Five Ancestor chis sao vs Wing Chun [Archive]

Hendrik

04-25-2009, 09:44 PM

Actually I really enjoyed the vid,
thanks for posting.

For me Chi Sau represents more of a time frame or a conditional response.

When we touch hands we react based on sensitivity but with certain energies incorporated such as fwd energy, structure energy, on & off along with the awareness of the centerline and various other concepts.

The energetics and structures are all of viable importance especially given you really don't know if your practicing correctly until put under pressure or skill challenge.
In other words the type of energy that will beat you down if you don't have correct structure.

So when these elements are not in line correctly then I would move to San Da:
Outside distance if being pressured for more of a kicking set up or just move in for a clinch and execute takedown, throws, joint locks, or groundwork.

Its important to remember that each of these have their own place in time and are all equally important for chi sau practice.

That's my opinion, take it for what its worth (probably not much lol)

Oh and also for Hendrik & Terence we also implore the ancient techniques of Qi oh and don't forget Fa Jing we derived these mystical approaches from the ancients. Just kidding!

Nice theory, does it work in real time action?

Qi? That is much much higher level that these basic stuffs.

what is right or wrong of the acting WCner? is he doing WCK? or not?

Also, this will be a great questions for Ten Tiger or omarthefish who believe Hung gar is the same with WCK. Please share your view, what's right? what's wrong? is this WCK? or is this similar with how you do in Hung gar?

Hendrik

04-25-2009, 09:46 PM

Anyone believe that video clip demo can work to defeat well train WCner is either ignorance or day dreaming.

WCner who watches this video clip and thinking they have to change thier training such as adding the

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?

for counter attack doesnt reallly know what is the basic of WCK.

I know some dont like what I am saying.
So, please ignore what i said.

For those who is interested in serious but non personal attack civilized technical discussion, look closely what's wrong with that WCner? something very very basic is missing do you see that?

LoneTiger108

04-26-2009, 06:38 AM

I believe that there are a lot of kung fu elements to learn from in the above video clip and these elements are relevant for us Wing Chun practitioners.

Discuss.

I'm not so sure.

Haven't posted here for ages as the discussions seem to be all over the place.

When people studying Wing Chun seem to be disillusioned into thinking Yap Leung Sifu can help with their Chisau, I think we have problems.

As much as I have time for other stylists and what they do (and why?) I personally feel that if you don't know what you're doing you should still be next to your own Sifu.

For those who is interested in serious but non personal attack civilized technical discussion, look closely what's wrong with that WCner? something very very basic is missing do you see that?

Yes I see it Hendrik. As much as I have respect for Yap Leung Sifu he IS NOT a Wing Chun practitioner and I don't believe he would appreciate people on here saying that he is!

Doi lin (Dulien) is NOT chisau. ;)

Hendrik

04-26-2009, 09:45 AM

Look at this Dan Chi,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4FmuaK30tc&feature=related

This show a type of Jin or energy pattern which is not shown in that clip above. Without this type of Jin, that is not WCK.

Look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWjsr7Yr5tY&feature=related

and see the detail explain and how to use others force.

See, we must speak with details and specific instead of going to become fuzzy thinking "oh yes, this is Hung gar...etc " or and calling WCK Traditional teaching fantasy but without a clue.

simple stuffs? nope, one needs to know the details that is what SLT training is about.

Thus, why looking at a clip and start wanting to import

Do you train these sensitivity elements and use them to jam and stop attacks before they happen?

Do you emphasis methods of uprooting and understand their relevance to kung fu training?

Do you include chin-na techniques inside your chi-sao practice?

Do you emphasis, "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?

without even knowing what is going on.

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move " mindset? is contradict to

WCK's "Comes accept, Goes return.... using Silence to lead action." WCK doesnt use mind and doesnt compete for speed. WCK dance with the opponent with ease. No stress of "oh I got to be faster then you." you know what? that mind set it self is a limitation, because in real time, thinking is too late.

As Mas Oyama's Kyokushin way, we by passed the thinking mind.

JPinAZ

04-26-2009, 11:55 AM

If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move

is contradict to

WCK's "Comes accept, Goes return.... using Silence to lead action." WCK doesnt use mind and doesnt compete for speed. WCK dance with the opponent with ease. No stress of "oh I got to be faster then you." you know what? that mind set it self is a limitation, because in real time, thinking is too late.

As Mas Oyama's Kyokushin way, we by passed the thinking mind.

I don't think Hedrick even understands what is meant by "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move". This isn't anything to do with "I must be faster than you". It's about reaction and timing. Not about who's faster. And it doesn't imply the person is 'thinking' in the real time of fighting.
Such the 'expert' :rolleyes:

Hendrik

04-26-2009, 01:26 PM

I don't think Hedrick even understands what is meant by "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move". This isn't anything to do with "I must be faster than you". It's about reaction and timing. Not about who's faster. And it doesn't imply the person is 'thinking' in the real time of fighting.
Such the 'expert' :rolleyes:

Ok, you are an expert.

if you want to qoute me please make a full qoute

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move " mindset?

That is what I quote from others, see that MINDSET term?

See, you are blind by what you are thinking, isnt it? you lost term and still not AWARE.

Not to mention all these "if you...., if You...." stuffs what is that? arent those Thinking?

it is Ok to have dissagrement or clarification, however, what is the point to go more then that?

Now, share with us who is the one who knows "move first", is that your mind or what ?

and is there a You and Me in the process of Comes accept goes return... using silence to lead action?

also, what is the different between reaction timing and spontaneous response?

BTW, do you do WCK? and how is your WCK react in the Youtube clip above?

m1k3

04-27-2009, 07:57 AM

Hendrick: words, words, words, words, deep questions! More words, words, words and thats why I have the deep wing chun. :p

Stevehans

04-27-2009, 10:43 AM

Look at this Dan Chi,

if you want to qoute me please make a full qoute

That is what I quote from others, see that MINDSET term?

See, you are blind by what you are thinking, isnt it? you lost term and still not AWARE.

Not to mention all these "if you...., if You...." stuffs what is that? arent those Thinking?

it is Ok to have dissagrement or clarification, however, what is the point to go more then that?

Now, share with us who is the one who knows "move first", is that your mind or what ?

and is there a You and Me in the process of Comes accept goes return... using silence to lead action?

also, what is the different between reaction timing and spontaneous response?

I agree with M1K3 you put too much words into your WCK, almost like you truly believe you can somehow explain everything with your literature ! So what happens when you cant ? You retort then ask Q's to which you expect an honest answer !

The simple fact is and its clear from your response you dont know what "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move" represents in the physical world, instead you pick up on the words, we all know what Yap & JPAZ was trying to say even though he didn't quote the keun kuet word perfect.

The irony is that with all your profound depth of knowledge in TCMA you actually dont understand one of TCMAs most iconic kuen kuet. It's physical interpretations is no secret but its obvious your lineage doesn't know it so maybe its time to seek out other schools to broaden your knowledge base.

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 10:46 AM

Hendrick: words, words, words, words, deep questions! More words, words, words and thats why I have the deep wing chun. :p

To be extremely serious, Words are very specific and they means different things.

one must know what type of art one train in.

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move" is one type

Another type is

" last to issue and first to arive" or Hao Faat Sin Do

Another type is

"using silence to lead action" or Yee Cheng Chai dong.

Another type is

"Fast comes fast response, Slow comes slow response" .......

And,

For example, can one drop one's mind and use awareness to lead? Those are action not words and not wise thoughts.

If one can drop one's mind and use awareness, then what kind of paradigm is that? That is not about Understanding, that is Does one Know the state and can get in and out at will?

Got to know which type of art one train in.
Otherwise, it is chaos.

Now back to the clip above, what's wrong with the acting Wcner? if it is you or you are his sifu, what have him done wrong? how to correct that?

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 10:55 AM

The irony is that with all your profound depth of knowledge in TCMA you actually dont understand one of TCMAs most iconic kuen kuet.

It's physical interpretations is no secret but its obvious your lineage doesn't know it so maybe its time to seek out other schools to broaden your knowledge base.

You are totally right, with the way how you think.

But do you know what I am presenting?

Golden Arms

04-27-2009, 11:32 AM

I agree with M1K3 you put too much words into your WCK, almost like you truly believe you can somehow explain everything with your literature ! So what happens when you cant ? You retort then ask Q's to which you expect an honest answer !

The simple fact is and its clear from your response you dont know what "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move" represents in the physical world, instead you pick up on the words, we all know what Yap & JPAZ was trying to say even though he didn't quote the keun kuet word perfect.

The irony is that with all your profound depth of knowledge in TCMA you actually dont understand one of TCMAs most iconic kuen kuet. It's physical interpretations is no secret but its obvious your lineage doesn't know it so maybe its time to seek out other schools to broaden your knowledge base.

I can't speak on what Hendrik does or doesn't know, when it comes to fighting. That being said, he is answering from a very Chan/Zen standpoint, and being familiar with that type of experiential learning, what he is saying gel's with my own perspective on training. There is a difference in the specifics on how words are used, and viewing something as a self or as another person, is a different rung on the ladder of progression, from "just being/acting".

Just because we train to fight doesn't mean that we stop learning. The moment we decide we have become an expert is the same moment we stagnate our own path of learning. Striving to be an eternal student keeps one on the endless path of progression.

m1k3

04-27-2009, 11:42 AM

You are totally right, with the way how you think.

But do you know what I am presenting?

This sounds almost exactly like the small child's retort "I know you are but what am I".

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 11:51 AM

This sounds almost exactly like the small child's retort "I know you are but what am I".

You like to think that way, that is fine with me.

Obviously, you dont read what I posts above on different based or platform of training.
and not interested in knowing what kind of based or platform suit WCK what less suit.
and that is fine with me.

For those who is interested, These are very very important, IE shao lin and Wudang are based on different platform. Thus, it becomes different type of arts..they uses different path in applications. that is the reason I bring this things up. WCK is not WuZu and cannot import Wuzu's stuffs....different platform

The important thing now is to know what do that Acting WCner's do wrong and not doing WCK?

m1k3

04-27-2009, 12:04 PM

Stevehans

04-27-2009, 12:34 PM

You are totally right, with the way how you think.

But do you know what I am presenting?

No i admit i do not know what you are presenting, but i was referring only to what YL originally said in the vid.

As i said, i acknowledge you have a 'profound depth of understanding' in one aspects of the TCMArts and to a degree i respect your effort and research in your specialised field.

Nonetheless i found it hilarious that you clearly didn't know the answer so instead you side tracked and confused some of us even more !

Others here might have used humility and just politely asked whether any members were prapared to share their insight ?

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 12:38 PM

I can't speak on what Hendrik does or doesn't know, when it comes to fighting. That being said, he is answering from a very Chan/Zen standpoint, and being familiar with that type of experiential learning, what he is saying gel's with my own perspective on training. There is a difference in the specifics on how words are used, and viewing something as a self or as another person, is a different rung on the ladder of progression, from "just being/acting".

Just because we train to fight doesn't mean that we stop learning. The moment we decide we have become an expert is the same moment we stagnate our own path of learning. Striving to be an eternal student keeps one on the endless path of progression.

I respectablely agree with this 10000%

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 12:44 PM

No i admit i do not know what you are presenting, but i was referring only to what YL originally said in the vid.

As i said, i acknowledge you have a 'profound depth of understanding' in one aspects of the TCMArts and to a degree i respect your effort and research in your specialised field.

Nonetheless i found it hilarious that you clearly didn't know the answer so instead you side tracked and confused some of us even more !

Others here might have used humility and just politely asked whether any members were prapared to share their insight ?

On one hand

No i admit i do not know what you are presenting,

on the other hand

Nonetheless i found it hilarious that you clearly didn't know the answer so instead you side tracked and confused some of us even more !

Sound contradiction isnt it?

BTW, Does what the practictioner of Wuzu said in the Clip applied to WCner?

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 12:48 PM

Actually I do read what you post. Some of it I like, some of it I don't. IMO you try to sound deep and mysterious and it comes off as condescending.

My point is why limit yourself to the perceived boundaries of your WKC platform? Seems too much like looking at the finger and not the moon. :)

Again, that is the way you think, and I am fine with it.

However,

What is the moon of WCK?

So what is the different between the

Comes accept, Goes return, let go and thrust forward, using silence to lead action.

Compare with

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move " mindset?

Or between WCK and WuZU?

m1k3

04-27-2009, 12:52 PM

Again, that is the way you think, and I am fine with it.

However,

What is the moon of WCK?

So what is the different between the

Compare with

Or between WCK and WuZU?

Hendrick, why do you still follow someone else's path? Do not parrot others, find your own truth.

Golden Arms

04-27-2009, 12:57 PM

What is the difference between sunlight/dirt/cloud/rain/a seed and a flower?

Perception. Depending on where one is on their path to clearing attachment and honing perception, one may see all of those as separate from a flower, or as one and the same. I write this knowing that many may see it as mystical mumbo jumbo, but I can assure you it plays a very large part in martial art.

Golden Arms

04-27-2009, 01:01 PM

Hendrick, why do you still follow someone else's path? Do not parrot others, find your own truth.

As soon as we say something like "we do bong sau ___ way, and they do it ___ way", then we have stepped away from finding our own truth.

Again I don't know if Hendrik can fight, but I know that he has contributed some of the most valuable information to some of these threads if we are able to see it for what it can be. Some people give out fish, rarely does someone give out how to fish for yourself.

If someone was talking about Hung Gar from the same perspective, I would be paying attention.

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 03:34 PM

We all age and then we starts pay attention to what those advance artists said...

There are many boxing arts.

Although they use different forms,
for the most part they don't go beyond
the strong dominating the weak,
and the slow resigning to the swift.

The strong defeating the weak
and the slow hands ceding to the swift hands
are all the results of natural abilities
and not of well-trained techniques.

From the sentence "A force of four ounces deflects a thousand pounds"
we know that the technique is not accomplished with strength.

The spectacle of an old person defeating a group of young people,
how can it be due to swiftness?

for some these are fortune cookies for some this is reality.

WCK, where it is lead to? That I ask to those who place in the deep of thier heart.

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 03:38 PM

Let's get back to the clip,

What is doing wrong there by the acting WCner? What's going wrong? What are the basic keys one needs to watch out?

Care to share?

t_niehoff

04-27-2009, 06:41 PM

We all age and then we starts pay attention to what those advance artists said...

Tell me, Hendrik, what makes these martial artists "advanced" beyond the fact that they can't fight?

for some these are fortune cookies for some this is reality.

There are genuine examples of smaller, weaker fighters defeating larger, stronger opponents -- BJJ fighters providing numerous examples (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4754358887413654428 is one example). Where are ANY examples of TCMA "advanced martial artists" defeating larger, stronger fighters? They all talk about it yet no one seems to be able to do it. It's not furtune cookie material, it is fantasy book material.

WCK, where it is lead to? That I ask to those who place in the deep of thier heart.

Where it leads you to depends on HOW you train. Fantasy only leads to fantasy.

t_niehoff

04-27-2009, 06:43 PM

Let's get back to the clip,

What is doing wrong there by the acting WCner? What's going wrong? What are the basic keys one needs to watch out?

Care to share?

The clip is bullsh1t. It's silly nonsense. There is nothing of substance to talk about.

Hendrik

04-27-2009, 08:20 PM

The clip is bullsh1t. It's silly nonsense. There is nothing of substance to talk about.

What's good to said it is bs...silly nonsense... ?

analyzed it and share so that everyone can learn.

Edmund

04-27-2009, 10:09 PM

Let's get back to the clip,

What is doing wrong there by the acting WCner? What's going wrong? What are the basic keys one needs to watch out?

Care to share?

Where is your head at?
I don't see much point critiquing the acting WCner. The clip is is for Yap sifu to demonstrate whatever he wants. The other guy is essentially the dummy to be demonstrated on.

He's completely besides the point of the thing.
Why would you pick on him and whether he's following the kuen kuits of WC?

ON TOP OF THAT, the point of the clip is completely bizarre. A 5 Ancestors person is teaching the 5 ancestors way of winning at WC chi sao against a WC person. That whole concept is of little value outside of the context of WC/5A people.

The glory of successful chi sao is hardly worth worrying about other than as drinking stories amongst other people who know what you're even talking about.
It's not even a sport.

EVEN IF you thought the concept is worthwhile, the clip gave very little information to you anyway. There's no MA instruction other than saying "I move first", "go to the side" or some other sayings. There was nothing shown other than a display of moves. I think he did a couple moves twice. Big whoop. Nothing was explained. Does that even help?

Shaolin Fist

04-27-2009, 11:58 PM

ON TOP OF THAT, the point of the clip is completely bizarre. A 5 Ancestors person is teaching the 5 ancestors way of winning at WC chi sao against a WC person. That whole concept is of little value outside of the context of WC/5A people.

I completely agree. The vid achieves nothing other than to demonstrate that Leong Sifu's skill is above that of his student.

In short he wasted an opportunity to demonstrate (or explain) some valid 5-A principles.

Rather than sharing his kung fu he made a pointless polictical vid which i doubt reflects the overall character of the broader 5-A community. If it did, this would be one of many.

Just like the previous thread it will go nowhere and IMO pointless as there are so few, if any experienced 5-A participating on this section of the forum, nor would i expect any of them to.

On a final note, little if any skills can ever be learnt through words and discussion, i suggests for those who wish to investigate further should pay Leong Sifu a visit in his shop in london Chinatown as he is still teaching full time.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 04:39 AM

What's good to said it is bs...silly nonsense... ?

analyzed it and share so that everyone can learn.

Analyze bullsh1t? While we're at it, let's discuss fairy dust and its relationship to "advanced martiol art."

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 04:42 AM

I completely agree. The vid achieves nothing other than to demonstrate that Leong Sifu's skill is above that of his student.

In short he wasted an opportunity to demonstrate (or explain) some valid 5-A principles.

The clip shows nothing of the kind. No skill is demonstrated. No "valid principles" are demonstrated. It was nonsense. If Leong wants to demonstrate his skill and some "valid principles" let him spar some good (proven) fighters -- then and ONLY then will we see his so-called skill and so-called principles. But we don't need to see that; we all know what would happen.

Shaolin Fist

04-28-2009, 05:20 AM

The clip shows nothing of the kind. No skill is demonstrated. No "valid principles" are demonstrated.

Maybe if you spent less time on this forum and actually opened your eyes you might actually learn something. If you are after your first trophy then i suggest you devote more time to your proven 'real training methods'.

Please dont upset yourself if some of us dont want to share your wine, i just prefer tea.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 06:35 AM

Maybe if you spent less time on this forum and actually opened your eyes you might actually learn something. If you are after your first trophy then i suggest you devote more time to your proven 'real training methods'.

Its ironic that people who live in a fantasy world with their eyes firmly shut to reality talk about eye-opening.

Please dont upset yourself if some of us dont want to share your wine, i just prefer tea.

No, you prefer fantasy fu.

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 09:09 AM

Still,

with all the emotion, name calling..... and.......etc

What's going wrong with the acting WCner? What does he do wrong?
If yourself is him or he is your student what is the advise for him to improve?

so, for those who like to share,

What is the point? the point is so that the beginner dont fall into the trap of other's spell of such as "every fight end up on the ground...." , It is not a religion or who can argue better or twisting words better or who is more macho to say big mouth words or who is the best critic forshake of critics, one has to know clearly what is done right what is done wrong without that there is no clear handling on what is one practice.

Care to share?

Yoshiyahu

04-28-2009, 09:12 AM

Whats up with Martial Arts in Asia?

It seems most Asian Martial arts show their skill by inanimate objects.

Like the Karate guy breaks bricks with Hands,Fist or Head!

The Tai Chi man does Push hands competitons!

The Wing Chun man does Chi Sao(sticky hand) competions!

Boxers never do things Like. A boxer doesn't hit a punching bag for a crowd to show he can box? Nor does grappler wrestle down a heavy bag to show he can wrestle! The get in the ring!

Even Bruce Lee discuss this! I mean its good to show those exhibitions and breaking 18 bricks is really excellent. Imagine if that guy hit you in the face like that?

But what about fighting. You see in the Movies(I know fantasy). They always had exhibitions of schools fighting each other to prove who was the best. If you wanted to prove your Kung Fu you could get on stage an challenge someone for a wager. If you won you got the money...if you lose you lost your deposit.

Didn't Yip say to fight to test your Wing Chun?

Check this out:

http://www.wingchun.si/yipman.htm

He only regretted that he never dreamt that he would be caught by a gentle scholar, because he had so far not met a real antagonist. Yip Man smiled and said, "You call me a scholar. Do you think you can defeat me with your techniques?" The robber said, "If I am allowed to fight with you bare-handed, I can defeat you within one minute." Upon hearing this, Yip Man asked his men to uncuff the man and promised him that if he could win, he would be set free. The two were then ready to have a free fight in the hall of the detective's office. The robber poised a wide stance, and adopted long bridge-arms, and attacked with thrusting punches which seemed fast and powerful. Yip Man dodged left and right, trying to keep himself evasive at first and avoiding to make direct contact with the robber. He waited for his chance. Suddenly, when the robber had just completed a reverse punch but had not withdrawn his forearm from the attack, Yip Man advanced, grabbed the robber's wrist with his right hand and pressed down the robber's elbow with his left hand, and exerted a powerful downward pull. The robber lost his balance and fell forward. At this moment, Yip Man raised his right leg to execute an upward knee thrust at the robber's chest. The robber fell to the floor and was out stone-cold. Since this incident, Yip Man was well-known as the unarmed scholar-detective of Futshan.

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 09:20 AM

He only regretted that he never dreamt that he would be caught by a gentle scholar, because he had so far not met a real antagonist. Yip Man smiled and said, "You call me a scholar. Do you think you can defeat me with your techniques?" The robber said, "If I am allowed to fight with you bare-handed, I can defeat you within one minute." Upon hearing this, Yip Man asked his men to uncuff the man and promised him that if he could win, he would be set free. The two were then ready to have a free fight in the hall of the detective's office. The robber poised a wide stance, and adopted long bridge-arms, and attacked with thrusting punches which seemed fast and powerful. Yip Man dodged left and right, trying to keep himself evasive at first and avoiding to make direct contact with the robber. He waited for his chance. Suddenly, when the robber had just completed a reverse punch but had not withdrawn his forearm from the attack, Yip Man advanced, grabbed the robber's wrist with his right hand and pressed down the robber's elbow with his left hand, and exerted a powerful downward pull. The robber lost his balance and fell forward. At this moment, Yip Man raised his right leg to execute an upward knee thrust at the robber's chest. The robber fell to the floor and was out stone-cold. Since this incident, Yip Man was well-known as the unarmed scholar-detective of Futshan.

You know, Terence will not believe this unless you change Ip 's last name to Gracia, and then if even you said The art can be learn Subsconciously Terence will buy it totally with his Super duper Critical thinking (as evident and seen in the previous post of Terence.) :D

Hahaha, it is a religion for Terence, all other Religion is no good and he is here in the WCK forum to be the savior of all WCners. :D

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 09:23 AM

Its ironic that people who live in a fantasy world with their eyes firmly shut to reality talk about eye-opening.

No, you prefer fantasy fu.

Sure , a reply from the same Terence who believe in Subsconcious Learning.

Sure, everyone one else is fanasy because they are not in the same cult as you.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 09:25 AM

Still,

with all the emotion, name calling..... and.......etc

Where have I called anyone a "name"? I haven't.

And there is no "emotion" behind my statement that the clip is nonsense. That's just a fact.

What's going wrong with the acting WCner? What does he do wrong?

so, for those who like to share,
What is the point? the point is so that the beginner dont fall into the trap of other's spell or such as "every fight end up on the ground...." , and know clearly what is done right what is done wrong.

Care to share?

What is "wrong" is your question. It presupposes that there is a "right" way (which, of course, YOU know) for the "WCer" to act in doing the chi sao exercise.

Chi sao is an artificial, cooperative, and unrealistic exercise. As such, you cannot act in a "right" way.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 09:39 AM

Sure , a reply from the same Terence who believe in Subsconcious Learning.

Sure, everyone one else is fanasy because they are not in the same cult as you.

Fantasy is that which doesn't exist except in the imagination. To show that something isn't fantasy, all you need to do is show that it really exists/works/etc. In martial arts, all you need to do is show it in fighting against competent fighters. No one can argue with that. No one can claim that is a fantasy.

Helio Gracie said that learning BJJ was a subconscious process. I think this is true for all fighting methods. But Hendrik KNOWS better. Don't listen to Helio, who went around the world fighting the best fighters, who produced loads of world-class fighters, etc. That guy surely doesn't know what he is talking about. That guy is, like me, part of a "cult". Fortunately, we have Hendrik, his qi, his martial DNA, his Yik Kam kuit, his Ch'an, his "bounce off energy", his "short power", etc. to guide us!

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 10:42 AM

Fantasy is that which doesn't exist except in the imagination. To show that something isn't fantasy, all you need to do is show that it really exists/works/etc. In martial arts, all you need to do is show it in fighting against competent fighters. No one can argue with that. No one can claim that is a fantasy.

Helio Gracie said that learning BJJ was a subconscious process.
I think this is true for all fighting methods.

But Hendrik KNOWS better.

Don't listen to Helio, who went around the world fighting the best fighters, who produced loads of world-class fighters, etc.

That guy surely doesn't know what he is talking about. That guy is, like me, part of a "cult". Fortunately, we have Hendrik, his qi, his martial DNA, his Yik Kam kuit, his Ch'an, his "bounce off energy", his "short power", etc. to guide us!

hahaha, defending your cult. :D

let see,

"Although it is important to study and train for skill in techniques, for the man who wishes to truly accomplish the way of budo, it is important to makehis whole life in training and therefore not aiming for skill and strength alone, but also for spiritual attainment."
~Mas Oyama~

Karate is the most ZEN-like of all the martial arts. It has abandoned the sword. This means that it trascends the idea of winning and losing to become a way of thinking and living for the sake of other people in accordance with the way of Heaven. Its meanings, therefore, reach the profound levels of human thought."
~Mas Oyama~

"I have not permitted myself to be ignorant of any martial art that exists. Why? Such ignorance is a disgrace to someone who follows the path of the martial arts."
~Mas Oyama~

"If you do not overcome your tendancy to give up easily, your life lead to nothing."
~Mas Oyama~

"Sice Karate exists for cultivating the spirit and training the body, it must be a moral way surpassing mere techniques..."
~Mas Oyama~

"Power is no more than a part, no more than the tip of the iceberg of limitless profundity and sublimate of Karate."
~Mas Oyama~

"In the martial arts, introspection begets wisdom. Always see contemplation on your actions as an opportunity to improve."
~Mas Oyama~

So? Dont listen To Mas Oyama. :D

why shoot the messanger?

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 10:43 AM

Where have I called anyone a "name"? I haven't.

And there is no "emotion" behind my statement that the clip is nonsense. That's just a fact.

What is "wrong" is your question. It presupposes that there is a "right" way (which, of course, YOU know) for the "WCer" to act in doing the chi sao exercise.

Chi sao is an artificial, cooperative, and unrealistic exercise. As such, you cannot act in a "right" way.

Sure, based on your cult. :D

Ok enough of Cult fun chat.

Let's get back to the topic. if you think the clip is no good tell us what it is no good.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 12:48 PM

hahaha, defending your cult. :D

let see,

"Although it is important to study and train for skill in techniques, for the man who wishes to truly accomplish the way of budo, it is important to makehis whole life in training and therefore not aiming for skill and strength alone, but also for spiritual attainment."
~Mas Oyama~

Karate is the most ZEN-like of all the martial arts. It has abandoned the sword. This means that it trascends the idea of winning and losing to become a way of thinking and living for the sake of other people in accordance with the way of Heaven. Its meanings, therefore, reach the profound levels of human thought."
~Mas Oyama~

"I have not permitted myself to be ignorant of any martial art that exists. Why? Such ignorance is a disgrace to someone who follows the path of the martial arts."
~Mas Oyama~

"If you do not overcome your tendancy to give up easily, your life lead to nothing."
~Mas Oyama~

"Sice Karate exists for cultivating the spirit and training the body, it must be a moral way surpassing mere techniques..."
~Mas Oyama~

"Power is no more than a part, no more than the tip of the iceberg of limitless profundity and sublimate of Karate."
~Mas Oyama~

"In the martial arts, introspection begets wisdom. Always see contemplation on your actions as an opportunity to improve."
~Mas Oyama~

So? Dont listen To Mas Oyama. :D

why shoot the messanger?

Tell me, Hendrik, when Oyama wasn't knocking the horns off of drugged bulls to impress the gullible, what competent fighters did he fight? Names? Really, can't think of any?

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 12:54 PM

Let's get back to the topic. if you think the clip is no good tell us what it is no good.

What is "no good" is your question. It presupposes that there is a "good" way (which, of course, YOU know) for the "WCer" to act in doing the chi sao exercise.

Chi sao is an artificial, cooperative, and unrealistic exercise. As such, you cannot act in a "good" way.

That clip was nonsense. It is a silly demo. It is some grandmaster-clown demonstrating his "skill" in an artificial, unrealsitic exercise, with a partner that let him do whatever he wanted. It has nothing to do with fighting or with developing fighting skill. It was clown fu. You want to talk about what people did "wrong"in their clown fu? I'll tell you. They did clown fu in the first place.

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 12:55 PM

Tell me, Hendrik, when Oyama wasn't knocking the horns off of drugged bulls to impress the gullible, what competent fighters did he fight? Names? Really, can't think of any?

Ok.

Do you mean by Terence standard the Founder of Kyokushin is not a fighter?

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 12:58 PM

Ok.

Do you mean by Terence standard the Founder of Kyokushin is not a fighter?

I don't know if he was a fighter or not. My question was what good fighters did he ever fight to really test his skill level? Do you know of any? Or is it another case of you believe what you want to believe and evidence isn't important?

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 12:58 PM

That clip was nonsense. It is a silly demo. It is some grandmaster-clown demonstrating his "skill" in an artificial, unrealsitic exercise, with a partner that let him do whatever he wanted. It has nothing to do with fighting or with developing fighting skill. It was clown fu. You want to talk about what people did "wrong"in their clown fu? I'll tell you. They did clown fu in the first place.

Ok, lots of "Clown" but you still didnt anylized and describe what is wrong with the technics or action of the Acting WCner as I have asked repeatablely.

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 01:00 PM

I don't know if he was a fighter or not. My question was what good fighters did he ever fight to really test his skill level? Do you know of any? Or is it another case of you believe what you want to believe and evidence isn't important?

Why dont you write to Kyokushin and ask them?

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 01:05 PM

Ok, lots of "Clown" but you still didnt anylized and describe what is wrong with the technics or action of the Acting WCner as I have asked repeatablely.

I said it was all nonsense. Your question is also nonsense.

Watch this master's demo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tib2Urowsdc

and let's analyze what his students are doing wrong.

I'll give you the answer: they're doing clown fu.

t_niehoff

04-28-2009, 01:06 PM

Why dont you write to Kyokushin and ask them?

Which means you don't know. Typical.

Golden Arms

04-28-2009, 01:39 PM

Tell me, Hendrik, when Oyama wasn't knocking the horns off of drugged bulls to impress the gullible, what competent fighters did he fight? Names? Really, can't think of any?

t_niehoff,

Are you for real on this? Oyama fought tons of challenge matches, including (allegedly on this one) a victory in Lumpinee Stadium. The man trained like an animal, and fought 300 rounds of fights with his best students, (there is footage of some of this, he was a well trained fighter). I think your point might be better made without trying to drag someones name through the mud, especially someone that did something positive for martial arts in the last century (bringing them back to contact, and scrapping in general). The lack of ethics in martial artists that post on forums is sometimes sad to see.

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 02:48 PM

I said it was all nonsense. Your question is also nonsense.

Watch this master's demo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tib2Urowsdc

and let's analyze what his students are doing wrong.

I'll give you the answer: they're doing clown fu.

The thread here is on 5-A vs Wing Chun. Could you please stay on topic?

The same question I post to the WCner here, what is wrong with the acting WCner or X WCner in the clip?

Hendrik

04-28-2009, 02:58 PM

Which means you don't know. Typical.

Since You are not a Kyokushin, thus I can understand you dont know.

As for me, as a Kyokushin, I refer you to the Hq. and it is better for the Kyokushin HQ to reply you. You can certainly ask all type of question or even pay a visit to them to test your greatest fighter skill.

Edmund

04-28-2009, 04:21 PM

I completely agree. The vid achieves nothing other than to demonstrate that Leong Sifu's skill is above that of his student.

In short he wasted an opportunity to demonstrate (or explain) some valid 5-A principles.

Rather than sharing his kung fu he made a pointless polictical vid which i doubt reflects the overall character of the broader 5-A community. If it did, this would be one of many.

Ah. You're talking about his motivations behind making the clip which I suppose is somewhat interesting: "what is he trying to say?"

However I was more talking about the point of clip from the perspective of the viewer. What are you meant to get out of watching it?

Shaolin Fist

04-29-2009, 10:34 AM

Ah. You're talking about his motivations behind making the clip which I suppose is somewhat interesting: "what is he trying to say?"

However I was more talking about the point of clip from the perspective of the viewer. What are you meant to get out of watching it?

My personal feeling is whatever the answer is, to your 1st question will probably answer the 2nd.

The clip was certainly not instructional so maybe its nothing more than marketing for his business, who knows ?

Kinda reminds me of the 80s when we had WCK vids demonstrating why it was superior against Karate or the older TCMArts. Only these days its more or less been replaced with 'BJJ/MMA is superior' marketing.

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 11:47 AM

What do you refer to? please be specific. simplistic and external practices doesnt mean anything when you dont define what do you mean.

What I mean is that many schools today train chi-sao as just an exercise to increase "sensitivity" without going into deeper principles such as that of moving "second" but hitting first!

Nor do they tend to fine tune the listening abilities to such a level when one knows his opponents´move almost before the opponent does himself.

Other schools may not teach the principles behind "floating" an opponent making him lose his structure/control.

Chin-na aspects are also ignored in many WC schools today.

It is just that many modern WC schools seem to train chisao as a way to increase basic sensitivity and nothing else, without going any deeper.

Why dont you share with us your answers on questions above? to start this discusion?

The answers to all the questions I made are YES!

what elements to learn?

The elements such as fine-tuned sensitivity to allow one to "move second" but hit first!

Chin na/Kum na practice to prepare one for grappling and submitting scenarios.

The ability to absorb force and then follow to uproot an opponent.

Today, many modern WC seems to treat chisao as a game where you try to hit the other person through the mastery of basic sensitivity. There is more to chi sao than that!

That is all I am trying to say and see if others here train chisao in a more complete way.:)

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 11:59 AM

When people studying Wing Chun seem to be disillusioned into thinking Yap Leung Sifu can help with their Chisau, I think we have problems.
Unfortunately LoneTiger, we do have problems and that is why I posted this thread. There are aspects that Sifu Yap Leong covers that should be part and parcel of authentic WC training but as you can see by the many clueless remarks in this thread (and other similar threads) many "wing chuners" have no idea.

As much as I have time for other stylists and what they do (and why?) I personally feel that if you don't know what you're doing you should still be next to your own Sifu.

I wholeheartedly agree, but again how many people have genuine kung fu sifus nowadays? Some of us have been fortunate but most have not (see Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom and its trickle down effect in forums such as this one).

So I believe that if we do come upon good info from an authentic sifu from whatever style then we should try and see relevant elements regarding what we do to enhance our knowledge and approach.

Yes I see it Hendrik. As much as I have respect for Yap Leung Sifu he IS NOT a Wing Chun practitioner and I don't believe he would appreciate people on here saying that he is!

I did not imply that he was a Wing Chun practitioner hence the title of this thread but I do believe that he teaches vital elements that many WC schools today have "forgotten".

Good to see you posting again.:)

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 12:05 PM

I did not imply that he was a Wing Chun practitioner hence the title of this thread but I do believe that he teaches vital elements that many WC schools today have "forgotten".

please share with us what is the elements which you think WC schools today have forgotten.

And

Before that please also share which lineage of WCK are you from? This is very important so we know your background and the WCK type.

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 12:08 PM

The elements such as fine-tuned sensitivity to allow one to "move second" but hit first!

What is the sensitivity your refer to and how to fine-tuned that sensitivity?

Also, how is sensitivity related to " move second" but hit first.

Doesnt this "move second but hit first " concept different then the

Do you emphasis, "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?

concept ?

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 12:12 PM

My personal feeling is whatever the answer is, to your 1st question will probably answer the 2nd.

The clip was certainly not instructional so maybe its nothing more than marketing for his business, who knows ?

Kinda reminds me of the 80s when we had WCK vids demonstrating why it was superior against Karate or the older TCMArts. Only these days its more or less been replaced with 'BJJ/MMA is superior' marketing.

IMHO,
See, others can do any type video clip they wants. It is a free world,

However, do we know what is the issues of the Acting WCK which they beat in the Clip?

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 12:18 PM

Anyone believe that video clip demo can work to defeat well train WCner is either ignorance or day dreaming.

I believe that you may have misunderstood the point of my thread. On a basic level the video shows that the kung fu exponent with the better "listening" ability and "sensitivity" defeating the opponent who did not have the same abilities.

Many modern WC schools in the West do not train the sensitivity aspects to such a level but again there are a few that do.

WCner who watches this video clip and thinking they have to change thier training such as adding the

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?

for counter attack doesnt reallly know what is the basic of WCK.
I have gained familiarity with this mindset from my own WC sifu before hearing it from anyone else.

I know some dont like what I am saying.
So, please ignore what i said.

Not at all. You are one of the very few people here that actually practices Wing Chun and know what you are talking about. You have made many enlightening posts before and I am thankful for them. I wish there were more people like you here in the forums and I mean it.

For those who is interested in serious but non personal attack civilized technical discussion, look closely what's wrong with that WCner? something very very basic is missing do you see that?
Well it is not a real chisao match it is only a demonstration so I don´t expect to see a full blast WC approach (nor a full blast Five Ancestor one), but please tell us what you see missing from the Wing Chuner.

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 12:32 PM

I believe that you may have misunderstood the point of my thread.

sure, it could be.

On a basic level the video shows that the kung fu exponent with the better "listening" ability and "sensitivity" defeating the opponent who did not have the same abilities.

Please quantify what do you mean.

Many modern WC schools in the West do not train the sensitivity aspects to such a level but again there are a few that do.

Also this need to be quantify and make detail and specific.

I have gained familiarity with this mindset from my own WC sifu before hearing it from anyone else.

As my questions to you in the previous post, which lineage are you from and why isnt this concept or mind set of

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?
contradict to the concept of "move second but hit first "

And to be real honest and blunt, sifu says is not a reason when it is technical.

Well it is not a real chisao match it is only a demonstration so I don´t expect to see a full blast WC approach (nor a full blast Five Ancestor one), but please tell us what you see missing from the Wing Chuner.

For me, it doesnt matter because the acting WCner is only mimic WCK and not doing WCK. as for it is a full blast 5 A or not I careless. that is non WCner issue.

and thus my question for all is why is the acting WCner's WCK is not WCK?

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 12:33 PM

The clip is bullsh1t. It's silly nonsense. There is nothing of substance to talk about.

That is because you are not actually a kung fu practitioner. You can use the Wing Chun tag to "enhance" whatever it is that you practice but the reality is that you are as clueless regarding authentic kung fu practice as the other glorified kickboxers who have miraculously (or perhaps understandably because of their lack of any actual kung fu knowledge) not made any "contributions" in this thread.

I still don´t see the purpose of you posting in these kung fu forums with your clueless remarks, or is it that you have been sent down from the heavens to test our patience?:eek:

taai gihk yahn

04-29-2009, 12:47 PM

Here is a link that was posted before inside another thread recently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJIthqEqGk0&feature=related

There are many elements here that should be present in Wing Chun but it seems that many schools nowadays do not train sensitivity and listening in favor of simplistic external practices.

Do you train these sensitivity elements and use them to jam and stop attacks before they happen?

Do you emphasis methods of uprooting and understand their relevance to kung fu training?

Do you include chin-na techniques inside your chi-sao practice?

Do you emphasis, "If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?

I believe that there are a lot of kung fu elements to learn from in the above video clip and these elements are relevant for us Wing Chun practitioners.

Discuss.

it's nothing that extraordinary at all; it's all trapping-range work, aside from the chi-sao set-up position (mirror hands set-up as opposed to opposite lead) the lines, the angles, the footwork, the sticking, the jamming and the finishes are pretty much all similar or the same from what we used to do 20+ years ago w/CTS, or the bagua "rou shou" I did, or what my taiji teacher does now, just with variations in "energetic flavor" for lack of a better descriptor; I mean, I wouldn't say it was useless, I'd just say that it's nothing particularly uncommon, at least in my personal experience

point is, this sort of close range touching hands is pretty common in TCMA, at least in the systems that I and the TCMA peeps I've hung out with have done;

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 12:47 PM

ON TOP OF THAT, the point of the clip is completely bizarre. A 5 Ancestors person is teaching the 5 ancestors way of winning at WC chi sao against a WC person. That whole concept is of little value outside of the context of WC/5A people.
For those who practice chi sao in the CORRECT way and with correct mindset will see the bigger picture and an extension of what was presented in that video. However, that is not the point of this thread.

EVEN IF you thought the concept is worthwhile, the clip gave very little information to you anyway. There's no MA instruction other than saying "I move first", "go to the side" or some other sayings. There was nothing shown other than a display of moves. I think he did a couple moves twice. Big whoop. Nothing was explained. Does that even help?

There was plenty of information for those who actually study genuine kung fu and have familiarity with the concepts.;)

taai gihk yahn

04-29-2009, 12:51 PM

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 01:04 PM

also, moving second / hitting first is also a common principle in the above mentioned systems: it's a very "Chinese" attitude - goes along w/the idea of "yahn msihk ngoh, ngoh sihk yahn" - "no one knows me, but I know everyone" - this can refer to the "hidden master" who no one has heard about but who knows about everyone else, it can also refer to a state of "being" such that when you touch hands with someone, they can't tell anything about you (having to do with the "internal" idea of having no fixed center that they can reference), but you "know" everything about them...

ok,

That is the reason I ask

why is or isnt this concept or mind set of

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset

contradict to the concept of "move second but get there first ".

Does
Move second but get there first needs to be
" if you move, I first move"?

taai gihk yahn

04-29-2009, 01:25 PM

ok,

That is the reason I ask

why is or isnt this concept or mind set of

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset

contradict to the concept of "move second but get there first ".

I don't really know; I personally am familiar w/the "move second get there first" idea, which you see not only in TCMA, but in "western" fencing as well; the "you don't move / I don't move" idea I have also seen, but as for "if you move, I first move" - don't know - maybe it's the same as as "move second / arrive first" just stated differently?

fundamentally, does it matter? the whole thing about "move second / arrive first" is basically a way to handle someone who is aggressive / gets the drop on you, etc. - we all know that usually, it's the guy who attacks first / is more aggressive, is the "winner", just based on the physics behind having forward momentum (skillfully applied) in one's favor: being on the defensive is inherently disadvantageous, so the skill required to turn it around is more difficult to develop and execute;

again, I think a lot of this is based on the Chinese cultural construct of getting someone to tip their hand, to make a "move", to "expose" themselves / their motives while you remain inscrutable: the ultimate "defeat" would be if two masters fought, master #1 makes a move, master #2 counters it, and to all onlookers, it seemed like nothing happened, meaning that only master #1 who made the initial move knows what happened - meaning that not only has he lost face by moving first, he is even more beholden to master #2 who has moved in such a way that he shut master #1 down, so that he actually saved him from loosing in a way that everyone else could see, and then pretending like nothing happened, or even portraying himself as the "looser" - so while everyone is congratulating master #1 on how great he is, he knows that he had been totally pwned by master #2; again, it's a construct, but I think it informs a lot about why "touching hands" has evolved the way it did,because it allows for that sort of exchange...

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 01:38 PM

The clip shows nothing of the kind.
Because you have no valid and genuine kung fu experience then you do not have a point of reference to appreciate that clip.

No skill is demonstrated.
Again, how would you know?

You have no genuine kung fu training to help you recognize the subtler skills involved in genuine kung fu methods.

No "valid principles" are demonstrated.
What do you know about valid kung fu principles? Lol.lol.lol.

It was nonsense.
Unfortunately, you are not qualified to make such statements as your kung fu understanding is way below beginner level.

If Leong wants to demonstrate his skill and some "valid principles" let him spar some good (proven) fighters -- then and ONLY then will we see his so-called skill and so-called principles.
How do you know that he hasn´t fought with his skills before? You really have to come out of your fantasy land T!

But we don't need to see that; we all know what would happen.
Well those of us who practice real kung fu will know what would happen while this world´s glorified kickboxers can go on and make all the fantasy assumptions they want....LOL

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 01:48 PM

Chi sao is an artificial, cooperative, and unrealistic exercise.
If anyone here had any doubts about Terrence's cluelessness regarding genuine kung fu practice then put your doubts to rest.

That clip was nonsense.
It was "nonesense" for people who have no understanding of genuine kung fu practice and I suspect that your knowledge of bellydancing is superior to that of your kung fu;

It is some grandmaster-clown demonstrating his "skill" in an artificial, unrealsitic exercise, with a partner that let him do whatever he wanted. It has nothing to do with fighting or with developing fighting skill. It was clown fu.

I suspect that you would not use those terms if sifu Yap Leong was standing in front of you but then perhaps you would so as to see him and experience him wiping the floor with your face.

Terrence you really need to grow up!

You want to talk about what people did "wrong"in their clown fu? I'll tell you. They did clown fu in the first place.
As it is becoming more and more apparent, it is YOU who is practicing clown fu or is it glorified kickboxing and not anyone in the video clip!

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 02:13 PM

please share with us what is the elements which you think WC schools today have forgotten.
Many WC schools today have "forgotten" the chin-na/kum-na/grappling elements; fine~tuned sensitivity; internal principles relating to the relaxed mind that creates the state of just "being" during combat (instead some schools teach the silly external "just use your anger and fear to help you win a fight" concept); the concept of not going back during chi sao and combat (unless in emergencies); Many hand and leg techniques and so on

And

Before that please also share which lineage of WCK are you from? This is very important so we know your background and the WCK type.
I thought that I shared this before but here goes, my lineage comes down from Fung Siu Shing (through Lo Gai Dong to Lo Siu Wan and then Leung Kit Chow).

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 02:22 PM

What is the sensitivity your refer to and how to fine-tuned that sensitivity?
Fine-tuned sensitivity is just the perfecting of general sensitivity all Wing Chuners train for. It is just taking it that much further by emphasizing it and working towards it.

Also, how is sensitivity related to " move second" but hit first.
You sense the attack before it actually happens or when it is about to happen and you "hit first" or jam and so on. It fits well into the Wing Chun approach.

Doesnt this "move second but hit first " concept different then the

concept ?

In my point of view it is very similar if not the same. It is all about using the sensitivity (that is enhanced through internal training) withing that concept.

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 02:38 PM

Please quantify what do you mean.
By "sensitivity" and "listening ability" I mean that one opponent feels the attack coming, through his bridge, before it actually happens and then he moves to either jam, float (his opponent) or even "embrace" and redirect that force. IMHO, all of this is valid within wing chun.

Also this need to be quantify and make detail and specific.
It is called the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom when the clueless teach the clueless and the blind teach the blind, the result being that people like t_niehoff, Sanjuro and other similar characters come to post in forums such as this one with their "knowledge".

"If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset?
contradict to the concept of "move second but hit first "
Not in my opinion which is based on my current level of knowledge.

And to be real honest and blunt, sifu says is not a reason when it is technical.
I was just making the point that my familiarity with the concept comes from Wing Chun teachings.

For me, it doesnt matter because the acting WCner is only mimic WCK and not doing WCK. as for it is a full blast 5 A or not I careless. that is non WCner issue.

and thus my question for all is why is the acting WCner's WCK is not WCK?

Please tell us.:)

I would however say that no matter what the guy did Sifu Yap Leong would still demonstrate what he was demonstrating as it is just a demonstration clip. My point as always has been that a lot (NOT ALL) of what is contained in his Five Ancestor Fist system should be present in WC but has somehow been "forgotten" in favor of more external and "hard" methodology.

Hardwork108

04-29-2009, 02:55 PM

it's nothing that extraordinary at all;
Well the extraordinary thing here is the fact that Yap Leong is a REAL kung fu sifu and he has combat skills. It is unfortunate that most people posting here have not seen a real kung fu sifu in their lives.;)

The stuff he demonstates is relevant for those who practice WC and a few other Southern arts and the thread is directed at actual Wing Chun practitioners and not those who have at some point in their lives crosstrained in wing chun with god knows who, together with god knows what!

it's all trapping-range work, aside from the chi-sao set-up position (mirror hands set-up as opposed to opposite lead) the lines, the angles, the footwork, the sticking, the jamming and the finishes are pretty much all similar or the same from what we used to do 20+ years ago w/CTS, or the bagua "rou shou" I did, or what my taiji teacher does now, just with variations in "energetic flavor" for lack of a better descriptor;
Well the forum company that you keep does not correlate with any deepness of kung fu knowledge that you are trying to imply , neither does the success of one of your "kung fu" classmates as a kickboxing coach and dvd sales man, but nevermind.

I suppose that you missed the point of this thread but then that is not the first time, is it?

Please go back and read my initial post and then consider your eventual response.

I mean, I wouldn't say it was useless,
Thank you, oh ye great kung fu god. I am sure that sifu Yap Leong will be pleased with your verdict and be forever thankful for your "approval".

I'd just say that it's nothing particularly uncommon, at least in my personal experience
The problem is that your "personal experience" limits you from seeing the clip in a profound way.;)

point is, this sort of close range touching hands is pretty common in TCMA, at least in the systems that I and the TCMA peeps I've hung out with have done;
You have missed the point haven´t you? Next time you and your "peeps" decide to study kung fu then find real sifus who are of Yap Leong´s calibre.

Edmund

04-29-2009, 03:24 PM

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 03:32 PM

By "sensitivity" and "listening ability" I mean that one opponent feels the attack coming, through his bridge, before it actually happens and then he moves to either jam, float (his opponent) or even "embrace" and redirect that force. IMHO, all of this is valid within wing chun.

It is called the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom when the clueless teach the clueless and the blind teach the blind, the result being that people like t_niehoff, Sanjuro and other similar characters come to post in forums such as this one with their "knowledge".

Not in my opinion which is based on my current level of knowledge.

I was just making the point that my familiarity with the concept comes from Wing Chun teachings.

Please tell us.:)

I would however say that no matter what the guy did Sifu Yap Leong would still demonstrate what he was demonstrating as it is just a demonstration clip. My point as always has been that a lot (NOT ALL) of what is contained in his Five Ancestor Fist system should be present in WC but has somehow been "forgotten" in favor of more external and "hard" methodology.

I like Jennifer Lopez because she has a special voice.

Enjoy her song and let go.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9nIUqrZ5kY

and I prefer this clip better interm of technics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh145Evyt4k&feature=related

another good song to say good bye to whatever have fade away and gone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saalGKY7ifU&feature=related

For those who prefer Chinese

机遇难赊
东风且暂借
流年似水足印难重叠
赤壁难辨
风流云散处
只剩下当时明月

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jkiTy2knz0

The rest I wont comments

taai gihk yahn

04-29-2009, 05:54 PM

Well the extraordinary thing here is the fact that Yap Leong is a REAL kung fu sifu and he has combat skills.
just out of curiosity, what evidence do you have in this regard (e.g. - documented fights, discussions w/people who have fought him / seen him fight)? as far as what he demonstrates, it's nothing particularly extraordinary; if you think it is, then you obviously you haven't encountered any really skilled sifu, which is sad, considering how you seem to want to practice "authentic" kung fu; that's ok, keep looking, one day you may actually find someone who is who will take you on;

Thank you, oh ye great kung fu god. I am sure that sifu Yap Leong will be pleased with your verdict and be forever thankful for your "approval".
it's this sort of ridiculous sarcasm that you employ that reveals you for the pisz ant that you are;

The problem is that your "personal experience" limits you from seeing the clip in a profound way.;)
profound? Christ, it's bridging hands work, not transubstantiation; get over it, already; I think that the only "problem" here is that you are overly impressed by something that, unlike you, those of us with "real" experience have repeatedly seen, experienced, practiced and understood, and as such do not have the need to act as the arbiter of "authentic" kung fu, which obviously you still haven't gotten past; you really are rather limited in your scope of understanding, sad to say;

You have missed the point haven´t you? Next time you and your "peeps" decide to study kung fu then find real sifus who are of Yap Leong´s calibre.
the intelligent thing before you make ridiculous statements of that nature would be for you to actually do a little research on the sifus with whom I have studied (and yes, yes, we all know that your next comment will be something to the effect that "well, they may be of high caliber but you didn't learn anything from them, etc. etc."; the point though, is that you still now and always will have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in any regard); but given your limited experience, you wouldn't know real kung fu if you tripped over it, sad to say for you;

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 06:24 PM

I don't really know; I personally am familiar w/the "move second get there first" idea, which you see not only in TCMA, but in "western" fencing as well; the "you don't move / I don't move" idea I have also seen, but as for "if you move, I first move" - don't know - maybe it's the same as as "move second / arrive first" just stated differently?

fundamentally, does it matter? the whole thing about "move second / arrive first" is basically a way to handle someone who is aggressive / gets the drop on you, etc. - we all know that usually, it's the guy who attacks first / is more aggressive, is the "winner", just based on the physics behind having forward momentum (skillfully applied) in one's favor: being on the defensive is inherently disadvantageous, so the skill required to turn it around is more difficult to develop and execute;

again, I think a lot of this is based on the Chinese cultural construct of getting someone to tip their hand, to make a "move", to "expose" themselves / their motives while you remain inscrutable: the ultimate "defeat" would be if two masters fought, master #1 makes a move, master #2 counters it, and to all onlookers, it seemed like nothing happened, meaning that only master #1 who made the initial move knows what happened - meaning that not only has he lost face by moving first, he is even more beholden to master #2 who has moved in such a way that he shut master #1 down, so that he actually saved him from loosing in a way that everyone else could see, and then pretending like nothing happened, or even portraying himself as the "looser" - so while everyone is congratulating master #1 on how great he is, he knows that he had been totally pwned by master #2; again, it's a construct, but I think it informs a lot about why "touching hands" has evolved the way it did,because it allows for that sort of exchange...

Thanks for the sharing.

These stuffs are deeper then most think. IMHO.

Hendrik

04-29-2009, 06:28 PM

just out of curiosity, what evidence do you have in this regard (e.g. - documented fights, discussions w/people who have fought him / seen him fight)? as far as what he demonstrates, it's nothing particularly extraordinary; if you think it is, then you obviously you haven't encountered any really skilled sifu, which is sad, considering how you seem to want to practice "authentic" kung fu; that's ok, keep looking, one day you may actually find someone who is who will take you on;

since you brought this up....

IMHO,
The problem with that clip is that the WCner never finished his execution or not even know what he is execute, muddy and have no basic training. The 5 A person is in a sense brute force through....

Both have no Jin but competing muscular li.

This acting WCner has no WC Chang Dai Lik/under elbow power and Jau Dai Keng/under sleve jin. Thus, he is mimic-ing only. Because there is no Chang Dai Lik and Jau Dai Keng, the opponent can easily using brute force to over come the mimic-ing hand shape or movement. With the BAsic Chang Dai Lik and Jau Dai Keng, it will be difficult to use power to overcome the movement. Not to mention the WCner doesnt even have Dim Dim Cheng or every point clear execution; meaning there is no threat at all for the technics he mimic to the opponents.....

also, this is level far under the " you move ... I first" or " I second reach first...." if these basic basic stuffs is not clear up dont even go to those because to be real honest one just doesnt up to that level yet.

Not to mention, when it comes to " comes accept.....using Silence to lead action" the flow.... since it is silence and flow it is a continous of flow or move; who stop? who has time for those you first I first stuffs? those are excessive and burden

Thus, I have heard,

One needs to KNOW the basic solidly and well, then can applied those "You move I first.... " general saying, but then that is not the it ; because it still cant flow, so One at that state /level has to get deeper and let go the mind and get into the silence..... ....

level by level step by step... until one can do it. it is all mind speculation which cant be used in the real time. Sure, one can be sm2rt a@s keep arguing like an expert. But, it means nothing. as in Zen said, " one is wrong at the instant of opening one's mouth" (because one has no clue what is one talking about but full of speculation thoughts instead of pointing out what is that buddha nature)

In WCK terminalogy, the performance of SLT got to reach the level of Dim Dim Cheng or every point is clear in order to reach the level of have a solid basic. ... that is very begining and basic level.

one can have all the look a like Kiu sau from other southern Style.....etc and even the Iron Wire but without the Chang Dai Li and Jau Dai Keng, one spot is clear it is not WCk even at the basic level.

as it says
翻天覆地攜手浪逐浪　
(flipping the heaven covering the earth, wave of hands chasing wave of hands)
千杯不醉只醉月光
(thousand of glass I will not get drunk, will only drunk seeing the moon light)
會心一笑不必講　
(a smile from heart there is no words needs to be said)
對看一切都雪亮
( take a look everything is crytal clear.)

That is the description of Dim Dim Cheng or every point is crytal clear.

Thus I have heard.

However, those are passed. like the Titanic it is almost extinc of no longer exist in this world.

机遇难赊
东风且暂借
流年似水足印难重叠
赤壁难辨
风流云散处
只剩下当时明月

taai gihk yahn

04-29-2009, 07:05 PM

Thanks for the sharing.

These stuffs are deeper then most think. IMHO.

I agree...

When Te Shan arrived at Kuei Shan, he carried his bundle with him into the teaching hall, where he crossed from east to west and from west to east. He looked around and said, “There's nothing, no one.” Then he went out.
Hsueh Tou added the comment, “Completely exposed.”
But when Te Shan got to the monastery gate, he said, “Still I shouldn't be so coarse.” So he reentered [the hall] with full ceremony to meet [Kuei Shan]. As Kuei Shan sat there, Te Shan held up his sitting mat and said, “Teacher!” Kuei Shan reached for his whisk, whereupon Te Shan shouted, shook out his sleeves, and left. Hsueh Tou added the comment,
“Completely exposed.” Te Shan turned his back on the teaching hall, put on his straw sandals, and departed.
That evening Kuei Shan asked the head monk, “Where is that newcomer who just came?”
The head monk answered, “At that time he turned his back on the teaching hall, put on his straw sandals, and departed.”
Kuei Shan said, “Hereafter that lad will go to the summit of a solitary peak, build himself a grass hut, and go on scolding the Buddhas and reviling the Patriarchs.” Hsueh Tou added the comment, “He adds frost to snow.”

Edmund

04-29-2009, 08:35 PM

For those who practice chi sao in the CORRECT way and with correct mindset will see the bigger picture and an extension of what was presented in that video. However, that is not the point of this thread.

There was plenty of information for those who actually study genuine kung fu and have familiarity with the concepts.;)

What make you think he was practicing correct chi sao? Because he demoed on his completely compliant partner?

If he was trying to teach something in particular, it would require some compliance to create the scenario. He didn't actually teach anything though.

Plenty of information? Saying "Uproot the guy" or "move first" is useless.

Your mindset is screwed. You're in love with the guy.

Edmund

04-29-2009, 11:37 PM

Well the extraordinary thing here is the fact that Yap Leong is a REAL kung fu sifu and he has combat skills. It is unfortunate that most people posting here have not seen a real kung fu sifu in their lives.;)

HW108,

Do you know this sifu in real life or what?
I can't believe you're hugging this guy's nuts so hard just based on this clip with nothing on it. Because there's some fat ninja Youtube that's going to blow your mind.

CFT

04-30-2009, 02:28 AM

Hendrik

04-30-2009, 05:37 AM

How "deep" should one really go with those idioms?

1) "I move after but arrive first"
2) "You move, I move first".
3) "Using silence to lead action"

At a "surface" level:

(1) can be interpreted as "economy of motion", and also the WCK idea of "lat sau jik chung" (if the hands are free strike ahead) comes to mind.

(2) & (3) seem very similar to me. Before motion there is stillness/silence, but really if you are already bridged there is no such thing as "non-motion" - there is always something going on. Bridging is a two-way street - if you can't hide your own intent, or in other words: if your enemy has superior sensitivity/skills, then you may be more disadvantaged than having no bridge.

IMHO, it is beyond Thinking or Mind speculation. and there is no surface Level or intepretation either one know how to do it or not.

Three different things

1, "I move after but arrive first" is "you walk bow I walk string."

2, "You move, I move first" is taking Pre Action or faster action.

3,"Using silence to lead action" is quiet one's mind and flow.

Three different things three different type of training and or level of Kung fu.

1, needs to know the path. manipulation of the Spartia is the key.

2, must have relative agile/fast operation then the opponent. Speed of processing information or action is the key. lots of predetermination.

3, needs to attain quiet. just flow without the needs of predetermination. Let it be, and making use of every thing to flow. Living in Now.

Thus, the art based on 1 is train different then 2. The art based on 3 be able to use 1 and 2 naturally. and those who know 2 doesnt know or doesnt realized 3 if they dont know what is Quiting the mind and flow.

Thus, one needs to ask what is one's art dominant characteristics 1? 2? 3? Those who is good in sea is different then those who is good on land.

But then, as I point out, if the one doesnt have the solid basic, IE cant even shoot a gun properly, there is no point to get into 1, 2, 3.

IE those who cannot do every point is clear will end up with muddy and un effective action while keep trying to do 2.

t_niehoff

04-30-2009, 07:48 AM

IMHO, it is beyond Thinking or Mind speculation. and there is no surface Level or intepretation either one know how to do it or not.

Three different things

1, "I move after but arrive first" is "you walk bow I walk string."

In my view, these kuit are not referring to the same thing. "You walk the bow, I walk the string" refers to favoring directness of action, ie. taking the most direct route to your objective. I say "favoring" because there are no absolutes , and there are times that the indirect gets better results.

"I move after but arrive first" refers to something else, of getting the opponent to move so as to create opportunites for you.

2, "You move, I move first" is taking Pre Action or faster action.

Yes, it is being preemptive.

3,"Using silence to lead action" is quiet one's mind and flow.

I don't know where this kuit comes from and I don't think it is a WCK kuit.

Three different things three different type of training and or level of Kung fu.

I disagree. The WCK kuit (including the ones you reference) don't refer to different types of training or levels of "kung fu" (LOL!) but rather they all point to one approach to fighting, though they may refer to different aspects of that one approach. In this instance, "I walk the string . . ." refers to favoring directness of action, "I move after . . ." refers to getting the opponent to move to create opportunities, and "you move . . . " refers to being preemptive in your action when you can. This is all consistent

CFT

04-30-2009, 08:03 AM

3,"Using silence to lead action" is quiet one's mind and flow.

I don't know where this kuit comes from and I don't think it is a WCK kuit.This is a general CMA kuen kuit. I think the characters are:

以靜制動

"Yee zing zai dong" or "yi jing zhi dong"

Hopefully this is what Hendrik is referring to. A literal translation is "using silence/stillness to control movement/action".

t_niehoff

04-30-2009, 08:18 AM

This is a general CMA kuen kuit. I think the characters are:

以靜制動

"Yee zing zai dong" or "yi jing zhi dong"

Hopefully this is what Hendrik is referring to. A literal translation is "using silence/stillness to control movement/action".

OK, I didn't recognize it in Hendrik's"interpretation". Yes, the kuit "using stillness to overcome movement" is in WCK. But, once again I think Hendrik misinterprets it; in my view, it doesn't refer to "silencing the mind" to permit "flow" but rather is a straightforward (as are all the kuit) comment on the WCK approach (controlling the opponent while striking him). You don't control movement with more movement.

CFT

04-30-2009, 08:33 AM

Hendrik might actually have a different kuit. This is just the one that I have heard of, and it applies to other CMA as well.

Hendrik

04-30-2009, 10:12 AM

Hendrik might actually have a different kuit. This is just the one that I have heard of, and it applies to other CMA as well.

Thus, I have heard,

It is not about speculation or point of view or intepretation.
it is an issue of if one have the kung fu to enter this state.....

以靜制動

"Yee zing zai dong" or "yi jing zhi dong", Using silence to lead action,
one first needs to know what the silence refer to and be able to enter into 靜 or silence.

and silence is not Still. Those type of "sit still /not moving silence" in Zen or Chan it is called, Dead Water Which will not reside Dragon.

靜. silence. is 靜. within 動/action.

It is the heart/mind is in silence. Otherwise one cant do the Using silence to lead action. if one cant quiet one's mind, one will not recognized this nature state.

Silence is non attachement or non resided in any state or flow.

as it said

One thought not rise the whole will shown, One grasp one is blind by the cloud.

Only there one can flow.

Thus, that support Comes accept goes let it return....... no thoughts.... no you move and I move first...... no me... thus it is just flow. crystal clear and clean flow.

Thus, I have heard.

t_niehoff

04-30-2009, 12:21 PM

Thus, I have heard,

It is not about speculation or point of view or intepretation.
it is an issue of if one have the kung fu to enter this state.....

以靜制動

"Yee zing zai dong" or "yi jing zhi dong", Using silence to lead action,
one first needs to know what the silence refer to and be able to enter into 靜 or silence.

and silence is not Still. Those type of "sit still /not moving silence" in Zen or Chan it is called, Dead Water Which will not reside Dragon.

靜. silence. is 靜. within 動/action.

It is the heart/mind is in silence. Otherwise one cant do the Using silence to lead action. if one cant quiet one's mind, one will not recognized this nature state.

Silence is non attachement or non resided in any state or flow.

Firstly, as I previously said, I think you are misinterpreting this kuit.

Secondly, you seem to be saying that this mental state (what you call "silence") must be cultivated FIRST to develop the ability to "flow". If that is what you are saying (it is often hard to tell what you are really saying -- I know that english isn't your first or second languages, but I really don't think your problem is poor english but rather poor thinking, and poor thinking cannot be exprressed clearly) -- so to repeat, if that is what you are saying, you are wrong.

You don't develop the ability to "flow" from first cultivating some mental state but from great amounts of physical practice of the activity itself. If developing that mental state developed the ability to "flow", then we could take you and put you on the ground with a BJJ fghter and you'd be able to flow with him. That wouldn't happen -- you'd be submitted in no time. You couldn't flow in that situation because you lack grappling ability, and with grappling ability comes the ability to flow. You get that ability by DOING IT (grappling), and by doing it you gain experience and familiarity, which in turn leads to the habituation of skills. That habituation permits you to move, act, respond, and adapt unconsciously ("flow") -- habituation is unconscious behavior. By developing skills to the point of habits, you develop that "unconscious", non-thinking mindset/mental state.

This is true in all areas of our lives. We develop the ability to "flow"while driving, to even drive without much conscious input, because through lots and lots of driving (familiarity), it becomes "second nature", or habituated. You don't develop the ability to "flow" while driving by first trying to cultivate the "proper mental state".

The ability to "flow" while fighting can't be cultivated outside of fighting anymore than you can develop the ability to "flow" while driving without driving.

And, the ability to flow or act/adapt unconsciously isn't the whole enchilada. Fightign, like driving, requires us to sometimes think, sometimes flow, sometimes think about one thing as we flow, etc.

Hendrik

04-30-2009, 12:50 PM

Firstly, as I previously said, I think you are misinterpreting this kuit.

Secondly, you seem to be saying that this mental state (what you call "silence") must be cultivated FIRST to develop the ability to "flow". If that is what you are saying (it is often hard to tell what you are really saying -- I know that english isn't your first or second languages, but I really don't think your problem is poor english but rather poor thinking, and poor thinking cannot be exprressed clearly) -- so to repeat, if that is what you are saying, you are wrong.

You don't develop the ability to "flow" from first cultivating some mental state but from great amounts of physical practice of the activity itself. If developing that mental state developed the ability to "flow", then we could take you and put you on the ground with a BJJ fghter and you'd be able to flow with him. That wouldn't happen -- you'd be submitted in no time. You couldn't flow in that situation because you lack grappling ability, and with grappling ability comes the ability to flow. You get that ability by DOING IT (grappling), and by doing it you gain experience and familiarity, which in turn leads to the habituation of skills. That habituation permits you to move, act, respond, and adapt unconsciously ("flow") -- habituation is unconscious behavior. By developing skills to the point of habits, you develop that "unconscious", non-thinking mindset/mental state.

This is true in all areas of our lives. We develop the ability to "flow"while driving, to even drive without much conscious input, because through lots and lots of driving (familiarity), it becomes "second nature", or habituated. You don't develop the ability to "flow" while driving by first trying to cultivate the "proper mental state".

The ability to "flow" while fighting can't be cultivated outside of fighting anymore than you can develop the ability to "flow" while driving without driving.

And, the ability to flow or act/adapt unconsciously isn't the whole enchilada. Fightign, like driving, requires us to sometimes think, sometimes flow, sometimes think about one thing as we flow, etc.

Keep thinking.

t_niehoff

04-30-2009, 12:52 PM

Keep thinking.

At least someone is. :)

JPinAZ

04-30-2009, 02:17 PM

Hurts to say this, but T actually made some real sense in those last 2 posts :)

Stevehans

05-01-2009, 06:13 AM

Haven't posted here for ages as the discussions seem to be all over the place.

When people studying Wing Chun seem to be disillusioned into thinking Yap Leung Sifu can help with their Chisau, I think we have problems.

As much as I have time for other stylists and what they do (and why?) I personally feel that if you don't know what you're doing you should still be next to your own Sifu.

Just curious on your logic, assuming you havent actually personally exchanged hands with Y.L then how do you actually know he cant help with your Chi Sau ?

Again by your same logic, your Sifu whoever he might be, is always the right guy to guide you ?

Maybe the disccussions are not all over the place, but more the fact not all members suffer from tunnel vision.

Wayfaring

05-01-2009, 08:50 AM

The ability to "flow" while fighting can't be cultivated outside of fighting anymore than you can develop the ability to "flow" while driving without driving.

And, the ability to flow or act/adapt unconsciously isn't the whole enchilada. Fightign, like driving, requires us to sometimes think, sometimes flow, sometimes think about one thing as we flow, etc.

Interesting. What I can note is the more comfortable I get in fighting scenarios the more relaxed I become and can "let my hands go". The mind is less involved in the basic mechanics and more involved in dictating pace, strategy, etc. Certainly not an "empty" mind - but better focused on the strategy stuff and letting the subconscious do the mechanical stuff.

So I think Hendrik's last post with the direct character translation "silence is within action" is the one that makes the most sense to me.

Hendrik

05-01-2009, 09:29 AM

At least someone is. :)

Sure, keep up with your BJJ thinking. you are not a WCner anyway.

Golden Arms

05-01-2009, 12:01 PM

The translation of the Demons/Tengu Sermon on martial arts, by Issai Chozanshi, directly addresses flow and stillness of the mind, as well as their relationship.

Hendrik

05-01-2009, 12:43 PM

So I think Hendrik's last post with the direct character translation "silence is within action" is the one that makes the most sense to me.

Thus, I have heard ,

Kuen Kuit is not for intepreting or translating or logical derivation, it is a certification when one arrived or attain the state and training direction.

Without the Kung Fu put into it , one can keep thinking for 10000000000000years and get no where. not to mention getting ridiculus ideas.

If Kuen Kuit is just some sort of saying then it is no different then lyrics of a song, not worthed to be mention at all. Kuen Kuit is certainly not a title for composition/essay class to see who write the best essay.

Hardwork108

05-02-2009, 12:52 PM

just out of curiosity, what evidence do you have in this regard (e.g. - documented fights, discussions w/people who have fought him / seen him fight)?
I have evidence!

What evidence do you have that he is not got combat skills, your interpretation of the clip, based on your limited kung fu experience?

as far as what he demonstrates, it's nothing particularly extraordinary;
Whether you see it as something "extraordinary" or not will depend on your appreciation and KNOWLEDGE of the subtilities involved in touching hands.

if you think it is, then you obviously you haven't encountered any really skilled sifu,
But I have and since you haven´t then you seem to be all over the place.

which is sad,
Yes it is (for you), considering how much you try to come across as knowledgable regarding kung fu matters.

considering how you seem to want to practice "authentic" kung fu;
I have got news for you. I have been practicing authentic kung fu for more than 8 years.:)

that's ok,

It is ok for me, but for you, I don´t know.

keep looking, one day you may actually find someone who is who will take you on;

You took the words out of my mouth except for the fact that I was going to add that you should do something about the "selective morality syndrom" that you seem to be suffering from eternally, otherwise no authentic sifu worth his salt is going to accept you and you will only end up with second class kung fu training (as always).

it's this sort of ridiculous sarcasm that you employ that reveals you for the pisz ant that you are;
The "sarcasm" was meant to show up your "know it all", clueless attitude.

profound?
Yes, but at your stage of training and knowledge you will not see this. So keep training (hopefully with a real sifu, if he will have you that is) and after a few years things will be clearer for you.

Christ, it's bridging hands work, not transubstantiation; get over it, already;
Bridging hands work has many levels to it. If you take the right path then you will understand what I am trying to tell you (in a "few" years).

I think that
That is a good start already, as you have started to "think".

the only "problem" here is that you are overly impressed by something that, unlike you, those of us with "real" experience have repeatedly seen, experienced, practiced and understood,

The problem here is that what you define as "real" experience is considered comedy territory for those of us who practice kung fu for real.;)

and as such do not have the need to act as the arbiter of "authentic" kung fu, which obviously you still haven't gotten past;
You don´t act as "arbiter" of real kung fu, because you CAN´T!

You do not possess the faculties to differentiate between what is real and what is glorified kickboxing with a bit of BJJ thrown in.

By the way, didn´t you list BJJ as part of your curriculum in the past? If so, why did you not include it in your new profile?

you really are rather limited in your scope of understanding, sad to say;
What is really sad is the fact that inspite of the forum company (of glorified kickboxers) that you keep you have managed to fool some people into thinking that you actually possess even a minute amount of kung fu knowledge, lol.

the intelligent thing before you make ridiculous statements of that nature would be for you to actually do a little research on the sifus with whom I have studied
The more intelligent thing would be for me to actually read your posts, including your take on the internals;cross training and your "scientific" explanations of concepts that you do not understand yourself, because if not anything else, they provide for entertaining reading as well as a good laugh.

(and yes, yes, we all know that your next comment will be something to the effect that "well, they may be of high caliber but you didn't learn anything from them, etc. etc.";
And what is wrong with telling the truth?:confused:

the point though, is that you still now and always will have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in any regard);
That coming from a guy who enters a Wing Chun thread and attempts to(unsuccessfully) "contribute" when the question is directed at WING CHUNNERS! LOL,lol,lol.

but given your limited experience, you wouldn't know real kung fu if you tripped over it, sad to say for you;

I hope that what I am going to say is not too profound for you, as none of us want your head to explode all over your computer screen, BUT IMHO, as far as real kung fu training is concerned, most of us have limited experience except that some of us have that limited experience training under genuine kung fu sifus, while others others are led by the "blind", leading them to enter the wrong forum threads and answer questions in the wrong way, just as you have.;)

Hendrik

05-02-2009, 01:31 PM

The translation of the Demons/Tengu Sermon on martial arts, by Issai Chozanshi, directly addresses flow and stillness of the mind, as well as their relationship.

Thanks.

I have not read the book.
Could you please briefly describe or qoute what the book says?

taai gihk yahn

05-02-2009, 02:06 PM

I have evidence!
and that evidence would be...

What evidence do you have that he is not got combat skills, your interpretation of the clip, based on your limited kung fu experience?
I don't need to provide evidence, because I am not claiming anything about his alleged combat skill; the burden of proof is on the individual making the claim (you): I am not saying that he does or doesn't, but you are saying he does; so I am asking what evidence you have to that effect; if you say it's based on what he shows on the clip, that's not evidence, it's opinion based on extrapolation, nothing more;

Whether you see it as something "extraordinary" or not will depend on your appreciation and KNOWLEDGE of the subtilities involved in touching hands.
exactly; and having trained with individuals with high-level skill in that area, it is nothing extraordinary;

But I have and since you haven´t then you seem to be all over the place.
I find it continually amusing that you feel you can state this with such certainty, yet at the same time you are so utterly wrong in this regard; but that's as may be, your ridiculousness always provides me with a good chuckle or two

Yes it is (for you), considering how much you try to come across as knowledgable regarding kung fu matters.
as always, I invite you to specifically refute any statements regarding "kung fu matters" that i make; but you never do, you simply engage in ad hominum attacks or resort to sarcastic remarks;

I have got news for you. I have been practicing authentic kung fu for more than 8 years.:)
indeed; and in that time how long have you have trained in the same school with the same teacher at a stretch? if you think that you are going to get anything "real" from an "authentic" Chinese sifu in the short amount of time you seem to spend at a given school, well, lol on you;

It is ok for me, but for you, I don´t know.
truer words were never spoken (bold mine)

You took the words out of my mouth except for the fact that I was going to add that you should do something about the "selective morality syndrom" that you seem to be suffering from eternally, otherwise no authentic sifu worth his salt is going to accept you and you will only end up with second class kung fu training (as always).
if you really, truly, believe that sort of silliness, then you are regrettably beyond all hope; enjoy your life of kung-fu fantasy;

The "sarcasm" was meant to show up your "know it all", clueless attitude.
all it showed was that you are a a churlish nincompoop;

Yes, but at your stage of training and knowledge you will not see this. So keep training (hopefully with a real sifu, if he will have you that is) and after a few years things will be clearer for you.
yeah, I'll be sure to remind my sifu of that the next time I see him :rolleyes:

Bridging hands work has many levels to it. If you take the right path then you will understand what I am trying to tell you (in a "few" years).
LOL, you are too funny

That is a good start already, as you have started to "think".
yes, admittedly it's a new experience in regards to reading your posts, which usually requires suspension of all critical analytical faculties in order to get through them without completely falling out of one's chair with laughter

The problem here is that what you define as "real" experience is considered comedy territory for those of us who practice kung fu for real.;)
that's about the funniest thing I have read from you to date;

You don´t act as "arbiter" of real kung fu, because you CAN´T!
LOL at your silliness; you act as "arbiter" (since I don't see you denying it) because your whole ego-structure depends on it;

You do not possess the faculties to differentiate between what is real and what is glorified kickboxing with a bit of BJJ thrown in.
riiight :rolleyes:

By the way, didn´t you list BJJ as part of your curriculum in the past?
no, as I actually only started training in BJJ about 8 months ago

If so, why did you not include it in your new profile?
a) because I wrote the new profile before that time and b) because I opted to list only my TCMA experience this time; as I already explained to you once before; please try to pay better attention in the future

What is really sad is the fact that inspite of the forum company (of glorified kickboxers) that you keep you have managed to fool some people into thinking that you actually possess even a minute amount of kung fu knowledge, lol.
I am sure that they are all grateful to you for exposing my perfidiousness :rolleyes:

The more intelligent thing would be for me to actually read your posts, including your take on the internals;cross training and your "scientific" explanations of concepts that you do not understand yourself, because if not anything else, they provide for entertaining reading as well as a good laugh.
I am glad that I am able to provide you with some levity in return for all the entertainment that you have provided me;

And what is wrong with telling the truth?:confused:
nothing; you might want to actually try it sometime

That coming from a guy who enters a Wing Chun thread and attempts to(unsuccessfully) "contribute" when the question is directed at WING CHUNNERS! LOL,lol,lol.
of course, because WC is so rarified that it has absolutely nothing to do with any other sort of TCMA :rolleyes:

I hope that what I am going to say is not too profound for you, as none of us want your head to explode all over your computer screen, BUT IMHO, as far as real kung fu training is concerned, most of us have limited experience except that some of us have that limited experience training under genuine kung fu sifus, while others others are led by the "blind", leading them to enter the wrong forum threads and answer questions in the wrong way, just as you have.;)
the only "right" way to answer your posts in your estimation is to unequivocally swallow your take on what constitutes "authentic" kung fu training hook, line and sinker; to a man, anyone who has ever disagreed with you in any capacity you instantly label a glorified kickboxer and take their lack of agreement as "proof" that they have not studied "authentic" kung fu; you really are too funny;

Edmund

05-03-2009, 05:49 PM

Just curious on your logic, assuming you havent actually personally exchanged hands with Y.L then how do you actually know he cant help with your Chi Sau ?

Again by your same logic, your Sifu whoever he might be, is always the right guy to guide you ?

Maybe the disccussions are not all over the place, but more the fact not all members suffer from tunnel vision.

1. Well how are we supposed to judge YL other than the clip?
The clip showed him demoing on his compliant partner and giving very little instruction on how to do chi sao. What exactly is he going to teach you (other than trying to twist your fingers backwards)?

2. I don't think people can afford to have personal lessons with everyone from any style who puts up a demo clip. He's not a WC teacher. At least a WC teacher can show you the general curriculum, the basic techniques etc. You know you're going to learn something along the lines of WC.

Stevehans

05-03-2009, 11:20 PM

1. Well how are we supposed to judge YL other than the clip?
The clip showed him demoing on his compliant partner and giving very little instruction on how to do chi sao. What exactly is he going to teach you (other than trying to twist your fingers backwards)?

2. I don't think people can afford to have personal lessons with everyone from any style who puts up a demo clip. He's not a WC teacher. At least a WC teacher can show you the general curriculum, the basic techniques etc. You know you're going to learn something along the lines of WC.

I agree, but most WCK clips are a demo with compliant partners anyway. More importantly i was suggesting that there might be some useful techniques, we just dont know as the clip wasn't instructional, and if he isn't playing a trick, i for one would be curious to know. But the only way anyone can find out would be to take lessons.

On the same token i pretty sure most would agree that some cross training is healthy and that its hard to judge the skill of any teacher until you actually seen him in person.

2. I wasn't suggesting desserting your WCK sifu, some WCnnrs cross train in BJJ, Tai Chi , TKD, .......... and it doesn't really do them any harm. But like you said it whether we can afford the time and money.

Personally i am not a fan of chi sau as i feel it creates more problems than it solves for people who want to fight. For those who dont want to get hurt, then why not spar light instead. Most chi sau clips i see suggests those preachers of chi sau should stick to fighting with fellow chi sau'ers, that way it all flows neatly within their WCK 'coreography' and no one get's their hairdo messed up !

Edmund

05-04-2009, 12:57 AM

More importantly i was suggesting that there might be some useful techniques, we just dont know as the clip wasn't instructional, and if he isn't playing a trick, i for one would be curious to know.

Based on what's *not* on the clip?!
Let's err on the side of safety and just go by what's on there.

On the same token i pretty sure most would agree that some cross training is healthy and that its hard to judge the skill of any teacher until you actually seen him in person.

2. I wasn't suggesting desserting your WCK sifu, some WCnnrs cross train in BJJ, Tai Chi , TKD, .......... and it doesn't really do them any harm. But like you said it whether we can afford the time and money.

Well if he demoed something of his *own* style maybe it would give reason to have some interest. If his clip is showing the same stuff as WC clips, you haven't seen anything different to call cross-training.

Because you're not going to a TKD guy for extra chi sao lessons are you?

Stevehans

05-04-2009, 01:13 AM

Based on what's *not* on the clip?!
Let's err on the side of safety and just go by what's on there.

No problem, but it was 'the fact' that i couldn't recognise anything in the clip was the reason behind my post.

Well if he demoed something of his *own* style maybe it would give reason to have some interest. If his clip is showing the same stuff as WC clips, you haven't seen anything different to call cross-training.

Because you're not going to a TKD guy for extra chi sao lessons are you?

Actually not strictly true as all the attacks and counters he showed was in his own style, but due the the fact that he didn't elaborate makes it hard for us go on what's there !

Because you're not going to a TKD guy for extra chi sao lessons are you?

Chi Geuk Maybe ? :rolleyes:

Edmund

05-04-2009, 03:28 AM

No problem, but it was 'the fact' that i couldn't recognise anything in the clip was the reason behind my post.

I don't understand what you're saying. Did you find the techniques that different from WC?

Actually not strictly true as all the attacks and counters he showed was in his own style, but due the the fact that he didn't elaborate makes it hard for us go on what's there !

How do you know it was 5A style?

Stevehans

05-04-2009, 05:33 AM

I don't understand what you're saying. Did you find the techniques that different from WC?

Not so much techniques but rather some obvious differences such as I notice that he doesn't keep his elbows in tight and he does not attack in a straight lines. He also holds with the other hand when he strikes, and there are so many other things like he doesn't run or huen much when he is pressed.

I could go on, but without properly understanding their underlying principles i'm not really in a position to accurately speculate what is or is not. All i know is that its not like the wing chun counters that i am used to.

How do you know it was 5A style?

I just assumed as he is an 5A instructor and the fact that he actually said in the beginning of the vid that he was 'showing how they apply their chi sau against wing chun.'

Hardwork108

05-04-2009, 11:41 AM

Good Post, thank you.:)

Not so much techniques but rather some obvious differences such as I notice that he doesn't keep his elbows in tight and he does not attack in a straight lines. He also holds with the other hand when he strikes, and there are so many other things like he doesn't run or huen much when he is pressed.
True, and he also uses circular strikes and chin-na, the latter being something that is not always seen in Wing Chun chi sao.

I could go on, but without properly understanding their underlying principles i'm not really in a position to accurately speculate what is or is not. All i know is that its not like the wing chun counters that i am used to.
Now you are touching upon stuff that were the primary reason for me having started this thread and those are the underlying principles that are used by YL, things that in my opinion should be present in good Wing Chun, but yet aren´t seen in majority of WC as practiced in the West.

You have noticed factors that some other "wing chuners" have failed to see. And 'know it all' clueless comments like, "nothing that extraordinary at all" by one of the forum´s "intellectual" trolls does not do justice to the video clip; the sifu and nor the subject matter of this thread.

The sifu in the clip shows given techniques but also the principles behind them. For example he jams, absorbs and floats his opponent. These are things that are present inside WC but the way YL does it demonstrates fine-tuned sensitivity, softness,etc. pointing to kung fu internals, an aspect that is missing from many WC schools nowadays.

I just assumed as he is an 5A instructor and the fact that he actually said in the beginning of the vid that he was 'showing how they apply their chi sau against wing chun.'

EXACTLY!

Don´t you wish that people would pay closer attention to video clips....:cool:

Thanks again for your posts.:)

Hendrik

05-04-2009, 11:52 AM

What the sifu in the clip shows given techniques but also the principles behind them. For example he jams, absorbs and floats his opponent. These are things that are present inside WC but the way YL does it demonstrates fine-tuned sensitivity, softness,etc. pointing to kung fu internals, an aspect that is missing from many WC schools nowadays.

To be real honest, to talk straight and not to be blunt.

5 A is not Wing Chun, and the above view is a totally misleading.

As for the sifu in the clip, he does his art whatever it is but nothing to do with WCK. and he must not be look as an idol or example of WCner.

What is WCK? What Internal? What external? if one has no clue on those,
making a statement as the following is really ignorance.

an aspect that is missing from many WC schools nowadays.

.

Hardwork108

05-04-2009, 12:38 PM

and that evidence would be...
Nothing that would convince you on an internet forum board but yet I have evidence and apparently you don´t, while at the same time you are void of any profound knowledge that would enable you to see and deduct it from the video clip.

I don't need to provide evidence,
Yet you have provided plenty, albeit unintentionally, about yourself and your own "knowledge" and character.

because I am not claiming anything about his alleged combat skill; the burden of proof is on the individual making the claim (you):
And as I said before, I have the evidence (and you don´t) but it is nothing that can be proved on an internet board as it will end up as another "claim". However, as you are currently unable to appreciate his skill/approach/style then if you are in London in the near future then why don´t you go and try your "chi sao" with him so as not to depend on my word regarding his skills?

I am not saying that he does or doesn't, but you are saying he does; so I am asking what evidence you have to that effect; if you say it's based on what he shows on the clip, that's not evidence, it's opinion based on extrapolation, nothing more;

That would be because in your case your "knowledge" is based on your opinions and not the other way round as it should be. Hence you have missed the point about the clip and the thread for that matter.

exactly; and having trained with individuals with high-level skill in that area, it is nothing extraordinary;

So you say....LOL.

I find it continually amusing that you feel you can state this with such certainty, yet at the same time you are so utterly wrong in this regard; but that's as may be, your ridiculousness always provides me with a good chuckle or two

Oh how the simple minds misinterpret profound comments. :rolleyes:

as always, I invite you to specifically refute any statements regarding "kung fu matters" that i make; but you never do, you simply engage in ad hominum attacks or resort to sarcastic remarks;
Well I just did in this thread. This is a Wing Chun thread inviting WC practitioner´s point of view on aspects represented in that video clip that relate to WING CHUN practice. Never mind that some so called WC-ners came out and did not manage to even see the basics of the clip (and what the thread was asking). Then you come up with your usual pompous and clueless remarks.

indeed; and in that time how long have you have trained in the same school with the same teacher at a stretch?
if you think that you are going to get anything "real" from an "authentic" Chinese sifu in the short amount of time you seem to spend at a given school, well, lol on you;

Long enough to recognize BS-ers such as yourself and your forum posey of MMA knuckleheads who have thankfully fallen silent in this thread. Could it be that they, unlike you, have finally realized that actual kung fu threads are way above their heads and have limited their forum participation to punch bag training and UFC/Bjj threads.

truer words were never spoken
Well that is me, baby. You should try speaking the truth sometimes and try to teach it to Sanjuro and Ross as well. There, that should keep you busy for the next 6 decades or so...Lol, Lol.

(bold mine)
The English could have been better but I know what you mean but don´t worry as this happens to most men.

if you really, truly, believe that sort of silliness, then you are regrettably beyond all hope; enjoy your life of kung-fu fantasy;
So morality = silliness for you and your forum buddies. You consider this kind of morality as "kung fu fantasy"?

It is funny, how much kung fu morality you have learnt from your "skilled" sifus...LOL,lol,lol.

all it showed was that you are a a churlish nincompoop;
Do keep running clutching at straws. It really is entertaining from where I am sitting.

yeah, I'll be sure to remind my sifu of that the next time I see him :rolleyes:
Right after or before he serves you your Mc fries and your "kung fu" badges?

LOL, you are too funny

Yep, the truth can be funny sometimes, even if sad (for you).

yes, admittedly it's a new experience in regards to reading your posts, which usually requires suspension of all critical analytical faculties

Yet you keep reading them inspite of your eternally suspended critical and analytical faculties. And good on you as one day you may actually understand the more complicated aspects of kung fu training, but as always, first correct your behavior and then find a genuine sifu!

in order to get through them without completely falling out of one's chair with laughter
Talk about bad kung fu roots. Boy you can´t even "sit" on a chair??? Lol,Lol.

that's about the funniest thing I have read from you to date;
Well the truth can be so funny sometimes that you end up laughing, even if it is at yourself, but don´t worry as we are all there with you, laughing at you!

LOL at your silliness; you act as "arbiter" (since I don't see you denying it) because your whole ego-structure depends on it;
Wrong (again)!
I act as "arbiter" because there are people here in these forums that talk a lot about kung fu knowledge and give a lot of advice but in reality their knowledge does not even approach the mediocre and they are just here to fill their own EGOES and sometimes pockets selling Mcdonald kung fu (with accompanying dvds) to the gullible. When I see such people then I do act as "arbiter".

I hope that even you have understood the above statement.

riiight :rolleyes:
Or maybe I was over-estimating you, as always...:rolleyes:

no, as I actually only started training in BJJ about 8 months ago
I could have sworn.....but nevermind...it seems that you have at last answered your "knucklehead" calling. Good luck with that.

It is interesting that after you claim to have trained (apparently cluelessly) with "skillful" sifus and for many years, you still felt the need to train in BJJ...lol,lol,lol.

Nevermind to each his own.:rolleyes:

a) because I wrote the new profile before that time and b) because I opted to list only my TCMA experience this time;
Christ, you mean you have more knucklehead MAs in your resume? No wonder you are friends with the other "clueless warrior", Sanjuro ronin...Lol,lol,lol.

as I already explained to you once before; please try to pay better attention in the future

I will, just as soon as I make sense out of your confused kung fu posts, as even I can´t multi task that much...LOL

I am sure that they are all grateful to you for exposing my perfidiousness :rolleyes:

I believe many of them have already grasped your lack of kung fu substance .;)

I am glad that I am able to provide you with some levity in return for all the entertainment that you have provided me;

And there is more "entertainment" where that came from.;)

nothing; you might want to actually try it sometime
I don´t have to "try" and be truthful as I AM truthful always, unlike you and your friends Sanjuro, Lkfmdc, Kansuke etc.

of course, because WC is so rarified that it has absolutely nothing to do with any other sort of TCMA :rolleyes:
Well it certainly has nothing to do with BJJ....LOL.

Of course there are links with other kung fu styles, specially Southern ones and hence the subject matter of the thread.

I want to congratulate you as you have touched upon the actual subject matter of this thread, even if it was unintentional.

the only "right" way to answer your posts in your estimation is to unequivocally swallow your take on what constitutes "authentic" kung fu training hook, line and sinker; to a man, anyone who has ever disagreed with you in any capacity you instantly label a glorified kickboxer and take their lack of agreement as "proof" that they have not studied "authentic" kung fu; you really are too funny;

That is a FALSE statement.

In this very thread you can see that Hendrik and I do not see eye to eye on certain aspects of the subject matter and I have not called him any names and nor has he called me any names for that matter. Hendrik, unlike you and your fellow forum MMA friends, is a real kung fu man, wether I disagree with him on certain matters or not, and that is the difference!

Hardwork108

05-04-2009, 12:57 PM

To be real honest, to talk straight and not to be blunt.

5 A is not Wing Chun, and the above view is a totally misleading.

As for the sifu in the clip, he does his art whatever it is but nothing to do with WCK. and he must not be look as an idol or example of WCner.
I am not calling him an idol. I started this thread to discuss some of the aspects that he uses that should be present in WC. That is all.

No one is saying that 5A is good and WC is bad.

What is WCK? What Internal? What external? if one has no clue on those,
making a statement as the following is really ignorance.

My statement was based on some schools I have seen as well as some of the comments of other WC practitioners in forums such as this one. Most of them seem to be practicing WC as a form of kickboxing. You can see that from Niehoff´s posts, for example. Many others have gone to BJJ and Muay thai to find some answers that their sifus have been unable to provide.

Hendrik, there is a real problem out there when it comes to good kung fu training as there are not enought good schools. There are many "sifus" who are teaching invented kung fu.

Keeping the above in mindd, I don´t believe that I made an ignorant statement.:)

Hendrik

05-04-2009, 01:29 PM

My statement was based on some schools I have seen as well as some of the comments of other WC practitioners in forums such as this one.

Most of them seem to be practicing WC as a form of kickboxing. You can see that from Niehoff´s posts, for example.

Many others have gone to BJJ and Muay thai to find some answers that their sifus have been unable to provide.

You know, rule of thump in TCMA training, Train. As the others' problems. That is theirs.

Hendrik, there is a real problem out there when it comes to good kung fu training as there are not enought good schools. There are many "sifus" who are teaching invented kung fu.

What is good kung fu training? That needs to be define. and no need to be judgmental.
and also, let others free to be what they like to be.

Keeping the above in mindd, I don´t believe that I made an ignorant statement.:)

your self-rigtheous ego has blind you. even the intention might be good but the result is ignorant.

Dont waste time, go back and Train. until you KNow, you cant help TCMA and others to Know.

Hardwork108

05-04-2009, 01:51 PM

You know, rule of thump in TCMA training, Train. As the others' problems. That is theirs.
I know but this is a forum and wether we like it or not "problems" come out.

What is good kung fu training? That needs to be define. and no need to be judgmental.
and also, let others free to be what they like to be.
They can be what they like to be but when a new kung fu student comes here for advise and they come out and recommend him to take up bjj to "improve" his abilities, and that has happened before, then that upsets me!

your self-rigtheous ego has blind you. even the intention might be good but the result is ignorant.
You see it the way you want to see it but my intention is good and just like you I like to present my view as well. Furthermore, most of us are "blind" sometimes.

Dont waste time, go back and Train. until you KNow, you cant help TCMA and others to Know.
I haven´t stopped training but I know sometimes even you have wasted time trying to explain certain kung fu aspects to some of the people here...Or am I wrong?

Hendrik

05-04-2009, 02:10 PM

I know but this is a forum and wether we like it or not "problems" come out.

That is their to solve.

They can be what they like to be but when a new kung fu student comes here for advise and they come out and recommend him to take up bjj to "improve" his abilities, and that has happened before, then that upsets me!

Honestly, there is no Their or ours.

They do that because thier so called WCK training can no longer provide them what they need. and they are trying to be helpfull and telling the truth.

As for those who defense WCK, can they make the art work better? if not it is great to be patrioc (sp?) or royal but how can one defense something which is no longer function?

You see it the way you want to see it but my intention is good and just like you I like to present my view as well. Furthermore, most of us are "blind" sometimes.

intention is good doesnt mean the result is good.

what is the different between mix a 5 A or Bjj into WCK? For me, no different.
Either way you destroy WCK. and what is the point to be allright that you ask others to import 5 A and totally a sinful stuffs if others mix WCK with Bjj?

Not to mention, if you know WCK, you wont do that.

How blind can one more blind then that?

I haven´t stopped training but I know sometimes even you have wasted time trying to explain certain kung fu aspects to some of the people here...Or am I wrong?

No offense, just reading your posts, your intention is great. But your term such as internal, Traditional Kung fu ...... are all empty.

Dont believe me? tell us what is Under Elbow force and under sleeve jin of WCK. That is extremely basic and see how deep can you describe them?

Not to mention, in your lineage, if the following is true,

http://www.wingchunpedia.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=WCP.ChengKwongLineage

This art is mixed with Hung Gar and dont do SNT/SLT either.

So, how can this type of view help the WCner instead of lead to other path?

I am saying this not to put you down. But to tell you. Life is much more complicated.

Go a head if you like to do what you like to do, free will world. However, what is the different between adding BJJ to WCK or adding Hung Gar or 5 A to WCK? nothing. see, BJJ is from Jujitsu and Jujitsu relate to Tang Dynasty art of China. So there is no different.

Thus, as i concluded before, go train and know your stuffs. only then you could help others. before that, everyone's five cents has no value. I said this because as I said, there is no Them and us. There is only one WCK. and to help WCK there is only one way. One must know WCK before anything otherwise, there is no different if you or me or others pulling the reverse gear, for it is not who it matter but "what it is and how it is "matter.

so go and train and get to the most advance level as possible, Lead us as a model who we all love to follow.

just some thoughts

Edmund

05-04-2009, 05:04 PM

Not so much techniques but rather some obvious differences such as I notice that he doesn't keep his elbows in tight and he does not attack in a straight lines. He also holds with the other hand when he strikes, and there are so many other things like he doesn't run or huen much when he is pressed.

I could go on, but without properly understanding their underlying principles i'm not really in a position to accurately speculate what is or is not. All i know is that its not like the wing chun counters that i am used to.

I just assumed as he is an 5A instructor and the fact that he actually said in the beginning of the vid that he was 'showing how they apply their chi sau against wing chun.'

I don't think you can attribute anything to 5A. What he demonstrated was fairly generic to many kung fu styles. Tai gik yahn said the same thing as well. It just fell on deaf ears. Partly because HW108 felt there was something special on the clip.

Just because it's special or different to you, doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way. Some people have seen this sort of thing before.

If it appeals to you, that's fine. It's up to you to pursue if you want. But don't get offended if it's not interesting or valuable to everyone.

Hendrik

05-04-2009, 09:03 PM

this is my view of " USing Silence to lead action" express in Kyokushin style.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtqQxF4qb7c&feature=related

As the Chinese said, Pu Chao Pu Chia Tze Seh ye sia or no deal no block just one strike.
and Cien Fung Cha Jen or sees the grap and stick a needle in.

Flow, Silence, zen...All is in this clip ordinary with nothing special but really special. As the question, can you do it this way?

Kuen kuit is not some poem or lyrics or speculation or logical derivative. one needs to recognize what it is when one sees it in real life.

silence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK_4Z5DZcNM

Violent Designs

05-04-2009, 09:34 PM

Do you "know" then Hendrik? You repeatedly claim others don't "know." Well, do YOU?

Hendrik

05-04-2009, 10:03 PM

Do you "know" then Hendrik? You repeatedly claim others don't "know." Well, do YOU?

Know what?

You want to enlightent us? Please go a head.

banditshaw

05-04-2009, 10:13 PM

A lil quote from ol' rummy should settle this.

''There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.''
Donald Rumsfeld

anerlich

05-04-2009, 10:22 PM

Good quote, but Rummy was a Greco-Roman wrestler, not a WC guy, and therefore, by the definitions of some of the self appointed pundits here, a Knucklehead.

"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure" - GWB

Stevehans

05-04-2009, 11:07 PM

I don't think you can attribute anything to 5A. What he demonstrated was fairly generic to many kung fu styles. Tai gik yahn said the same thing as well. It just fell on deaf ears. Partly because HW108 felt there was something special on the clip.

Just because it's special or different to you, doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way. Some people have seen this sort of thing before.

If it appeals to you, that's fine. It's up to you to pursue if you want. But don't get offended if it's not interesting or valuable to everyone.

I have always had an open mind and a curious one. As such i was the was the most disloyal student in that i was always looking in everything else, it's in my nature so i wont be easily offended. Each to their own and that's the way it should be.

If there is one thing i have learnt in life, its not to take everything at face value. Its always good to question but above all if we can experience it for ourselves. The reality is, we can only really comment truthfully on what we have actually experienced for ourselves, everything else is speculative and at best just repeating someone elses experience.

I would not attempt to demo against the likes of Choy Li Fat, Muay Thai, Greco W., Boxing etc as i do not have first hand experience but that does not stop many others from doing so. Sure they may get some right but for the most part its still a stab in the dark.

Our minds are only as good as our experiences, just like talking to the same man when he was adolescent and then later in life when as a retiree, in most cases it wont be same.

Its been my experience that we can learn something from all styles, if only to learn that ours is better ;)

Edmund

05-05-2009, 05:02 PM

I have always had an open mind and a curious one. As such i was the was the most disloyal student in that i was always looking in everything else, it's in my nature so i wont be easily offended. Each to their own and that's the way it should be.
...
..
...
Its been my experience that we can learn something from all styles, if only to learn that ours is better ;)

I believe the same thing. We can learn from other styles.
That doesn't mean every clip from another stylist has value for everyone though. And when you don't see value in the clip, you wouldn't go out of your way to take personal lessons from them.

Hardwork108

05-07-2009, 12:39 PM

That is their to solve.
And perhaps my "problems" are for me to solve, not you???

Honestly, there is no Their or ours.
There shouldn´t be but IMHO there is!

They do that because thier so called WCK training can no longer provide them what they need.
Then perhaps they should find other WC schools rather than giving bad labels to Wing Chun. What they actually do is say Wing Chun is not effective in x, y, z and then they go on to recommend BJJ, Kickboxing etc.

I don´t agree with that approach and this being a discussion forum I show my feeling about the subject just like you do about other matters.

and they are trying to be helpfull and telling the truth.
They are not being helpful to Wing Chun but to MMA!

They prefer to criticize the art of Wing Chun instead of criticizing their own,as you yourself put it, "so called wing chun training"!

As for those who defense WCK, can they make the art work better? if not it is great to be patrioc (sp?) or royal but how can one defense something which is no longer function?
Well how do you know my WC does not function? I am not an advanced student but I am doing well for my level taking into consideration the many recent changes in my life.

intention is good doesnt mean the result is good.
Agreed!

But sometimes it is worth a try.:)

what is the different between mix a 5 A or Bjj into WCK?

Actually I was not talking about MIXING the two but that they share some similar concepts, that is all, Hendrik. Again, I was not saying that one is better than the other either.

However, I must add that the difference between bjj and 5A is that 5A is a kung fu style and bjj is not!

Either way you destroy WCK. and what is the point to be allright that you ask others to import 5 A and totally a sinful stuffs if others mix WCK with Bjj?
Again, I was not asking anyone to import 5A techniques. To do so one would require to study 5A for years. What I was asking was for people to recognize certain WC elements in what YL was showing and enquired if anyone practiced in that way.

How blind can one more blind then that?
As my explanation should show by now, I am not blind as I did not ask anyone to crosstrain WC with 5A and I still say that you have misunderstood the subject matter of my thread.

No offense, just reading your posts, your intention is great. But your term such as internal, Traditional Kung fu ...... are all empty.
Not from where I am sitting.

Dont believe me? tell us what is Under Elbow force and under sleeve jin of WCK. That is extremely basic and see how deep can you describe them?
In my lineage those terms are unfamiliar even if they are extremely basic in your lineage. However we have the Forward Elbow Flow Force. Which is the firm but relaxed elbow structure which generates force from the elbow joint at a forward direction. This applies not only in striking but blocking/redirecting as well where the elbow holds its structural integrity while flowing forward.

We also have the upward (and forward) explosion of yin punch when striking where the bottom knuckles contact the target area in an upward angle, which may or may not be what you are referring to when you talk about "under sleeve jin".

Not to mention, in your lineage, if the following is true,

http://www.wingchunpedia.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=WCP.ChengKwongLineage

This art is mixed with Hung Gar and dont do SNT/SLT either.
Well this view is not true. We do practice the SNT/SLT, but perhaps slightly differently to your lineage.

We have the Chum Kiu (my level) and Biu Jee forms. The wooden dummy and sandbag form and Shaolin influenced IP training.

Furthermore the Shaolin influence is present but does not take precedence over the WC concepts and principles. For example there are Tiger elements that manifest themselves at advanced (not my) levels.

I am saying this not to put you down. But to tell you. Life is much more complicated.
I am fully aware of what you are saying.

Go a head if you like to do what you like to do, free will world. However, what is the different between adding BJJ to WCK or adding Hung Gar or 5 A to WCK? nothing. see, BJJ is from Jujitsu and Jujitsu relate to Tang Dynasty art of China. So there is no different.
Again, I am not attempting to add anything to WC but only trying to discuss similarities that WC and 5A share as they are both Southern Kung Fu styles with Crane influences among other things.

Whereas others here try to "improve" WC (or other kung fu styles) by adding BJJ.

Thus, as i concluded before, go train and know your stuffs. only then you could help others.
Well I do train my stuff and try to discuss withing the boundaries of my knowledge. Actually you could give that advice to 99% of people who post here.;)

before that, everyone's five cents has no value.
They will if their posts are not misunderstood.;)

I said this because as I said, there is no Them and us. There is only one WCK.
There are at least 2 WCK. The authentic and the MacDonald variety.

The authentic has MORE THAN ONE manifestations, IMHO.

and to help WCK there is only one way. One must know WCK before anything otherwise, there is no different if you or me or others pulling the reverse gear, for it is not who it matter but "what it is and how it is "matter.
As I said before, I try to make my posts within the boundaries of my own student level knowledge.

so go and train and get to the most advance level as possible, Lead us as a model who we all love to follow.
If everyone did that then there would be no one posting here and this discussion board would go out of business..lol.

just some thoughts

And as always, they are well appreciated.:)

Hardwork108

05-07-2009, 12:42 PM

That doesn't mean every clip from another stylist has value for everyone though.
It will depend on their level, or lack of, kung fu understanding (and reading comprehension;)).

And when you don't see value in the clip, you wouldn't go out of your way to take personal lessons from them.
As I said.......

Hardwork108

05-07-2009, 12:45 PM

Good quote, but Rummy was a Greco-Roman wrestler, not a WC guy, and therefore, by the definitions of some of the self appointed pundits here, a Knucklehead.

And you can see the wisdom behind the label, "knucklehead" from Donald Rumsfeld´s own behavior while in political office! Lol.

Edmund

05-07-2009, 03:23 PM

It will depend on their level, or lack of, kung fu understanding (and reading comprehension;)).

Certainly does.
People with a low level of experience will believe any clip is awesome.

Hardwork108

05-07-2009, 04:04 PM

Certainly does.
People with a low level of experience will believe any clip is awesome.
And they will not see the awesome in the quality clips.;)

Edmund

05-07-2009, 05:24 PM

And they will not see the awesome in the quality clips.;)

I asked you before and you didn't answer. DO YOU KNOW THIS GUY PERSONALLY?

No demo where the partner is just complying is showing anything awesome.
Yet you think the guy's awesome...

Hardwork108

05-07-2009, 05:34 PM

I asked you before and you didn't answer. DO YOU KNOW THIS GUY PERSONALLY?
What would that tell you, either way?

No demo where the partner is just complying is showing anything awesome.
Yet you think the guy's awesome...

You don´t see anything "awesome" because you don´t know what to look for! The relevant info has been given to you in this thread.

Edmund

05-07-2009, 06:05 PM

What would that tell you, either way?

You don´t see anything "awesome" because you don´t know what to look for! The relevant info has been given to you in this thread.

It would tell me you've possibly experienced him do better than what he showed in the clip!

If you DON'T know the guy, you are basing all your BS off the clip.

You think it's amazing timing uprooting and chin-na. The point is he didn't have to actually time anything because the partner wasn't providing anything close to realistic.

You're going to be able to move first if the partner *LETS* you go first!

The reaction to getting pulled and pushed was to allow it! Same with twisting his fingers. That 's all a passive reaction which is why it's a compliant demonstration.

It's not even chi sao/poon sao in the first place. YL Sifu didn't do a bong sao once with all that "rolling" so why the **** would you go to him for how to do poon sao?

Hardwork108

05-08-2009, 02:56 PM

It would tell me you've possibly experienced him do better than what he showed in the clip!
"Better"??? LOL!

You just didn´t see it did you? And that is you have no familiarity with what he was trying to show. End of story!

If you DON'T know the guy, you are basing all your BS off the clip.

My "BS" is based on actual concepts that I recognize from that clip which you yourself have so far failed to even contemplate...lol.

You think it's amazing timing uprooting and chin-na. The point is he didn't have to actually time anything because the partner wasn't providing anything close to realistic.
You are lost in the woods, so find your way out of the woods and then look at the bigger picture. By the way, re-reading my initial post might help you a little.;)

You're going to be able to move first if the partner *LETS* you go first!
You really don´t have any familiarity with the concept involved and there is no problem with that except for the fact that you take the knucklehead angle and call it, "BS". Now that is plain unforgivable.

The reaction to getting pulled and pushed was to allow it! Same with twisting his fingers. That 's all a passive reaction which is why it's a compliant demonstration.

LOL!

It's not even chi sao/poon sao in the first place. YL Sifu didn't do a bong sao once with all that "rolling" so why the **** would you go to him for how to do poon sao?

Watch the video again and see if YL sifu is claiming or trying to teach people bong sao....LOL,Lol,lol!

Read my initial post again....LOL....You may eventually come to understand what this thread is all about, meanwhile, thanks for the laughs...LOL,lol,lol.

Edmund

05-08-2009, 04:12 PM

"Better"??? LOL!

You just didn´t see it did you? And that is you have no familiarity with what he was trying to show. End of story!

Your non-answer means you *don't* know this guy personally.
You are judging his skill based on compliant demonstrations.

You've never felt him do anything so you couldn't know how sensitive he is or how he times something or how powerful he is. You're worshipping a guy you've never even seen fight. And then you're all offended that it's not understood for it's awesomeness!

Your concepts are fine. I don't disagree with them.
But this guy can't show **** when it's a compliant demo that he can't even get right.

Hardwork108

05-08-2009, 04:23 PM

Your non-answer means you *don't* know this guy personally.
You are judging his skill based on compliant demonstrations.
You are the one who is "judging" his skills. I KNOW his skills. But the question still remains, DO YOU HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH WHAT HE IS SHOWING BECAUSE THAT IS THE QUESTION AND WETHER YOU PRACTICE SOME OF THE STUFF THAT RELATES TO WC IN YOUR PRACTICE????

Your answer seems to be that you are lost and have missed the whole point!

You've never felt him do anything so you couldn't know how sensitive he is or how he times something or how powerful he is.
Did I say that I have never felt him? LOL!

You're worshipping a guy you've never even seen fight.

"Worshipping"? LOL!

The thing is that he is a REAL kung fu sifu and people like you are more likely to meet aliens from Jupiter then a genuine kung fu sifu, hence your clueless comments. READ MY FIRST POST!

And then you're all offended that it's not understood for it's awesomeness!
Not offended but amazed and still laughing....lol,lol,lol.

Your concepts are fine. I don't disagree with them.
Well I am eternally thankfull Gran Master Edmund....but the fact remains that you are clueless to what he is demonstrating in the clip and hence your unenlightened comments!

But this guy can't show **** when it's a compliant demo that he can't even get right.

Again, LOL!

taai gihk yahn

05-08-2009, 05:45 PM

I have the evidence...if you are in London in the near future then why don´t you go and try your "chi sao" with him so as not to depend on my word regarding his skills?

I KNOW his skills

Did I say that I have never felt him? LOL!

so, it seems that the "secret" as to where you trained in London is out...unless, of course, that last line means something entirely different, in in that case, I really don't want to know...

anyway, based on his video, I'd still say he's just ok; IMPE, if you want to see some high level / advanced bridging skills, you might want to look here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk1v4RXsH8U&feature=related)

Hardwork108

05-09-2009, 02:41 PM

so, it seems that the "secret" as to where you trained in London is out...unless, of course, that last line means something entirely different, in in that case, I really don't want to know...
LOL...I have news for you, I have met a few sifus in London.

anyway, based on his video, I'd still say he's just ok;
anyway, based on your "performance" in this thread, then I would say that your kung fu "knowledge" is "just" less than ok!

IMPE, if you want to see some high level / advanced bridging skills, you might want to look here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk1v4RXsH8U&feature=related)
Thank you and you surprised me for the better this time (yes, I am shocked too) as the video actually did have high level bridging just like the one that started this thread, even if in a different context.

Unfortunately your knowledge base is not high enough to make you appreciate it nor comprehend what this thread is actually asking.

Liddel

05-09-2009, 04:07 PM

So ive got some time on my hands and have read most of this thread and its just a joke from the first page.... is anyone discussing the clip or just collaborating in a b i t c h session ?

I can only comment on the Chun, but what i see is poor VT and 'co operation' by the student.
His Bong Pak and Lop sau are all but non exsistent which are the core actions that one should use when faced with whats being shown...especially with the pressure given to his bridge which he seems un able to let go, rather taking the force on his body and looking like a novice.

He looses balance and gets pulled down due to lack of an adequate turning horse and for the most part is in responce mode not acting first from when his arms get crossed to the under the elbow attack which any VT person Should and thats a big should LOL be able to block at the very least.

Elbow position/structure and behavior are VT 101.

The thing that concerns me is his habbit actions to begin with. The initial attack given by the supposed 'VT guy' is not direct and using a straight line but a three step attack given with poor timing and little to no body movement....

Again - his Kwan Sau, Bong Da Lop Sau and stepping/turning is non existent !
Hes a slave in this demo, if he actually looked decent and had good VT habbits then id say fair play the old guy looks skilled and has a point but against this VT novice ....not so much :o

Its a demo sure but IMHO its similar to the clip on another thread where a VT guy tries to explain trapping on the ground and clearly knows nothing of ground techniques which only serves to offer openings and advantages to an opponent your training to actually beat...

"He did VT for many years a some time ago, so he knows" - yeah well i did English in school for many years but check out my grammar and spelling LOL :cool:

Poor example of VT IMO and even though i dont get shocked much in the VT world anymore, it does shock me that some people may think that the VT shown here is acceptable.

DREW

Kansuke

05-09-2009, 09:13 PM

LOL...I have news for you, I have met a few sifus in London.

Secret sifus, TYGM?

taai gihk yahn

05-10-2009, 12:22 PM

LOL...I have news for you, I have met a few sifus in London.
did you "feel" them all? no, wait, I don't think that I want to know that...:D

Thank you and you surprised me for the better this time (yes, I am shocked too) as the video actually did have high level bridging just like the one that started this thread, even if in a different context.
if you take the time to peruse other videos of Sifu Chin's, you might find numerous things that are of interest to you; of course, I don't know if you will care for them, because Sifu Chin uses lots of "scientific" terms, and I know that you don't think "science" has any bearing on "real" kung fu :rolleyes:

Unfortunately your knowledge base is not high enough to make you appreciate it.
are you so certain of that? for example, if I am able to identify it as high level (which you yourself agree with), that would suggest I am able to appreciate it; and there might be other reasons I can "appreciate" it as well...

nor comprehend what this thread is actually asking
actually, I do; and in general, I would say that the majority of the WC people I have touched hands with have no concept in regards to bridging of this level, and would do well to avail themselves thereof; likewise, most taiji folks push in a way that is devoid of much of what taiji really has to offer, and misunderstand rootedness completely (meaning that it's not about just standing there when someone is pushing against you in a straight line)

Hardwork108

05-10-2009, 01:38 PM

did you "feel" them all? no, wait, I don't think that I want to know that...:D
Well there was this lady sifu.........

if you take the time to peruse other videos of Sifu Chin's, you might find numerous things that are of interest to you;
I have already and thank you.:)

of course, I don't know if you will care for them, because Sifu Chin uses lots of "scientific" terms, and I know that you don't think "science" has any bearing on "real" kung fu :rolleyes:
Well there are points of profound differences between Chinese and Western science and I suppose that sifu Chin may be using scientific terms to access the Western mind in a more practical way.;)

are you so certain of that? for example, if I am able to identify it as high level (which you yourself agree with), that would suggest I am able to appreciate it;
Maybe someone else made you "appreciate" it? :D

Or maybe not!:)

Who knows?:confused:

and there might be other reasons I can "appreciate" it as well...
You mean you are Chin´s Sifu and you taught him everything he knows? Taai, you old rascal you.....:D

actually, I do; and in general, I would say that the majority of the WC people I have touched hands with have no concept in regards to bridging of this level, and would do well to avail themselves thereof;
Thank you!

You have got it!

And such information is welcome, no matter wether the source is 5A or Hsing I, etc.

likewise, most taiji folks push in a way that is devoid of much of what taiji really has to offer, and misunderstand rootedness completely (meaning that it's not about just standing there when someone is pushing against you in a straight line)
Actually I would say that IMHO tai ji push hands is one of the most misunderstood exercises in TCMA.;)

Liddel

05-10-2009, 03:33 PM

Thank you and you surprised me for the better this time (yes, I am shocked too) as the video actually did have high level bridging just like the one that started this thread.

Seriously, if you call that high level bridging then every time i meet and greet someone with a handshake you must consider it 'uber level bridging'. :o

Faark you post from a standpoint that you are high level whatever and its quotes like this that say otherwise, unless your making fun and i missed it :cool:

DREW

Hardwork108

05-10-2009, 04:03 PM

Seriously, if you call that high level bridging then every time i meet and greet someone with a handshake you must consider it 'uber level bridging'. :o
Those of us who take the internal approach to kung fu training can see and recognize the higher levels.

Faark you post from a standpoint that you are high level whatever and its quotes like this that say otherwise, unless your making fun and i missed it :cool:

I am not a "high level whatever" (I am just a student) however, the sifus in the video clips (mine and Taai gihk´s) were. If you can´t see that then you should look inward into the way you train your kung fu.

taai gihk yahn

05-10-2009, 04:33 PM

Well there are points of profound differences between Chinese and Western science and I suppose that sifu Chin may be using scientific terms to access the Western mind in a more practical way.;)
something like that...

Maybe someone else made you "appreciate" it? :D
Or maybe not!:)
Who knows?:confused:
let's just say that I have had a pretty direct appreciation of it...

You mean you are Chin´s Sifu and you taught him everything he knows?
sort of in reverse, actually;

Actually I would say that IMHO tai ji push hands is one of the most misunderstood exercises in TCMA.;)
most taiji push hands players in the US move like anemic grandparents; but, quite frankly, that's their problem, not mine;

Edmund

05-10-2009, 05:26 PM

You are the one who is "judging" his skills. I KNOW his skills. But the question still remains, DO YOU HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH WHAT HE IS SHOWING BECAUSE THAT IS THE QUESTION AND WETHER YOU PRACTICE SOME OF THE STUFF THAT RELATES TO WC IN YOUR PRACTICE????

Your answer seems to be that you are lost and have missed the whole point!

Did I say that I have never felt him? LOL!

"Worshipping"? LOL!

You are basically a dishonest person.
You wiggle out of answering whether you know this sifu personally because of this.

You've studied with him and you are basically posting then defending his advert.
You wanted to post about HIM not skill and you weren't trying to show or inform anyone. You were promoting him and you don't want to discuss any opinion other than your own because it's not a discussion for you. You wanted more people to see his ad.

Your constant claims that others are clueless is just another symptom of this.

This sort of slimey underhanded **** takes precedence over any talk of skills.

taai gihk yahn

05-10-2009, 05:45 PM

You are basically a dishonest person.
You wiggle out of answering whether you know this sifu personally because of this.

You've studied with him and you are basically posting then defending his advert.
You wanted to post about HIM not skill and you weren't trying to show or inform anyone. You were promoting him and you don't want to discuss any opinion other than your own because it's not a discussion for you. You wanted more people to see his ad.

Your constant claims that others are clueless is just another symptom of this.

This sort of slimey underhanded **** takes precedence over any talk of skills.
:eek::eek::eek:

Liddel

05-10-2009, 10:59 PM

Those of us who take the internal approach to kung fu training can see and recognize the higher levels.

I personally dont think the first vid posted showed high level anything, never watched the second so i cant comment. But this begs the question -

If something is internal how do you HW8 recognise the internal influence when its only percieved through external attributes ?

I am not a "high level whatever" (I am just a student) however, the sifus in the video clips (mine and Taai gihk´s) were. If you can´t see that then you should look inward into the way you train your kung fu.

@43 secs the supposed VT has no bong falling over like a newbie.

@156 the Sifu uses an under the elbow flick while holding the wrist of the "VT" guy not bothering to use Lop to cross up the Sifu and punch him with the free hand he has doing NOTHING.

@243 both exchange attacks with niether using a turning horse, again no habbit bong by the "VT" guy.

@258 the "VT" guy cant even again use a bong nor bring his Wu sau back to the center holding hands with the Sifu only getting himself crossed up. Newbie mistake. he cant even use Tut Sau to free his hand prior to getting crossed, bad sensitivity.

@311 the Sifu crosses his own hands allowing the "VT" to cross him up if he bothered to use a Jut or Lop which he doesnt

@341 the "VT" guy again could cross up the sifu but never thinmks of using Lop Da. instead repeating getting crossed up and again no Tut Sau to free his hand.

These are but a few issues i see with just the VT guy. So if this Sifu wishes to post a respectful vid showcasing his skill and knowledge of how to deal with VT Chi Sau...start with a better VT practitioner... end of.

DREW

monji112000

05-13-2009, 07:58 AM

punchdrunk

05-13-2009, 01:58 PM

when someone says "this is how to beat a Wing Chun person" they really mean this is how to beat a begginner with no clue. You can learn tactics against a specific style only if your opponent is still a begginner and bound by training rules and limits and doesn't even know it. That 5A guy might have some skills but not much at all is being demonstrated, I'd love to see him under some real pressure. Are there any clips of him actually getting hit or really hitting anyone? I always enjoy seeing traditional kung fu.

SergeTk

05-13-2009, 02:33 PM

Hardwork108

05-13-2009, 03:31 PM

You are basically a dishonest person.
I resent that statement!

Especially when it comes from a person who wrongly (ie. dishonestly!) implies kung fu knowledge while posting in a kung fu forum!

Your clueless comments reveal who you are as far as genuine kung fu training is concerned.

You wiggle out of answering whether you know this sifu personally because of this.
I "wiggle out" because it is irrelevant if I know this sifu or not. The fact is that you either know what he was showing or you don't!

And you are as clueless as ever and hence now are blaming the messenger!

You've studied with him and you are basically posting then defending his advert.

LOL! Next you will say that he is paying me commission...LOL,LOL,LOL.

Face it, you screwed up. You are clueless to the subject matter of this thread and that reflects your "kung fu" :rolleyes: training.

You wanted to post about HIM not skill and you weren't trying to show or inform anyone. You were promoting him and you don't want to discuss any opinion other than your own because it's not a discussion for you. You wanted more people to see his ad.
Yes, I wanted everyone to leave their countries and travel to London to study with him. LOL.

Your feeling are hurt because you have realized how clueless you are regarding certain aspects of kung fu.

Next question, are you going to ask for your money back from your sifu(s)?

Your constant claims that others are clueless is just another symptom of this.

You are the symptom with what is wrong with kung fu today. You have no idea how deep it goes. I have got news for you and others and that is if you want to understand what he is showing in that video then you need to have trained and be familiar with the concepts otherwise you will not see anything and that will lead to clueless comments and attacks.

This sort of slimey underhanded **** takes precedence over any talk of skills.
You mean the skills (and concepts) that you and most others have failed to see so far?

punchdrunk

05-13-2009, 03:34 PM

be easier if I lived in London... but your right the best way to find the truth is in person. What I was hoping for was a better demo clip, preferably with a resisting partner and real contact. Honestly that's pretty rare from any kung fu demo's though.

Really my point isn't to say he is good or bad, just that style vs style is ignorant. I love Kung Fu regardless of the style, but doing style A doesn't necessarily teach you to beat style B.

Hardwork108

05-13-2009, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Edmund
You are basically a dishonest person.
You wiggle out of answering whether you know this sifu personally because of this.

You've studied with him and you are basically posting then defending his advert.
You wanted to post about HIM not skill and you weren't trying to show or inform anyone. You were promoting him and you don't want to discuss any opinion other than your own because it's not a discussion for you. You wanted more people to see his ad.

Your constant claims that others are clueless is just another symptom of this.

This sort of slimey underhanded **** takes precedence over any talk of skills.

:eek::eek::eek:

Now you have done it Edmund!

You have left Taai Gihk Yahn shocked and speechless. I thought I would never see the day....:D

SergeTk

05-13-2009, 05:01 PM

hardwork may I ask about your experience lvl in WuZuQuan.........

Edmund

05-13-2009, 05:23 PM

I resent that statement!

Especially when it comes from a person who wrongly (ie. dishonestly!) implies kung fu knowledge while posting in a kung fu forum!

Your clueless comments reveal who you are as far as genuine kung fu training is concerned.

I "wiggle out" because it is irrelevant if I know this sifu or not. The fact is that you either know what he was showing or you don't!

It's not irrelevant at all.
Typical BS which is why you still don't answer the question.

You have an attitude problem. You wanted to play the role of a superior and call others clueless for not recognizing this guy's skill.

I never said he was unskilled in the first place. That was you projecting what you think I said. I said you can't learn WC chi sao from him but you couldn't address that without having a tantrum.

You couldn't admit that you actual studied under this guy.
If you had said it in the beginning, people would have been a lot more restrained about rebutting his "WC beating" video clip. We thought it was something you just found on the youtube and critiqued it like any other random clip. But you couldn't say that because you couldn't be the expert on deepness you try to play on here.

You talk about being a humble student in kung fu yet you are the biggest a-hole on the forum. You're willing to accept another style as long as it's who YOU LIKE because you're so up yourself.

taai gihk yahn

05-14-2009, 03:40 AM

It's not irrelevant at all.
Typical BS which is why you still don't answer the question.

You have an attitude problem. You wanted to play the role of a superior and call others clueless for not recognizing this guy's skill.

I never said he was unskilled in the first place. That was you projecting what you think I said. I said you can't learn WC chi sao from him but you couldn't address that without having a tantrum.

You couldn't admit that you actual studied under this guy.
If you had said it in the beginning, people would have been a lot more restrained about rebutting his "WC beating" video clip. We thought it was something you just found on the youtube and critiqued it like any other random clip. But you couldn't say that because you couldn't be the expert on deepness you try to play on here.

You talk about being a humble student in kung fu yet you are the biggest a-hole on the forum. You're willing to accept another style as long as it's who YOU LIKE because you're so up yourself.

again, :eek::eek::eek:

Hardwork108

05-14-2009, 11:47 AM

It's not irrelevant at all.
Typical BS which is why you still don't answer the question.
The question has been answered but you are too up yourself to see it.

You have an attitude problem. You wanted to play the role of a superior and call others clueless for not recognizing this guy's skill.

I never said he was unskilled in the first place.
We are all thankful for that Grand Master Edmund.

However, you missed the point of this thread and failed to see the concepts involved in that clip and their relevance to GOOD Wing Chun, that seems to be very rare nowadays.

That was you projecting what you think I said.
:confused:

I said you can't learn WC chi sao from him
The thread is not about learning WC Chi sao!!!

Read my first post!!!!

but you couldn't address that without having a tantrum.

Hence the "tantrum".

You couldn't admit that you actual studied under this guy.
If you had said it in the beginning, people would have been a lot more restrained about rebutting his "WC beating" video clip. We thought it was something you just found on the youtube and critiqued it like any other random clip.

Who is "we"?

The thread was not about "wing chun beating" it was (among other things) about some of the concepts displayed that should be present in WC but that they have apparently been "forgotten" by most schools hence the clueless and insecure comments.

But you couldn't say that because you couldn't be the expert on deepness you try to play on here.
I am not expert but it seems that I have received the type of quality Wing Chun instruction that people like you can only dream about, hence I understood the clip and its relevance to Wing Chun whereas you are still shooting (your foot) in the dark.

You talk about being a humble student in kung fu yet you are the biggest a-hole on the forum.
Is that because I show people like you for the clueless "kung fu-ist" pretenders that you are?

You're willing to accept another style as long as it's who YOU LIKE because you're so up yourself.

I "accept" another kung fu style because it has essence that bag punchers like you will never see.

Kung fu styles have some common concepts and when finds an expert demonstrating a relevant concept, even if it is not from one's own style, then one can use it as a subject matter for discussion and for learning purposes.

Hardwork108

05-14-2009, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Edmund
It's not irrelevant at all.
Typical BS which is why you still don't answer the question.

You have an attitude problem. You wanted to play the role of a superior and call others clueless for not recognizing this guy's skill.

I never said he was unskilled in the first place. That was you projecting what you think I said. I said you can't learn WC chi sao from him but you couldn't address that without having a tantrum.

You couldn't admit that you actual studied under this guy.
If you had said it in the beginning, people would have been a lot more restrained about rebutting his "WC beating" video clip. We thought it was something you just found on the youtube and critiqued it like any other random clip. But you couldn't say that because you couldn't be the expert on deepness you try to play on here.

You talk about being a humble student in kung fu yet you are the biggest a-hole on the forum. You're willing to accept another style as long as it's who YOU LIKE because you're so up yourself.

again, :eek::eek::eek:

Edmund, if you are not careful, you are going to give taai gihk yahn (and yourself) a heartattack with all of your idiotic posts.;)

Edmund

05-14-2009, 07:18 PM

Typical BS rant again. Supposedly your recognition of his skill makes you superior.

Exactly how much 5A have you learnt?

Liddel

05-14-2009, 11:19 PM

Your clueless comments reveal who you are as far as genuine kung fu training is concerned.
You are clueless to the subject matter of this thread and that reflects your "kung fu" :rolleyes: training.

This is basically what everyone gets from her when you dont agree with whats come out of her keyboard Edmund....

Your banging your head against a wall and arent even getting a conditioned forehead out of it for fighting LOL

DREW

Hardwork108

05-15-2009, 10:55 AM

Typical BS rant again. Supposedly your recognition of his skill makes you superior.
I believe that right now my recognition of a closed fist makes me superior to you.....LOL.

Exactly how much 5A have you learnt?
You still don't get it do you?

This is a Wing Chun thread that involves holistic kung fu principles some of which should be present in any good Wing Chun (kung fu) training, yet for some reason they are not!

Sifu Yap Leong's clip was an excellent example of some of those principles that are present in his 5 Ancestor style, yet missing from most Wing Chun that I have personally come across. However they are mostly present in the Wing Chun - NOT 5A! - that I train!

The purpose of this thread was to see wether others here recognize those elements and so far the overall majority (not all!) of Wing Chuners - including your "good" self- who have participated in it, seem to have failed to recognize or to even understand the concepts and some of whom have gone to completely misinterpreted the subject matter of this thread. :rolleyes:

Hardwork108

05-15-2009, 11:01 AM

This is basically what everyone gets from her when you dont agree with whats come out of her keyboard Edmund....
You have "mis-interpreted" my sex, no wonder you are having problems recognizing and understanding the more complicated internal kung fu principles involved in that clip...LOL.

Your banging your head against a wall and arent even getting a conditioned forehead out of it for fighting LOL

You are kidding right? Because Edmund seems to have one of the thickest skulls in the forum, in par with the "great" Sanjuro ronin......LOL.

Those shopping mall kung fu joints must have some excellent Iron Head training in their curriculums.:D

Liddel

05-16-2009, 06:29 PM

You have "mis-interpreted" my sex, no wonder you are having problems recognizing and understanding the more complicated internal kung fu principles involved in that clip...LOL.

Whats funny is you didnt realise i was taking the p i $ $. :p

I waded into this thread with a fair and honest approach just wanting to discuss the substance of the VT shown which i think you acknowldged but you post in generalisations and havent offered much substance IMO.

So in the interest of actually understanding each others opinion ill re itterate mine -

Sifu Yap Leong's clip was an excellent example of some of those principles that are present in his 5 Ancestor style, yet missing from most Wing Chun that I have personally come across. However they are mostly present in the Wing Chun - NOT 5A! - that I train!

Personally a general group of basic internal principals i use in my VT envolve
- Mutli point touch / rotational diversion
- inch power / short range hinge mechanics or hightened control of tendons / ligaments.
- Running water / gravitational angles
- Yu Ma Lik / Co ordinated Body and horse power.

These aspects used with a good sence of timing make the shapes of ones forms come to life through constant use in Chi Sau - Poon Sau - Gor Sau - Lux Sau sparring etc. others may know them by other terms/names they have at thier individual school, but these are the basic terms from what i was taught.

Now IMHO minor aspects of these are shown in the first clip by each participant but not at a level i think is worthy of a demo clip on the internet nor as a guide for other students from other lineages/schools...

So getting back..

1 -Do you train these sensitivity elements and use them to jam and stop attacks before they happen?

2 -Do you emphasis methods of uprooting and understand their relevance to kung fu training?

3 -Do you include chin-na techniques inside your chi-sao practice?

4 -Do you emphasis, " If you don't move, I don't move, if you move, I first move", mindset

1- Yes i train sensitivity but to a higher degree than the poor effort thats shown.
@258 the "VT" guy cant even again use a bong nor bring his Wu sau back to the center holding hands with the Sifu only getting himself crossed up. Newbie mistake. he cant even use Tut Sau to free his hand prior to getting crossed, bad sensitivity.

2 - Do bears $ h i t in the woods. The ex 'VT" student shown in the vid has a poor turning horse and bad footwork so is easily off balance IMO.
@43 secs the supposed VT guy has no bong taking all the force on his bridge without turing to bong to relieve the force and turning and/or stepping to dissipate force falling over like a newbie.

3 - Aside from the afct Chi Na is a part of many many MA's, yes. Actually its one of the main reasons my lineage doesnt ever use the thumb to grip bridges in the Chi Sau range.

4 - Absolutly not, If you don't move, I don't move is a game during Chi Sau IMO to teach basic princpals of VT... I.E. sensitivity. Its not something you would / should consider in a real life confrontation IMHO.

I believe that there are a lot of kung fu elements to learn from in the above video clip and these elements are relevant for us Wing Chun practitioners.

While they might be relevant for a VT practitioner i think we need better examples to set our sites on, again i thought the overall behaviour of the VT guy was not advanced.

Now i think thats a fair offering of substance and opinion, and its mine alone.

So what specific examples of the hollistic appraoch do think are shown in the clip that are missing from most VT that are present in yours ?

DREW

Tensei85

05-16-2009, 06:55 PM

Whats funny is you didnt realise i was taking the p i $ $. :p

I waded into this thread with a fair and honest approach just wanting to discuss the substance of the VT shown which i think you acknowldged but you post in generalisations and havent offered much substance IMO.

So in the interest of actually understanding each others opinion ill re itterate mine -

Personally a general group of basic internal principals i use in my VT envolve
- Mutli point touch / rotational diversion
- inch power / short range hinge mechanics or hightened control of tendons / ligaments.
- Running water / gravitational angles
- Yu Ma Lik / Co ordinated Body and horse power.

These aspects used with a good sence of timing make the shapes of ones forms come to life through constant use in Chi Sau - Poon Sau - Gor Sau - Lux Sau sparring etc. others may know them by other terms/names they have at thier individual school, but these are the basic terms from what i was taught.

Now IMHO minor aspects of these are shown in the first clip by each participant but not at a level i think is worthy of a demo clip on the internet nor as a guide for other students from other lineages/schools...

So getting back..

1- Yes i train sensitivity but to a higher degree than the poor effort thats shown.
@258 the "VT" guy cant even again use a bong nor bring his Wu sau back to the center holding hands with the Sifu only getting himself crossed up. Newbie mistake. he cant even use Tut Sau to free his hand prior to getting crossed, bad sensitivity.

2 - Do bears $ h i t in the woods. The ex 'VT" student shown in the vid has a poor turning horse and bad footwork so is easily off balance IMO.
@43 secs the supposed VT guy has no bong taking all the force on his bridge without turing to bong to relieve the force and turning and/or stepping to dissipate force falling over like a newbie.

3 - Aside from the afct Chi Na is a part of many many MA's, yes. Actually its one of the main reasons my lineage doesnt ever use the thumb to grip bridges in the Chi Sau range.

4 - Absolutly not, If you don't move, I don't move is a game during Chi Sau IMO to teach basic princpals of VT... I.E. sensitivity. Its not something you would / should consider in a real life confrontation IMHO.

DREW

Sweet! thanks for the info.

On a side note I wonder if all of us Wing Chun guys/girls should seek group counseling together. (it seems like all the Wing Chun practs have a hard time getting along) just my perspective based on 99% of the threads, but that would probably end terribly. lol :D

Stevehans

05-21-2009, 03:09 AM

Tensei85

05-21-2009, 06:04 AM

It depends on "what" or "how" you define chi sau: Most systems have a form of Chi Sau but if your referring to a yi ji kuem ying ma with tan, bong, fuk structures then I would have to say thats an illusion. (not saying anyone is) Chi Sau- sticking hands or however you wish to categorize it has many different forms and are covered in many systems even outside of CMA just some may not have documented text book style as seen in some WCK. As far as "comprehensive" thats open to intrepretation by nature. I've met Mantis dudes and even Bak Mei dudes that wiped the floor with my so called "comprehensive" chi sau that I was practicing for way over a decade. So that in itself is an illusion, if chi sau's practical than thats great if you don't have the understanding of it than its time to go back to the labratory or better yet someone that wants to knock your head off and see if it works. But on another side I can see where the drilling format is useful for developing mechanics, attributes, concepts etc.... but in the end just drilling is not realistic or comprehensive.

just my $.02.

Stevehans

05-21-2009, 08:04 AM

It depends on "what" or "how" you define chi sau: Most systems have a form of Chi Sau but if your referring to a yi ji kuem ying ma with tan, bong, fuk structures then I would have to say thats an illusion.

They are not an illusion, you just have not yet reached the level where you fully understand your tools. Both Mantis and Pak Mei both share the same above tools but if you cant see past shapes then i can understand why you would think that way.

I've met Mantis dudes and even Bak Mei dudes that wiped the floor with my so called "comprehensive" chi sau that I was practicing for way over a decade. So that in itself is an illusion, if chi sau's practical than thats great if you don't have the understanding of it than its time to go back to the labratory or better yet someone that wants to knock your head off and see if it works. But on another side I can see where the drilling format is useful for developing mechanics, attributes, concepts etc.... but in the end just drilling is not realistic or comprehensive.

just my $.02.

Both Mantis and Pak Mei also have strong and dynamic bridging, and with any system that uses bridging as a their core they will also have a good degree of sensitivity. And may i imply that the reason they wiped the floor with you was due to your own lack of skill, as i have also played against them but with different results. I would love to say i wiped the floor with them, but rather i comfortably held my own and was only better against those who were less experienced.

If you see WCK Chi Sau as a separate stand alone system, then i am not surprised it didn't work for you. You probably would have fared better if you never learned any Chi Sau but instead concentrated on just sparring and drills.

Tensei85

05-21-2009, 08:29 AM

Perspective is an illusion: You can talk all day about I'm superior and your not til your blue in the face but that personal attachment is also an illusion. Wake up and smell the coffe that is reality "in the moment" thats the problem with most Wing Chun guys under the false illusion that only (I) possess all the answers but the reality is the answers are in the moment. Just like you can talk about holding your first born but if you havent experienced it then the words are hollow with little to no meaning. So in closing I would say your right and I would also say I'm right, there is only awareness not wrong or right. Confused?? Me to lol

Tensei85

05-21-2009, 08:31 AM

And don't forget Karma, thats important lol : ) enjoy

Tensei85

05-21-2009, 08:40 AM

Stevehans

05-21-2009, 04:15 PM

So my entire point so I dont ramble on anymore: Is we can't judge who's chi sau is comprehensive or not when we narrow down the meaning of chi sau to just techniques or drills. We also cant fully define something we havent experienced, we all have experiences and personal concepts that vary from individual to individual but we cant say that mine are more comprehensive than yours or yours are more superior than mine. Thats judging something we have little knowledge of as we arent that individual or for the sake of the argument "that style".
take it for what its worth.

Drop the silly philosophy talk, it's only confusing you..........you remind me of a young Hendrick before he witnessed a White Crane fighting a Duck on Emei mountain ! Quit while you can, otherwise you too wont be able to stop yourself from writing successions of rambling posts.

Why the obsession with who's superior ? Why cant you face reality and accept that your skills were at a lower level to most people you have sparred with. Nothing to be ashamed of, just reality.

And finally, I can say that my Wing Chun understanding is more comprehensive than yours............by far ;)

Liddel

05-21-2009, 07:40 PM

Guys its not a matter of one being better than another in an ego sence... from my pov its about habbits or techs of chi sau that work for you or against you which every art can relate to.

Vt chi sau should develope certain habbits like letting force go, not crossing your hands, simultaneous attack and defence this list goes on....

What should be noted is that the first video showed total lack of these and other basics, by the VT guy... which makes the value of the clip what ? How to defeat a VT practitioner thats ahhm not so good :o

Its the same as the anti grappling vides that come out shot by KF stylists sayig how to stop a grpplers takedown - all the thread gets is guys with mucho grappling experience saying the takedown isnt even showing the basic behaviour of a grappler... So whats it worth ? its a simple thought process for a critical mind...

Would you rather learn to be gangster rapper from me, a 29yr old white boy from NZ... or 50 cent LOL :o :cool:

DREW

Edmund

05-21-2009, 07:53 PM

Its a little ironic that in times of cross training popularity, that even though there are only really three main kung fu styles that employ a comprehensive Chi Sau system, yet each styles seems to understand so little of the other.

Maybe each believes they are superior and hence no need to see what the other guy is doing ? Or is it because there are too many contradictions of principles which if encorporated might effect the 'fluidity' or 'efficiency' ?

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Cross training is fine. It's up to you to investigate whatever you find interesting. If others are not interested, it's none of your business. You and HW108 want to get offended that's your problem because I certainly never said anything about being superior.

You're imagining an insult that wasn't even given.
Get off your high horse. Not everyone HAS to be into the same stuff.

Stevehans

05-22-2009, 12:24 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

I've also said it and i will say it again ; I have always had an open mind and a curious one. As such i was the was the most disloyal student in that i was always looking in everything else, it's in my nature so i wont be easily offended. Each to their own and that's the way it should be.

Cross training is fine. It's up to you to investigate whatever you find interesting. If others are not interested, it's none of your business. You and HW108 want to get offended that's your problem because I certainly never said anything about being superior.

You're imagining an insult that wasn't even given.
Get off your high horse. Not everyone HAS to be into the same stuff.

I cant speak for Hardwork but again i am not in the least offended. I was implying that Yap Leong only knows a little about WCK Chi Sau but i'm sure he thinks he is an expert based on his past exposure, and a Tai Chi guy probably feel the same about 5 Ancestors and so on.

But the real truth is that no one can possibly know unless they have experienced it first hand from a high level experienced and and skilled praticitioner regardless of style or system.

Tensei85

05-22-2009, 03:48 AM

Stevehans

05-22-2009, 04:11 AM

Comprehensive?? Do you know anything else besides bong, tan, fuk chi sau?
Whats your understanding of chi sau? What does it mean to you? (since its comprehensive of course you should have these answers)

:D LOL............................i'm not even gonna try

Nothing i have said seem to register, either you cant read or you have a problem with basic comprehension.

No offence but I'm not even sure you are old enough to be partaking in this forum.......be honest how old are you ?

Tensei85

05-22-2009, 04:28 AM

Stevehans

05-22-2009, 06:04 AM

Was there an age limit? (j/k) I'll say this I've studied Wing Chun for 16 years, make up what ever age you want from that.

And its not philosophy its "methods" (the new in word) get with the program.
To be honest I'm not really concerned with your take on chi sau but for the sake of the thread I thought it may be helpful to define it. (maybe it doesnt register because you spend 99% of your time on insults) not very constructive. But its all good, best with your comprehensive chi sau lol!

Good i respect a guy who can take 'stick' and 99% is a little high :D

I suggest having a look on the Chi Sim websites to broaden your base. There you will see at least 18 Kiu Sau (in fact there are more but i am just using them as an example)and i hope this answers your question on whether there is more to Chi Sau than Tan,Bong,Fok !!!

In fact you only have to asked your Mantis friend, only if you dont understand what you are doing, you are hardly going to know where you need to improve.

Like Yap said in one of his vids, 'its not the Chi Sau, its the skill of the practitioner !' If after 16 years you are still thinking Tan,Bong, Fok then i would say you wasted 13 years !

punchdrunk

05-22-2009, 01:24 PM

don't get stuck on sticking hands! It's just a training method.

Hardwork108

05-22-2009, 09:17 PM

Whats funny is you didnt realise i was taking the p i $ $. :p
My mistake and sorry I made a mistake and misinterpreted your attempt at humor, but this is understandable in a forum where most humor is unintentional by those who try to come across as kung fu experts...Lol.

I waded into this thread with a fair and honest approach just wanting to discuss the substance of the VT shown which i think you acknowldged but you post in generalisations and havent offered much substance IMO.
And that would be because the thread was not about the "VT shown" but the substance that should be present in any good VT training program. Why is this so hard to understand by you people???:confused:

Personally a general group of basic internal principals i use in my VT envolve
- Mutli point touch / rotational diversion
- inch power / short range hinge mechanics or hightened control of tendons / ligaments.
- Running water / gravitational angles
- Yu Ma Lik / Co ordinated Body and horse power.

The above aspects are basic Wing Chun.

These aspects used with a good sence of timing make the shapes of ones forms come to life through constant use in Chi Sau - Poon Sau - Gor Sau - Lux Sau sparring etc. others may know them by other terms/names they have at thier individual school, but these are the basic terms from what i was taught.

Fair enough but there is more to it, for example, where do you get your good timing from, besides the obvious mechanical repetitions during chi sao and other two man training? How about priniciples and mindset?

Now IMHO minor aspects of these are shown in the first clip by each participant but not at a level i think is worthy of a demo clip on the internet nor as a guide for other students from other lineages/schools...

IMHO, your training has failed to provide you with faculties to recognize the finetuned "listening" abilities and "softness" demonstrated in that clip. BTW, soft beats hard!!!!

1- Yes i train sensitivity but to a higher degree than the poor effort thats shown.
Yet you have failed to recognize the aspects I mentioned above.

@258 the "VT" guy cant even again use a bong nor bring his Wu sau back to the center holding hands with the Sifu only getting himself crossed up. Newbie mistake. he cant even use Tut Sau to free his hand prior to getting crossed, bad sensitivity.
You could be a master but if you come across someone who is "softer" than you then he will finish you off quickly, making your effort seem like a "newbie mistake".

2 - Do bears $ h i t in the woods. The ex 'VT" student shown in the vid has a poor turning horse and bad footwork so is easily off balance IMO.
@43 secs the supposed VT guy has no bong taking all the force on his bridge without turing to bong to relieve the force and turning and/or stepping to dissipate force falling over like a newbie.

Read my comment to your previous quote. By the way, you try and turn your bong to relieve the force against an exponent with the sifuś abilities and you will see him following your turn and pushing your bong into your own body (central line). Remember, "If you move, I first move"?

3 - Aside from the afct Chi Na is a part of many many MA's, yes. Actually its one of the main reasons my lineage doesnt ever use the thumb to grip bridges in the Chi Sau range.
Take my word for it, there is a lot more to chin-na than the lap sao grip with no thumb.

4 - Absolutly not, If you don't move, I don't move is a game during Chi Sau IMO to teach basic princpals of VT... I.E. sensitivity. Its not something you would / should consider in a real life confrontation IMHO.
IMHO, that is where you show that you do not really understand the concept, which brings me back to aspects that have somehow been "forgotten" by many WC schools.

While they might be relevant for a VT practitioner i think we need better examples to set our sites on, again i thought the overall behaviour of the VT guy was not advanced.
And as I stated before, if your opponent is "softer" then you ain't gonna look good, whatever your style.

Now i think thats a fair offering of substance and opinion, and its mine alone.
Not much different from the others here who misunderstood the thread and the higher kung fu/internal elements involved.

So what specific examples of the hollistic appraoch do think are shown in the clip that are missing from most VT that are present in yours ?

Well at least a few of them are in my response in this post.:cool:

For whatever its worth maybe Taai Gihk Yahn can give you a better understanding of what it is like to touch hands with a master with soft, sensitive, listening and heavy hands, in a more scientific way. I seem to remember that many moons ago he did a very good technical description of the "feel" of someone who has mastered this aspect of kung fu.

I believe that he wrote that post for the benefit of MMA ¨kung fu-ist" member of many years of experience (aren't they all? LOL!) who did not understand the difference between a soft,"listening" kung fu punch and/or block and a shotokan karate one. Anyway, I hope that Taai Gihk will oblige and perhaps you will see a little deeper into the internals.

Stevehans

05-23-2009, 04:42 AM

Guys its not a matter of one being better than another in an ego sence... from my pov its about habbits or techs of chi sau that work for you or against you which every art can relate to.

I couldn't agree more, if your techniques are not of a universal nature then as Tensei85 found out, its best not to cross hands outside your own style (or club).

Tensei85

05-23-2009, 10:16 AM

Stevehans,
To clear a misconception. I never once said that I only thought chi sau was of bong, tan, fuk nature. In fact that was the asumation that I thought you were inferring but it was not so that's great!
And yes, I've both trained the Chi Sim Kiu Sau as taught by Andreas Hoffmann (via seminars unfortunately not hands on Sifu-Todai) so I have a small understanding of the Sap Baat Kiu Sau from the Chi Sim as well as an understanding of the Sap Yi Kiu Sau as seen in lineages of Hung Ga.
So I have seen various formats and understandings of Chi Sau as well as training in Manits and Bak Mei. Even in Wing Chun our understanding of Chi Sau was not geared towards a bong, tan, fuk centralized nature. But more of a free flowing range concept with proper structures and energetics applied. So thanks for your take on Chi Sau its great hearing other perspectives. But my take is we can never have the ego to say that what we know is the be all end all of anything. That was my entire point ina nutshell.

All the best, enjoy the Holidays!

Stevehans

05-23-2009, 03:01 PM

Liddel

05-24-2009, 04:08 PM

IMHO, your training has failed to provide you with faculties to recognize the finetuned "listening" abilities and "softness" demonstrated in that clip. BTW, soft beats hard!!!!

My entire POV in this thread is that the listening abilities shown are at low to mid level at best !

Yet you have failed to recognize the aspects I mentioned above.

First off you really only mention them in a genreal sence and dont offer specific examples...

I dont recognise them because they are not there IMO, however i try to be open minded...please dont just say "they are there", offer a specific example with clip time so i can take a description from you and relate it to the clip.... then we actually have a discussion going :rolleyes:

Cause right now im personally finding you to vague.

You could be a master but if you come across someone who is "softer" than you then he will finish you off quickly, making your effort seem like a "newbie mistake".

Thats a cop out IMO, are you saying the VT guy looks like he has a good VT foundation ? Because im saying its poor.

You say he looks poor because of the Sifu's ability... but im saying the "sifu" looks to have ability because the VT guy doesnt... after all its VT specific and VT is the point of contention i have not who these people are personally.

clear now.

Take my word for it, there is a lot more to chin-na than the lap sao grip with no thumb.

I offerd one example to make my point, pigeon hole me if you want.

IMHO, that is where you show that you do not really understand the concept, which brings me back to aspects that have somehow been "forgotten" by many WC schools.

Apart from the fact you say "the concept" or "aspects" and "higher KF elements involved" but you dont actually state what specific elements you see and relate them to a time in the clip....as i have.

I offered points and times where the VT guy did not react / had a hand doing nothing when being attacked / did or could not feel the necesary red flags that could have enabled him to cross the "Sifu" up, hell i offered a time where the Sifu crosses his own hands almost giving it to the 'student' but his sensitivity or lack there of meant he had NO reaction. Not because the Sifu was so great but because IMO the VT guys habbit actions are non existent.

These are VT basics that have been forgotten by the very example you put foward to highlight others short commings LOL. Ironic :p

Not much different from the others here who misunderstood the thread and the higher kung fu/internal elements involved.

What specific ones and where in the clip. The reality is people have not misunderstood rather thay disagree.

DREW

Hardwork108

05-25-2009, 02:25 PM

My entire POV in this thread is that the listening abilities shown are at low to mid level at best !

Hence my point that you have not been trained to recognize such abilities at their fine tuned level, not that they are easy to recognize in a video clip but you should at least have understood what it is that I was talking about.

First off you really only mention them in a genreal sence and dont offer specific examples...
That is because you see them as "general". Anyone familiar with the level of softness, sensitivity (and heaviness) that I am talking about including their practical applications would have seen them in the video.

I dont recognise them because they are not there IMO,

They are there but again you are not familiar with the deepness of what you imply to be "familiar" with, concepts.

however i try to be open minded...please dont just say "they are there", offer a specific example with clip time so i can take a description from you and relate it to the clip.... then we actually have a discussion going :rolleyes:

I am saying that they are there because they are!

Unfortunately one has to be familiar with the deeper internal concepts to see their relevance to Wing Chun. What I can offer as an example with a clip time will only appear to most people as an external techique. You will not see the internal concepts, unless you are aware and familiar with them.

Ok you talked me into it. Have a look at the sequence starting from 0.35 (and keep in mind "if you don`t move, I don`t move.....concept). Then look at 3.19.

To pull off the above one would need to have "soft" but "heavy" "listening" hands. If that does not make sense to you then that would be because of the way you were taught.

The second clip shows the floating concept. Most people will not be able to avoid being floated in such a way by just using techniques. Being extremely relaxed physically while "listening" may enable one to escape from what was being done there.

Cause right now im personally finding you to vague.

I believe that you unfamiliarity with the deeper concepts of internal kung fu is making all this vague for you, IMHO.

Thats a cop out IMO, are you saying the VT guy looks like he has a good VT foundation ? Because im saying its poor.
Again, my point is that you can have all the WC foundations you want but if you meet up against someone who is "softer", more "sensitive" and "heavier", then you are going to lose and look very bad. What I say here relates to the subject matter of this thread as many people have failed to see what it is that I am talking about.

You say he looks poor because of the Sifu's ability... but im saying the "sifu" looks to have ability because the VT guy doesnt...in

Again, that is your opinion based on your "appreciation" of the internals.

after all its VT specific and VT is the point of contention i have not who these people are personally.

Just as well.;)

clear now.

More than you think.

I offerd one example to make my point, pigeon hole me if you want.
Well my example is that chi na is a fundemental part of many major kung fu styles including wing chun and it incorporates pressure point attacks and is also applied on the ground. Chi na should be part and parcel of all WC training, yet for some reason it does not seem to be.

I offered points and times where the VT guy did not react / had a hand doing nothing when being attacked / did or could not feel the necesary red flags that could have enabled him to cross the "Sifu" up, hell i offered a time where the Sifu crosses his own hands almost giving it to the 'student' but his sensitivity or lack there of meant he had NO reaction. Not because the Sifu was so great but because IMO the VT guys habbit actions are non existent.

Look it was not a real fight. It was a demonstration of certain aspects of 5A as used against WC in a chi sao scenario. I saw the concepts in action and you didn´t. We are from different lineages and schools and if you are happy with yours then I am happy with it as well.

These are VT basics that have been forgotten by the very example you put foward to highlight others short commings LOL. Ironic :p
The real irony is that the WC basics would have not amounted to much against internal approach of the 5A sifu.

If you see that then you will see the point of this thread.:)

The reality is people have not misunderstood rather thay disagree.

Unfortunately, the sad reality is that people disagree because they are for the most part clueless about the kung fu internals (See the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom in its various forms ;)).

Liddel

05-25-2009, 04:04 PM

The real irony is that the WC basics would have not amounted to much against internal approach of the 5A sifu.

If you see that then you will see the point of this thread.:)

Woulda shoulda coulda......Too much cool aid bruva.
Ive touched hands with all 6 of the VT sifus in my local area, i feel if you did the same some of your P'sOV would change with regard to how high you hold this example up.

Anyway, agree to disagree. OUT.

DREW

Hardwork108

05-25-2009, 05:24 PM

Woulda shoulda coulda......Too much cool aid bruva.
Ive touched hands with all 6 of the VT sifus in my local area, i feel if you did the same some of your P'sOV would change with regard to how high you hold this example up.

You really need to be careful with the definition of the word "sifu". It has been my observation and it is sad, that more than 95% of people calling themselves kung fu sifus nowadays are mediocre at best.

Anyway, agree to disagree. OUT.
Thank you for your time.:)

Violent Designs

05-26-2009, 06:41 AM

Man, the only way to prove if this stuffs work is by a fight between equally skilled WC and 5A fighters.

Liddel

05-26-2009, 03:27 PM

Man, the only way to prove if this stuffs work is by a fight between equally skilled WC and 5A fighters.

Thats kinda my whole point - what are your observations of the level of skill shown ?

Im told i dont have enough experience of the internals by someone who knows nothing of my experience which even if for the sake of argument i conceed, people that are known for thier approach to internals like hendrik mirror the fact there are basic problems with the VT guys habbits...lending to your post ???

DREW

Hardwork108

05-26-2009, 04:30 PM

Thats kinda my whole point - what are your observations of the level of skill shown ?

Im told i dont have enough experience of the internals by someone who knows nothing of my experience which even if for the sake of argument i conceed, people that are known for thier approach to internals like hendrik mirror the fact there are basic problems with the VT guys habbits...lending to your post ???

DREW

Again, the clip was not about the WC guy but more so about the approach used by the 5 Ancestor sifu and the relevance of this approach to any good Wing Chun training program.

Liddel

05-27-2009, 06:23 PM

Again, the clip was not about the WC guy but more so about the approach used by the 5 Ancestor sifu and the relevance of this approach to any good Wing Chun training program.

I dont see them as being mutually exclusive -

While that may sound logical to someone like yourself - its not because the clip uses a BAD VT example....

So its more about "the relevance of this approach to any substandard Wing Chun training program"

If it were against a decent level VT practitioner it would not hold water.

For your point to make any sence it would have to be as Violent Designs posted...

between equally skilled WC and 5A fighters.

and you yourself have already noted the Sifu apparently is way more skilled... so really anything he does would look sucessful :rolleyes:

The VT practitioners sensitivity and other sences such as SIGHT are poor IMO.

You really need to be careful with the definition of the word "sifu". It has been my observation and it is sad, that more than 95% of people calling themselves kung fu sifus nowadays are mediocre at best.

Yes, and this is one example IMHO.

I mean @156 when the Sifu holds the students Tan with his opposite hand and flicks his body below the Tan Sau side elbow i laughed out loud.

The Sifu is leaning foward for a start, and has given openings that if a decent VT person replaced the student would lead to Chi Na wrist lock or A Lop Da resulting in the sifu having crossed hands and a punch to the face while the lop would simultaneously block the flick as your Lop action lowered your elbow protecting your body.... and i havent even again touched on the left hand of the student which is where exactly...looks to me like its on the Sifus ribs so he actually got caught worse than the student if one extrapolates this into full force.

But you said its just a demo - fair call - although its titled "combat challenge"
WTF ?

These are only some of the examples i see wrong and ive used them because they are relevant to your points previously mentioned about Chi Na and what you say this is mainly about, sensitivity.

Its akin to anti grappling clips where niether one of the demo people have decent grappling knowledge or ability...lets rename the clip on youtube "anti Ving Tsun challenge" :o

:cool:
DREW

Shaolin Fist

06-04-2009, 11:57 PM

Hardwork108

06-06-2009, 12:45 AM

I dont see them as being mutually exclusive -

While that may sound logical to someone like yourself - its not because the clip uses a BAD VT example....

For god's sake, just read my first post a couple of times and then read the subsequent ones. This was not a sparring match or a fight!

So its more about "the relevance of this approach to any substandard Wing Chun training program"
And as anyone who lives in the real world will tell you, more than 95% of WC schools are -at best - substandard. Please see the Mcdojo/kwoon phenomenom. Then see what I say about the fact that the aspects demonstrated should be part of a good WC training program.

If it were against a decent level VT practitioner it would not hold water.
Firstly, that is what YOU say.

Secondly, finding a "decent level" Wing Chun practitioner nowadays is easier said than done. Unless you classify the many glorified kickboxers who also happen to practice WC as "decent" Wing Chuners.

For your point to make any sence it would have to be as Violent Designs posted...
My point already makes sense to those who can see the internal elements demonstrated by the sifu.

and you yourself have already noted the Sifu apparently is way more skilled... so really anything he does would look sucessful :rolleyes:

And for that same reason the Wing Chuner looks bad.

The VT practitioners sensitivity and other sences such as SIGHT are poor IMO.
It does not matter about your perception of his weaknesses. The fact is that the video was about elements some (perhaps not all) of which should be present in the internal training of all good Wing Chun schools.

I mean @156 when the Sifu holds the students Tan with his opposite hand and flicks his body below the Tan Sau side elbow i laughed out loud.

IMHO, you wouldn't if you were the one facing him.

The Sifu is leaning foward for a start,
Pay attention to the sifu´s back when he is "leaning" forward.

and has given openings that if a decent VT person replaced the student would lead to Chi Na wrist lock or A Lop Da resulting in the sifu having crossed hands and a punch to the face while the lop would simultaneously block the flick as your Lop action lowered your elbow protecting your body....and i havent even again touched on the left hand of the student which is where exactly...looks to me like its on the Sifus ribs so he actually got caught worse than the student if one extrapolates this into full force.

IMHO, what you don't appreciate is the fact that when you have that level of sensitivity then you will always move first when your opponent moves.

But you said its just a demo - fair call - although its titled "combat challenge"
WTF ?
I agree that the title may be a little misleading even if the aspects shown can be applicable to combat.

These are only some of the examples i see wrong and ive used them because they are relevant to your points previously mentioned about Chi Na and what you say this is mainly about, sensitivity.
Fair enough as we all perceive things based on our own experience and exposure to kung fu and its internals.

Its akin to anti grappling clips where niether one of the demo people have decent grappling knowledge or ability...lets rename the clip on youtube "anti Ving Tsun challenge" :o

A rose under any other name will have the same sweet smell.;)

Liddel

06-06-2009, 05:09 PM

Perhaps i havent got my point across as well as id like cause i see your points and i do feel they are valid but sensitivty alone is useless IMO so what im saying here is....

Having good sensitivity is fairly easy to attain especially given the amount of Chi Sau most schools do all over the world - hell alot of schools dont have the majority of students get passed Chi Sau platforms into sparrring....all they do is sensitivity drills !

So i totally get your emphasis on the 5A WC sensitivity etc. and i agree there are many Mckwoons out there that dont train Chi Sau well. But IMO its not a lack of sensitivity thats the problem its lack of knowledge or ability to use habbits actions regarding - what to do once you feel someones intentions.

I also understand your points about some of VT's maxims -

1) "I move after but arrive first"
2) "You move, I move first".
3) "Using silence to lead action"

But to me these things can be more of a hinderance if you first have not developed good base habbits during chi Sau. Why ?

Because even if your sensitivity is so great you can sence the intentions of your opponent, if you dont have good habbits techs to then bennifit from your sensitivity then what have you got ? awareness only :rolleyes:

Thats why i stated i dont see them as being mutually exclusive - sensitivity and good habbit actions.

You need good habbit techniques driven by good sensitivity.

So ill conceed that the sifu shows a level of sensitivity and can implement stifle tactics like 1, 2 or 3 above - interupted actions controlling behaviour and forces etc etc, but the habbits shown by both dont utilise the sensitivity shown very well in application.

Sensitivity gives you an advantage in terms of timing, however there are bad habbit actions that one can do that negate that by complicating or conveluting the action reaction process.

As another example -
You could have posted a clip of Dan Chi Sau where the Tan Sau turning to an attack 'you move' gets stuffed by Fook pressing to Jum ' i move first'.
:)

Originally Posted by Liddel
I mean @156 when the Sifu holds the students Tan with his opposite hand and flicks his body below the Tan Sau side elbow i laughed out loud.

Originally Posted by Hardwork108
IMHO, you wouldn't if you were the one facing him.

Based on what i see solely in the clip - i respecfully beg to differ :o

What Lop Da didnt come to mind for you ? Honestly this cross grab action is giving the opponent one hell of a handicap. I hope its not a habbit action people use where you train.

... if it is take my advice when its done to you immediatly Lop Da...ill stake my life on the fact the opponents face feels more sore than your ribs and you would have shown good sensitivity and implemented a "I move after but arrive first" mentality. :cool:

DREW

Shaolin Fist

06-07-2009, 01:14 AM

As another example -
You could have posted a clip of Dan Chi Sau where the Tan Sau turning to an attack 'you move' gets stuffed by Fook pressing to Jum ' i move first'.
:)

The above example doesn't represent the 'you move i move first' idiom but possibly "I move after but arrive first" The simple reason being, its not possible to create enough internal flow from a 'fok tool' to create enough distortion to move first.

Based on what i see solely in the clip - i respecfully beg to differ :o

What Lop Da didnt come to mind for you ? Honestly this cross grab action is giving the opponent one hell of a handicap. I hope its not a habbit action people use where you train.

... if it is take my advice when its done to you immediatly Lop Da...ill stake my life on the fact the opponents face feels more sore than your ribs and you would have shown good sensitivity and implemented a "I move after but arrive first" mentality. :cool:

DREW

IMO I still feel that its rather pointless having this discussion as kung fu can only realistically be expressed and experienced through physical interaction as words can only convey what one can see (unless one has a trained and experienced eye on both subject matter). And even if we did get a discussion going, with both sides properly represented it would probably only end up political.

Its hard to tell on visual alone what energetics the novice WCK on the receiving end is getting from YL.

Respectfully however i will address your above point as i know your posts are genuine.

The reason why it would be near impossible for the other guy to have lapped is because of the timing, as YL moved first and had just floated the other guy through his bridge so he was immediately off balance. Not only that what you dont see is that he has used chin na in his grip (which distorts the wrist/elbow thus draining power) and has already sent energy spiralling down his own elbow (creating maximum side/downward power). The effect this has is that its near impossible to execute a conventional lap as he has already distorted his student's elbow position through his grip and held firm position from his elbow, not to mention the fact that the guy has been floated already (so has no footing). So all-in-all YL has employed 3 combined techniques in executing that attack.

Now i am not suggesting that his attack cannot be effectively countered, but i personally dont think a lap in this case would not have been the best response. The main reason being that footing and regaining power and structure to the bridge has to be immediately addressed first.

Having said all this, i know i will get another side of possibilities in response which is fine but it stills brings me back to my original assumption that kung fu cannot be adequently expressed through words.

As the saying goes "You have to be there.............."

Liddel

06-07-2009, 04:06 PM

The reason why it would be near impossible for the other guy to have lapped is because of the timing, as YL moved first and had just floated the other guy through his bridge so he was immediately off balance. Not only that what you dont see is that he has used chin na in his grip (which distorts the wrist/elbow thus draining power) and has already sent energy spiralling down his own elbow (creating maximum side/downward power). The effect this has is that its near impossible to execute a conventional lap as he has already distorted his student's elbow position through his grip and held firm position from his elbow, not to mention the fact that the guy has been floated already (so has no footing). So all-in-all YL has employed 3 combined techniques in executing that attack.

In this exchange around 141 - i see YL moving second interupting Black as he tries to Tan YL's bridge and use a lower palm (common Poon Sau attack)

I did see the wrist grab and had mentioned previously the fact its open to getting locked or Lop'd.

Given Blacks a VT guy and his elbow is inside his body width while YL's elbow is flying outside his body id be extremely surprised if his Chi Na grip has greater control over Blacks wrist - but thats just my opinion based on my experience with such grips.

What are your views on Blacks left hand at this time ?
YL says in th clip about the wrist grab "i stop him from hitting me" but regardless of my views on using Lop Da on the right etc the left hand seems like an afterthought, blacks a compliant partner so its seems as though it doesnt matter..

I will say, im not trying to be disrespectful - im discussing the techncal aspects of the exchange bearing both sensitivity and technique in mind.

We are going to have to agree to disagree on a few things.

Your right you just have to be there. Wish we could have a friendly visit to further this but that aint going to happen anytimme soon as we are in different hemispheres :o

Out of curiousity given your view is his elbow is distorted by the Chi Na grip and that his horse has been 'floated' what is your prefered responce if you think Lop is "near impossible" ?

DREW

Shaolin Fist

06-10-2009, 03:42 AM

In this exchange around 141 - i see YL moving second interupting Black as he tries to Tan YL's bridge and use a lower palm (common Poon Sau attack)

I did see the wrist grab and had mentioned previously the fact its open to getting locked or Lop'd.

Given Blacks a VT guy and his elbow is inside his body width while YL's elbow is flying outside his body id be extremely surprised if his Chi Na grip has greater control over Blacks wrist - but thats just my opinion based on my experience with such grips.

What are your views on Blacks left hand at this time ?
YL says in th clip about the wrist grab "i stop him from hitting me" but regardless of my views on using Lop Da on the right etc the left hand seems like an afterthought, blacks a compliant partner so its seems as though it doesnt matter..
DREW

Granted we both wasn’t there but here’s my personal observation. VT student turns and tries to steps in with (or without) proper structure (with/without elbow intent) with his body weight behind his Tan with the intent to trap.

On sensing this intent, YL immediately & simultaneously lifts & grabs the Tan (thus neutralising any forward/side energy) whilst stepping 45’, then continues the spiral and pulls from his grip down through his elbow in order to maintain the distortion on VT’s elbow.

If VT did indeed have his body weight behind his elbow then his entire body would have been momentarily floated (lifted) just from the first reaction.

The fact that YL elbows are flying outside his body is actually normal as 5-A use both inside and outside structures The structured integrity of YL's bridge was covered through stepping (forward or backwards) and by intent through the proccess of sending spiral energy down through to his elbow.

The reason I know is that i would have made the same response. Having said that, one would only choose this response if you were familiar with using these sets of energetics otherwise as you rightly pointed out, without them it’s a weak response.

5-A has a very specific kiu Sau drill that deals with all cross hand grabs/attacks and so this is a relatively routine counter. The skill in the response is reliant on the initial float (lift) and to then to maintain pressure (intent) through the grip. YL does this by either stepping forward at 45’ or by stepping round and back. He shows both options but initially showed fixed footing (without body intent) just to show that he has dealt with the Tan without the need of footwork. But he messed up which effected his distancing so his slap would have been weak.

Basically VT had made the attack at the wrong moment and from the wrong position. As a result YL easily floated the initial attempt and made this a textbook 5-A response.

Out of curiousity given your view is his elbow is distorted by the Chi Na grip and that his horse has been 'floated' what is your prefered responce if you think Lop is "near impossible" ?

DREW

My response would been, first regain my elbow/body position back to YL centre and I would have counter with my own spiral by dropping my own body/elbow whilst opening into a Tan, at the same time applying an apposite (ying/yang) pressure counter to whatever direction YL was stepping into.

YL would be at the stage where he is using 3D direction/energy through his bridge, which might sound a bit silly for those who are not into the internal side but i can assure you it exist. Which also makes my explaination harder as i would also instinctively match and counter his 3D energy.

Then i would have waited to see what position i ended up in before i could act again.

Assumming there was a Chin Na grip YL would have twisted VT's wrists (resulting in a distorted elbow) making it hard for him to immediately attempt a Lap Counter without first regaining his own bridge alignment. (Twisting and distorting the wrist and elbows alters muscle alignments resulting in a momentary loss of power)

And if you still disgree then respectfully we shall just have to agree to disagree.

Liddel

06-10-2009, 03:55 PM

Hardwork108

06-12-2009, 09:34 PM

I personally dont believe in the internals too much -

And that is the reason that you have failed to "appreciate" the internal aspects pointed out to you and of course, as Shaolin Fist put it some of these have to be experienced so as to be fully understood.

If you end up in the same hemisphere as Shaolin Fist who I assume lives in England then you can also pay a visit to YL. Chat with him and perhaps take a few classes. That is the best way to appreciate his approach.

Anyway i did take something away from chatting with you which is more than one can say for Hw8 whose manner is just a tad condecending LOL,

Sorry to have come across as condecending but it is just not easy and down right frustrating trying to explain concepts to a person who is unfamiliar to them to start with. And talking of condcending posts, here is one you made earlier, addressed to me:

Seriously, if you call that high level bridging then every time i meet and greet someone with a handshake you must consider it 'uber level bridging'.
It was not just condecending to me but to the sifu in that clip!

Actually, I have found an interview with YL that was posted here some years ago, that should tell you more about his kung fu approach. He does not mince his words. Here is the link. It makes for good reading:

http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1266

Perhaps t_niehoff should also read this interview so as not to go on making ridiculous comments like he did earlier in this thread. Hey, who am I kidding.:rolleyes:

Shaolin Fist

06-14-2009, 07:03 AM

We just have different POV's and thats fine... i will say though that discussing this with you has made me want to actually get together, i find it quite interesting.

We could probably both challenge each others views and experience if we rolled / sparred together...shame were so far away.

I personally dont believe in the internals too much - body mechanics is body mechanics - the results i do but not the source, mystical chi etc. (not saying thats your view) and my sifu is a chinese medicine practitioner as well as KF teacher so.... :rolleyes:

Anyway i did take something away from chatting with you which is more than one can say for Hw8 whose manner is just a tad condecending LOL, so cheers.

Good training
DREW

You are always welcome to drop by for a friendly exchange if you are ever passing this side of the world.

As kung fu isn't a faith or religion it shouldn't be a matter of believing or not, but rather as enthusiasts we can quite easily discover the truth for ourselves given the widespread availabilty of kung fu schools teaching internal arts. (i'm assuming you havent done so ? apologies if you have.)

Then if we dont experience anything different other than maybe, better timing and coordination then we can quite easily dismiss this side of the CMA.

Dont worry if you dont make it before you retire, if its not indeed a myth then my internals should hopefully have held pretty well and your muscles degenerated which would make our exchange all that more enjoyable for me !

IME many instructors who have this knowledge are not prepared to openly share such information, Yap Leong being one of them. (No dis-respect just my opinion)

Its a fact that some TCMA instructors, more notibly the ones who teach WCK, either dont know or indeed are not interested in training their art internaly. IMO the fact that WCK was originally marketed & promoted as an quick way to learn an effective street fighting system doesn't lend well to the slower pace of the Soft/Internal way of training. So in its place we have many instructors teaching the idea of Soft, being purely as a state of relaxion, alongside increasing speed of their execution.

For me its, its not a question on whether WCK is Internal or External but rather its how you wish to train it (given you have the knowledge).

I have however noticed some WCK instructors like Chu Shong Tin, who have devoted more time in training his art internally.

Personally i dont believe in the mystical side of Chi (but then i have yet to see it first hand). Soft/Internals to me represents the ability to control the flow and directions of intent (chi) throughout the body and limbs.

Once you have trained this ability, the idiom 'You move, I move first' will immediately make sense.

Hardwork108

06-18-2009, 01:41 AM

Well I hope that by now Liddel has read the YL interview and hence is more enlightened regarding his approach.

grasshopper 2.0

06-18-2009, 05:03 PM

Hardwork108

06-18-2009, 08:31 PM

ok I watched the clip and it seems like this thread and this video is answering the general question of how to handle a wing chunner. But, i don't get it. Why would any two "fighters" chi sao each other? wouldn't they just..well..fight? i mean, who's witnessed any "street chi-sao"..as opposed to a streetfight.

Many times if your skill level is high enough you use a chi sao match to determine who is better or SOFTER. Here"softer" means superior.

anyway, i don't see how this is groundbreaking or revealing of anything. one was just able to hit and the other wasn't. The one who can hit has better structure, reaction time, pressure, etc...has nothing to do with wing chun per se. you can develop these things thru other means.
The certain internal aspects are not easy to see.;)

Why not read some of the posts in this thread, then perhaps you will see more aspects.:)

If you are really interested then read the interview with Yap Leong in the link I provided a couple of posts ago.

grasshopper 2.0

06-18-2009, 09:06 PM

I will take a look at those posts and the interview...

i guess it depends on what we use as a marker to determine skill - chi sao or the fight? I would choose the fight, personally. Regardless of chi-sao skill, it does not make one a good fighter. At the end of the day, if you're knocked out, who cares about one's bong sao.. (this is my perspective..for now).

Analogous to looking at the engine or the entire car - sure a mustang's engine can blast through a quarter mile faster than a bmw, but the bmw can handle around the twists/turns of the road and its own horse power, while the mustang's chassis wouldn't be able to keep up with its roaring engine. Do you look at the engine only or the entire car, in terms of performance?

To each their own - people own mustangs out there ;)

Hardwork108

06-18-2009, 09:12 PM

grasshopper 2.0

06-18-2009, 10:03 PM

You're absolutely right. I think you're like light years ahead of me. I'm not even kidding.

Hardwork108

06-18-2009, 10:24 PM

You're absolutely right. I think you're like light years ahead of me. I'm not even kidding.

Thank you for you kind words. I don't think that I am light years ahead of you. (I have only had a relatively short-in kung fu terms- 8 years plus of training).

It all depends on the training approach one is exposed to. The fact is that the internals go deep and it is always better to be exposed to this approach as soon as one can. I have been lucky finding sifus that take and teach this approach. Nowadays one is really lucky to come across such genuine sifus but firstly will need to know what he is looking for.

Just to emphasis my point I will say that there are people here who say they have trained kung fu for decades but yet they are somehow unaware of the existance and indeed the fundemental importance of the internals within a genuine kung fu training program. Some here in the forums would (and eventually will) tell you that the internals do not exist and that they are just fantasy, and etc.etc.

Some of the more "evolved" amongst them might even tell you that the internals are all about relaxation and bio mechanics, etc. etc.

I am not too surprised about such people and such comments anymore, after all we do live in the Mcdojo/kwoon era, ;)

Liddel

06-19-2009, 04:18 PM

Well I hope that by now Liddel has read the YL interview and hence is more enlightened regarding his approach.

I dont need enlightenment. One can be capable of understanding your POV but still disagree with the context of this thread.

The internals shown were the focus for you in the Chi Sau 'game' for me they are overridden by the lack of good VT habbit techs which are missing.

Good VT techs can stand on thier own where as good internals need to use the foundation of good Techs to have any use at all. Its cart before the horse IMO.

It comes down to what you think is most important with regard to what your trying to achieve with your fighting art !

LOL at the fact because i disagree you think i dont undersdtand your POV...

I will say that there are people here who say they have trained kung fu for decades but yet they are somehow unaware of the existance and indeed the fundemental importance of the internals within a genuine kung fu training program.

Awareness is not a requisite, if its an inherent part of your training you just have it... Some think that all the hypothesising about theory and techs is the ticket to ability but thats less than half the job IMO.

DREW

Hardwork108

06-19-2009, 08:44 PM

I dont need enlightenment. One can be capable of understanding your POV but still disagree with the context of this thread.

The internals shown were the focus for you in the Chi Sau 'game' for me they are overridden by the lack of good VT habbit techs which are missing.

Good VT techs can stand on thier own where as good internals need to use the foundation of good Techs to have any use at all. Its cart before the horse IMO.

It comes down to what you think is most important with regard to what your trying to achieve with your fighting art !

LOL at the fact because i disagree you think i dont undersdtand your POV...

And again you have misunderstood and failed to see the internal elements shown to you by YL's techniques, IMHO.

Awareness is not a requisite, if its an inherent part of your training you just have it...

It is an inherent part of training if you have trained a given style of kung fu with a GENUINE sifu!

Some think that all the hypothesising about theory and techs is the ticket to ability

It is not so much about hypothesizing and more about seeing and appreciating it when it is dangled infront of ones nose. IMHO ;)

If you are really interested in kung fu training (as opposed to MMA)and have the short time necessary, then read the interview with YL that was provided by me in a link in an earlier post.

Liddel

06-19-2009, 10:51 PM

And again you have misunderstood and failed to see the internal elements shown to you by YL's techniques, IMHO.

No in reality i have failed to see it as having the same value as what you believe.

It is an inherent part of training if you have trained a given style of kung fu with a GENUINE sifu!

GENUINE teacher or GENUINE fighter ? :rolleyes:

It is not so much about hypothesizing and more about seeing and appreciating it when it is dangled infront of ones nose. IMHO ;)

If i belt a football past the goalie into the back the net from way out, some may say wow. others may say yawn because they hang with beckham or rooney.
:rolleyes:

If you are really interested in kung fu training (as opposed to MMA)and have the short time necessary, then read the interview with YL that was provided by me in a link in an earlier post.

Im interested in you providing evidence that Chi exists and then that whats in the vid is a high level example of it :p

Good luck.

DREW

Hardwork108

06-19-2009, 11:17 PM

No in reality i have failed to see it as having the same value as what you believe.

You missing the value I see indicates your none-internal approach and hence lack of references.

GENUINE teacher or GENUINE fighter ? :rolleyes:
In my book, a genuine kung fu teacher is a genuine fighter. Despite what many MMA knuckleheads such as IKfmdc tell you, Traditional Kung fu is a fighting art!

Furthermore, I have never trained under kung fu sifus who weren't fighters. Do you see where I am coming from now, and why I see relevance in traditional/internal aspects that you don't seem to recognize or validate?

If i belt a football past the goalie into the back the net from way out, some may say wow. others may say yawn because they hang with beckham or rooney.
:rolleyes:

You may knock someone out with a Western boxing technique and achieve the goal of protecting yourself but you cannot refer to what you did as kung fu fighting, just because you were in a pseudo kung fu stance when you used the boxing hook.

Im interested in you providing evidence that Chi exists and then that whats in the vid is a high level example of it :p

And that is another example of you misunderstanding my thread. There is more to the internal martial approach than just the chi!!!

The video clip was not about Chi!!!

Good luck.

It seems that I have had plenty of good luck as regards genuine and authentic kung fu training. So good luck to you. ;)

PS-- READ THE YL INTERVIEW, PLEASE.

Liddel

06-20-2009, 04:20 PM

You missing the value I see indicates your none-internal approach and hence lack of references.

So because i have a differnet opinion i am 'missing' the value, thats fairly open minded :p its so open minded you've assumed my approach isnt internal.

In my book, a genuine kung fu teacher is a genuine fighter. Despite what many MMA knuckleheads such as IKfmdc tell you, Traditional Kung fu is a fighting art!

Actually IME MMA guys tend to be less knuckleheads than most VT guys and comming from a staunch VT person like myself thats saying something, after all your the one that keeps mentioning Mckwoons and there are pleanty.

I have never trained under kung fu sifus who weren't fighters. Do you see where I am coming from now, and why I see relevance in traditional/internal aspects that you don't seem to recognize or validate?

I see where your comming from, you like to argue.

I see relevance in the internals however different than you... i still see relevance. But on my 'importance ladder' the importance of the internals is lower than that of stable habbit actions -
which if i took your approach i would say you fail to see the relevance of good habbit actions that are the base for good internals therefore all you have is internals and no good habbit actions to make then functional, as seen in the clip. :cool:

Its a bit of a shame as if you had better habbit actions than whats shown then you internals would have a better base from which to work and you'd be much more functional overall IMO.

You may knock someone out with a Western boxing technique and achieve the goal of protecting yourself but you cannot refer to what you did as kung fu fighting, just because you were in a pseudo kung fu stance when you used the boxing hook.

What does this have to do with the price of fish - who mentioned western boxing and i think you should refer to a chinesse dictionary looking up what kung fu actually means....i think you mean Wu Shu.

PS-- READ THE YL INTERVIEW, PLEASE.

Who said i havent mate. Your like religious people comming to my door - do you really think in this community that after 13 years in KF and 29 years on this earth your telling me anything i havent investigated before.....

I agreed to disagree and in my absence you post about me...let it go...
(the fact im board isnt helping me hold back though, my bad :p)

I go re read.

DREW

Hardwork108

06-20-2009, 06:06 PM

So because i have a differnet opinion i am 'missing' the value,
Your "different opinion" is based on the fact that you did not appreciate the internal principles demonstrated by sifu Yap Leong, and hence have missed the value.

thats fairly open minded :p its so open minded you've assumed my approach isnt internal.
Exactly!

Your "open mindedness" is irrelevant. Either you know and appreciate certain internal principles or you don't and it seems that you haven't and based on your own statement here, then no one should have expected you to appreciate any internal aspects shown in that video clip:

Originally Posted by Liddel View Post
I personally dont believe in the internals too much.

...and your forum name does not reflect an appreciation of internals either.:p

Actually IME MMA guys tend to be less knuckleheads than most VT guys

That would be because most VT guys seem to be more MMA-ists than traditional kung fu expontents. Just take a look at some of the "kung fu" tagged members in this very forum. ;)

and coming from a staunch VT person like myself thats saying something, after all your the one that keeps mentioning Mckwoons and there are plenty.

You are right and that is why this forum is full of "staunch" VT/WC people who are nothing more than McKwoon fodder. And for that same reason many of them have gone on to find MMA "enlightenment".

I see where your comming from, you like to argue.
I am arguing my point while hoping to inform you about certain aspects of the internal approach. That was the whole point of this thread.

I see relevance in the internals however different than you... i still see relevance. But on my 'importance ladder' the importance of the internals is lower than that of stable habbit actions -
which if i took your approach i would say you fail to see the relevance of good habbit actions that are the base for good internals therefore all you have is internals and no good habbit actions to make then functional, as seen in the clip. :cool:

You are lecturing me on the internals having missed the fundamental aspects /principles shown in that clip and in light of your comment earlier? :

Originally Posted by Liddel View Post
I personally dont believe in the internals too much.

Its a bit of a shame as if you had better habbit actions than whats shown then you internals would have a better base from which to work and you'd be much more functional overall IMO.

BUT AGAIN note your own statement here:

Originally Posted by Liddel View Post
I personally dont believe in the internals too much.

What I am trying to say by quoting your own admission as regards the internals is the fact that the Kung fu Internals mean different things to different people but they mean the SAME thing to the people who ACTUALLY practice them.

These people understand the various aspects such as "floating", "if you move, I first move", "softness", "listening", etc. etc, and in time learn to RECOGNIZE AND VALIDATE them.

What does this have to do with the price of fish - who mentioned western boxing and i think you should refer to a chinesse dictionary looking up what kung fu actually means....i think you mean Wu Shu.

I was just trying to emphasis that just like the internal, you either practice and know it or you don't.

Furthermore you will find that if you don't practice the internals of a given style of kung fu then your kung fu is not really kung fu but an incomplete shell of what you should actually be practicing.

Who said i havent mate. Your like religious people coming to my door - do you really think in this community that after 13 years in KF and 29 years on this earth your telling me anything i havent investigated before.....

If you did then good on ya' mate.:p

I agreed to disagree and in my absence you post about me...let it go...
(the fact im board isnt helping me hold back though, my bad :p)

I suppose that we have no option but to agree to disagree.:cool:

I go re read.

Well I will probably doing that soon, myself, as it is good to read comments from sifus who know their stuff and don't hold back the truth for the sake of some perceived diplomacy.:)

Liddel

06-20-2009, 10:12 PM

I think its taken out of context unless you read more of the sentence -

I personally dont believe in the internals too much- body mechanics is body mechanics - the results i do but not the source, mystical chi etc

Too much doesnt mean not at all. And i mention mystical chi because alot of internalist rest thier P'sOV on Chi, perhaps you dont but your picking holes that arent thier.

The more i read the IV the more i realise you and i differ greatly in what we learn and how we see it fitting into what we are trying to achieve. Especially cause YL seems to have more experience in every style but VT which explains the clip well IMO.

most VT guys seem to be more MMA-ists than traditional kung fu expontents. Just take a look at some of the "kung fu" tagged members in this very forum.

Dude how many different KF styles have you learnt and does YL teach under one roof ? In his case the IV suggests more than one...

Do you not agree that one needs a good foundation of habbit actions or standard tech behaviours for your internals to have a vehicle to work through ?

I mean ive said this a few times in different posts and your only retort is i dont understand because i dont hold whats shown in the clip in as high regard as you...which says to me your defending the person and what your taught because its yours and not on the merits of the actual approach... theory application etc.

I mean clearly you have some strong views about the internals saying without them KF is just a shell, i would say that about those with internals and without good base habbit actions in a VT sence.

What I am trying to say by quoting your own admission as regards the internals is the fact that the Kung fu Internals mean different things to different people but they mean the SAME thing to the people who ACTUALLY practice them.

Thats a gross generalisation, even if your terminolagy is the same it can mean differnt things.
Have you even Gone to other VT schools outside your area, outside your country..im curious ?

These people understand the various aspects such as "floating", "if you move, I first move", "softness", "listening", etc. etc, and in time learn to RECOGNIZE AND VALIDATE them.

Yes we refer to sofness and listening as cotton hand, floating as uprooting, interupted action , action vs reaction blah blah...

The sad fact is without good habbit actions you have nothing to put that into. Moreover with good habbit actions/responces you can nullify the internals. No one thing is the be all and end all..Ying AND Yang my friend :p

DREW

Hardwork108

06-22-2009, 12:08 AM

I think its taken out of context unless you read more of the sentence -

Ok here is your original quote:

I personally dont believe in the internals too much- body mechanics is body mechanics - the results i do but not the source, mystical chi etc

The now favorite description of body mechanics can also apply to external modes of practice and applications. So it is not saying much.

Too much doesnt mean not at all. And i mention mystical chi because alot of internalist rest thier P'sOV on Chi,

That is a common misconception of externalists when referring to the subject matter of internalists!!!

Lets just say that it is not all about chi and the subject matter of chi is way beyond you (and I ) at the present.

perhaps you dont but your picking holes that arent thier.
You mean like you picking holes at the video clip?

The more i read the IV the more i realise you and i differ greatly in what we learn and how we see it fitting into what we are trying to achieve. Especially cause YL seems to have more experience in every style but VT which explains the clip well IMO.
The fact is that he knows more about WC than you realize.;)

Dude how many different KF styles have you learnt
Why does that matter? The fact is I see and am familiar with certain concepts in that video clip.

and does YL teach under one roof ? In his case the IV suggests more than one...
I am not sure if I understand your point????

Do you not agree that one needs a good foundation of habbit actions or standard tech behaviours for your internals to have a vehicle to work through ?

Look, those are given if one even wants to start developing internal skills!

I mean ive said this a few times in different posts and your only retort is i dont understand because i dont hold whats shown in the clip in as high regard as you...which says to me your defending the person and what your taught because its yours and not on the merits of the actual approach... theory application etc.

I am just defending the live internal principles that were shown by a real kung fu sifu. Either you see them or you don't. If your "internal" training has not enabled you to recognize those aspects nor relate to the principles mentioned and showen by the sifu himself then you should ask your own sifu about them and see what he says. If he says that it is all mumbo jumbo then I would suggest that you look elsewwhere.

I mean clearly you have some strong views about the internals saying without them KF is just a shell,

I stand by those views while at the same time I will regretfully admit that most kung fu schools will not have a clue about them no matter what their publicity says.

You will know how much of an empty shell purely externally trained kung fu is when you touch hands with an internal master. You will realize under a minute!

That is why to my knowledge, there is no purely external style of kung fu. The way it has been explained to me, all kung fu has both internal and external aspects. Of course some lean more towards the external while many lean more towards the internal (Yin Yang balance).

i would say that about those with internals and without good base habbit actions in a VT sence.
As I stated before, what you say here is given as you will never see anyone who is expert in an internal aspect while not having mastered the habit actions that can be both external and internal, I suppose.

Thats a gross generalisation, even if your terminolagy is the same it can mean differnt things.

Unfortunately that is true in many cases because of all the clueless "sifus" who are claiming mastery.;)

However, the principles are the same. Differences may arise in the practice of different styles solely due to the fact that they may be from different regions of China, hence speak a different dialect or perhaps emphasis aspects that are different from other styles. However, the major priniciples are the same!

If tendons are trained in a certain way (also internal!!!) for certain reasons then that does not change, even if the exercises vary from style to style, but again the principles of the exercises stays the same!

If you are really interested as you seem to be then you should research these aspects further. That is where real kung fu essence (and power)lies!

Have you even Gone to other VT schools outside your area, outside your country..im curious ?

Yes I have! LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,!!

Yes we refer to sofness and listening as cotton hand, floating as uprooting, interupted action , action vs reaction blah blah...

Some of the WC schools that I visited "referred" to such aspects as well...lol

The sad fact is without good habbit actions you have nothing to put that into. Moreover with good habbit actions/responces you can nullify the internals. No one thing is the be all and end all..Ying AND Yang my friend :p

I will give you a sentence that enbodies the a truth about the internals. You may take it or leave it, which will reflect your true understanding of the internals.

Here goes: When speaking of true internal mastery, only internal mastery can nullify the internals.

I will give you a hint, there are Yin and Yang principles suggested in the above sentence (even if it doesn't look like it). If you are really familiar with the true internals then you will see them.;)