-realism intelligentsia" seems to be that the range in which chi sao is performed, "trapping range", is artificial and contrived, and in "real fights" appears only for split seconds, before either collapse through into clinch range, or break apart again. For this reason, the techniques you practice from here are allegedly a waste of time as the opportunity to employ them hardly ever appears in real fighting.

Hand fighting and grip fighting as wrestling drills are IMO more like chi sao than pummelling.

Not all wrestlers regard pummelling as valuable, same as not all WCers like chi sao ... apparently.

[k gledhill]

Ive met some lineages that just roll 3 times and do stuff , no development of ability in arms to strike , rather searching fo impact after 3 rolls....others roll to simply and very randomly do anything for no real reason other than 'sifu said' :D

[Liddel]

Personally i think you cant get the same level of VT without Chi Sao because certain VT habbits are so far from every day natural habbits which need to be drilled in isolation prior to sparring to become second nature.


Wing Chun without Chi Sao? According to Ip Chun, Ip Man focused on Chi Sao 90% of the time...Ip Man said Chi Sao was the genius of wing chun.

He may have said that back in those days, but they had better balance.

Chi Sao may have been done 90% of the time but it was very differnt than what is considered or how most people approach chi sao today IMO.

Mainly because once a student reached a stable level of application through Chi Dan and Poon Sao they did it with resistence, intent and it was full contact.

Not to mention it was supplimented outside of training with fighting other styles way more than today......

This was my Sifu's experience from mid 50's when he began learning untill he started his own school.

We cant compare without recognising the differences that have happened over time.

DREW

[Vajramusti]

Lots of generalizations on this thread about what some or all wcers do in chi sao.
Actually- there appears to be great variations in the details of chi sao across the wc spectrum
of schools, teachers and lines..

Despite Kevin's comments there are folks who dont just mechanically roll 3 times and then do "things".

Similarly there are folks who dont just mechanically roll on and on without knowing what they are doing..But not everyone is interested in being on YouTube or entertain forum folks.

Similarly paralleling one of Andrew's comments...if one is not doing forms and applications that arise from the forms, chi sao and gor sao- why call it wing chun.. why not call it Joe's xyz-perhaps it could be effective in the right hands. WC is not the only way to do things but why distort the use of the term beyond recognition and add to the noise?

Boxing is boxing, wrestling is wrestling, jj is jj and mma is mma and wc is wc.specially on a wc forum..

Some rectification of names and labels could help communication. And- less same old same old preaching...?

Several claims on this thread are by people who seem to think they know what every wcer is doing after good survey research.

joy chaudhuri

[Lee Chiang Po]

I have difficulty understanding sometimes, but from what I have read through this entire thread is that most seem to consider Chi Sao to be a form of sparing. It is not. It is merely a 2 man drill that lets each man practice his skills. It can be switched up and changed to give them both practice in all their skills. You can apply resistance and forward pressure against a partner that will help him in his development as well as your own, but it is not a form of sparring.
Chi Sao can develop a life of it's own if you let it.

[k gledhill]

A life of its own , you can say that again !!...

[sanjuro_ronin]

TWC requires forms, including the dummy, and chi sao.

You could have an art with similar techniques and tactics, but IMO you should call it something else.



The view of the "self-appointed WC-realism intelligentsia" seems to be that the range in which chi sao is performed, "trapping range", is artificial and contrived, and in "real fights" appears only for split seconds, before either collapse through into clinch range, or break apart again. For this reason, the techniques you practice from here are allegedly a waste of time as the opportunity to employ them hardly ever appears in real fighting.

Hand fighting and grip fighting as wrestling drills are IMO more like chi sao than pummelling.

Not all wrestlers regard pummelling as valuable, same as not all WCers like chi sao ... apparently.

Interesting, thanks.

[t_niehoff]

I agree with you in most of what you said.
Question though, how do you view "pummeling" ?
All grapplers drill it and yes, I know it is not chi sao, but perhaps it is what chi sao is suppose to "become" ?

Again, I don't think approaching this from a theoretical perspective is helpful. Instead, we should look at it from a practical, individual perspective based on experience. When you begin to actually fight from contact (attached fighting), you'll see very quickly what you need to be able to do, what works, what doesn't work, etc.

Pummeling is more than arm swimming, but is fighting for position while in close body contact. Do you need that in contact fighting? If you do some contact fighting the answer will be obvious. Is it chi sao? No.

[t_niehoff]

Lots of generalizations on this thread about what some or all wcers do in chi sao.
Actually- there appears to be great variations in the details of chi sao across the wc spectrum
of schools, teachers and lines..


Forms are forms, chi sao is chi sao -- you can generalize about those "things". Certainly different WCK teachers often have a different emphasis in what they "teach". But the nature of "exercise", whether form or chi sao, won't change.



Despite Kevin's comments there are folks who dont just mechanically roll 3 times and then do "things".

Similarly there are folks who dont just mechanically roll on and on without knowing what they are doing..But not everyone is interested in being on YouTube or entertain forum folks.


It doesn't matter how anyone performs an unrealistic, artifical drill like chi sao -- regardless of how anyone does it, it will not -- because it cannot by its very nature -- develop realistic (fighting) skills. And that's because realistic skills come from realistic practice. This is very easy to show.



Similarly paralleling one of Andrew's comments...if one is not doing forms and applications that arise from the forms, chi sao and gor sao- why call it wing chun.. why not call it Joe's xyz-perhaps it could be effective in the right hands. WC is not the only way to do things but why distort the use of the term beyond recognition and add to the noise?


Like most nonfighters, you approach this backwards. Certainly WCK has a technical repertoire (that is easily identifiable). You don't need a form to learn that repertoire, anymore than you need a form to learn the technical repetoire of boxing, wrestling, judo, BJJ, MT, etc. Moreover, when you learn that repetoire in a form and practice it in chi sao, you are NEVER learning the realistic application of that technical repertoire. You are only learning the artifical, unrealistic use of those movements. You can only learn the realisitic application through realsitic practice. Worse still, by learning that way, you are essentially learning fantasy fu because unrealistic, artificial practice develops an artificial, unrealsitic "understanding". This is why most "application" we see on the net, in magazines, in chi sao, etc. you'll never see them pull off in sparring. Put just about any WCK guy in a contact fighting situation and you'll see how all their "application" goes out the window.



Boxing is boxing, wrestling is wrestling, jj is jj and mma is mma and wc is wc.specially on a wc forum..


Very true, but we can learn useful things about training and fighting from fighters.



Some rectification of names and labels could help communication. And- less same
old same old preaching...?

Several claims on this thread are by people who seem to think they know what every wcer is doing after good survey research.


A person doesn't need to know what every WCKer is doing or do any surveys -- they can know what anyone, what any martial artisit, must do to develop fighting skills as that process is universal. By knowing that process, we can also tell whether or not any particular exercise, dril, etc. fits into that process (and so develops realistic skills) or not (and so doesn't develop skills).

[k gledhill]

Lots of generalizations on this thread about what some or all wcers do in chi sao.
Actually- there appears to be great variations in the details of chi sao across the wc spectrum
of schools, teachers and lines..

Despite Kevin's comments there are folks who dont just mechanically roll 3 times and then do "things".

Similarly there are folks who dont just mechanically roll on and on without knowing what they are doing..But not everyone is interested in being on YouTube or entertain forum folks.

Similarly paralleling one of Andrew's comments...if one is not doing forms and applications that arise from the forms, chi sao and gor sao- why call it wing chun.. why not call it Joe's xyz-perhaps it could be effective in the right hands. WC is not the only way to do things but why distort the use of the term beyond recognition and add to the noise?

Boxing is boxing, wrestling is wrestling, jj is jj and mma is mma and wc is wc.specially on a wc forum..

Some rectification of names and labels could help communication. And- less same old same old preaching...?

Several claims on this thread are by people who seem to think they know what every wcer is doing after good survey research.

joy chaudhuri

despite Kevins claims :D I wasn't claiming that everyone did this 3 rolls and 'must hit you ' . The implication being the chi-sao was simply a place to start wailing on each other in a 'lop fest' of 2 handed attacks after a 3 count .

[Vajramusti]

like most nonfighters, you approach this backwards.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not worth a reply.

joy chaudhuri

[RGVWingChun]

Which one of his many many differently taught students did he say this to?

Since we do seem to be talkign exclusively about Yip Man's chun, then I would have to say that chi sao is a useful training tool... and a good starting point for teaching some points, but 90%? Sorry, but even if this is straight from one of the incarnations of Yip Man, I don't agree.


You can see the quote from Ip Chun in his book "Wing Chun" by Ip Chun with the late Danny Connor

[t_niehoff]

like most nonfighters, you approach this backwards.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not worth a reply.

joy chaudhuri

There is no reply since that is just a fact, and one you can't deny. You aren't looking at WCK from a fighting perspective -- and for the simple reason that you are not fighting. You're not starting with the fight. You're starting from the other end -- hence my "backwards"comment -- and approaching it from a theoretical perspective (how you believe things should work in fighting) reinforced with unrealistic, artificial "practice", e.g., chi sao.

[Vajramusti]

Still not worth a reply-you dont know what I actually do, have done or will do.

joy chaudhuri

[Edmund]

Why would you not do chi sao when it's just about the only thing you're good at?
:p

[Vajramusti]

Who are you referring to?

joy chaudhuri

[Edmund]

Just a general statement.

WC people love chi sao so much they don't think it would be WC without chi sao as this thread shows.

[Vajramusti]

Ok-thanks for the clarification. Opinions abound. But FWIW I line up with the idea that chi sao is important for developing wing chun auto reflexes and developing the sense for what is open and when and what could open up and when.
You dont just throw bong sao, tan sao, fok sao shapes around or just chain punch. But chi sao is quite a process and meanings vary with people and schools. For me it is not only single and double and lop
but it also includes deveoping different kinds of timing and spontaneous combinations and gor sao, lat sao and moving in and out and changing angles, distance and foot work and controlling
what your structure, hands and feet are doing and controlling your opponent. And- wing chun folks I know and respect do work out with folks from other styles and boxers and grapplers.
Chi sao isnt fighting but it is an important link in wing chun's training system. In the details of chi sao there are lots of differences in details, practice, application and execution among schools. Sometimes in discussions we are not even talking abouth the same thing.Although there is good wing chun- there is a lot of substandard wing chun.

Also, wing chun folks who are going to do competitive fighting- some do do it- have to have a special training regimen-generally more aggressive than club training.

Thanks again for your clarification.

joy chaudhuri

[Liddel]

For me it is not only single and double and lop
but it also includes deveoping different kinds of timing and spontaneous combinations and gor sao, lat sao and moving in and out and changing angles, distance and foot work and controlling
what your structure, hands and feet are doing and controlling your opponent.

Im with you 100% here joy. Excellent call.

They way i train - this platform is sparring without full contact - punching hard is not the focus, thats done in full contact sparring with gear on.

DREW

[Edmund]

The reason I said what I did is because, to make another general statement, WC people are good at chi sao. They practice it a lot. This make them good at it.
If they suddenly stopped practicing it, they would not be good at anything else in my opinion (but trying to be as objective as possible).

They would be a poor imitator of another art without the background in that other art.

The original question is just a thought experiment essentially. The answers are a reflection of how much people value chi sao in relation to WC.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Again, I don't think approaching this from a theoretical perspective is helpful. Instead, we should look at it from a practical, individual perspective based on experience. When you begin to actually fight from contact (attached fighting), you'll see very quickly what you need to be able to do, what works, what doesn't work, etc.

Pummeling is more than arm swimming, but is fighting for position while in close body contact. Do you need that in contact fighting? If you do some contact fighting the answer will be obvious. Is it chi sao? No.

Should chi sao be more like Pummeling?

[KPM]

Just a general statement.

WC people love chi sao so much they don't think it would be WC without chi sao as this thread shows.

Which may be an indicator that perhaps you shouldn't just drop Chi Sao so readily from what you do. Maybe it does have some value. :eek:

[couch]

Ok-thanks for the clarification. Opinions abound. But FWIW I line up with the idea that chi sao is important for developing wing chun auto reflexes and developing the sense for what is open and when and what could open up and when.
You dont just throw bong sao, tan sao, fok sao shapes around or just chain punch.

joy chaudhuri

I agree with Joy.

It's important because it teaches you when to apply that "High Pressure Water Hose" when the line opens up.

In my Chi Sau world, the idea is to "move, control, hit." And if I were to pick just one out of those three, it would be to hit!

Best,
Kenton

[Edmund]

Which may be an indicator that perhaps you shouldn't just drop Chi Sao so readily from what you do. Maybe it does have some value. :eek:

I always said it has some.
I don't drop chi sao. I drop the useless aspects.

I also don't just do WC. I'm not a WC only person. Hence I have to weigh up the amount of chi sao I do, how I do it and what I'm doing it for.

*If* I spent 90% of my effort doing it like some people apparently, that leaves 10% for all the rest.

So that 90% better be pretty useful or I'm wasting quite a lot of effort getting good at something that has no use outside of WC circles.

[Wilson]

Should chi sao be more like Pummeling?

Good thought....one I've actually played with and really enjoyed.

If your end goal is not "to grapple", can you take the standard pummeling drill and look for elbows, knees, better positioning and angles...while at the same time learning to avoid grappling or the clinch and really use the WC distance?

Pummeling could be our "bridge" to working with other arts in a (umm...) realistic way???

[couch]

Good thought....one I've actually played with and really enjoyed.

If your end goal is not "to grapple", can you take the standard pummeling drill and look for elbows, knees, better positioning and angles...while at the same time learning to avoid grappling or the clinch and really use the WC distance?

Pummeling could be our "bridge" to working with other arts in a (umm...) realistic way???

Also, one of the most satisfying things that can happen is when you Chi Sao with someone with, say: a JJJ or a BJJ or a Judo or a ETC background. They will see opportunities and openings differently. Just this morning I had my senior training partner start to put me in an armlock in Chi Sau and it was exciting to escape this and hit!

Best,
Kenton

[LoneTiger108]

I also don't just do WC. I'm not a WC only person. Hence I have to weigh up the amount of chi sao I do, how I do it and what I'm doing it for.

*If* I spent 90% of my effort doing it like some people apparently, that leaves 10% for all the rest.

So that 90% better be pretty useful or I'm wasting quite a lot of effort getting good at something that has no use outside of WC circles.

Double edged this one Edmund.

If you're not a WC man, through and through, what makes you think you even know what chisau is? Let alone what you want it to be? Have you ever considered that it was 'meant' for Wing Chun circles ONLY?

Joy made some crucial points about 'everything else' that chisau explores, which makes it slightly more than a 'pattacake' session which I'm afraid to say I see quite a lot of online.

FWIW I believe Chisau to be a fundamental 'part' of WCK interactive excercise. Basically, connecting with the intent to control. WC students sure will be good at this skill in their own environment and you can converse and work out many things if you have an actual compliant partner. What I'm talking of are 'responses' (if I touch your elbow this way your reaction is...) Now we see chisau being tested more because people have different responses and are definately stronger athletes! But this shouldn't sway its purpose. Touch and finish. If you can't do this you may have just missed an important session!

Trouble is, I suppose we all get carried away, and from what I know of earlier competitions in the UK chisau soon developed into a sparring type selling point. This was never the intention by Ip Man, but its something that has happened so now we're forced to defend that which has also created more divides in the family.

IMHO Wing Chun with no Chisau like Ip Mans is an older version of Wing Chun. Not something to cast out on the streets, but something to be cherished.

[Edmund]

Double edged this one Edmund.

If you're not a WC man, through and through, what makes you think you even know what chisau is? Let alone what you want it to be? Have you ever considered that it was 'meant' for Wing Chun circles ONLY?



Well isn't that what the point of this topic was?
Regardless what the definition of chi sao is, for WC circles only it's very important.
It's something they devote the majority of their time doing at the cost of doing something else.

Hence the original question has the implication that doing chi sao all the time is defining their abilities. If it were gone, they wouldn't have any skills.

I'm not in the same position. I *can* stop doing chi sao. I don't need to justify all its methods and relevance because I'm not just doing chi sao 90% of the time.

[anerlich]

If your end goal is not "to grapple", can you take the standard pummeling drill and look for elbows, knees, better positioning and angles...while at the same time learning to avoid grappling or the clinch and really use the WC distance?

It's easy to add strikes to a pummelling style drill. Many MMA schools do this.

I don't think pummelling can teach you to "avoid" grappling when you both start with an underhook on each other in a classic neutral grappling position. If your aim is to avoid grappling, then avoid it.

If you want to become good at "antigrappling", learn how to grapple. Grapplers have the best antigrappling anyway as they are defending against grapplers all the time.

[Wilson]

If you want to become good at "antigrappling", learn how to grapple. Grapplers have the best antigrappling anyway as they are defending against grapplers all the time.

I agree with this 100%

From a standup fighter perspective, I think of the pummeling drill as a way of learning more about positioning and balance in that bridge/grapple range, with an emphasis on moving to striking rather than on takedowns.

Of course, if the other guy is trying to take you down during the drill, then that's an even better learning experience if you're trying to keep it on your feet to strike. Especially if they're a good grappler/wrestler.


Another question, do you believe you can you have an aggressive drill that works sensitivity? I think I hear some say that chi sau shouldn't be aggressive, but instead be cooperative. Thoughts?

[Vajramusti]

Should chi sao be more like Pummeling?(sanjuro ronin)

Another question, do you believe you can you have an aggressive drill that works sensitivity? (Wilson)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(No- to Ronin's question IMO

To Wilson's question-Agression and sensitivity are not mutually exclusive attributes.

IMO when folks dont learn enough wing chun-one can add bells and whistles from other systems. If you are going to wrestle-pummeling and hand grip drills can help.
But if you are going to do wing chun pummeling is not necessary.
I play my own wing chun game- a wrestler will beat you at his.
I have worked with good wrestlers to test wing chun.
Enough good chi sao you can begin to learn how to cut through close quarters work of other systems.

But if you dont learn enough wing chun, I can see people making their own stews.
Depends on what you want to do. Not selling dogmas))

joy chaudhuri

[Mr Punch]

To Wilson's question-Agression and sensitivity are not mutually exclusive attributes.Er, yes they are.

[Vajramusti]

Mr Punch


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vajramusti
To Wilson's question-Agression and sensitivity are not mutually exclusive attributes.

Er, yes they are.(Mr. Punch)
__________________


loi lau heui sung lat sau jik chung !!!

Punch when you should.

joy chaudhuri

[anerlich]

Another question, do you believe you can you have an aggressive drill that works sensitivity? I think I hear some say that chi sau shouldn't be aggressive, but instead be cooperative. Thoughts?


To some degree, all drills are cooperative. I don't agree that chi sao or pummelling have to be totally cooperative, however. Generally, the first thing you do after learning the basic pummelling drill is to fight for double underhooks. That's not cooperative, it's still a drill. Then you move on to adding armdrags, duckunders, snapdowns and shoots - not cooperative but still a drill. In BJJ you can roll in a cooperative fashion or go 100% competitive. When does it stop being a drill and turn into sparring? Which some might still regard as a drill because you're not trying to kill each other ASAP.

One of my gradings included about 30 minutes of "chi sao" - I finished that session with two black eyes, one side of my body red from impact, a bruise in the shape of a palm print on my chest with three individual fingers visible, and another in the shape of the ball and toe panel of a wrestling boot near my solar plexus. Good times. That's at the extreme aggression end, but you can work many drills on a specturm between total cooperation and total competition.


To Wilson's question-Agression and sensitivity are not mutually exclusive attributes.

Er, yes they are.(Mr. Punch)


Mr Punch, Please explain. I might agree with your logic, but IMO you need to justify this bald statement.

[Liddel]

Another question, do you believe you can you have an aggressive drill that works sensitivity? I think I hear some say that chi sau shouldn't be aggressive, but instead be cooperative. Thoughts?

Learning sure, later its should def not be cooperative IME.

Gor Sao and Lux have force and full intent where i train, you will see both controlled aggression and sensitivity at work.

IME it can seem co operative to someone looking in but both participants are VT stylists so of course both want to stick and control etc giving that appearence.
But its not, emphasised by strikes :o

If your talking Chi Dan Sao an isolated repetitive drill, you should have intent which lends to aggression IMO and its mainly about sensitivity being that the user is bound to 'playing the game' of keeping to the platform of Tan Da Bong - Fook Jum Da.

IME where Chi Sao is the most vunerable is in the intent of the participants.

Often i see younger students just putting thier punch out willy nilly, not aiming at the face properly which then effects the reaction of Bong....

The same with the punch after Tan, no intent effects the block of Jum. It becomes very easy to block and even in some cases with younger students i havent even reacted to show them they wont even touch me because of this lack of intent.

This IMO makes an already non realistic isolated drill even more unrealistic.

Thats why its so important to learn under a good teacher, they should know how to spot these things and assist in keeping it as real as possible for an isolated drill. They can also recognise new gained skills and move you on....

Its just a stepping stone to agressive un cooperative Gor and Lux Sao where all your VT can come out when and where needed. (and full on sparring of course :) )

DREW

[namron]

To some degree, all drills are cooperative. I don't agree that chi sao or pummelling have to be totally cooperative, however. Generally, the first thing you do after learning the basic pummelling drill is to fight for double underhooks. That's not cooperative, it's still a drill. Then you move on to adding armdrags, duckunders, snapdowns and shoots - not cooperative but still a drill. In BJJ you can roll in a cooperative fashion or go 100% competitive. When does it stop being a drill and turn into sparring? Which some might still regard as a drill because you're not trying to kill each other ASAP.

One of my gradings included about 30 minutes of "chi sao" - I finished that session with two black eyes, one side of my body red from impact, a bruise in the shape of a palm print on my chest with three individual fingers visible, and another in the shape of the ball and toe panel of a wrestling boot near my solar plexus. Good times. That's at the extreme aggression end, but you can work many drills on a specturm between total cooperation and total competition.



Mr Punch, Please explain. I might agree with your logic, but IMO you need to justify this bald statement.

certainly sound like good times andrew, what grading was that one and did you still have to cop sparring rounds after?

I really hate it when the will is there but the body is totally knackered during the end of a grade (which is usually where the sparring rounds sit).

Dunno how it is for you, but this is usually when sifu starts stacking multiple opponents (i.e. rounds of one opponent, two opponents, three opponents)

Almost a slug fest in the end cause all motor skills are shot from fatigue.

I would be interested in how others grading structures are.

Do all grades (especially senior grades) follow a similar spa to burn out phase at the end?

Been watching some of Allan Orr's stuff again, was wondering how they round out their grades too (allan you out there still?)

[anerlich]

The grading I did was all the forms, 108 dummy movements, weapons forms, weapons sparring with protective gear, 30 minutes of "chi sao" as described, then somewhere around 10 rounds of sparring with fresh opponents.

I'm a skeptic and secularist, but it was a pretty spiritual experience. I was pushed to my limit. I literally could not stand up afterward.

In Machado BJJ, you have to do 10 2 minute rounds with fresh opponents for the blue belt test, and this is the most physically demanding grading (though every rolling session is tough), but that was easy compared to this WC grading. Getting to purple belt was REALLY hard work over a period of years, but the actual grading day itself was actually not that taxing.

I'd love to see all the chi sao decriers here step up and show us how its done. I doubt the most vocal critic (guess who?) would last more than a few minutes, if that. Of course, it won't ever happen.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"To some degree, all drills are cooperative. I don't agree that chi sao or pummelling have to be totally cooperative, however. Generally, the first thing you do after learning the basic pummelling drill is to fight for double underhooks. That's not cooperative, it's still a drill. Then you move on to adding armdrags, duckunders, snapdowns and shoots - not cooperative but still a drill." (Anerlich)


***AND THE SAME WITH CHI SAO. It's best to learn and drill some stuff cooperatively (luk sao, punch from fuk, block/redirect with tan, lop sao, defend against it, palm strike, jut against it, etc., etc.) - and then compete with what you've learned. And keep building upon it.

But to take chi sao and turn it into an all out "competition" that takes up to 1/2 or 3/4's of your class time is absurd...

because whether it's cooperative or competitive it's STILL just a limited construct to what the total fight picture looks like.

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

And more to the point of this thread: I have recently begun a slightly different addition to the whole chi sao/pummeling...striking/grappling....thing. (Since I now consider what I do to be a mixed martial art).

Chi sao is chi sao in the wing chun class....pummeling is pummeling in the catch wrestling class....

And then in the all out sparring class I sometimes try to stop and start the action to point out where and when the two drills and their respective principles, strategies, and techniques can overlap and/or marry - creating a mixture wherein the basic concepts of both chi sao and pummeling are, in effect, thrown out and replaced by a simple understanding:

strike him or grab him as appropriate to the idea of inflicting immediate pain or dominance.

Period.

[sanjuro_ronin]

"To some degree, all drills are cooperative. I don't agree that chi sao or pummelling have to be totally cooperative, however. Generally, the first thing you do after learning the basic pummelling drill is to fight for double underhooks. That's not cooperative, it's still a drill. Then you move on to adding armdrags, duckunders, snapdowns and shoots - not cooperative but still a drill." (Anerlich)


***AND THE SAME WITH CHI SAO. It's best to learn and drill some stuff cooperatively (luk sao, punch from fuk, block/redirect with tan, lop sao, defend against it, palm strike, jut against it, etc., etc.) - and then compete with what you've learned. And keep building upon it.

But to take chi sao and turn it into an all out "competition" that takes up to 1/2 or 3/4's of your class time is absurd...

because whether it's cooperative or competitive it's STILL just a limited construct to what the total fight picture looks like.

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

And more to the point of this thread: I have recently begun a slightly different addition to the whole chi sao/pummeling...striking/grappling....thing. (Since I now consider what I do to be a mixed martial art).

Chi sao is chi sao in the wing chun class....pummeling is pummeling in the catch wrestling class....

And then in the all out sparring class I sometimes try to stop and start the action to point out where and when the two drills and their respective principles, strategies, and techniques can overlap and/or marry - creating a mixture wherein the basic concepts of both chi sao and pummeling are, in effect, thrown out and replaced by a simple understanding:

strike him or grab him as appropriate to the idea of inflicting immediate pain or dominance.

Period.

Chi Sao for positional dominance....who'd a thunk it ??!?!?
;)

[robwdwc]

Hi Terence,

My view is that WCK is not "in" the forms and drills, like chi sao. The forms and drills are only representations of the superficial, surface movements of WCK. They don't teach or develop contact fighting skills. They can't by their very nature. WCK exists only in application, in fighting. No fighting, no WCK.[/QUOTE]

Long time no speak!! :))

I agree with you whole heartedly. I always say in you can't transform a technique from chi sao to 'actual combat use' then don't train it in chi sao. We've all seen the 'chi sao' techniques in various media etc. People get 'good' at chi sao and get banged with a good hook punch or a over hand cross - and why, because they are 'expert' at straight line punches and 'touches' from chi sao, change the angles and it messes them up. Chi sao is an 'exercise' to build ting jing and basic understanding of of the use of the 3 seeds - tan, bong , fook and structure - once you got that take it to san sao and free the hands. Start with the trusty straight line punches so you are in your comfort zone then ask your partner to do any shape / angle punch. Be sure to get your partner to wear good gloves as it really hurts when your tan can't stop his cross or hook. Now I'm not refering to a 1-punch attack I'm refering to a good boxers hands that zips in 3 punches as fast a wing chun guy can 'let them go'. You'll find as you go to bridge against his jab he is changing real fast and not leaving his arm out as in chi sao - a bitter pill to swallow.......

Kind Rgds
Rob

[Mr Punch]

Mr Punch, Please explain. I might agree with your logic, but IMO you need to justify this bald statement.Adrenaline.

Unless you really are the zen master who can turn on the aggression as you need it without any interference from chemicals in the brain...

[k gledhill]

Hi Terence,

My view is that WCK is not "in" the forms and drills, like chi sao. The forms and drills are only representations of the superficial, surface movements of WCK. They don't teach or develop contact fighting skills. They can't by their very nature. WCK exists only in application, in fighting. No fighting, no WCK.

Long time no speak!! :))

I agree with you whole heartedly. I always say in you can't transform a technique from chi sao to 'actual combat use' then don't train it in chi sao. We've all seen the 'chi sao' techniques in various media etc. People get 'good' at chi sao and get banged with a good hook punch or a over hand cross - and why, because they are 'expert' at straight line punches and 'touches' from chi sao, change the angles and it messes them up. Chi sao is an 'exercise' to build ting jing and basic understanding of of the use of the 3 seeds - tan, bong , fook and structure - once you got that take it to san sao and free the hands. Start with the trusty straight line punches so you are in your comfort zone then ask your partner to do any shape / angle punch. Be sure to get your partner to wear good gloves as it really hurts when your tan can't stop his cross or hook. Now I'm not refering to a 1-punch attack I'm refering to a good boxers hands that zips in 3 punches as fast a wing chun guy can 'let them go'. You'll find as you go to bridge against his jab he is changing real fast and not leaving his arm out as in chi sao - a bitter pill to swallow.......

Kind Rgds
Rob[/QUOTE]


This is a common misunderstanding in chi-sao training . To assume the tactical fight is in the chi-sao drill starting positions.:D Think about it ....why would you stand in the middle of a guy's arms capable of throwing fast flanking shots from both sides ?
Your a heavy bag turning to fight arms ...if he just ducks down and or shoots, you are training to fight like a statue doing salutations with both arms in the air, great for birds to hang out on.

answer , you wouldn't adopt this fighting tactic. If you have a fight do you extend both arms and seek contact ? or strike from available angles and space while avoiding being hit yourself , tactically. Any good boxer learns to "float like a ....sting like a...". This idea isnt exclusive to western boxing. How to get to the guy and execute a tactical 'pointing finger' is usually not working because it comes from knife fighting. Knife fighting is not commonly done with a tactical duality to bare hands . Simply because the redundant idea that the chi-sao will make you a super hero is reinforced by further 'competition' within the boundaries of our 'TRAINING" angles etc and mutual betterment of a functioning assault, that requires certain techniques to achieve its goal is lost to a sticking , 'you cant get me , but I can get you ' slap fest. When the frustration of the ego surfaces , the lop n chop comes out , the western slapping hand , the palms on wrists , elbows up in the air hands above heads ...feeeeling....:D the wrestle up and down clinching chi-sao...bs for short.

Why chi-sao ? to have arms capable of withstanding to and being able to fight and deflect force or stalemate without collapsing while maintaining an attacking response , either individually using the 2 actions per strike, or 2 hands in rotation as 'door openers' . Never using two extended arms in a waddling basic stance for anything :D except another style.;)

We train here as partners , finish. We mutually exchange the same angles and responses to better our positions, attributes, etc...we can increase pressure to find faults , bad vu-sao , hips twisted , feet wrong...no impact force , let alone being able to stop entry with a counter strike. We fight a mirror of ourselves using = ideas and opposite roles to be attacker /counter attacker. How to receive and how to give. We don't charge into the dummy head on with a lead leg , so why do so many do this in chi-sao and you tube clips ? simple answer isn't a nice one .
:o

There is a missing piece of the 'fighting bubble' of requirements, not least the ability to shift and move in a face off with an attacker.

IME many adopt a mainstream view of chi-sao , beig the 'WAY' without any input from a higher idea of simply , 'what to do when I face MYSELF with a knife in each hand ?' what is my idea how do I deal with it and stop myself ? Whats the best position for % to be better off in a fast exchange of blurring , timeless stabs/chops ? How will I react ? by thinking differently to my chi-sao rolling positions ? too late !


think about how your fighting a person , face on 100 % of even a school kids wild swinging ability or attacking them as they present 50 % by having a tactical response and instinctive movement from a perimeter face off , like any fighters vying for a shot and counter....

the difference in vt is that the counters are attempts to sustain the assault to and end for a 'combat' mind to survive , not 'out point' the guy.

The chi-sao develops the arms etc. to work independently to throw shots that can act as 2 hands per strike...they cant do this if they train to go 'off-line' and adopt a chase idea from chi-sao. There are many pitfalls in chi-sao without proper guidance from someone who knows to fight with the system, rather than to adopt an abstract disjointed approach by doing set pieces , then doing 'contact' exercises. Like saying 'look for contact to control' rather than develop a higher ability than the other guy in your arms ...why wrestlers are beating you at wrestling...why guys who throw free flanking strikes to you with a lead leg forwards backwards on a line approach get taken down so easily....your training to be were they want you , front and center :o

Don't be where they think you will be and you can become an elusive counter striker from random angles that are adopted by the actions of the attacker..There is nothing written in stone that says you have to even touch an arm ...sometimes blocking it will help them to not over-swing at you off balance etc...by adopting a middle face off turning to block [ I hate saying that] you in effect 'stop' their mistakes and help them throw another shot from the opposite side...they can duck /slip and take you down , simply because your 'root ' idea was ingrained into you improperly.

i learned on my feet 'so to speak' hitting guys coming at me in bars /clubs doing 10 years of security work ..adopting a perimeter and striking at angles is a natural action..if you fight 1/2 the man you don't need to fight the other arm ..ergo we train to overwhelm with 1 arm capable of acting like 2 per strike ...each arm is always simply striking and ****ing to maintain the working distances and tactical angles /responses ...through chi-sao training not like chi-sao drill stance starting points.

If you stand either side of a guy ..you don't need to extend your arm/s to block the off side arm unless they manage to face you and place you in their 'strength' facing you square on...so what do you do then ? make them over turn , lop them if you have to get them turned, allow the swing to arc past you to 'take' the offering of entry...
it boils down to how good is their attack ? how good is the delivery [telegraphed] and recovery of the attack to re-face ?

Attacking is a concept all do in fighting. bjj is very good at it because they are doing a vt mind set of combat to an end by getting in and staying in to work an idea to its end ...not back off, shoot, back off , let go...VT should smother you standing up, bjj while your past striking ...on the ground. and striking again or submitting .

[bennyvt]

In our school the main thing we talk about is constant forward force, Meaning that if there is a gap then your hand should move before your brain reacts. Just like mat time for BJJ people, they normally start on the gruond or grabbing as this is what they want to train. We go into chi sao much the same. But yes i believe just chi sao is not enough. Gor sao when the arms are not in contact is more like a real fight. I also find practicing with other styles helps. In the old days they would have a challenge, talk about why this worked and that and learn from this, we cant any more so we have to limit what we can do.
Chi sao is about repetion, you train your body as quickly as you can to do certain things when given a certain stimulus.