Why chi sau?

[LSWCTN1]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

[AdrianK]

Bridge hands implies a desire to bridge.

Sticky Hands implies a desire to stick, implying the bridging is already a constant of the exercise.

At least thats my interpretation of it. The name doesn't really matter though, as chi sao has several other variable applications, which is why bridge hands wouldn't fit perfectly either. But Chi Sao sure sounds a hell of a lot better than "Exercise for training close-range fighting" :D

[-木叶-]

Kiu Sao is a name for your arms, referring to 桥手 in Chinese.

Chi Sao is a name describing an action, when 2 hands stick together.

[LSWCTN1]

Bridge hands implies a desire to bridge.

Sticky Hands implies a desire to stick, implying the bridging is already a constant of the exercise.

At least thats my interpretation of it. The name doesn't really matter though, as chi sao has several other variable applications, which is why bridge hands wouldn't fit perfectly either. But Chi Sao sure sounds a hell of a lot better than "Exercise for training close-range fighting" :D

ok, maybe i should have said 'training the bridge hands' to me sticking is pretty much chasing hands

the way we are taught chi sau, as i understand it, is that the whole exercise is about displacement (my words, not my instructors). its about the displacement of their energy, the displacement of their structure, of their force, and of their bridges (to create an opening)

We don’t do chi sao per-sé, more of what I would call kiu sau. Basically we are fed techniques to find the holes and use them. The better we are the faster and more ingrained it becomes – when we practice with other lineages who don’t practise how we do we will luk sao holding our structure until we feel or create the gap.

Much more like common chi sao, but it’s not sticky hands though it’s a pushing bridges training I feel. We don’t deliberately try to stick at all we repel and deflect and search for or create an opening

is this how others practise their chi sao?

[t_niehoff]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

As I see it, WCK is what you could call a"dirty-clinch" boxing style. By "clinch" I mean sustained contact (sticking). Chi sao is a learning platform/exercise where we can learn and practice in an unrealistic way certain contact skills. Chi sao is like the training wheels when you learn to ride a bike.

[LSWCTN1]

As I see it, WCK is what you could call a"dirty-clinch" boxing style. By "clinch" I mean sustained contact (sticking). Chi sao is a learning platform/exercise where we can learn and practice in an unrealistic way certain contact skills. Chi sao is like the training wheels when you learn to ride a bike.

that sounds similar to how i see my particular style of wc (athough not all wc i have seen emphasis/values this). My instrutor 'smothers' you, constantly preventing you from attacking him when practising gwoh sau. the idea we learn is to close down all the options, which of course includes taking the space etc

but still, chi sau itself, I dont see as being a 'sticky' exercise. i guess in a way it is a very up close and personal gwoh sau?

do any of you deliberately try to stick, and if so what benefit to your training do you feel this brings?

[t_niehoff]

that sounds similar to how i see my particular style of wc (athough not all wc i have seen emphasis/values this). My instrutor 'smothers' you, constantly preventing you from attacking him when practising gwoh sau. the idea we learn is to close down all the options, which of course includes taking the space etc

but still, chi sau itself, I dont see as being a 'sticky' exercise. i guess in a way it is a very up close and personal gwoh sau?

do any of you deliberately try to stick, and if so what benefit to your training do you feel this brings?

Chi sao is just an exercise to learn these various "elements" but is not realistic, i.e., it does not reflect what really goes on in fighting. It just gives you a platform to learn/practice those "elements" in a nonfighting environment so that you can focus on them without needing to deal with all the other things that come in with fighting. Gwoh sao isn't realistic either, it is just a more free-flowing way of doing the chi sao drill/exercise. Chi sao and gwoh sao won't and can't teach you how to really use those elements - or contact skills - in fighting. Only fighting (dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is using high levels of physical force against you) can teach you that or develop those chi sao contact skills into fighting skills. To put it another way, chi sao and gwoh sao is beginner-level WCK.

[Violent Designs]

What is gwoh sao? Never heard if it, if there are some videos or if you can go into a bit of detail I would appreciate it.

Honest question I am not from a WCK background. :)

Thanks

[-木叶-]

What is gwoh sao? Never heard if it, if there are some videos or if you can go into a bit of detail I would appreciate it.

Honest question I am not from a WCK background. :)

Thanks

Gwoh Sao translating literally is crossing hands, but it means sparring in
chinese, "过手".

In Wing Chun, it starts with chi sao, then slowly each partner will try to look for
moves and openings to execute on their partner.

[TenTigers]

two things-
one-Terrence-the training wheels analogy is priceless.
two-what is the difference between gor-sao (gwoh-sao) and Gong-Sau?

[Vajramusti]

Without some hands on showing-not pictures or videos- chi sao cannot be sensibly discussed
in one up manship laced forums. Chi sao is done in different ways in different lineages in vastly varying quality. It's an important bridge to real action if you are using wing chun ... and you develop lots of skills( the list is huge) if you practice it right and well.

And- no thanks- I don't care to discuss the silly and inaccurate training wheel or swimming on dry land analogies. And, I know I know some just do san sik, or limited versions of chi sao or no chi sao at all. Onwards through the forum fog.

joy chaudhuri

[t_niehoff]

. Chi sao is done in different ways in different lineages in vastly varying quality. It's an important bridge to real action if you are using wing chun ... and you develop lots of skills( the list is huge) if you practice it right and well.


Yes, you are "using wing chun" tools in chi sao, but the problem is that you are not using them in a realistic environment, i.e., under fighting conditions. Your partner in chi sao or gwoh sao is not behaving like someone who is fighting you; he is instead trying to play chi sao with you. So, no matter how you do chi sao, it remains an unrealistic exercise.

This is why chi sao will permit you to learn and develop certain contact skills -- and why it is useful as such. By taking out many of the "elements" of fighting, chi sao permits you to focus on certain things without needing to deal with additional fighting elements. And, that's also precisely why chi sao cannot make those chi sao skills fighting skills. Chi sao doesn't and can't teach you HOW to use WCK in fighting. Only fighting can teach you that.

That's why I like the training wheels analogy -- the training wheels permit you to learn and practice bike-riding skills (steering, peddling, etc.) but in an unrealistic (since you can't fall off and so don't need to be concerned with that) representation of bicycle riding. To learn and develop those things into genuine bike riding skills requires you take off the training wheels and really ride the bike.

[dirtyrat]

Great thread. I had studied a couple different kung fu systems before taking up wing chun. While training it had occurred to me based on my previous experience that chi sao was not really necessary to learn fighting applications. There were times that I wish we wasn't focus so much on chi sao.

[t_niehoff]

two things-
one-Terrence-the training wheels analogy is priceless.
two-what is the difference between gor-sao (gwoh-sao) and Gong-Sau?

Thanks. I took that analogy from Nick Forrer, a fine WCK practitioner.

My understanding is the gor sao is essentailly freely applied chi sao, whereas gong sao is essentially sparring (usually in a "challenge" context).

[HumbleWCGuy]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

A waste of time. My school almost exclusively practices out of movement from an on guard position.

[Vajramusti]

A good chance that we differ on the whole enchilada of chi sao. Of course one should develop experience beyond it. Some folks actually have done that and do that but don't blabber on chat lists.
You have lots of people who really haven't learned chi sao..even some Ip Man name droppers who really never did chi sao with their sifu and just picked some tough guys as students and give the impression that they taught chi sao.

A fight is a fight---sparring, rolling, etc ain"t- they are still pretend fighting IMO.

No problem if you dont chi sao- but it is dishonest to call it wing chun. Wing chun is not the only path to fighting. Many ways to skin that one.

joy chaudhuri

[Hendrik]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too



Seriously, WCK dealing with Force Vectors trajectory thus the chi sao is for testing the Force Vectors trajectory which is a 3D + time deal.

IE: a tan is not a block as in other art because it is the Force Vectors Trajectory which generate by the Tan Shape which count. One needs to "see" the Force Vectors Trajectory instead of fix on what way a Tan must be.

not to mention the look a like Tan can use for different force vectors transfer.



The SLT/SNT is training one to have a DYNAMIC force VECTORS trajectory structure, Force vectors balancing, and Force vectors projection which is Fa jin.
the ancestor PURPOSEly making that Vertical weak YJKYM for the purpose of emphasis on dynamic Force Vectors Trajectory instead of sit still like a rock mount on ground and then strike. It is about flow and what is the root of Water?


Thus, from Slt/SNT to Chi Sau there is a Theme which is different completely with Nam Kuen or Southern Shao Lin.....etc.

And the reason SLT is called the essencial of details training is that only when one can handle the details one could manupulate the Force Vectors TRajectory.

As it said, gentlely subdue the opponents within a split of an inch.

Furthermore, even with the Kuen kuit, Come accept. for example, there are numerous type of Dynamic Force vectors trajectory based on real life adaptation condition.

IE: if some one trust into you with a type of Force Vectors Trajectory, how are you going to make use of it instead of sitting like a rock trying to resist it.






Thus, WCK is pronous DEAD when one get into the Tan Sau this way or Shao Lin Kiu Sau that way. or block this way ...... WCK has no way because Force vectors TRajectory can be group into different resultant on the fly while adaptation with the condition.
Thus, the mind needs to be quiet or silence otherwise one lost control.






TCMA at 1850 has evolved into the technology of the Force Vectors tracetory it is no longer those punching....etc.

and actually, the vertical punch of WCK is not just a punch because the real thing is the Vectical Force Trajectory. once this Vectical Force TRajectory is issue it doesnt matter if the target was hit by the first of bridge or elbow within the trajectory. see, it is not the hand or the punch. It is the Froce vectors trajectory behind the shape.


as for figthing, without even be able to generate, handle, issue, and play with different Force Vectors trajectory. one doesnt even have the basic WCK.

If one have the basic traning of the Force Vectors trajectory, then it is not that simple to being take down or force into a dis advantage position. Sure, in Martial art, if one's competitor is having much higher Kung fu than that is a different story. But in general with the same level of kung fu. WCK with the Force Vectors trajectory training will be at lease be able to force tie. It is about technology not faith not religion.


Time to wake up WCner. ask yourself what the heck you are doing and what is the advantages of those Tan bong Fok or sun punch vesus the BJJ's take down hug or CLF's swing punch, and also what is the big deal on the Structure of YJKYM where it still got take down?

It doesnt need a world class figther or competance fighter as Terence suggest everyone to test or follow. just examine things with PHysical 3 D force Vectors trajectory COMMON SENSE instead of arguing " oh I can do this to you, I can biu jee, I have sifu X's YJKYM to sustain my struture....." if you cant passed that 3 D force vectors trajectory common sense, forget about taking any hot shot action.


Nope, SLT and WCK is not design to be those Kiu Sau type of art. It is NOT.
my 2 Cents.

[Pacman]

My instrutor 'smothers' you, constantly preventing you from attacking him when practising gwoh sau. the idea we learn is to close down all the options, which of course includes taking the space etc

this is exactly why it is called chi sau or sticky hands. one of the major concepts of chi sau is to smother your opponent. you can imagine your opponent like a fan and your hands are like a wet towel over that fan.

i see lots of sticky hand demos where the people are not maintaining contact. when you do this, you stop doing sticky hands and you are just throwing punches and blocks at a close range.

people who say sticky hand training is not realistic are right. you will rarely start a fight in a rolling hands position. on top of that your opponent is not necessarily going to stand there with you. however, those who say sticky hands is useless are wrong.

the main reason why people think sticky hands is useless (aside from those who do it incorrectly) is that they (as a result of their respective schools) start training sticky hands immediately and only do sticky hands.

you need to learn how to fight from a long range first, as most fights start this way. then you need to learn how to apply sticky hands in a setting where you arent just doing a drill with your sihing

its like tai chi people doing push hands for 10 years and never learning how to actually apply it. then they come out thinking tai chi is only for health with no combat applications

[duende]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

It is both.

And sometimes the sticky part is the bridge. :D

Chi Sau is a highly generalized term and refers to many many "live" (pre-contact san sau sparring) and "dead" (established contact rolling platform drills). It is not simply only "poon sau" and it is not unique to WCK.

In our system for instance, their exist three distinct manner and methods in which one makes contact and controls the bridge. We call them Kiu Sau, Chi Sau, and Chi Kiu. For time conserving purposes we can describe them briefly as Structural bridge, flowing bridge, and sticking bridge. All three have their own body mechanic identities and Time, Space, and Energy when they are most beneficial to employ.

However when put together, all three (Kiu Sau, Chi Sau, Chi Kiu) still just add up to one greater "Chi Sau" identity.

When one learns these various forms of bridging, it is much easier to see how WCK relates to the other southern fist systems.

WCK was not developed in a vacuum.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Yes, it's both...and Adrian's original definition of the two early in the thread is correct.

But the real issue is, why do it at all?

And let me preface my following remarks by saying that the position that "it's too unrealistic a platform to be of any real fighting value" almost always means that the person saying this hasn't learned:

1) Enough chi sao/kiu sao

2) They have little or no idea about how to take not only the attributes and concepts learned and developed in chi sao - but also the techniques learned...and make them relevant to a more "realistic" setting, ie.- actual sparring or fighting.

AND AS LONG AS ONE UNDERSTANDS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LEARNING...is almost exclusively for very close quarter striking/fighting/unbalancing/taking space away...

then you're on the road.

A road that can take you from chi sao/kiu sao "drills" to actual close quarter fighting skills.

[dirtyrat]

Seems to me that some instructors that focus a lot on chi sao do so to keep their students around longer for commercial purposes.

I'm willing to bet that you could train an average student to fight a lot faster by teaching san sik and application/combat drills first. Save chi sao for much later in their training for refining purposes. The 'college' level of their education so to speak. Emphasis should be place on relaxation and structure and how its used in attack and defense. The combat drills should teach the student WCs strategy for fighting.

[Lee Chiang Po]

Chi sao means just as it says. Chi is your energy flow, sao is your hand. It is designed to do several things at once, but it is mostly for developing an ability to use your energies effeciently in altering an opponent's attack trajectory. The idea is to be able to do this with as little exertion as possible, and to be able to focus your energies more effeciently. It is not a fight form or a compitition, but a form or drill where 2 individuals can both practice their hand techniques in both attack and defense. Too many people get so deep into chi sao that it takes on a life of it's own. I was told that it becomes a childs game eventually. Where 2 people try to out chi sao one another. I think you stop learning and developing when that occurs.

[LSWCTN1]

Wow! We have an actual discussion going here!


Chi sao is just an exercise to learn these various "elements" but is not realistic, i.e., it does not reflect what really goes on in fighting. It just gives you a platform to learn/practice those "elements" in a nonfighting environment so that you can focus on them without needing to deal with all the other things that come in with fighting. Gwoh sao isn't realistic either, it is just a more free-flowing way of doing the chi sao drill/exercise. Chi sao and gwoh sao won't and can't teach you how to really use those elements - or contact skills - in fighting. Only fighting (dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is using high levels of physical force against you) can teach you that or develop those chi sao contact skills into fighting skills. To put it another way, chi sao and gwoh sao is beginner-level WCK.

i do agree that chi sau is not a 'be-all-and-end-all' but i have highlighted the part i think is the most intelligent rebuttal for continuation of chi sau i have seen you make yet. we can agree to differ, but it makes a good point. however - gwoh sau (to us) IS sparring. albeit whilst pulling the punches


A waste of time. My school almost exclusively practices out of movement from an on guard position.

to me that can be a good program, as someone on here later mentioned - chi sau could actually be looked upon as the more refined version of wing chun. i like the idea, IMHO the individual points of chi sau are the begining base of wck, striking whilst covering etc. but the advanced chi sao exchanges are, again IMHO the upper echelons of wck


A good chance that we differ on the whole enchilada of chi sao. Of course one should develop experience beyond it. Some folks actually have done that and do that but don't blabber on chat lists.
You have lots of people who really haven't learned chi sao..even some Ip Man name droppers who really never did chi sao with their sifu and just picked some tough guys as students and give the impression that they taught chi sao.

A fight is a fight---sparring, rolling, etc ain"t- they are still pretend fighting IMO.

No problem if you dont chi sao- but it is dishonest to call it wing chun. Wing chun is not the only path to fighting. Many ways to skin that one.

joy chaudhuri

i also am of the opinion that sparring isn't fighting, although i do feel that its among the the best training you can do (once a certain proficiency is reached) in the classroom


Seriously, WCK dealing with Force Vectors trajectory thus the chi sao is for testing the Force Vectors trajectory which is a 3D + time deal.

IE: a tan is not a block as in other art because it is the Force Vectors Trajectory which generate by the Tan Shape which count. One needs to "see" the Force Vectors Trajectory instead of fix on what way a Tan must be.

Thus, WCK is pronous DEAD when one get into the Tan Sau this way or Shao Lin Kiu Sau that way. or block this way ...... WCK has no way because Force vectors TRajectory can be group into different resultant on the fly while adaptation with the condition.
Thus, the mind needs to be quiet or silence otherwise one lost control.

Nope, SLT and WCK is not design to be those Kiu Sau type of art. It is NOT.
my 2 Cents.

i have highlighted two areas of your post

the first is because i feel that you may have contradicted yourself (please correct me if i am wrong - it isnt a dig at you, just asking for information on your 'chi' sau)

the reason i think you may have contradicted yourself is: the way we are taught is exactly the way you are describing, (albeit in a much less 'scientific' language - i guess thats the difference between chatting on a fourum, and a hands-on instruction) i.e. it is the motion of the 'block' (or more accurately: movement) that creates the force required. however, take your example of tan sau - unless the shape of the hand within tan sau is correct (by correct, i mean what WE deem to be correct) then the force or energy it issues is different to the straight arm/wrist/hand tan sau. if the arm and wrist ARE angled then the fingers must also be straight to issue this energy. therefore i highlighted this to point out that i believe you are saying the tan sau must be issued a certain way (to create the 'force vectors') then you go on to say its not about the tan sau being 'this' way, but about the force it issues - as i understand it they are one and the same

the second highlight was to highlight that i may have used the wrong wording. by Kiu Sau i mean training the hands/arms to bridge correctly. i have no knowledge of any other TCMA's, and as such i might not mean kiu sau in the traditional way

do you deliberately stick to your opponent in order to produce and develop the correct shapes? although its not how i am taught i can understand that. would i be rght in saying that thee idea is to thrust the structure through your opponents bridge?



this is exactly why it is called chi sau or sticky hands. one of the major concepts of chi sau is to smother your opponent. you can imagine your opponent like a fan and your hands are like a wet towel over that fan.

i see lots of sticky hand demos where the people are not maintaining contact. when you do this, you stop doing sticky hands and you are just throwing punches and blocks at a close range.

people who say sticky hand training is not realistic are right. you will rarely start a fight in a rolling hands position. on top of that your opponent is not necessarily going to stand there with you. however, those who say sticky hands is useless are wrong.

the main reason why people think sticky hands is useless (aside from those who do it incorrectly) is that they (as a result of their respective schools) start training sticky hands immediately and only do sticky hands.

you need to learn how to fight from a long range first, as most fights start this way. then you need to learn how to apply sticky hands in a setting where you arent just doing a drill with your sihing

its like tai chi people doing push hands for 10 years and never learning how to actually apply it. then they come out thinking tai chi is only for health with no combat applications

i have highlighted a section here, are you saying that the object is not to disenagage and strike. but to deliberately control and smother:confused:


Yes, it's both...and Adrian's original definition of the two early in the thread is correct.

But the real issue is, why do it at all?

And let me preface my following remarks by saying that the position that "it's too unrealistic a platform to be of any real fighting value" almost always means that the person saying this hasn't learned:

1) Enough chi sao/kiu sao

2) They have little or no idea about how to take not only the attributes and concepts learned and developed in chi sao - but also the techniques learned...and make them relevant to a more "realistic" setting, ie.- actual sparring or fighting.

AND AS LONG AS ONE UNDERSTANDS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LEARNING...is almost exclusively for very close quarter striking/fighting/unbalancing/taking space away...
then you're on the road.

A road that can take you from chi sao/kiu sao "drills" to actual close quarter fighting skills.

the bit in capitals that i highlighted - thats exactly how i view it. its a training exercise, but one to learn how to tie someone up or block the path of their trajectory - whether that is a block, deflection, or strike - and disengage to launch your own attack


Chi sao means just as it says. Chi is your energy flow, sao is your hand. It is designed to do several things at once, but it is mostly for developing an ability to use your energies effeciently in altering an opponent's attack trajectory. The idea is to be able to do this with as little exertion as possible, and to be able to focus your energies more effeciently. It is not a fight form or a compitition, but a form or drill where 2 individuals can both practice their hand techniques in both attack and defense. Too many people get so deep into chi sao that it takes on a life of it's own. I was told that it becomes a childs game eventually. Where 2 people try to out chi sao one another. I think you stop learning and developing when that occurs.

THAT is what i feel chi sau is!

someone (by the name of Kevin i think) posted around 6 months ago giving some possibly different explanations of the names of hand movements in wck

he was riduculed, and i didnt understand why. his oppresors :p siad that the characters in chinese are set and have set meanings - but why cant the first people to characterise them have had it wrong (unlikely, but still possible), based on the pronounciation?

many believe chi sau to mean sticky hands - which is the way i learn it to be. but by definition i dont think we practice 'sticky' hands - i feel it is 'energy' training for bridge contact hands!

lets keep this going - its getting very interesting

[sanjuro_ronin]

When ANY drill becomes the focus over the core of a MA system, then the problems start.
Chi Sao is a drill, the core of WC is fighting, the drill should never be more important or prioritized over the fighting.

[t_niehoff]

i do agree that chi sau is not a 'be-all-and-end-all' but i have highlighted the part i think is the most intelligent rebuttal for continuation of chi sau i have seen you make yet. we can agree to differ, but it makes a good point. however - gwoh sau (to us) IS sparring. albeit whilst pulling the punches


Well, that depends on how you define sparring. If sparring to you is playing around, then yes, your gwoh sao is sparring. If sparring to you is fighting to develop fighting skills, then gwoh sao is not sparring.

No matter how you perform gwoh sao it can never develop fighting skills. Only fighting develops fighting skills. And fighting is facing a genuinely resisting opponent (which you don't in gwoh sao) who is using high levels of physical force to overcome you (which is not going on in gwoh sao). Since in gwoh sao you aren't facting a genuine resisitng opponent who is using high levels of physical force, you can't develop skill dealing with it.

This is why you can see WCK practitioners do all kinds of things in chi sao and gwoh sao but when they spar it all goes out the window.



to me that can be a good program, as someone on here later mentioned - chi sau could actually be looked upon as the more refined version of wing chun. i like the idea, IMHO the individual points of chi sau are the begining base of wck, striking whilst covering etc. but the advanced chi sao exchanges are, again IMHO the upper echelons of wck


There is no such thing as "advanced" chi sao -- that's like saying advanced bike-riding with the training wheels on. Chi sao and gwoh sao are for beginners to learn the contact skills. Once they learn those things (when you can perform them comfortably and consistently), it's time to take off the training wheels and leave chi sao.



i also am of the opinion that sparring isn't fighting, although i do feel that its among the the best training you can do (once a certain proficiency is reached) in the classroom


Consider what happens in a fight: you face an opponent who is going to genuinely resist you (by using both offense and defense) and is going to use high levels of physical force to do that trying to defeat you. That is the common denominator for any fight. So that's what you need to train for. You want to develop skill overcoming someone who is genuinely resisting you while using high levels of physical force to defeat you. The more you do THAT, the better you get at THAT, the more skill you develop at THAT. And you can only really learn and develop the ability to do THAT -- just as you do any physical skill --by doing THAT. You develop a skill by practicing the skill, by doing the skill. The skill we want is fighting skill.

WCK provides us a strategy (basic gameplan) and tools (tactics and techniques, movements, actions, etc.) to do THAT. Our skill in WCK is our ability to do THAT using the WCK strategy and tools.

We learn that strategy and tools through forms and drills. That is the curriculum of WCK. But the form and drills don't and can't teach us to USE the things in that curriculum. We only can learn and develop the ability to USE -- fight with -- those things by and through fighting. The problem is that many people just don't want to accept that fact. They want to believe that you can develop fighting skills by not fighting.

i

[couch]

When ANY drill becomes the focus over the core of a MA system, then the problems start.
Chi Sao is a drill, the core of WC is fighting, the drill should never be more important or prioritized over the fighting.

True that. Everyone eventually moves past Pak Da, so why wouldn't we move past Chi Sau? That isn't saying that I still don't practice my Pak Da, however. I just didn't stop at the 'Pak Da stage.'

I currently look at Chi Sau as the stage after Single-Arm Chi Sau and Luk Sau and the stage before Goh Sau. I view Goh Sau as Chi Sau that starts non-contact that has very high (And realistic as possible) energies. Then after Goh Sau comes sparring. This is my progression.

I also think that getting this person to the sparring stage shouldn't take years. It's only about 1-1.5 years of drills and conditioning until the boxing coach lets you fight in the ring/spar - so I view the Chinese version of boxing (Wing Chun) to be no different.

Best,
K

[LSWCTN1]

Well, that depends on how you define sparring. If sparring to you is playing around, then yes, your gwoh sao is sparring. If sparring to you is fighting to develop fighting skills, then gwoh sao is not sparring.

No matter how you perform gwoh sao it can never develop fighting skills. Only fighting develops fighting skills. And fighting is facing a genuinely resisting opponent (which you don't in gwoh sao) who is using high levels of physical force to overcome you (which is not going on in gwoh sao). Since in gwoh sao you aren't facting a genuine resisitng opponent who is using high levels of physical force, you can't develop skill dealing with it.

This is why you can see WCK practitioners do all kinds of things in chi sao and gwoh sao but when they spar it all goes out the window.



There is no such thing as "advanced" chi sao -- that's like saying advanced bike-riding with the training wheels on. Chi sao and gwoh sao are for beginners to learn the contact skills. Once they learn those things (when you can perform them comfortably and consistently), it's time to take off the training wheels and leave chi sao.



Consider what happens in a fight: you face an opponent who is going to genuinely resist you (by using both offense and defense) and is going to use high levels of physical force to do that trying to defeat you. That is the common denominator for any fight. So that's what you need to train for. You want to develop skill overcoming someone who is genuinely resisting you while using high levels of physical force to defeat you. The more you do THAT, the better you get at THAT, the more skill you develop at THAT. And you can only really learn and develop the ability to do THAT -- just as you do any physical skill --by doing THAT. You develop a skill by practicing the skill, by doing the skill. The skill we want is fighting skill.

WCK provides us a strategy (basic gameplan) and tools (tactics and techniques, movements, actions, etc.) to do THAT. Our skill in WCK is our ability to do THAT using the WCK strategy and tools.

We learn that strategy and tools through forms and drills. That is the curriculum of WCK. But the form and drills don't and can't teach us to USE the things in that curriculum. We only can learn and develop the ability to USE -- fight with -- those things by and through fighting. The problem is that many people just don't want to accept that fact. They want to believe that you can develop fighting skills by not fighting.

i

i do understand your argument, both above, and on the subject in general

i take it, by your analogy, once you start sparring in your wing chun training you no longer need to use any of the 'training wheels'... weapons practise, dummy practise, chi sau, gwoh sau, lap sau, forms etc etc?

also, by your analogy, if you can beat your SiFu in sparring/fighting (am i right in saying Robert Chu?) then he no longer has anything to teach you, because you have completed all the 'training wheel' sections before sparring? that is the part i dont buy

all the best

David

PS - our gwoh sau is sparring - just without full contact headshots

[sanjuro_ronin]

True that. Everyone eventually moves past Pak Da, so why wouldn't we move past Chi Sau? That isn't saying that I still don't practice my Pak Da, however. I just didn't stop at the 'Pak Da stage.'

I currently look at Chi Sau as the stage after Single-Arm Chi Sau and Luk Sau and the stage before Goh Sau. I view Goh Sau as Chi Sau that starts non-contact that has very high (And realistic as possible) energies. Then after Goh Sau comes sparring. This is my progression.

I also think that getting this person to the sparring stage shouldn't take years. It's only about 1-1.5 years of drills and conditioning until the boxing coach lets you fight in the ring/spar - so I view the Chinese version of boxing (Wing Chun) to be no different.

Best,
K
I think that sparring should be introduced sooner rather than later, for a variety of reasons.
First it tends to crystalize that a MA is about fighting.
Second, it makes one understand the stimuli of fighting when we need to the most, at the beginning.
Third, when you start doing chi sao or any of the other drills, you already have the "understanding" ( to whatever degree you are able to grasp it) that a fight is NOT a drill and a drill is not a fight and as such, you will not fall into any delusions.
Forth, by starting a person off in fighting (sparring) right from the get go ( of course I don't mean full contact) the tools they wil be introduced to right from the beginning, which are the core of any system, will be introduced "under fire", and as such they will be as directly applicable to fighting as they can be at that stage.

[couch]

I think that sparring should be introduced sooner rather than later, for a variety of reasons.
First it tends to crystalize that a MA is about fighting.
Second, it makes one understand the stimuli of fighting when we need to the most, at the beginning.
Third, when you start doing chi sao or any of the other drills, you already have the "understanding" ( to whatever degree you are able to grasp it) that a fight is NOT a drill and a drill is not a fight and as such, you will not fall into any delusions.
Forth, by starting a person off in fighting (sparring) right from the get go ( of course I don't mean full contact) the tools they wil be introduced to right from the beginning, which are the core of any system, will be introduced "under fire", and as such they will be as directly applicable to fighting as they can be at that stage.

I totally get (and agree) with where you're going with this. However, if someone doesn't have any WCK tools, or perhaps very limited tools (1-3 months), how are they to cope? We all see WC differently to varying degrees. Personally, I think I would need more time to reprogram that person to let their WC come out naturally.

(And you hit the head on the nail about helping people clear up any delusions about fantasy Kung-Fu).

[sanjuro_ronin]

I totally get (and agree) with where you're going with this. However, if someone doesn't have any WCK tools, or perhaps very limited tools (1-3 months), how are they to cope? We all see WC differently to varying degrees. Personally, I think I would need more time to reprogram that person to let their WC come out naturally.

Baptisim of fire baby !!

BOO YAHH !!!
:D

On a serious note, I would hold off on hard contact sparring for maybe 3 months (depending on attendance and progression), but sparring, as soon as they are able and willing to.

[t_niehoff]

i do understand your argument, both above, and on the subject in general

i take it, by your analogy, once you start sparring in your wing chun training you no longer need to use any of the 'training wheels'... weapons practise, dummy practise, chi sau, gwoh sau, lap sau, forms etc etc?


You need to keep the objective in mind: developing your ability to fight with your WCK. That's what skill in WCK is.

The curriculum of WCK won't develop fighting skills. Only fighting (facing a genuinely resisiting opponent who is using high levels of phycical force against you) develops fighting skills. (And that includes "alive" drills where you take snippets of fighting and repeatedly practice those situations under realistic conditions). The curriculum teaches you the things you will need to fight with WCK. But the curriculum can't teach you how to fight with those things or develop them to a fighting level.

The dummy is the "heavy bag" of WCK. Not in the sense that you just pound it but that it is a training device to work on certain, specific contact elements.



also, by your analogy, if you can beat your SiFu in sparring/fighting (am i right in saying Robert Chu?) then he no longer has anything to teach you, because you have completed all the 'training wheel' sections before sparring? that is the part i dont buy


Your WCK sifu can't teach you to fight. He can teach you the currciulum of WCK. If he has certain skills, he can teach you those skills. But he can't teach you to fight, to apply your WCK. Only your opponent's can teach you that. Robert's motto is "let application -- fighting -- be your sifu".



PS - our gwoh sau is sparring - just without full contact headshots

No, it's not. And that's because your partners are doing gwoh sao when you are doing gwoh sao -- in other words, they are not genuinely resisting you, i.e., behaving as someone is who is really fighting you. You're both playing by artificial WCK rules. An easy way to see this is to get a nonWCK fighter, begin in a gwoh sao position, and then fight. You'll see that it looks and feels nothing like gwoh sao. Gwoh sao is an artificial, unrealistic exercise. It is not fighting.

[Vajramusti]

Some commentary-I see many differences- some similarities and many differences- in part due to how language is used and the terminologies. I don't try to impose my terminology -just express
some considered views.

Lee= the "chi" in chi sao is different from the "chi" as in chi gung.

On "duende"'s post- I have no comment because I don't know HFY terminology.

On sparring- wc folks can spar too- but if they don't have much chi sao experience they will miss
using wing chun skills. They just have to get used to using whatever equipment being used.When you have a good wing chun framework you adjust to circumstances and conditions.

Unlike Victor I dont think that wing chun is limited by range- an engagement is an engagement- you dont have to switch cars and engines...learning wing chun footwork does not mean that you can't walk or run or do what is necessary in an engagement.

Wing chun is not robotic---in the development stage in training lots of key skills are learned- if you learn them well- you develop the wing chun conceptions of intercepting if needed,attacking whenever possible, redirecting. moving, positioning, distance management, two handedness, line orientaiton, sensing the vectors and trajectories of incoming forces irrespective of the style that is being faced-Hendrik's post showed some insights on that apart from language issues that people may see.. Wing chun doesn't fight for you. Wing chun when well done .superbly trains the person- it's upto the
person to do what is best at any given moment.Issue is -can you do it and do you have the guts to do it.

I have no specific comment on TN's post.

Joy Chaudhuri

[Tom Kagan]

It's not 'sticky hands'. It's STICKING HANDS.

Sticky: adjective

having the property of adhering, as glue; adhesive.
covered with adhesive or viscid matter: sticky hands.
...


Sticking: verb (used with object) - to stick:

piercing or puncturing with something pointed
killing by this means: to stick a pig.
thrusting (something pointed) in, into, through, etc.
...


A profound difference.


"I don't know much English. This word, I happen to know." -- Moy Yat

[t_niehoff]

My understanding of the chinese character "chi" as used in "chi sao" is that it pertains to the characteristic of adhering -- like two pieces of rice "stuck" together.

[Hendrik]

that i believe you are saying the tan sau must be issued a certain way (to create the 'force vectors')

Nope. that is not what I said.






you go on to say its not about the tan sau being 'this' way,

but about the force it issues


it is not the fix shape of the Tan sau but the needed 3 D force vectors trajectory which is generated count.




BTW. There is a serious reason of why I am using the dyanamic 4 D force vectors trajectory space for WCK. We need that level of "language" for detail communication. reading your post, you still dont understand what I am presenting eventhough you thought it is the same with what you know.

with the 4 D force vectors space one is describing the Jin and Jin is not a single direction matter but a six directional matter.

and Chi Sau is for testing the handling of six directional force vectors; it is beyond shape and different part of limp.

[Hendrik]

For those who know chinese and curious where the heck I got into these 4 D stuffs

The following is a good reference which speaking in our modern language about the ancient TCMA.



“神动得自有象外，意存妙在无念中。”

这是王芗斋先生的诗文，它对于健身和技击的练习都有指导意义。

需将自己的意念与天空、大气、宇宙相呼应，而且这种呼应是从四维空间得到的。“有象”是三维空间。“有象外 ”是四维空间。

[AdrianK]

Best way to explain a point is to post it in a language barely anyone reading here, understands.

Next time someone challenges me in a discussion, I'm just going to spout some chinese, and then tell them that THAT is why my **** works. :D

[Hendrik]

Best way to explain a point is to post it in a language barely anyone reading here, understands.

Next time someone challenges me in a discussion, I'm just going to spout some chinese, and then tell them that THAT is why my **** works. :D


if you dont understand and dont know how to ask properly then that is your **** business not others. :D

[AdrianK]

If you want people to understand and discuss with you then you should put it in a language that people understand :D

It'd be different if you were writing an article, but this is a discussion board, c'mon now.

[Hendrik]

If you want people to understand and discuss with you then you should put it in a language that people understand :D

It'd be different if you were writing an article, but this is a discussion board, c'mon now.

if you notice, I do said "For those who know chinese "

So those who knows chinese can trace and track where it is from....etc.

as for English translation, put it this way, not even every chinese can understand this type of language.

[LSWCTN1]

Nope. that is not what I said.

it is not the fix shape of the Tan sau but the needed 3 D force vectors trajectory which is generated count.

BTW. There is a serious reason of why I am using the dyanamic 4 D force vectors trajectory space for WCK. We need that level of "language" for detail communication. reading your post, you still dont understand what I am presenting eventhough you thought it is the same with what you know.

with the 4 D force vectors space one is describing the Jin and Jin is not a single direction matter but a six directional matter.

and Chi Sau is for testing the handling of six directional force vectors; it is beyond shape and different part of limp.

ok, in all honesty i am not au fait with 'jin' as i see it described

however i know from hands on experience that certain shapes must, IMHO, be held in the correct manner to have the desired effect. the effect created by holding it in another shape is profoundly different

how about the other questions i asked previously? is it about taking your bridges through your opponents bridges for you?

also, why would it be known as 'sticky' hands to you? do you deliberatly stick? if so can i ask why?

regards

David

[LSWCTN1]

It's not 'sticky hands'. It's STICKING HANDS.

Sticky: adjective

having the property of adhering, as glue; adhesive.
covered with adhesive or viscid matter: sticky hands.
...


Sticking: verb (used with object) - to stick:

piercing or puncturing with something pointed
killing by this means: to stick a pig.
thrusting (something pointed) in, into, through, etc.
...


A profound difference.


"I don't know much English. This word, I happen to know." -- Moy Yat


excellent answer, that would pretty much answer my question, but i dont want the thread closed because it has raised so many interesting points!

[LSWCTN1]

You need to keep the objective in mind: developing your ability to fight with your WCK. That's what skill in WCK is.

The curriculum of WCK won't develop fighting skills. Only fighting (facing a genuinely resisiting opponent who is using high levels of phycical force against you) develops fighting skills. (And that includes "alive" drills where you take snippets of fighting and repeatedly practice those situations under realistic conditions). The curriculum teaches you the things you will need to fight with WCK. But the curriculum can't teach you how to fight with those things or develop them to a fighting level.

The dummy is the "heavy bag" of WCK. Not in the sense that you just pound it but that it is a training device to work on certain, specific contact elements.



Your WCK sifu can't teach you to fight. He can teach you the currciulum of WCK. If he has certain skills, he can teach you those skills. But he can't teach you to fight, to apply your WCK. Only your opponent's can teach you that. Robert's motto is "let application -- fighting -- be your sifu".



No, it's not. And that's because your partners are doing gwoh sao when you are doing gwoh sao -- in other words, they are not genuinely resisting you, i.e., behaving as someone is who is really fighting you. You're both playing by artificial WCK rules. An easy way to see this is to get a nonWCK fighter, begin in a gwoh sao position, and then fight. You'll see that it looks and feels nothing like gwoh sao. Gwoh sao is an artificial, unrealistic exercise. It is not fighting.

to me wck is a set of principles and actions to be used in combat. your SiFu will teach you the ways to use and not to use these in a setting outside full contact sparring... usually :D.

you say gwoh sau doesnt look like a real fight. of course it doesnt. it looks like a real fight between two wck practitioners. two practitioners that have been taught to adhere to wck principles of economy of motion and taking the shortest path, among other things.

therefore you arent going to see huge hooks or high kicks when you practice gwoh sau - because they dont adhere to wck principles. as someone mentioned earlier - for wck practitioners, gwoh sau means free hands. doing as you please

why would you kick someone in the head, for example, if you have never practised it in a trained environment, and have been specifically taught to avoid it?

it IS sparring, not sparring in a boxing or kickboxing sense. but it is sparring.

and i dont know what happens when you practice gwoh sau, but i think many people on here will agree that when they practice it - it is full of intent

[Pacman]

in chinese the 'chi' of chi sau means to stick.

not sticking. totally wrong

the point is to stick to the other person

[Mr Punch]

in chinese the 'chi' of chi sau means to stick.

not sticking. totally wrong:D :D :D This is hilarious... farcical even! Perhaps your Chinese is better than your English? Would you like to explain the difference between the full infinitive in English and the present participle? And then tell us maybe how these are different in Chinese, a language which has neither? :D

Otherwise, this is a great discussion, but let's keep the pointless semantics out of it. Semantics has value but between two languages it then becomes a plainly linguistic argument and pointless.

[LSWCTN1]

:D :D :D This is hilarious... farcical even! Perhaps your Chinese is better than your English? Would you like to explain the difference between the full infinitive in English and the present participle? And then tell us maybe how these are different in Chinese, a language which has neither? :D

Otherwise, this is a great discussion, but let's keep the pointless semantics out of it. Semantics has value but between two languages it then becomes a plainly linguistic argument and pointless.

when Tom Kagan brought this up, i was satisfied (almost) that i had the answer to my initial question

now I'm not :( cheers Mr Punch :D

I guess that, like the exercise itself, the semantics of it mean different things to different people!

who here deliberately sticks (as in 'sticky') to their training partner? i know Pan Nams wck does - as their chi sau has a sole purpose of uprooting and snatching structure (as i understand it)

[Mr Punch]

Sticking: verb (used with object) - to stick:

piercing or puncturing with something pointed
killing by this means: to stick a pig.
thrusting (something pointed) in, into, through, etc.
...


A profound difference.


"I don't know much English. This word, I happen to know." -- Moy YatInteresting: I'd only ever heard of the 'adhering' definition before... is it 黐?

[CFT]

My poor attempt at translating Hendrik's Chinese post.
Not easy to translate the Chinese philosophical terms - I don't have the background in either Chinese or Western disciplines. I think the term "beyond image" must allude to the "mere physical".

“神動得自有象外，意存妙在無念中。”
Movement of “Shen” (Spirit) comes from “beyond image” (“有象外”). The wonder of “Yi” (Intent) comes from “Wu Nian” (Mou Nim - No thought).

這是王薌齋先生的詩文，它對於健身和技擊的練習都有指導意義。
This is the prose of Mr. Wang Xiangzhai. These words are guidance for the training of fitness and striking skills.

需將自己的意念與天空、大氣、宇宙相呼應，而且這種呼應是從四維空間得到的。“有象”是三維空 間。“有象外 ”是四維空間。
One’s thoughts (intent) must resonate with the sky(?), atmosphere and universe. This resonance is achieved in 4-dimensional space. “With image” (“有象”) is 3-dimensional space, “Beyond image” (“有象外”) is 4-dimensional space.

[CFT]

in chinese the 'chi' of chi sau means to stick.

not sticking. totally wrong

the point is to stick to the other personCorrect, the Chinese character is the one for "adhering" as Mr. Punch points out.

Sticking - as to pierce/puncture might best be: 刺
http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-can/search.php?q=%A8%EB

However, one can't really infer the intent of chi sau from just the term "chi sau" even in the original Chinese characters.

[-木叶-]

黐 - chi
[1] stick sth to/on/together, especially using a sticky substance such as glue
[2] stick with; stay close to

Practicing chi sao is to practice sticking to the opponent's arms as much as you can. This is because once the opponent's hand leaves (no longer sticks) to your hand/arm, his arm is free to strike, and becomes unpredictable.
This is also why, when training on the wooden dummy, mook yan jong, sifu will
ask you to also "chi jong", as in sticking to the wooden arms as much as possible.

I tend to disagree that chisao is only a small part of training, in fact it is a very integral and important part of wing chun training. People will argue that in real
fighting situations, it is hard to really apply chi sao techniques.

However, one has to apply what is learnt into the situation and not follow like a wooden block, move for move. I believe once this can be done, wing chun will be applied in a deadly way.

A person who chisao/gongsao (Gongsao here also means sparring with opponents from another discipline) more often than another who does less, will be more effective in combat. A person who does chisao, will be more effective than another who doesn't know MA.

[CFT]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

[-木叶-]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

If you tend to do "arm chasing", it will give rise to risk of not defending your
centerline, and be exposed to attack. If the opponent's arms leaves, one of
the ways to get it back is always, man sao, if you man sao, the opponent
will leave with no choice and block. Therefore if you receive well, once
again, it will be sticking again.

[t_niehoff]

to me wck is a set of principles and actions to be used in combat. your SiFu will teach you the ways to use and not to use these in a setting outside full contact sparring... usually :D.


WCK is a skill -- fighting skill -- which involves many different skills working together. A skill is your ability to consistently get some desired result with max certainty and min time/effort.

There are many "problems" with the whole notion of WCK principles. for a starter, they are ideas -- not skills. You don't fight with principles, you fight with skills. So how can you tell if your "principles" are working? You can't; you can only tell if your skills are working. It also brings up the next question of WHOSE ideas? Because a person's "understanding" of WCK, including its principles, will depend on their skill level, their ability to USE (fight with) their WCK.

Also, skill in fighting, regardless of your method, doesn't come from simply ssparring with yoru sifu. It comes from doing lots of fighting, and with COMPETENT fighters. Your skill level will be directly proportional to the amount of time you spend sparring with competent fighters. I'd say that most WCK sifu aren't competent fighters since most haven't put in the hundreds of hours of sparring with GOOD fighters that it takes to develop basic level competence.

So if someone who hasn't put inhundreds of hours of sparring with competent fighters is telling you how to do something, it begs the question: how does he know? If he can't do it, and do it against a competent fighter, then what makes you think he's right or knows what he is talking about?



you say gwoh sau doesnt look like a real fight. of course it doesnt. it looks like a real fight between two wck practitioners. two practitioners that have been taught to adhere to wck principles of economy of motion and taking the shortest path, among other things.


No, it doesn't look likea fight between two WCK practitioners, it looks like free flowing chi sao between two WCK practitioners. If you think it lookslike fighting, then you haven't spent time fighting.



therefore you arent going to see huge hooks or high kicks when you practice gwoh sau - because they dont adhere to wck principles. as someone mentioned earlier - for wck practitioners, gwoh sau means free hands. doing as you please

why would you kick someone in the head, for example, if you have never practised it in a trained environment, and have been specifically taught to avoid it?

it IS sparring, not sparring in a boxing or kickboxing sense. but it is sparring.


It's not sparring/fighting since neither of you are genuinely resisting with high levels of physical force. As you yourself said, you are "adhering" to YOUR understanding of WCK "principles". And your partner is doing the same. What this means is that you are doing a cooperative drill, essentially adhering to artificial rules and making it unrealistic (not like a fight). Fighting is not chi sao. Chi sao, gwoh sao won't develop fighting skills.



and i dont know what happens when you practice gwoh sau, but i think many people on here will agree that when they practice it - it is full of intent

That's like saying if we practice "sparring" but restrict ourselves to standing on one leg but have "intent" then it is like fighitng. No, it's not. It's unrealistic. No one is ever going to fight like that. Ever. No one is ever going to fight you like gwoh sao. Ever. There are "rules" of gwoh sao that both sides must stick to in order for it to remain gwoh sao -- like sticking. In fighting, your opponent is never going to try and remain "sticking" with you, not even a WCK fighter unless he is a complete scrub. No one is going to stay at that range unless he is a complete scrub. Nor does ghow sao permit you to face the kinds of things that will really happen in a fight when you make contact. Chi sao/gwoh sao isn't ANYTHING like a fight.

[t_niehoff]

How do you avoid arm chasing?

As I see it, chi sao is a platform/exercise to learn certain contact skills. As they are contact skills, we need to be in contact to practice them -- hence "sticking", i.e., remaining attached to an opponent.

The objective of those contact skills isn't simply to remain attached but to learn how to control and set up control of our opponent. We are not, therefore, chasing the hands but chasing (seeking) control (not just openings to hit).

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lets make it clear that, in a fight, someone is trying to rip your face off and use it as a napkin, to one degree or another, and he does that will all the available tools at his disposal ( rules take into account, if applicable), unless your Chi Sao is like that, well, its then a drill, nothing more, nothing less.

[LSWCTN1]

黐 - chi
[1] stick sth to/on/together, especially using a sticky substance such as glue
[2] stick with; stay close to

Practicing chi sao is to practice sticking to the opponent's arms as much as you can. This is because once the opponent's hand leaves (no longer sticks) to your hand/arm, his arm is free to strike, and becomes unpredictable.
This is also why, when training on the wooden dummy, mook yan jong, sifu will
ask you to also "chi jong", as in sticking to the wooden arms as much as possible.

I tend to disagree that chisao is only a small part of training, in fact it is a very integral and important part of wing chun training. People will argue that in real
fighting situations, it is hard to really apply chi sao techniques.

However, one has to apply what is learnt into the situation and not follow like a wooden block, move for move. I believe once this can be done, wing chun will be applied in a deadly way.

A person who chisao/gongsao (Gongsao here also means sparring with opponents from another discipline) more often than another who does less, will be more effective in combat. A person who does chisao, will be more effective than another who doesn't know MA.

with respect, as i understand it that is incorrect.

sticking to the dummy is about controlling your opponents bridge - like chum kiu. that is not, as i understand it, the same as in chi sau. although i believe it should be - but not in the way that you seem to be expressing :confused:

i agree that once his arm has left yours he is free to strike, but is that not the 'upon loss of contact rush forward'?

[LSWCTN1]

As I see it, chi sao is a platform/exercise to learn certain contact skills. As they are contact skills, we need to be in contact to practice them -- hence "sticking", i.e., remaining attached to an opponent.

The objective of those contact skills isn't simply to remain attached but to learn how to control and set up control of our opponent. We are not, therefore, chasing the hands but chasing (seeking) control (not just openings to hit).

of course, this is what i mean....

but you dont have an opening to hit (safely) without controlling their bridges

[t_niehoff]

of course, this is what i mean....

but you dont have an opening to hit (safely) without controlling their bridges

As I see it, striking isn't the objective of chi sao. The objective of chi sao is to learn certain contact skills that will permit you to control your opponent. Not simply bridge control. Striking is one of those contact skills. Striking used to set up, get or maintain control.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Nothing controls a person better than being knocked out.
:D

[t_niehoff]

Nothing controls a person better than being knocked out.
:D

Sure. And that raises two questions: how do you get to that point? and can you do it?

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sure. And that raises two questions: how do you get to that point? and can you do it?

The word CAR answers both questions.
:p

[LSWCTN1]

well I'm off to Egypt now for a week, so i hope to see this thread flourishing on my return! :D

[-木叶-]

with respect, as i understand it that is incorrect.

sticking to the dummy is about controlling your opponents bridge - like chum kiu. that is not, as i understand it, the same as in chi sau. although i believe it should be - but not in the way that you seem to be expressing :confused:

i agree that once his arm has left yours he is free to strike, but is that not the 'upon loss of contact rush forward'?

Thanks for your correction, your explanation makes it more clear.

Yes you are also correct that "upon loss of contact rush forward" (甩手直冲).
But i was thinking along the lines of losing stickiness then trying to gain it back when losing it completely.

Therefore i now understand CFT question, from my little understanding, to avoid this, is to adhere to wing chun principles of facing the enemy along the centreline.
The opponent may be using fancy arm movements and using the side body to
face me, but as long as i face him along the centreline and also observing his centreline, i can apply 来留去送，甩手直冲 on the opponent.

Please correct me if i am wrong.

[CFT]

Yes, I asked the question because I was somewhat taken aback by your assertion:


Practicing chi sao is to practice sticking to the opponent's arms as much as you can. This is because once the opponent's hand leaves (no longer sticks) to your hand/arm, his arm is free to strike, and becomes unpredictable.

I don't see "chi sau" as trying to cling to limbs. I see it as training responses to situations where there is limb (bridge) contact - it can be a block or a grab by your opponent. Surely the response is not just "to stick" - for what purpose? Stick to control and to hit. But don't blindly follow the limbs in an effort to stick.

[-木叶-]

Yes, I asked the question because I was somewhat taken aback by your assertion:

I don't see "chi sau" as trying to cling to limbs. I see it as training responses to situations where there is limb (bridge) contact - it can be a block or a grab by your opponent. Surely the response is not just "to stick" - for what purpose? Stick to control and to hit. But don't blindly follow the limbs in an effort to stick.

Yes you are correct, i only talked about a small part of what chi sau's purpose it, definitely it is not just an exercise to just cling to arms. It is a very good exercise where both parties are thinking whether to cling? to block? to attack? to shift stance? make use of opponent's strength? and so on.

I was too focused on explaining the word "chi", so much so i only talk about a small part of it.

Thanks for your advice and replies.

[Vajramusti]

Yes, I asked the question because I was somewhat taken aback by your assertion:



I don't see "chi sau" as trying to cling to limbs. I see it as training responses to situations where there is limb (bridge) contact - it can be a block or a grab by your opponent. Surely the response is not just "to stick" - for what purpose? Stick to control and to hit. But don't blindly follow the limbs in an effort to stick.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What to do with the slightest contact- not for becoming "attached" to sticking...among other things...how to control upon contact..the devil is in the details, again.

joy chaudhuri

[Hendrik]

My poor attempt at translating Hendrik's Chinese post.
Not easy to translate the Chinese philosophical terms - I don't have the background in either Chinese or Western disciplines. I think the term "beyond image" must allude to the "mere physical".

“神動得自有象外，意存妙在無念中。”
Movement of “Shen” (Spirit) comes from “beyond image” (“有象外”). The wonder of “Yi” (Intent) comes from “Wu Nian” (Mou Nim - No thought).

這是王薌齋先生的詩文，它對於健身和技擊的練習都有指導意義。
This is the prose of Mr. Wang Xiangzhai. These words are guidance for the training of fitness and striking skills.

需將自己的意念與天空、大氣、宇宙相呼應，而且這種呼應是從四維空間得到的。“有象”是三維空 間。“有象外 ”是四維空間。
One’s thoughts (intent) must resonate with the sky(?), atmosphere and universe. This resonance is achieved in 4-dimensional space. “With image” (“有象”) is 3-dimensional space, “Beyond image” (“有象外”) is 4-dimensional space.



Thanks!

Good Job!

[Ultimatewingchun]

***WANT to comment of some of this....first there was this post by LSWWCTN1:

Originally Posted by LSWCTN1
"My instructor 'smothers' you, constantly preventing you from attacking him when practising gwoh sau. the idea we learn is to close down all the options, which of course includes taking the space etc."

***FOLLOWED by this from Pacman:


this is exactly why it is called chi sau or sticky hands. one of the major concepts of chi sau is to smother your opponent. you can imagine your opponent like a fan and your hands are like a wet towel over that fan.

i see lots of sticky hand demos where the people are not maintaining contact. when you do this, you stop doing sticky hands and you are just throwing punches and blocks at a close range.

people who say sticky hand training is not realistic are right. you will rarely start a fight in a rolling hands position. on top of that your opponent is not necessarily going to stand there with you. however, those who say sticky hands is useless are wrong.

the main reason why people think sticky hands is useless (aside from those who do it incorrectly) is that they (as a result of their respective schools) start training sticky hands immediately and only do sticky hands.

you need to learn how to fight from a long range first, as most fights start this way. then you need to learn how to apply sticky hands in a setting where you arent just doing a drill with your sihing

its like tai chi people doing push hands for 10 years and never learning how to actually apply it. then they come out thinking tai chi is only for health with no combat applications

***LOTS Of good stuff here. Excellent points, Pacman. Waaaaay too many schools doing it the way you outlined. Been teaching for 25 years now, and I realized quite a long time ago that it is of the utmost importance to teach people how to first fight from long range - and then start honing not only their chi sao skills – but how to take what they learn in chi sao and put it into the fighting/sparring setting.

For example, I’m thinking of one student in particular who started training with me about 15 months ago. This person began learning SLT right from day one, to be sure, along with some basic footwork/stances and some rudimentary short range wing chun vertical fist punching and kicking drills…along with a basic pak sao/pak da exercise with a partner.

But that was it.

I didn’t even begin teaching this person dan chi sao (and then shortly thereafter the rudimentary basics of double arm chi sao, ie.- just rolling and switching)…until about maybe 3-4 months ago.

Because this person has spent lots of time training how to punch, kick and move from long range FIRST…and how to defend (using things like pak, bong, lop, garn, etc.) against straight punches, round punches, front kicks, and roundhouse kicks that come from long range (ie.- not from a “contact” position).


So the training is mostly from the “outside”…to the “inside”.

[Pacman]

hi victor

why did you choose to teach SLT to him first?

the problem i have with the typical HK style WC curriculum is SLT and chi sau right away.

when you teach SLT to a person...do you teach them the applications? if you don't, they will never figure out all the applications themselves. they moves are very subtle with a lot of depth into each one.

again its like tai chi movements. people watching tai chi movements will never figure out the applications of those movements.

this is opposed to hard styles like lets karate where its blatantly obvious what the meaning is behind the moves in the kata

so many students learn SLT immediately and its basically a waste of time because they cant apply anything they 'learned'


***WANT to comment of some of this....first there was this post by LSWWCTN1:

Originally Posted by LSWCTN1
"My instructor 'smothers' you, constantly preventing you from attacking him when practising gwoh sau. the idea we learn is to close down all the options, which of course includes taking the space etc."

***FOLLOWED by this from Pacman:



***LOTS Of good stuff here. Excellent points, Pacman. Waaaaay too many schools doing it the way you outlined. Been teaching for 25 years now, and I realized quite a long time ago that it is of the utmost importance to teach people how to first fight from long range - and then start honing not only their chi sao skills – but how to take what they learn in chi sao and put it into the fighting/sparring setting.

For example, I’m thinking of one student in particular who started training with me about 15 months ago. This person began learning SLT right from day one, to be sure, along with some basic footwork/stances and some rudimentary short range wing chun vertical fist punching and kicking drills…along with a basic pak sao/pak da exercise with a partner.

But that was it.

I didn’t even begin teaching this person dan chi sao (and then shortly thereafter the rudimentary basics of double arm chi sao, ie.- just rolling and switching)…until about maybe 3-4 months ago.

Because this person has spent lots of time training how to punch, kick and move from long range FIRST…and how to defend (using things like pak, bong, lop, garn, etc.) against straight punches, round punches, front kicks, and roundhouse kicks that come from long range (ie.- not from a “contact” position).


So the training is mostly from the “outside”…to the “inside”.

[Pacman]

Yes, I asked the question because I was somewhat taken aback by your assertion:



I don't see "chi sau" as trying to cling to limbs. I see it as training responses to situations where there is limb (bridge) contact - it can be a block or a grab by your opponent. Surely the response is not just "to stick" - for what purpose? Stick to control and to hit. But don't blindly follow the limbs in an effort to stick.

the purpose is to stick or cling to his limbs. the purpose of this sticking is to control your opponent by restricting his ability to attack or defend while you attack him

ultimately the a WC person should be able to close in from the outside and to stick to his opponent

when you say 'dont blindly follow the limbs...' i agree. you shoudnt ever do anything without regard for the consequences, but i will say that the purpose is to stick and to remain stuck.

[Yoshiyahu]

The Wing Chun system is about establishing a bridge so you can control your opponent and attack with out being hit. With in my lineage we practice loose hand techniques or free hand techniques called San Shou. For instance there is random or freestlye San Shou which I do mostly. An there are set patterns similiar to defense drills. Standing in Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma and forward advancing stance you practice defending against various attacks. Guards out as your partner fires attacks. Doing it free stlye he throws attacks at you from different angles and vectors an you try your best to defend and deflect or intercept. As time goes on power and speed should progress to the point where you are blocking real punches being fired at your face and body. Not merely WC punches but all styles such as boxing, choy li fut and karate strikes along with any other arts your partner crosstrained or studied.

When doing San Shou as a drilling routine you defend against one attack at a time. Like defending against a boxer's hook from different angles for like five minutes or more then an upper cut for five minutes or more then jab and then a right and left cross, then hammer punch, then front kick then side kick etc. At first your partners' attacks should be slow and light. An as you succeed in deflecting, force should increase. Also time limit can increase too especially if your training independantly outside of class.

San Shou freestlye:
Every time I throw a punch at you a bridge is made. You deflect or intercept my attack an there we have a bridge. You go on to next bridge when you intercept my next attack. So we have changing bridges. Also San Shou should be flowing not chopping. You should flow from one attack to another and your partner should intercept fluidly. San Shou trains your eyes and reflexes and also trains your bridging techniques along with some slight conditioning of the your arms.

Chi Sau
This is a drill where you start off bridging both hands. Now there are drilling set patterns. I prefer freestyle since in a fight you need to be able to defend against what you don't know. Anyway the purpose is to feel your opponent. Now when you are sticky and following his motion you can feel or begin to feel his intent. Also you can learn how to conceal or feint your intent with Chi Sao. When you are connected If I move my arm up you feel it. If I loose contact you rush to regain contact or strike with in my gates when free. When you feel me change you follow and allow me to lead you to the hits. San Shou and Chi Sau are very important. The isolate idiviual skills. I personally thing that Chi Sau and San Shou should be started at the beginning. With Chi sau you are also training your Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma. You are learning how to generate power in a short range. An your learning how to turn off short range power as well. With San shou you learn how to turn off both long range and short range energies. With Chi Sau you develop skill in deflecting, intercepting, gaining entry, trapping, striking holes and using your structure in the clinch. Not all fights in up there in the clinch. But training Chi Sau will prepare you for if your enemy ends up tangled up with you. So utilize Chi Sau for clinch training. Learn how to feel your enemies intent when your close. Most long range fighters when they get to elbow and shoulder range they have no idea how to defend or attack. They simply have to push off one another an be first to through a round house kick. Chi sau is said to develop listening Ging. An you won't realize you have until you spar and end up in a clinch. WC with out Chi Sao is like boxing with out shadow boxing. Chi Sau is a little more than Shadow Boxing however...

Anyway Lets cover sparring. Personally I believe your WC training should start with San Shou, Chi Sau and Sparring. Form,San Sik and Steps and punches and other things can be practice by yourself at home. But when you have a training partner. I suggest you work on drills, Sparring and Chi Sau. You should be learning basic self defense techniques such as how to use the San Sik and Forms but you should also practice using them in a freestyle environment...
Sparring covers both light sparring and hard sparring

Light sparring: Wear a cup and mouth piece. Fist strikes to body and palm strikes to the face. One does not use full power to face however. The idea of light sparring is to work on your technique. There are ways to work on hitting fast and lighting up the power upon impact. I practice this but I won't share it right now. Friendly sparring or light contact sparring is really useful when sparring a someone less skilled, younger(your son or child) and women. Also it is something you do anytime if you like. It allows you to share techniques and begin to see how it works. Take techniques from the forms and apply them. Light sparring helps to develop your accuracy, timing, speed, endurance, chi, flow and other skills. Light sparring should be atleast an hour to 4 hours on weekends. Sparring allows you to apply techniques both long range and short range. Both at a long bridge and clinch. So with sparring you move from one technique to other in contious flowing motion.

Heavy sparring: Wear a cup,mouth piece, gloves and/or headgear with face shield. Heavy sparring is the closet thing to actual fighting. Although it is not real fighting because you do not do eye gouges or break legs and arms you are still punching hard and kicking hard. Also incorporate throws and take downs along with your strikes. Now of course in a real fight you stomp your opponent when down. But by incorporating throws and take downs you atleast get some training. With heavy sparring you build up endurance and stamina. You test your skill with struggling fighting opponent. You truly learn how to deflect and intercept strong force and strength under fire. Your sparring should flow continously and shouldn't become choppy. You should attempt to continous attack. A good session would be 20 minutes but aim for an hour. You can work on short power in close and defend and attacking with long range attacks. This will engrain in you what is going on in actual fighting and prepare you to utilize your force, ging, strenght, lik, chi in the most advantageous way.


Last Weekend:
My personal experience. The other day at Tai Chi class. This Six foot three guy did a little light sparring. The reason it was light was because he didn't make full contact. But anyway he tried to throw a round house which I stop hit. most of kicks I either evaded or stop kick before they got out the Door. He threw some punches that I deflected with minimum force. Eventually he clinched. When he clinched I began to roll his hands down to strike and move out posistion. He would often stick and move. Moving in and out posistion. This where my San Shou training comes in. And when he clinched I began to feel his next movement so from there I jammed his attacks and begin to trap his arms. Then I hit him with a palm strike to kidney and moved to his flank. He attempted to rush in I deflected his punch and front kick his abdomen. So with the little short exchange I had experience in both ranges. Outside and Inside. Which allows you to have muscle memory and subconscious memory of how to defend instinctlively.

So in conclusion all parts of partner training are important...

1.San Shou
2.Free sparring
3.Chi Sau
4.Drills (Set Pattern/Routine)

Doing Forms and Drills:
As for the training wheels parable. Well what is Training anyway? What are you doing when you practice Wing Chun but training? The Wing Chun system is Training you how to fight. Practicing your art is a training wheel. So all aspects of the Wing Chun are just training wheels. That even includes sparring. Which prepares you for real fighting. In a real fight you don't have an opponent wearing gloves. In a real fight you don't stop if someone goes down. You don't stop hitting someone in real fight if you poke them in the eye or break their leg. In a real fight you don't advoid kicking them in groin(male organ). In a real fight you do not hold back anything that may hurt your friend. So hard sparring is also just a training wheel when compared to real fighting. Practicing Forms is just training the techniques and your stances. The forms are your Dictionary or Encylopedia to use when writing speeches or reading books. For instance if you study your Dictionaries and Encylopedias your vocabulary will increase. Spelling Bee Champions spend hours studying the Encylopedia(Sil Lim Tao) and Dictionary(Chum Kiu) and Etymology books(Bil Gee) so they can compete in the spelling Bee. Although Encylopedia is just a training tool for your actual speech, a Spelling Bee or book you are writing or reading the knowledge is still needed. For instance if you are to read a book by Cornel West called "Race Matters" You will definitely need a dictionary. With out one you will be unable to understand his complete thought. The same thing applies to Sil Lim Tao or the Forms. They are the phyiscal Encylopedias one needs in order use the WC system in a fight. You may be able to kick, punch, pak da and tan da. But there is more to Wing Chun then just that. So many elements you will never learn unless you practice the form. An also take each section and drill it. Then begin to apply the elements in sparring until you can use all of your techniques successfully. So in order to be great orator or writer one needs to make use of Encylopedia which in turn are the Forms. With out them your Wing Chun is mediorce. Mere kick boxing!!!

[sihing]

the purpose is to stick or cling to his limbs. the purpose of this sticking is to control your opponent by restricting his ability to attack or defend while you attack him

ultimately the a WC person should be able to close in from the outside and to stick to his opponent

when you say 'dont blindly follow the limbs...' i agree. you shoudnt ever do anything without regard for the consequences, but i will say that the purpose is to stick and to remain stuck.

If you stick and cling to his limbs, you are chasing hands big time.

The purpose of chi sau IMO is to isolate a prolonged contact in training. WC essentially excels from a contact point, but the contact is never sought after nor is it for very long. Hitting is the key thing and is primary, but there is a controlling element involved with the hitting which is secondary. Chi sau allows two people in "training" to stay in constant contact with one another. Both people feel and reflect one another’s structure to bring about a mechanic/framework within you.

What I see as a basic flaw in most WC chi sau training is most are too far away from one another. When I chi sau with someone we are within each others elbow range, you can definitely feel my structure and I should be able to feel yours, each of us effecting the others COM, while simultaneously learning how to deal with that pressure without using stiffness in the arms or muscular tension. With constant practice in this range one is working stance/footwork, structure, body pressure, elbow control and aim (chasing center, not chasing limbs or hands), and a multitude of other things, but in training it is isolated and prolonged, not something you want to do in a real fight. You then take that training and speed it up and adapt it for application purposes. As soon as the range is close enough you engage and continue to engage upon your opponents COM while attacking with your tools. If there is bridging, then your reflexes from Chi sau allow you to function without hesitation and tension.

The goal is too never "chi sau" with him. Your framework (body) is adaptable to pressure, which is only felt from a close range, this is learned thru chi sau and the various other drills within the WC curriculum. WC functions from a close range to jam up and/or eat their space, as most fighters need more space to use their weapons effectively. This strategy will not work well in the ring, where a fighter can adapt his training to stay on the outside, but in the reality of the streets where nothing is known beforehand about your opponent, nor that the altercation is going to take place, a tactic such as this is more effective. Like a "Holy Shi!" response.

James

[chusauli]

Chi Sao is to find the body, and how to deal with the limbs while finding the body.

You are at the whim of multi-vector forces in snippets of time and need to neutralize them, thereby training your body to relax, be fluid, sink and control the center of gravity.

Chi Sao is to find the opponent's center of gravity and exploit it.

All techniques are frozen examples.

Just my $0.02.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"hi victor

why did you choose to teach SLT to him first?

the problem i have with the typical HK style WC curriculum is SLT and chi sau right away.

when you teach SLT to a person...do you teach them the applications? if you don't, they will never figure out all the applications themselves. they moves are very subtle with a lot of depth into each one.

again its like tai chi movements. people watching tai chi movements will never figure out the applications of those movements.

this is opposed to hard styles like lets karate where its blatantly obvious what the meaning is behind the moves in the kata

so many students learn SLT immediately and its basically a waste of time because they cant apply anything they 'learned'..." (Pacman)


***I BEGIN to teach the first section of SLT right away, so that they get a basic understanding of the meaning and the importance of the centerline, as well as the meaning and relevance of having the shoulders squared up with each other, ie.- so that simultaneous, (or near simultaneous) block and strike are possible...

and basic solid body structure and alignment (for strong balance and short range power generation); and of course, moves (hands) like tan, fuk (which is just a variation of pak), wu sao, etc...

and as an introduction to the concept of the gates - and which hands can be used to defend them...

But it could be a good 6-8-10 months before they do section 2 or 3...even though I start showing bong sao, for example, long before thay get to section 3...

Which means yes, I do start teaching applications almost immediately, ie.- bong/lop vs. a leading straight punch coming from the parallel side, or bil sao against a round/hook punch long before the learn a "bil sao" in a form, for example. Or pak against a straight punch. (They start learning these kinds of moves within the first few classes of joining the school - quite often, in fact, on day one - if they show they understand things quickly).

And the reason why, imo, so many people think SLT is a waste of time, as you put it, is because waaaaaay too many instructors have fixated on this idea that there are no actual "techniques" in wing chun, that it is all "concept based".

Pure nonsense.

WING CHUN IS ALL OF THE ABOVE.

[Ultimatewingchun]

...It's sticking to the opponent, yes...in order to learn how to pressure him, take his balance and space away, flow through openings and strike, take his arms off a protected line and strike, how to defend the centerline, how to return to it if taken off, how to do this technique, and that particular technique...how to keep your strong, solid body alignment/structure while under pressure or when on the attack...how to position your body so as to attack and/or defend very quickly and on the shortest, straightest (and therefore fastest) paths...

and also, it's about distancing....(but still within a relatively short range fighting sequence)...and therefore...

chi sao/kiu sao also has to do with BREAKING CONTACT and re-establishing it...which means sometimes even a blatant (though still very short range) retreat...or a sidestep...or a retreat with a slight angling or sidestep - in order to come back in with strikes/pressure/unbalancing on a different line...

IT'S ALL OF THE ABOVE.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Chi Sao helps develop a serious sense of ENERGY FLOW.

Chi = Energy

Sao= Hands


How to get the energy r-e-a-l-l-y moving when it's time to strike, kick, push, pull, lop, bong, pak, etc...

Relaxed - but explosive when it's time to make your move.

[Yoshiyahu]

Chi Sao helps develop a serious sense of ENERGY FLOW.

Chi = Energy

Sao= Hands


How to get the energy r-e-a-l-l-y moving when it's time to strike, kick, push, pull, lop, bong, pak, etc...

Relaxed - but explosive when it's time to make your move.

You do know the word Chi there means stick not energy/breath

[duende]

Chi Sao is to find the body, and how to deal with the limbs while finding the body.

You are at the whim of multi-vector forces in snippets of time and need to neutralize them, thereby training your body to relax, be fluid, sink and control the center of gravity.

Chi Sao is to find the opponent's center of gravity and exploit it.

All techniques are frozen examples.

Just my $0.02.

Agreed. Through proper occupation of space, and establishing a bridge with the correct energy dynamics. Then the goal of controlling an opponent's COG can be achieved.




I'm willing to bet that you could train an average student to fight a lot faster by teaching san sik and application/combat drills first. Save chi sao for much later in their training for refining purposes. The 'college' level of their education so to speak. Emphasis should be place on relaxation and structure and how its used in attack and defense. The combat drills should teach the student WCs strategy for fighting.

Also agreed.

We actually do not begin two hand Chi Sau until the later on in our program. We do however teach Dan Chi Sau, and Dan Kiu Sau to beginners. As they directly lead into 4-gate defence or what we call Sei Mun Da, which is SLT level material. This is done with the aid of coinciding drills and exercises like you mention.


In regards to sparring and free sparring...

From my YM experience, I would not call Luk Sau or Gor sau sparring, as I see it more as a competitive fixed-drill skill challenge.


San Sau is truly free hand/anything goes sparring. Meaning utilizing whatever you can do to get past your opponents gate, bridge and create the proper time and space for a strike. Be it head shots, kicking, sweeping, shooting... what have you. This can begin from both contact and pre-contact.

Thanks to everyone for sharing their insights here. lots of good points.

[Hendrik]

Originally Posted by chusauli View Post
Chi Sao is to find the body, and how to deal with the limbs while finding the body.

You are at the whim of multi-vector forces in snippets of time


Agreed. Through proper occupation of space, and establishing a bridge with the correct energy dynamics. Then the goal of controlling an opponent's COG can be achieved.


believe it or not multi-vector forces is not the same thing as Through proper occupation of space, and establishing a bridge with the correct energy dynamics.

[duende]

believe it or not multi-vector forces is not the same thing as Through proper occupation of space, and establishing a bridge with the correct energy dynamics.

No they aren't. But one through proper occupation of space. One can control the multi-vector forces at work. Or at least impair their energy direction.

[Hendrik]

No they aren't. But one through proper occupation of space. One can control the multi-vector forces at work. Or at least impair their energy direction.



Your view bounded within fix 3 D space and cant enter into “beyond image” or No thought.

multi-vector force is


“神動得自有象外，意存妙在無念中。”
Movement of “Shen” (Spirit) comes from “beyond image” (“有象外”). The wonder of “Yi” (Intent) comes from “Wu Nian” (Mou Nim - No thought).


that is not fix chronological space time energy center line....etc as you think, but arise from Let go of identifying /No thought or using silence to lead action.


different by a split of an inch yield different of ten thousand mile. Thus, since years ago I present the Un Broken Arrow physical platform which is very different then what HFY present in the Mastering Kung Fu book.



Note:
這是王薌齋先生的詩文，它對於健身和技擊的練習都有指導意義。
This is the prose of Mr. Wang Xiangzhai. These words are guidance for the training of fitness and striking skills.

需將自己的意念與天空、大氣、宇宙相呼應，而且這種呼應是從四維空間得到的。“有象”是三維空 間。“有象外 ”是四維空間。
One’s thoughts (intent) must resonate with the sky(?), atmosphere and universe. This resonance is achieved in 4-dimensional space. “With image” (“有象”) is 3-dimensional space, “Beyond image” (“有象外”) is 4-dimensional space and beyond or boundless.

[t_niehoff]

Note:
這是王薌齋先生的詩文，它對於健身和技擊的練習都有指導意義。
This is the prose of Mr. Wang Xiangzhai. These words are guidance for the training of fitness and striking skills.

需將自己的意念與天空、大氣、宇宙相呼應，而且這種呼應是從四維空間得到的。“有象”是三維空 間。“有象外 ”是四維空間。
One’s thoughts (intent) must resonate with the sky(?), atmosphere and universe. This resonance is achieved in 4-dimensional space. “With image” (“有象”) is 3-dimensional space, “Beyond image” (“有象外”) is 4-dimensional space and beyond or boundless.

Speaking of Wang, look at yiquan in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-ZBR51Tewg especially the sparring at 2:30.

[Hendrik]

Speaking of Wang, look at yiquan in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-ZBR51Tewg especially the sparring at 2:30.

so?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVur4OQOWQE

so?

[t_niehoff]

so?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVur4OQOWQE

so?

OK, since you can't see the point -- as the video I posted shows, people can do all kinds of "internal training" but when they fight, it all goes out the window. Showing me one failure of a BJJ fighter when there are thousands of videos of BJJ-trained fighters (since almost every pro fighter trains BJJ) doing exactly what they train to do misses the point -- we can easily find examples of BJJ fighters doing what they train to do in fighitng, but we can't find ONE example of a yi quan fighter doing that.

[Hendrik]

OK, since you can't see the point -- as the video I posted shows, people can do all kinds of "internal training" but when they fight, it all goes out the window.


what is internal training?

After one got internal training is one going to fly or walk on water? or fighting in a Hand stand position? NOPE.

and also who care if one instincly biting to win? I dont.


so?



Showing me one failure of a BJJ fighter when there are thousands of videos of BJJ-trained fighters (since almost every pro fighter trains BJJ) doing exactly what they train to do misses the point -- we can easily find examples of BJJ fighters doing what they train to do in fighitng, but we can't find ONE example of a yi quan fighter doing that.



My point is to tell you, so what? BJJ fighter, Kyokushin fighter, TCMA fighter, MT fighter,,,,, who never lost? so who cares? I dont. if you fight you plan to accept lost. and also there is no such thing as invincible training as you believe in. NONE. that is Fantasy.


What is that fantasy different then the WCK marketing FANTASY in the 1970 that WCK training is the INVINCIBLE training that build BRUCE LEE? NOPE!

IMHO, you are just jumping from hot pot to fire back and forth.



and also,

Yes, the mantra said " every fight end up on ground" but it does NOT said IT DOESNOT applied to get knock down and end up on ground. so dont give me all the brain wash tatic on "every fight end up being take down to ground."

Knock down and take down is a very different thing.

thus who said the opponents who is good in take down dont have to worry about 50/50 chances of being Knock down?


it can be BJJ knock others to ground ; it can be BJJ get knock to ground ; it can be TCMA get Knock to ground; it can be TCMA knock others to ground.


So?

who cares.


have you get into a competition which required to sign accident death waiver? if not than what to say? if yes, which tournament/competition have you been in?

and also, you could be similar to that guy who got knock down or knock down others or ..... does it matter to others. NOpe, that is your victory or your own issue not others.




BTW.

to be real honest and direct.

why do you still do WCK ; or claim you do WCK; or act like you know WCK but keep pushing and mislead and put down WCK /TCMA training where you are clueless?

you are a BJJ guy doing anything and everyting to defend BJJ. It is great that you love your style . I can respect that.

face it if you cant make your WCK work that is fine. but that is your issue not others.

[t_niehoff]

what is internal training?

After one got internal training is one going to fly or walk on water? or fighting in a Hand stand position? NOPE.

and also who care if one instincly biting to win? I dont.

so?


How about simply developing significant fighting skills? If you do "internal training" and it doesn't develop fighting skills, then isn't it rather pointless to make it part of a martial art?



My point is to tell you, so what? BJJ fighter, Kyokushin fighter, TCMA fighter, MT fighter,,,,, who never lost? so who cares? I dont. if you fight you plan to accept lost. and also there is no such thing as invincible training as you believe in. NONE. that is Fantasy.


Again, you miss the point. So let's try this --WHERE IS AN "INTERNAL" FIGHTER, LIKE A YI QUAN FIGHTER, THAT HAS EVER BEATEN A COMPETENT FIGHTER? I can point to all kinds of BJJ fighters, MMAists, Mt fighters that have, but you can't point to one single IMA that has. EVER. What does that tell you? Well, if you had a lick of sense, it would tell you that one sort of training produces solid results while another sort of traiing produces nothing of consequence.

Or, how about showing one IMA fighter that can do in fighting what he trains to do. One. We can see it with boxer, wrestlers, MMAists, BJJ, MT, etc. So why can't we see that with IMAs?

The simple reason is that IMAs don't work. The "engine" or mechanics or whatever don't work in fighting. They can't do what they train to do. They never develop significant fighting skills. Their training method is extremely poor.



Yes, the mantra said " every fight end up on ground" but it does NOT said IT DOESNOT applied to get knock down and end up on ground. so dont give me all the brain wash tatic on "every fight end up being take down to ground."

Knock down and take down is a very different thing.

thus who said the opponents who is good in take down dont have to worry about 50/50 chances of being Knock down?

it can be BJJ knock others to ground ; it can be BJJ get knock to ground ; it can be TCMA get Knock to ground; it can be TCMA knock others to ground.

So?

who cares.


Anyone who is concerned about having well-rounded fighting (including self-defense) skills should care.



have you get into a competition which required to sign accident death waiver? if not than what to say? if yes, which tournament/competition have you been in?


You seem to place great store by these waivers. I had to sign such a waiver just to TRAIN at the places I train. The last competition I was in was a regional sub grappling competiton, and I had to sign a waiver for that too. So what?



BTW.

to be real honest and direct.

why do you still do WCK ; or claim you do WCK; or act like you know WCK but keep pushing and mislead and put down WCK /TCMA training where you are clueless?


I don't think there is anything wrong with WCK. It suits me.

WCK is not the problem. How people train it -- like a TCMA -- is the problem.

If YOU trained your WCK realistically, you wouldn't be saying the nonsense you are. You only say this stuff because you are not DOING WCK. You're doing forms and drills and other unrealistic stuff and imagining that your WCK will work a certain way. But that's in your imiagination. Your fantasy. If you actually did it, actually used it consistently in fighting, you wouldn't believe the stuff you do. You'd know better.



you are a BJJ guy doing anything and everyting to defend BJJ. It is great that you love your style . I can respect that.

face it if you cant make your WCK work that is fine. but that is your issue not others.

BJJ is my "minor", WCK is my "major". I don't need to "defend" BJJ; its results speak for itself. And its results come from how it is trained. And the same is true for boxing and wrestling and MT and the other martial arts that are trained functionally.

[Hendrik]

How about simply developing significant fighting skills? If you do "internal training" and it doesn't develop fighting skills, then isn't it rather pointless to make it part of a martial art?..................Again, you miss the point. So let's try this --WHERE IS AN "INTERNAL" FIGHTER, LIKE A YI QUAN FIGHTER, THAT HAS EVER BEATEN A COMPETENT FIGHTER? I can point to all kinds of BJJ fighters, MMAists, Mt fighters that have, but you can't point to one single IMA that has. EVER. What does that tell you? .....

BJJ is my "minor", WCK is my "major". I don't need to "defend" BJJ; its results speak for itself. And its results come from how it is trained. And the same is true for boxing and wrestling and MT and the other martial arts that are trained functionally.



It has come to my observation that you love to speculate on things you dont know or/and assume thing you dont know or havent seen doesnt exist.


Good luck on your journey.

[t_niehoff]

It has come to my observation that you love to speculate on things you dont know or/and assume thing you dont know or havent seen doesnt exist.


Good luck on your journey.

Which means that you can't provide one example of a competent IMA fighter.

I'm not the one speculating, you are. You are speculating that your "internal power" and "internal cultivation" will work, yet you can'tprovide any evidence of it ever working in fighitng. Nothing.

I don't assume something exists or that something works. I want to see evidence that it exists or that it works. You can't provide that. Nor can anyone. Why? How many millions of people practice IMAs (loads more than BJJ btw) yet we can't find a single example of someone using it successfully in fighting. Not a one. Why?

The answer is blatantly obvious: it doesn't work.

When people fight, really go at it, all that nonsense goes out the window because your body is hardwired to move in certain limited ways at high levels of intensity. That's how you are going to move when you fight regardless of what you train or how you practice. You can't overcome that hard-wiring. You can move differently at low levels of intensity, but those won't function at high elvels of intensity. If you recognize that, then you can practice moving in those hard-wired ways, develop skill moving in those ways, etc. Then you'll be training to do what you will end up doing. Or, you can practice stuffthat works at low-levels of intensity and when the intensity goes up, you'll find that you wasted your time since none of it will work.

[Hendrik]

Which means that you can't provide one example of a competent IMA fighter.

I'm not the one speculating, you are. You are speculating that your "internal power" and "internal cultivation" will work, yet you can'tprovide any evidence of it ever working in fighitng. Nothing.



sure,

for Terence who discount even Mas Oyama, wang xiangzhai, Kenichi Sawai , chen ManChing, ...... as competence fighter


but defending

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVur4OQOWQE

with
"Showing me one failure of a BJJ fighter when there are thousands of videos of BJJ-trained fighters.....""


Who is speculating with BIAS?








I don't assume something exists or that something works. I want to see evidence that it exists or that it works. You can't provide that. Nor can anyone. Why? How many millions of people practice IMAs (loads more than BJJ btw) yet we can't find a single example of someone using it successfully in fighting. Not a one. Why?

The answer is blatantly obvious: it doesn't work.


hahaha,

Let's take Kyokushin

The fact is kyokushin is influence by Yi Chuan and adapted Yi Chuan principle in the training and fighting.

any one who know Yi Chuan can see the Yi Chuan influence here in a sample clip of thousands of hard core deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBrSEfCuW9Q&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV-AneK721I&feature=related


and ofcorse Mas Oyama is not shy to admit Kyokushin Yi Chuan connection.

http://www.taikiken.org/kenichi_sawai.html

You dont see it doesnt mean they dont exist.

In this case you are NOT EVEN CAPABLE TO SEE.



Not to mention, you dont even know what is INTERNAL ART and keep speculate with your confuse mind.


So it is not it doesnt exist but you are blind and fantasying.




When people fight, really go at it,

all that nonsense goes out the window because


your body is hardwired to move in certain limited ways at high levels of intensity.

That's how you are going to move when you fight regardless of what you train or how you practice.

You can't overcome that hard-wiring.


This is so True for you.

similar to your preaching on Take down .....as that is the ONLY GREATEST EFFECTIVE WAY, until I show you your fighter got Knock down instead of Take Down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVur4OQOWQE


How realistic are you preaching your religion?



your limitation is not others' problem so stop making yourself as the model of every human being.

BTW. if you are right, hahaha, why even train like you do, those who have better Hard-Wiring performance always will beat you disregard of your Major or Minor WCK or BJJ or anything else.





You can move differently at low levels of intensity, but those won't function at high elvels of intensity.

If you recognize that, then you can practice moving in those hard-wired ways, develop skill moving in those ways, etc. Then you'll be training to do what you will end up doing.

Or, you can practice stuffthat works at low-levels of intensity and when the intensity goes up, you'll find that you wasted your time since none of it will work.




You know what Kyokushin means? what is Aikido means? your finding is at least 50 years behind Mas Oyama , Morihei Ueshiba, and much later then Wang Xiang Zai, and at much lower level.

not to mention, you dont have the ability or the Technology to transcent the Hard-Wired Limit and they have.



A blind man will always speculating there is no Sunshine and since no one can make a blind man see. it is wasting of energy to argue with a blind man on Sunshine.

Just because you cant do it doesnt mean others is as stuck as you.


BTW. Dont give me those BS



BJJ is my "minor", WCK is my "major".

you dont even know what is WCK otherwise you wont post what you post on WCK. Read your own posts such as
[QUOTE]
If someone choreographed the movements you use in riding a bike into a fixed set, so that you perform them in the air, what would THAT be good for?[/QUOTE

you dont have a clue by evidence.

[Ultimatewingchun]

begin with the idea that soooooo much time needs to spent doing it.

And undoubtedly, one of the biggest reasons for this is that it can become a very easy money-maker for wing chun instructors, past and present, who know little else about fighting (and how to make wing chun fight efficient).

Have seen this phenomena time and again.

What can be learned in chi sao/kiu sao covers only certain limited aspects of fighting, but some people want to make a giant chess game out of it that seemingly lasts forever.

And so a multitude of "possibilities" are drilled, discussed, analysed, seminared...over-and-over-and-over again.

Imo, if you're spending more 20 minutes or so in any given class doing chi sao/kiu sao and related drills...you clearly aren't going to be spending enough time doing other very valuable and necessary things for your training.

[-木叶-]

begin with the idea that soooooo much time needs to spent doing it.

And undoubtedly, one of the biggest reasons for this is that it can become a very easy money-maker for wing chun instructors, past and present, who know little else about fighting (and how to make wing chun fight efficient).

Have seen this phenomena time and again.

What can be learned in chi sao/kiu sao covers only certain limited aspects of fighting, but some people want to make a giant chess game out of it that seemingly lasts forever.

And so a multitude of "possibilities" are drilled, discussed, analysed, seminared...over-and-over-and-over again.

Imo, if you're spending more 20 minutes or so in any given class doing chi sao/kiu sao and related drills...you clearly aren't going to be spending enough time doing other very valuable and necessary things for your training.

I think this is due to the duration of training currently (correct me if i am wrong).
I think you mean if a student does longer durations of chi sao, he/she may be missing other valuable things for training as the time is short.

But if one is able to dedicate more time outside of the times when you DO NOT HAVE a partner and ALONE, i believe those areas can be covered, except for real sparring.

In Grandmaster Yip Man's time, his students spend a whole day training and stay for long periods of time with their sifu, you can imagine the dedication. E.g. Master Wong Shun Leung will spend hours just doing the straight punch, 500 punches one time on the sandbag. (I think someone will say things about fairy tales on this one...)

[Pacman]

this is what you truly do not understand

in the internal arts, you purposely practice a lot of the things differently than you would apply them.

(im sure you are wondering why they would do this and whether that is useful , but that is another topic.)

tai chi poses, bagua circle walking, even SLT are very subtle and you need to learn the application of the technqiues and not just the forms.

so when you see a tai chi boxer not movie like a snail and holding a "single whip" pose or not "reeling silk" during a fight, its not because his training went out the window


this is opposed to external arts like hung ga , karate, etc where you can see how their forms or kata might apply to a real situation


OK, since you can't see the point -- as the video I posted shows, people can do all kinds of "internal training" but when they fight, it all goes out the window. Showing me one failure of a BJJ fighter when there are thousands of videos of BJJ-trained fighters (since almost every pro fighter trains BJJ) doing exactly what they train to do misses the point -- we can easily find examples of BJJ fighters doing what they train to do in fighitng, but we can't find ONE example of a yi quan fighter doing that.

[Pacman]

you dont even know what is WCK otherwise you wont post what you post on WCK. Read your own posts such as
[QUOTE]
If someone choreographed the movements you use in riding a bike into a fixed set, so that you perform them in the air, what would THAT be good for?[/QUOTE

you dont have a clue by evidence.

for once hendrik is making SOME sense. good job for not making a whole post in chinese on an english forum

what terrence doesnt know is that WCK (his supposed major...wait isn't he a Muay Thai master?) is an internal art

he was probably taught by a person who took karate or something and then trained in WC. so terrence probably learned and trained in WCK like an external fighter.

[Pacman]

I think this is due to the duration of training currently (correct me if i am wrong).
I think you mean if a student does longer durations of chi sao, he/she may be missing other valuable things for training as the time is short.

But if one is able to dedicate more time outside of the times when you DO NOT HAVE a partner and ALONE, i believe those areas can be covered, except for real sparring.

In Grandmaster Yip Man's time, his students spend a whole day training and stay for long periods of time with their sifu, you can imagine the dedication. E.g. Master Wong Shun Leung will spend hours just doing the straight punch, 500 punches one time on the sandbag. (I think someone will say things about fairy tales on this one...)

i do 1000 reps of chung choi and then 1000 reps of other moves. it doesnt take that long. 1000 reps of chung choi can be done under 10 minutes...even shorter if i go faster

[-木叶-]

i do 1000 reps of chung choi and then 1000 reps of other moves. it doesnt take that long. 1000 reps of chung choi can be done under 10 minutes...even shorter if i go faster

Wow thats nice, but be careful not to over strain your elbows/shoulders :)

[Mr Punch]

this is what you truly do not understand

in the internal arts, you purposely practice a lot of the things differently than you would apply them.

(im sure you are wondering why they would do this and whether that is useful , but that is another topic.)

tai chi poses, bagua circle walking, even SLT are very subtle and you need to learn the application of the technqiues and not just the forms.

so when you see a tai chi boxer not movie like a snail and holding a "single whip" pose or not "reeling silk" during a fight, its not because his training went out the window


this is opposed to external arts like hung ga , karate, etc where you can see how their forms or kata might apply to a real situationNice post.

[Mr Punch]

I'm not weighing in to the mess that this thread is but this point is silly:
Again, you miss the point. So let's try this --WHERE IS AN "INTERNAL" FIGHTER, LIKE A YI QUAN FIGHTER, THAT HAS EVER BEATEN A COMPETENT FIGHTER? ...There are a growing number. You sound like someone telling Alan Orr there's no wing chun in his competition fighting because they don't know what they're looking at. I don't have time to find any right now, and it seems you wouldn't know what you were looking at either, but they are there. That old 'master' (Wang?) learned in an age when a lot of MA had been over-codified and there was no platform for challenges from competent fighters. Comparing Wang with today's internal competition fighters is like comparing 90 yr-old JJJ getting its ass whupped by judo with today's BJJ.

Edit: meaning that comparison in terms of quality rather than numbers of competitors.

[Hendrik]

I am in a story telling mode tonight, if you dont like my post please ignore it and dont read it and complain.



For those of you who want to know about Internal training, what I present to you is how I live my life... so take it as a reference but not the only truth because the everyone has his/her own reality.

Here I present what I used my training for Living instead of figthing. this because I am a Buddhist and I know the law of Karma very clearly.


thus, It is not my intention to promote fighting or get gung ho on what one can do with the power to hurt others, he who kill will be kill. That is just a fact or karma or the combination of the law of cause and effect and law of attraction.




what I describe below is my experience and NOT recomended ANY ONE TO try on!





A,
So,
Does the six directional force vectors of the Internal art real?

for me, the answer is Yes because I live with it. Without it I will certainly not who I am and can function this well today.




Since I was young
I was train in dynamic internal structure which I use the six direction force vectors to present today,

(I adopted Wang Xiang Zai's Yi Chuan's terminology because it is easier to understand since it can link with 3D physics ....etc, certainly, one can use whatever one likes to present.)


I was in a head to head car accident in the Campus of Iowa state university 1988.

I was sitting in the "dead seat" or the front seat beside the driver. I was in a small Toyota and the incoming car is an old US made big size family car.

Got into accident, the driver turn my side toward the incoming car.
The speed of the car I sit in was about 40mph.

and

I have a fatal problem ---- I dont wear sit belt.

So, I saw the other car crash in, its head cutting into the corolla' engine like a knife cutting tofu. and It happen just a few feet in front of me. the car stop crashing in after hit the engine....

at the instant of collison, without a single thought of what to do, my body get into a modification " Tree Hugging post (Zhan Zhuang) or ball " adapting to the front seat space, and I was bounce back and forth like a ball for atleast 4 times.

and at the end my right side of arm cant sustain anymore and the" ball" broken, that lead to my face hitting the windshield, Luckily, all of the energy was transfered and I have only a lite hit, ligther then taking a punch.

The ambulance came, they asked me to not move, and trying to get me out. Well, they cant because the seat doesnt slide. It turns out the seat was sink down more then an inch, bending the support bar down ward. The car was total.

sitting there with no injury waiting for those ambulance people, I just walk out of the car and get on the ambulance. went to the emergency room, and got release after the doctor examine me.


So, why do I said here " forget about the Rooting..." but watch out for the six directional force vectors balancing?

see, it is the formation of that "ball" which is critical, when I was bouncing back and forth up and down, side to side. My body keep a balance in all of the six direction until finally after the 4 bounce when my right hand side can no longer sustain the impact.

the car is moving, my legs are in a sitting position which stepping on the car's floor, the whole body practically got to adjust itself dynamically to be like a ball.

and, the force/momentum active towards me got transfer downward to bend the seat's support bar. do I direct the force this way and that way? NOPE. I dont even have time to think. What I do is just keep the "ball" or the six directional force vectors in balance as much as I can based on my training. Not my mind at all.



So, with my experience and the requirement I got in my training from my sifu on the dynamic structure, most of today's so called YJKYM structure or gung ho Figthing training simply cant sustain those type of impact. Why we can certain on that? because there are key points on the training. One have no chance to attain it if these key points are incomplete.


I certainly not recomending some one untie thier seat belt and planing a car crash to test out their capability. in fact, I strongly ask everyone to wear sit belt and never try any stunt like what I have gone through.

As for me, the TCMA six directional force vectors stuffs as GM Wang Xiang Zai and many TCMA masters describe is as real as gold. otherwise, I would not be able to hold myself and transfer the incoming power to bend the support bar of my seat without any injury. Those are Jin stuffs not brute force. it is about jin transfer.






B, Zhen Qi

I was sick seriously decades later after working in the silicon valey: without training, junk food, stress, .......

So, the doctor cant do a thing but told me here on in my life I got live with medicine. I reject his proposal because I want to live a life without become a slave or influence of drug.

So another journey begun....

six months laterafter I run away from the doctor decide to do what I intend to do, the doctor gave me a full test and told me, do those things you do, you dont have to take medicine you are ok.


Well, I ate proper food, get back to my Buddhist Meditation, and Evoke and circulate my Zhen Qi.

Sure, this involve lots of sifus and advisors from nature food, to spiritual, and the cultivating Zhen Qi. This is saving my life, it is a real life survival deal.

while evoking and Cultivating Zhen Qi, this is no joke it is not for a science project or scientific proof of an arguement but survival.
and The Zhen Qi cultivation got to be working or make it works disregards of how many sifus I need to correct my cultivation.







Thus, as a conclusion, I am not some super fighter, I am not even a fighter but a Buddhist and happy to be a Buddhist to tell you all. Dont Fight.

However, the basic TCMA Internal art training help me to survive and help me to heal when I needs.

Those old TCMA sifu's of mine are telling me the truth. And until one got those training one must not jump gun on what is Internal art.

Finally, I am NOT recomend anyone to try my path. What I tell you is my life. and life mean how I am living.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I think this is due to the duration of training currently (correct me if i am wrong).
I think you mean if a student does longer durations of chi sao, he/she may be missing other valuable things for training as the time is short.

But if one is able to dedicate more time outside of the times when you DO NOT HAVE a partner and ALONE, i believe those areas can be covered, except for real sparring.

In Grandmaster Yip Man's time, his students spend a whole day training and stay for long periods of time with their sifu, you can imagine the dedication. E.g. Master Wong Shun Leung will spend hours just doing the straight punch, 500 punches one time on the sandbag. (I think someone will say things about fairy tales on this one...)


***HAVING TRAINED directly under two of Yip Man's students (William Cheung & Moy Yat)...I am well aware of the "whole day training" business, and I can tell you straight up that all the evidence points to much more "socializing" than actual training.

Moy Yat, for example, would always tell everyone that he ran his school exactly like Yip Man ran his (and I believe that this is true) - and I can't tell you how many times over the course of the 8 years I trained with Moy Yat that I spent MANY hours with him on one particular day (countless times)...

and that the % of time actually spent training was VERY small.

So yeah, I personally think that there were plenty of fairy tales being told.

With William Cheung it was different (lots of training in relation to the actual amount of time spent with him on any given day)...but his accounts of Yip Man did not differ from those of Moy Yat in any significant way.

So my point, once again, is this: if your ACTUAL classtime training on any given day is let's say 2 hours...anything more than about 20-25 minutes or so doing chi sao/kiu sao and related drills will be counter productive to your overall training...

assuming that your goal is to learn how to fight and that you're beyond just the very "beginner" stages of your training.

[-木叶-]

***HAVING TRAINED directly under two of Yip Man's students (William Cheung & Moy Yat)...I am well aware of the "whole day training" business, and I can tell you straight up that all the evidence points to much more "socializing" than actual training.

Moy Yat, for example, would always tell everyone that he ran his school exactly like Yip Man ran his (and I believe that this is true) - and I can't tell you how many times over the course of the 8 years I trained with Moy Yat that I spent MANY hours with him on one particular day (countless times)...

and that the % of time actually spent training was VERY small.

So yeah, I personally think that there were plenty of fairy tales being told.

With William Cheung it was different (lots of training in relation to the actual amount of time spent with him on any given day)...but his accounts of Yip Man did not differ from those of Moy Yat in any significant way.

So my point, once again, is this: if your ACTUAL classtime training on any given day is let's say 2 hours...anything more than about 20-25 minutes or so doing chi sao/kiu sao and related drills will be counter productive to your overall training...

assuming that your goal is to learn how to fight and that you're beyond just the very "beginner" stages of your training.

Thanks for sharing the Wing Chun Life.

[AdrianK]

what terrence doesnt know is that WCK (his supposed major...wait isn't he a Muay Thai master?) is an internal art

WCK is looked at far and wide by a whole group of people as an external art. And a whole group of people as an internal art. And a whole group of people as a hybrid as well.

The fact of the matter is, internal, external is nonsense. Life is both. All Art, All forms of human expression are both.

If you mean to characterize it by traditional internal aspects, like breathing, chi development, etc. - Well, WCK has those elements but their interpretation is extremely varied depending on the practictioners experience in other so-called "internal" arts.

Its there. But its not necessarily spoken of or focused on like it is in say, a taiji class. In general, with most instructors, anyway.

[t_niehoff]

this is what you truly do not understand

in the internal arts, you purposely practice a lot of the things differently than you would apply them.

(im sure you are wondering why they would do this and whether that is useful , but that is another topic.)

tai chi poses, bagua circle walking, even SLT are very subtle and you need to learn the application of the technqiues and not just the forms.

so when you see a tai chi boxer not movie like a snail and holding a "single whip" pose or not "reeling silk" during a fight, its not because his training went out the window


this is opposed to external arts like hung ga , karate, etc where you can see how their forms or kata might apply to a real situation

Don't you see that this sort of training is extremely poor? Practicing X to do Y will never significantly develop your ability to do Y. If you want to do Y, the only way to get better doing that by is doing more Y. You can't get good at Y by practicing "not Y".

That's why the functional martial arts develop high levels of skill -- they practice Y to get better at Y.

[t_niehoff]

I'm not weighing in to the mess that this thread is but this point is silly:There are a growing number. You sound like someone telling Alan Orr there's no wing chun in his competition fighting because they don't know what they're looking at. I don't have time to find any right now, and it seems you wouldn't know what you were looking at either, but they are there. That old 'master' (Wang?) learned in an age when a lot of MA had been over-codified and there was no platform for challenges from competent fighters. Comparing Wang with today's internal competition fighters is like comparing 90 yr-old JJJ getting its ass whupped by judo with today's BJJ.

Edit: meaning that comparison in terms of quality rather than numbers of competitors.

So, essentially you're saying they do exist, you just can't find any? Think about that.

You're right when you wrote "comparing Wang with today's internal competition fighters is like comparing 90 yr-old JJJ getting its ass whupped by judo with today's BJJ" but not for the reason you think. The reason we don't see JJJ producing good fighters today is because the training methods of JJJ suck. Kano took JJJ and changed the training method to make it functional (making sparring the core of their training). If you take tai ji or WCK and you train it like modern fighters train (the functional approach), then you will have good results. It's not so much the art but the training methods that are primary. Internal training is simply a poor approach. It's results speak for itself.

[Mr Punch]

So, essentially you're saying they do exist, you just can't find any? Think about that. I didn't say that: I said I didn't have time. I still don't.

There are easily as many vids out there as of WC fighting competitively (gasp - sooo many!? ;) ) on youtube and various sites. A guy from my friend's Tai Chi school fought yesterday in pro-Shooto too (lost, but what's more to the point is it didn't look like tai chi any more than Alan Orr's guys look like WC... to the uninitiated/ill-informed!).


You're right when you wrote "comparing Wang with today's internal competition fighters is like comparing 90 yr-old JJJ getting its ass whupped by judo with today's BJJ" but not for the reason you think. The reason we don't see JJJ producing good fighters today is because the training methods of JJJ suck. Kano took JJJ and changed the training method to make it functional (making sparring the core of their training). If you take tai ji or WCK and you train it like modern fighters train (the functional approach), then you will have good results. It's not so much the art but the training methods that are primary.Er, that was my point.

[t_niehoff]

I didn't say that: I said I didn't have time. I still don't.

There are easily as many vids out there as of WC fighting competitively (gasp - sooo many!? ;) ) on youtube and various sites. A guy from my friend's Tai Chi school fought yesterday in pro-Shooto too (lost, but what's more to the point is it didn't look like tai chi any more than Alan Orr's guys look like WC... to the uninitiated/ill-informed!).

Er, that was my point.

OK.

But the reason Alan's guys and any other TCMA guy will develop the skill level to fight competently is that they are training like (using the modern traiing approach) -- and with -- modern, competent fighters and fight trainers.

It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point.

[Ultimatewingchun]

wck is looked at far and wide by a whole group of people as an external art. And a whole group of people as an internal art. And a whole group of people as a hybrid as well.

The fact of the matter is, internal, external is nonsense. Life is both. All art, all forms of human expression are both.

If you mean to characterize it by traditional internal aspects, like breathing, chi development, etc. - well, wck has those elements but their interpretation is extremely varied depending on the practictioners experience in other so-called "internal" arts.

Its there. But its not necessarily spoken of or focused on like it is in say, a taiji class. In general, with most instructors, anyway.


***Well said.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point." (Terence)


***NO, half a point. It's both.

[Pacman]

Don't you see that this sort of training is extremely poor? Practicing X to do Y will never significantly develop your ability to do Y. If you want to do Y, the only way to get better doing that by is doing more Y. You can't get good at Y by practicing "not Y".

That's why the functional martial arts develop high levels of skill -- they practice Y to get better at Y.

i knew you would say this. which is why is why i left it for another discussion. (in short i can say that internal stylists also have real application training which is what you focus on. their other types of training could be comparable to a boxer using a speedbag or training a double ended bag or skipping rope. its not useless)

my point is that you are wrong in your assertion that their training goes out the window. they never intended their fighting to look like their drills.

[Pacman]

WCK is looked at far and wide by a whole group of people as an external art. And a whole group of people as an internal art. And a whole group of people as a hybrid as well.

The fact of the matter is, internal, external is nonsense. Life is both. All Art, All forms of human expression are both.

If you mean to characterize it by traditional internal aspects, like breathing, chi development, etc. - Well, WCK has those elements but their interpretation is extremely varied depending on the practictioners experience in other so-called "internal" arts.

Its there. But its not necessarily spoken of or focused on like it is in say, a taiji class. In general, with most instructors, anyway.

if an instructor teaches something with a lack of proper emphasis or a change in emphasis it does not change the essence of WCK as it was developed.

[CFT]

at the instant of collison, without a single thought of what to do, my body get into a modification " Tree Hugging post (Zhan Zhuang) or ball " adapting to the front seat space, and I was bounce back and forth like a ball for atleast 4 times.

and at the end my right side of arm cant sustain anymore and the" ball" broken, that lead to my face hitting the windshield, Luckily, all of the energy was transfered and I have only a lite hit, ligther then taking a punch.

So, why do I said here " forget about the Rooting..." but watch out for the six directional force vectors balancing?

see, it is the formation of that "ball" which is critical, when I was bouncing back and forth up and down, side to side. My body keep a balance in all of the six direction until finally after the 4 bounce when my right hand side can no longer sustain the impact.

the car is moving, my legs are in a sitting position which stepping on the car's floor, the whole body practically got to adjust itself dynamically to be like a ball.

and, the force/momentum active towards me got transfer downward to bend the seat's support bar. do I direct the force this way and that way? NOPE. I dont even have time to think. What I do is just keep the "ball" or the six directional force vectors in balance as much as I can based on my training. Not my mind at all. Hendrik, thank you for your story. I can better understand your philosophy and motivation now. I am happy to hear that TCMA practice has had such a positive effect on your life.

However, I have to question your assertion that your redirection was responsible for the bending of the seat support bar. Perhaps it was the structure of the car that did it? I think that if you did receive any direct force from a car component you would have received fractures. It sounds like what you were dealing with was your own inertia/momentum - like a ball rattling around a now relatively stationary cage.

[AdrianK]

if an instructor teaches something with a lack of proper emphasis or a change in emphasis it does not change the essence of WCK as it was developed.

And with the vast amount of lineages and conflicting views both inside and outside of Yip Man's lineage, how exactly do you ascertain exactly what wing chun is, in that way?

And what is the "essence" of WCK? As a martial art, its essence is that of fighting. You'd be hard pressed to make a convincing argument that its essence was anything more specific.

[t_niehoff]

i knew you would say this. which is why is why i left it for another discussion. (in short i can say that internal stylists also have real application training which is what you focus on. their other types of training could be comparable to a boxer using a speedbag or training a double ended bag or skipping rope. its not useless)

my point is that you are wrong in your assertion that their training goes out the window. they never intended their fighting to look like their drills.

Whether they "intended" it or not, that is a really poor, ineffective way to develop skill. The only way to develop skill is by doing the skill; you don't develop a skill by not doing the skill. This is simply common sense -- backed up by science and sport.

Your speedbag, etc. examples miss the point. That stuff is CONDITIONING, not skill building.

[t_niehoff]

And with the vast amount of lineages and conflicting views both inside and outside of Yip Man's lineage, how exactly do you ascertain exactly what wing chun is, in that way?

And what is the "essence" of WCK? As a martial art, its essence is that of fighting. You'd be hard pressed to make a convincing argument that its essence was anything more specific.

I do think that we can say, based on the tools of a fighting method, the general approach of that method. However, I think it unwise to get anymore specific than that.

[t_niehoff]

"It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point." (Terence)


***NO, half a point. It's both.

You're confusing the skills themselves (the art) with building/developing those skills (training).

I was talking about skill building or development. The training method is what develops skill, regardless of your art. The art itself doesn't develop skill, it just "teaches" you those skills. You can take any proven fighting method, let's say for the sake of argument boxing, and train it like a TCMA and you won't develop fighting skill. It's HOW boxers train that develops their skills.

[Hendrik]

However, I have to question your assertion that your redirection was responsible for the bending of the seat support bar.

Perhaps it was the structure of the car that did it?


What you propose could be likely also.





I think that if you did receive any direct force from a car component you would have received fractures.

That is very possible.





It sounds like what you were dealing with was your own inertia/momentum - like a ball rattling around a now relatively stationary cage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjIud8zYRbI&feature=related

Whatever it is, I am happy that the Buddha help me to handle and escape whatever it is, and walk out one piece.



and ofcorse we all need to take the following seriously even we have better technology today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5h2NF2xMYI


Thus, six directional force vectors, it can be from any side in a collision or momentum transfer.....

[CFT]

Well someone upstairs must smile upon you Hendrik - that's all I can say. Even relatively low speed impacts like yours, though you would have had much higher closing speeds, can cause horrendous damage and injury.

[Mr Punch]

OK.

But the reason Alan's guys and any other TCMA guy will develop the skill level to fight competently is that they are training like (using the modern traiing approach) -- and with -- modern, competent fighters and fight trainers.

It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point.OK, had a quick look on youtube for any of the tai chi in mma comp vids i'd seen before and couldn't find any - all seems to have been taken off or supplanted by some odd mix by the name of western tai chi, which i didn't really watch. i hadn't bookmarked any of them as i'd only had a passing interest. guy called shooter on the main board used to have fighters with tai chi and posted vid as far as i remember, maybe mas judt remembers him, think they'd trained together.

anyway.

let's say you agree that weightlifting can help you become stronger and therefore can make you a better fighter, if someone then gives you some good people to spar against and tells you how to use the lovely muscles you've been training. you know, the squat relates to this... the exact pushing out of the hips at the top of a squat relates can be used like this, etc. he's building body structure and using it to improve his fighting skills.

then let's say you train slt to learn the wc body structure. you also train wall bag. you learn chi sao to test the structure you've been learning with your slt and wallbag and various other drills. then someone gives you some good people to spar with and who tells you how to use all the lovely muscles you've been training. he's building body structure and using it to improve his fighting skills.

then say you train tai chi form to learn the body structure. you also train with other people with shields. you learn pushing hands to test the structure you've been learning with your form and various other drills. then someone gives you some good people to spar with and who tells you how to use all the lovely muscles you've been training. he's building body structure and using it to improve his fighting skills.

i'm assuming that even alan and you (i'm not assuming you're using exactly the same training methodology, or trying to get you to speak for him, but i guess you know what he does and he's not around so often to ask himself) still do slt and go over slt with even your advanced students... or ck, or bj, or the dummy, or the wallbag, or chi sao, from time to time if you think they need it or to keep them aware of various points? that's all we're talking about.

i don't learn wing chun to learn how to fight. everyone knows how to fight. i learn it to give me a couple of ways to improve my fighting and a couple of advantages.

my yoga, my weightlifting, my aikido/jutsu, my koryu, my chun all effect the way i move, the way i walk, sit, stand, my awareness, every day, all the time... they effect it in small ways, but none of these arts taught me how to move, how to walk, how to sit, how to stand in the first place.

it's the same with tai chi fighters and wing chun fighters and thai fighters: they learn how to move their flesh effectively on their structural framework. if they test it out it helps them in their fighting. everyone can kick, throw a punch, knock someone over in the first place.

of course, there are plenty of shrinking violets who never had any fight in them in the first place: for them the MA may teach them the techs of fighting. but they'll never have the principles down without crippling over-analysis and they'll never have the killer instinct: in short, you can't make a natural.

[CFT]

Mr. P. check out Sami Berik. He has a background in Tai Chi and Wing Chun. He trains BJJ for the ground.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm not confusing anything, Terence. But rather, it's you AS ALWAYS trying to change the subject RATHER THAN ADMIT THAT YOU'RE OVER-GENERALIZING OUT OF YOUR A55...

but the fact still remains (and will always remain) that it is both the art and the training method that develops the skill TO BE A GOOD FIGHTER.

You can be all the fantastic you want as a Tae kwondo fighter, for example, using all the latest and greatest training methods and then some...

but if your art utilizes VERY little striking, no clinch work, and no grappling/ground work - because 95% of what you do is just kicking...

that's not going to cut it.

[Hendrik]

Well someone upstairs must smile upon you Hendrik - that's all I can say. Even relatively low speed impacts like yours, though you would have had much higher closing speeds, can cause horrendous damage and injury.

Yup. Some one upstairs must be helping me. That is forsure everything needs to be right in that few seconds.

[Vajramusti]

Hendrik's accident and health crisis illustrates the real challenges of self defense in the US...
cars and junk food are up there on the list.

joy chaudhuri

[Mr Punch]

Mr. P. check out Sami Berik. He has a background in Tai Chi and Wing Chun. He trains BJJ for the ground.
LOL, was trying to avoid Sami: his Sherdog record is about twice as many losses as wins and most of those to first round submissions if I remember correctly! :D

There is some nice footage of him knocking people out though and to me, using a definite, recognisable tai chi engine.

[CFT]

LOL, was trying to avoid Sami: his Sherdog record is about twice as many losses as wins and most of those to first round submissions if I remember correctly! :D.LOL. I read that he was currently focusing on the BJJ , now I know why!

[Ali. R]

Hendrik's accident and health crisis illustrates the real challenges of self defense in the US...
cars and junk food are up there on the list.

joy chaudhuri


That’s true; I was also in a head on collusion going about 55mph on I 75 in Detroit, and just before impact I went limp in structure and just followed the G’s and spins of the wreck… (A car jumped the divider that deals with north and south.)…

The cops were amazed that all I came out with were pockets full of cars glass, and that’s something that I can’t figure out tills this day…

But most of all, the only thing that I could think about was training as if someone was doing it to me personally; spinning me around with more then three hard subtle stops…

I do believe that chi sao pretty much helped me in that situation…

I have to be honest; I did have on my seatbelt too…


Ali Rahim.

[t_niehoff]

LOL, was trying to avoid Sami: his Sherdog record is about twice as many losses as wins and most of those to first round submissions if I remember correctly! :D

There is some nice footage of him knocking people out though and to me, using a definite, recognisable tai chi engine.

As there is no such thing as a "tai chi engine", I find that hard to believe. But, why don't you cite some of Sami's fights on youtube (with minute marks) to show his tai ji in action?

[t_niehoff]

I'm not confusing anything, Terence. But rather, it's you AS ALWAYS trying to change the subject RATHER THAN ADMIT THAT YOU'RE OVER-GENERALIZING OUT OF YOUR A55...

but the fact still remains (and will always remain) that it is both the art and the training method that develops the skill TO BE A GOOD FIGHTER.

You can be all the fantastic you want as a Tae kwondo fighter, for example, using all the latest and greatest training methods and then some...

but if your art utilizes VERY little striking, no clinch work, and no grappling/ground work - because 95% of what you do is just kicking...

that's not going to cut it.

I'm not changing any subject. We're still on the same subject.

You don't -- as your example illustrates -- understand my distinction. I'm not saying that TKD "properly trained" will give you clinch or ground; it will just give you the skills of TKD. However, TKD improperly or poorly trained won't give you the skills of TKD. So it is not the ART, TKD, that DEVELOPS the skill (the skill found in TKD), but HOW it is trained.

I said this when I wrote: "It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point." Notice my word choice: DEVELOPS. I didn't say teach you the skill, which is what the art does, but DEVELOP the skill. Developing the skill is what the training method does.

Of course you are correct that different arts teach different skills.

BTW, Victor, when are we going to see your video of you making the block and strike (that you made of video of) work against the hook in sparring? I know the guys over at bullshido have been talking smack about you for not delivering it when promised.

[Yoshiyahu]

What skills does Wing Chun teach...and how do you feel these skills can be of use in a street encounter???



I'm not changing any subject. We're still on the same subject.

You don't -- as your example illustrates -- understand my distinction. I'm not saying that TKD "properly trained" will give you clinch or ground; it will just give you the skills of TKD. However, TKD improperly or poorly trained won't give you the skills of TKD. So it is not the ART, TKD, that DEVELOPS the skill (the skill found in TKD), but HOW it is trained.

I said this when I wrote: "It's the training method that develops the skill, not the art. That was my point." Notice my word choice: DEVELOPS. I didn't say teach you the skill, which is what the art does, but DEVELOP the skill. Developing the skill is what the training method does.

Of course you are correct that different arts teach different skills.

BTW, Victor, when are we going to see your video of you making the block and strike (that you made of video of) work against the hook in sparring? I know the guys over at bullshido have been talking smack about you for not delivering it when promised.

[t_niehoff]

What skills does Wing Chun teach...and how do you feel these skills can be of use in a street encounter???

In a nutshell, WCK is a fighting method and teaches you the skills/tools to control an opponent while striking him.

A fight is a fight.

[Hendrik]

Terence has actually bring up an excellent point on High Level intensity.

And it is very honest for him to describe his experience on


"
When people fight, really go at it, all that nonsense goes out the window because your body is hardwired to move in certain limited ways at high levels of intensity. .....You can't overcome that hard-wiring. "



However, that is his experience.


In Fact, TCMA internal does have a process of push out the boundary or Shift Gear where the High Intensity at one point is no longer the Highest Intensity.

As a generalization, Via the six directional force vectors dynamic structure and the Zhen Qi cultivation culitvation, one can goes beyond and much beyond one's own limit.




Without the six directional force vectors training One cant issue force vectors flow fully without compremization . Sure one can still hit and kick.... but that is not issuing force which could accelerate within an inch between the activate of power generation to hitting the target.

Without the Zhen Qi training one cannot clear the path to unstuck the six directional force vectors path.


Yes, both technology are Within SLT in 1850 and it is within the Chi Sau , it is not limited to WCK but lots of other TCMA because at that era TCMA has already evolve into a very mature state, but most of general TCMA has lost it today.


IS there still competance fighters exist today? Yes. Is the process still exist ? Yes.

However, these people hold the Law of Karma higher then how general westerner view figthing and competition.

Take some one like late GM Ma Li-Dang, for his whole life he was well know TCM and Qigong Doctor who have saved lots of life and heal /cured lots of people with chronic disease but not promoting figthing eventhough he is one of the top fighter.

See, different culture, different value system.


For me, after I have gone through what I gone through, life is a different story where helping others is much important then compete and fight to make the fame and reputation ....etc.
Winning is not a must but living in a peaceful mutual healthy way is.


I told my Kung Fu brother GM Robert Chu the other day, " In Buddhism, what we implement in our art, if it was using to hurt others' the karma is ours to pay."

Thus, eventhough I dont know much, I can now understand why those old TCMA masters rather bring their process and art into thier grave. ----- what is the point to let the process or art stay in the world and hurting others like a poison snake?

Just some thougths.

[t_niehoff]

Terence has actually bring up an excellent point on High Level intensity.

And it is very honest for him to describe his experience on

However, that is his experience.


Yes, it is my experience. And that also includes every fight that I've ever seen.



In Fact, TCMA internal does have a process of push out the boundary or Shift Gear where the High Intensity at one point is no longer the Highest Intensity.

As a generalization, Via the six directional force vectors dynamic structure and the Zhen Qi cultivation culitvation, one can goes beyond and much beyond one's own limit.

Without the six directional force vectors training One cant issue force vectors flow fully without compremization . Sure one can still hit and kick.... but that is not issuing force which could accelerate within an inch between the activate of power generation to hitting the target.

Without the Zhen Qi training one cannot clear the path to unstuck the six directional force vectors path.

Yes, both technology are Within SLT in 1850 and it is within the Chi Sau , it is not limited to WCK but lots of other TCMA because at that era TCMA has already evolve into a very mature state, but most of general TCMA has lost it today.

IS there still competance fighters exist today? Yes. Is the process still exist ? Yes.

However, these people hold the Law of Karma higher then how general westerner view figthing and competition.

Take some one like late GM Ma Li-Dang, for his whole life he was well know TCM and Qigong Doctor who have saved lots of life and heal /cured lots of people with chronic disease but not promoting figthing eventhough he is one of the top fighter.

See, different culture, different value system.

For me, after I have gone through what I gone through, life is a different story where helping others is much important then compete and fight to make the fame and reputation ....etc.

Just some thougths.

Hendrik, I've heard this all before,and not just from you. It's the same with all the theorists -- they all believe that they know how it can work. The problem is we never see it work the way they say it can. If what you are talking about works in fighting and against competent fighters, then it should be a fairly simple thing to show, right?

So we have two different POV. Mine -- which anyone can see occurring in any fight they watch -- or yours -- which we never see work.

[Hendrik]

Yes, it is my experience. And that also includes every fight that I've ever seen.

sure. I have seen the same thing repeat again and again since the 1970's.







Hendrik, I've heard this all before,and not just from you. It's the same with all the theorists -- they all believe that they know how it can work.

There are theorists and there are people the process. that is a heaven and earth different.

It is not a believe but a process. either it works or not. and even if it works, how far could it brought one? that is still that questions.





The problem is we never see it work the way they say it can. If what you are talking about works in fighting and against competent fighters, then it should be a fairly simple thing to show, right?


I have never buy into anyone's "says" or "believe" as I always ask in this forum " do you have the process so that I could test drive it and see how far it could take me?







So we have two different POV.

Mine -- which anyone can see occurring in any fight they watch --
or yours -- which we never see work.


I wont put it as POV.

But,
are we really speaking on something we really know. Not see Not believe But Do we know and can we operate it? knowing its capability and its limit? before making any conclusion.

in this case, you are making an assumption a big one.

[t_niehoff]

Hendrik,

I base my views and conclusions on evidence. Not theories, not stories. So, I am not assuming it won't work. Instead, I am saying is that there is no evidence to show that it works. I don't believe in things absent evidence. That isn't rational -- it's irrational. That's called faith (believing despite the evidence or lack of evidence).

On top of that, it is reasonable to conclude that if such things did work, and there were people who could do these things you believe, then we'd see evidence of it. We'd see people pulling this stuff off in fighting. Especially since millions of people practice TCMAs. But we can't find a single case.

If you want to convince people, the way to do it isn't through theory or stories but by presenting evidence of these things working in fighting. That's the only evidence that is meaningful. Nothing else will show that these things work in fighting.

[Hendrik]

I base my views and conclusions on evidence. Not theories, not stories. So, I am not assuming it won't work.

Instead, I am saying is that there is no evidence to show that it works. I don't believe in things absent evidence.

That isn't rational -- it's irrational. That's called faith (believing despite the evidence or lack of evidence).



Terence,

I propose you might want to look at these stuffs with a Technology point of view.



if you have seen a Technology process then the pro and con and the limit or boundary or characteristics of that Process can be discussed and compared. Why it works why it doesnt.....what is the limit.....etc

Jumping into conclusion before identifiying the Technology process is known doesnt solve anything but present one's bias and blind spot.






On top of that, it is reasonable to conclude that if such things did work, and there were people who could do these things you believe, then we'd see evidence of it. We'd see people pulling this stuff off in fighting. Especially since millions of people practice TCMAs.

But we can't find a single case.


Again, I dont assume. but you like to assume and make conclusion.








If you want to convince people, the way to do it isn't through theory or stories but by presenting evidence of these things working in fighting.

That's the only evidence that is meaningful. Nothing else will show that these things work in fighting.


1, I am not interested to convince ANY ONE.
I am just relaying what is exist and known those who practiced it.


2,
Totally Contradict to you, I will even pray these PROCESS will never be used in Fighting.
One doesnt need to prove a bullet can kill.


We certainly living a very different life,
As I told Robert, Those who provide Weapon to kill has to pay the Karma or impact one cause to others. There is nothing Gong Ho to be a star and win because one is tough , or to be the competent fighters, or to think one is a good fighter or to prove one is a good fighter.
one uses those technology only because it is in avoidable to help others.



Just be plain honest Terence, I have known some one who known the process.

yes, its acceleration and power generation and force handling is extra-ordinary. compare with other processes which rely heavily on muscle and youth age strength. it delivers shock penetration force vectors instead of colision force as a strong punch with body weight.

it is magic? nope. It is the best of the world? nope. It is very different then most training the physical? yes.

It is alots of discipline and detail training. One has to see it test drive it to know it certainly not belongs to imagination or speculation.


For me,
compare it with the Kyokushin training process which I have experience with, there is all the reason to believe this IMA TCMA process is parr.

[Hendrik]

Hendrik's accident and health crisis illustrates the real challenges of self defense in the US...
cars and junk food are up there on the list.

joy chaudhuri


Joy,

I really pray that Everyone feed their kids at least three natural meat with fresh vegi and full grain every week. To give the Kids a fair chance to be able to grow properly.

Can food or process food are not good for the Kids in term of thier health and brain power.



As for the car stuffs, wear sit belt even we have air bag today.



Peace

[Hendrik]

I have to be honest; I did have on my seatbelt too…


Seat belt is a great present from God.
as it says, buckle up and dont be a dummy.

[Yoshiyahu]

In a nutshell, WCK is a fighting method and teaches you the skills/tools to control an opponent while striking him.

A fight is a fight.

What are the skills and tools to control an opponent???

[t_niehoff]

What are the skills and tools to control an opponent???

The tools of WCK.

[Pacman]

And with the vast amount of lineages and conflicting views both inside and outside of Yip Man's lineage, how exactly do you ascertain exactly what wing chun is, in that way?

And what is the "essence" of WCK? As a martial art, its essence is that of fighting. You'd be hard pressed to make a convincing argument that its essence was anything more specific.

because WCK does not make sense as a hard style. to use chi sau effectively you must have the soft internal sensitivity training just like tai chi, bagua, xing yi.

wck postures also share many similarities with the abovementioned soft styles.

there are obvious influences from emei mountain

[Pacman]

Whether they "intended" it or not, that is a really poor, ineffective way to develop skill. The only way to develop skill is by doing the skill; you don't develop a skill by not doing the skill. This is simply common sense -- backed up by science and sport.

Your speedbag, etc. examples miss the point. That stuff is CONDITIONING, not skill building.

i never said dont do the skill to learn the skill. your responses are always full of exaggerations and mischaracterizations of what other people are saying.

i said you need to have everything. you need to isolate some parts of the overall skill to train it effectively. then you need to learn to apply what you have trained in a real situation

if all you do is put on the gloves every day and wack your training partner around you wont be learning or improving much in skill.

btw, a lot of the internal training you see and the things that i mentioned ARE FOR CONDITIONING. mentally and physically.

[Pacman]

terrence

i am actually 100% like you. i based everything on fact and evidence. it seems that many people on this board also think this way (not all but many)

the difference between you and the rest is that if you have not personally experienced it, you automatically think everyone else's experiences are BS. even if they tell you that they have experienced it, you call it meaningless and fantasy.

it is fair for you to say "ok i will believe it when i see it", but you dont do that. you simply say we are fantasizing i.e. we are full of sh!t even though we tell you that we are not basing our opinions on stories or fantasy but real experience. you think its utterly impossible for people disagreeing with you to be logical as you THINK you are.

this is why people say you are close minded. this is why your attitude has nothing to do with being an objective person...because you are actually not objective but rather extremely biased

you are emotionally invested for some reason in your world view.

i am close to automatically skipping your posts like i do hendrik's


Hendrik,

I base my views and conclusions on evidence. Not theories, not stories. So, I am not assuming it won't work. Instead, I am saying is that there is no evidence to show that it works. I don't believe in things absent evidence. That isn't rational -- it's irrational. That's called faith (believing despite the evidence or lack of evidence).

On top of that, it is reasonable to conclude that if such things did work, and there were people who could do these things you believe, then we'd see evidence of it. We'd see people pulling this stuff off in fighting. Especially since millions of people practice TCMAs. But we can't find a single case.

If you want to convince people, the way to do it isn't through theory or stories but by presenting evidence of these things working in fighting. That's the only evidence that is meaningful. Nothing else will show that these things work in fighting.

[t_niehoff]

terrence

i am actually 100% like you. i based everything on fact and evidence. it seems that many people on this board also think this way (not all but many)

the difference between you and the rest is that if you have not personally experienced it, you automatically think everyone else's experiences are BS. even if they tell you that they have experienced it, you call it meaningless and fantasy.


It boils down to a question of how do we know.

It's not just a matter of me personally experiencing it. I also recognize from experience, and from the experience of PROVEN fighters and fight trainers, what is and is not possible. If someone said they could levitate, I'd say that was fantasy. Similarly, if someone said they could knock someone out by merely touching them (ala Dillman), I'd say that was fantasy. Yet, there are people -- sincere people -- who believe it possible and will say they've witnessed it and experienced it. But, all they've done is fool themselves. So it's not just the experience, but the quality of the experience that matters.



it is fair for you to say "ok i will believe it when i see it", but you dont do that. you simply say we are fantasizing i.e. we are full of sh!t even though we tell you that we are not basing our opinions on stories or fantasy but real experience. you think its utterly impossible for people disagreeing with you to be logical as you THINK you are.

this is why people say you are close minded. this is why your attitude has nothing to do with being an objective person...because you are actually not objective but rather extremely biased

you are emotionally invested for some reason in your world view.

i am close to automatically skipping your posts like i do hendrik's

It has nothing to do with being emotionally invested -- just the opposite. I am just rational. To be rational is not to accept something as true without good evidence that it is true. The quality of the evidence always needs to be examined. Look, anyone can claim anything. They can say they have experienced it. But that doesn't mean it is true or they are telling the truth.

Now, even if it is true, that they have experienced "something", that experience itself needs to be questioned. That's why I ask, "have you seen it done in fighting with competent people?" Because the mere fact that someone can do something not in fighting (in drills or demos or whatever) doesn't mean it will work in fighting, or that it has any bearing on fighting skills.

I call something fantasy when it is not something that people are doing actually in fighting (and with competent people) but imagining that they will do in fighitng. I call that fantasy because that is what it is -- how they believe things will work in their imagination. Similarly, people will say that you should do X to develop fighting skills, right? How do they know? Are they fighting? Or is this something they imagine to be true?

Whether someone agrees with me or not, I can't argue with good evidence. That's all it takes to shut down my disagreement and change my mind. If someone is basing their conclusion on sound, good evidence, then my disagreement should be easily dispatched -- just provide the evidence. Don't get bent out of shape, don't get angry, just provide the evidence to back up your claim. IME the only people who get angry are the people who don't have any good evidence but believe things anyway.

[t_niehoff]

i never said dont do the skill to learn the skill. your responses are always full of exaggerations and mischaracterizations of what other people are saying.

i said you need to have everything. you need to isolate some parts of the overall skill to train it effectively. then you need to learn to apply what you have trained in a real situation


I don't know what you mean by "you need to have everything" -- wtf is "everything"?

What you NEED are the fundamentals -- that's actually the definition of what the fundaamentals are, i.e., the things you need to "play the game".

I agree that you can isolate "parts" of the game. As long as you train these things realistically.

Your statement about "then you need to learn to apply what you have trained in a real situation" illustrates the problem I'm trying referring to. Why train to do X, and then learn to apply it in a "real situation" when you can start by training to do X just like you will do X in a "real situation", so that your training exactly mirrors your fighting (since it is fighting?). As far as I'm concerned, the time you take doing X is wasted and may actually be counter-productive. Instead just start with application.



if all you do is put on the gloves every day and wack your training partner around you wont be learning or improving much in skill.


I'm not saying that ALL you should do is fight. I'm saying to train functionally, just like boxers, wrestlers, MT, BJJ, etc. people do. To make sparring the core of their training. To teach skills as application (from a fighting/sparring platform) -- in other words to teach X as you will really do it, to practice it as you will really do it, and then do it just as you learned and practiced it.




btw, a lot of the internal training you see and the things that i mentioned ARE FOR CONDITIONING. mentally and physically.

If it doesn't mirror what is occurring in fighting, then it can't condition you either physically or mentally.

[Yoshiyahu]

The tools of WCK.

What are the tools of WCK?

How do you train or conditioned these tools?

[Pacman]

these are good points if they applied to what i or others said. again you are making hyperboles out of my statements

i, nor anyone i have seen on this forum, talked about levitation etc. most of the things you call fantasy are training methods and movements--none of which involve anything supernatural.

for instance, you call chi sau just a drill. you say that anyone who thinks they could apply it in a live situation is living in fantasy.

this is a perfect example of something reasonable, that others have said they have seen and done themselves (no one said they imagined it) with competent fighters, but that you believe is pure fantasy because you yourself cannot do it and do not train with people that can do it.

it is fair to say "i have not seen it. i will believe it when i see it", but you completely dismiss it as pure delusional, humanly and scientifically impossible, as if we were smoking dope and imagined the whole thing.

i understand the need for good evidence, but this is an internet board and all we have is our words.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. the fact that you are already so convinced tells me that you are extremely arrogant or over-confident about your fighting skills.

this is why i say you are emotionally invested.

well you are always talking about evidence evidence evidence and you like to deride others' opinions from a pedestal because you are and train with competent fighters. you denied yoshi's interest to train with you. why dont YOU put up a video of you fighting so that you can back up your strong opinions?




It boils down to a question of how do we know.

It's not just a matter of me personally experiencing it. I also recognize from experience, and from the experience of PROVEN fighters and fight trainers, what is and is not possible. If someone said they could levitate, I'd say that was fantasy. Similarly, if someone said they could knock someone out by merely touching them (ala Dillman), I'd say that was fantasy. Yet, there are people -- sincere people -- who believe it possible and will say they've witnessed it and experienced it. But, all they've done is fool themselves. So it's not just the experience, but the quality of the experience that matters.



It has nothing to do with being emotionally invested -- just the opposite. I am just rational. To be rational is not to accept something as true without good evidence that it is true. The quality of the evidence always needs to be examined. Look, anyone can claim anything. They can say they have experienced it. But that doesn't mean it is true or they are telling the truth.

Now, even if it is true, that they have experienced "something", that experience itself needs to be questioned. That's why I ask, "have you seen it done in fighting with competent people?" Because the mere fact that someone can do something not in fighting (in drills or demos or whatever) doesn't mean it will work in fighting, or that it has any bearing on fighting skills.

I call something fantasy when it is not something that people are doing actually in fighting (and with competent people) but imagining that they will do in fighitng. I call that fantasy because that is what it is -- how they believe things will work in their imagination. Similarly, people will say that you should do X to develop fighting skills, right? How do they know? Are they fighting? Or is this something they imagine to be true?

Whether someone agrees with me or not, I can't argue with good evidence. That's all it takes to shut down my disagreement and change my mind. If someone is basing their conclusion on sound, good evidence, then my disagreement should be easily dispatched -- just provide the evidence. Don't get bent out of shape, don't get angry, just provide the evidence to back up your claim. IME the only people who get angry are the people who don't have any good evidence but believe things anyway.

[Pacman]

thanks for clarifying. in most cases this is true. you would not want to practice something totally different but in some cases there are reasons and the results do not conflict with the end result (applying it in a live situation)

1. tai chi practitioners initially practice the postures very slowly. because tai chi power also involves total body movement/coordination and complete relaxation, they move slowly to get the movements burned into their brains and to learn to relax (because tension while moving is a very common thing that they need to learn to resist)

they are training in a way that does not 100% mirror a live situation but the training does not inhibit their application

2. in our wing chun, when we practice many moves your aim is for a long distance. this trains you to hit through your target or teaches you to use all your body weight in the strike--basically you exaggerate the core concept of the move.

in real application the distance would be much smaller, but again the training does not inhibit real application.

this is why i said you need everything. you need to train individually, sometimes in a non realistic context and then train to apply it in a live setting by sparring



I'm not saying that ALL you should do is fight. I'm saying to train functionally, just like boxers, wrestlers, MT, BJJ, etc. people do. To make sparring the core of their training. To teach skills as application (from a fighting/sparring platform) -- in other words to teach X as you will really do it, to practice it as you will really do it, and then do it just as you learned and practiced it.




If it doesn't mirror what is occurring in fighting, then it can't condition you either physically or mentally.

[t_niehoff]

What are the tools of WCK?

How do you train or conditioned these tools?

The tools of WCK are those things that are contained the WCK curriculum (the faat, the forms, the drills, etc.).

Once you have the tool, you develop skill at using the tool (using it in fighitng) by using the tool (fighting).

[t_niehoff]

thanks for clarifying. in most cases this is true. you would not want to practice something totally different but in some cases there are reasons and the results do not conflict with the end result (applying it in a live situation)


I've heard that before. But that is simply a theory -- there's no evidence to support that it is true.

One of the main problems with TCMA and WCK is that people go about things in the wrong direction. They always will say if you do this or that it will make you better skilled, a better fighter, etc. What they don't do -- but functional martial arts do --is SHOW THE RESULTS FIRST, then say if you want this result, do what I'm doing. The former (TCMA) way is purely theoretical and, not suprisingly, we never see the results; the latter (functional) way doesn't rely on theory or argument as to why or whether it works.



1. tai chi practitioners initially practice the postures very slowly. because tai chi power also involves total body movement/coordination and complete relaxation, they move slowly to get the movements burned into their brains and to learn to relax (because tension while moving is a very common thing that they need to learn to resist)


That's the theory, but it doesn't work that way. You can't develop fast or powerful or explosive movements by practicing slowly. Modern sport science has proved that beyond a doubt. You've provided a perfect example of a trainng method that has been completely refuted by modern research, by sport science, and by their own results, yet people continue to train that way and continue, like you, to believe it despite the evidence. That sort of training is pure crap.



they are training in a way that does not 100% mirror a live situation but the training does not inhibit their application


Sure it does. As I explained above. Not only that, but you can see that from their own results -- out of all the millions of tai ji practitioners, where is there evidence that any are competent fighters?



2. in our wing chun, when we practice many moves your aim is for a long distance. this trains you to hit through your target or teaches you to use all your body weight in the strike--basically you exaggerate the core concept of the move.


Again, this makes no sense. If you want to practice "follow through" at close range, then just do that.



in real application the distance would be much smaller, but again the training does not inhibit real application.


Again, this is your theory, what you believe is true. But that doesn't make it true. The only way to know is to go fight with some competent fighters and see if you can do what you train to do.



this is why i said you need everything. you need to train individually, sometimes in a non realistic context and then train to apply it in a live setting by sparring

Working in a unrealistic environment is fine for learning a skill (because it is difficultto learn something under the stress of fighting and because it permits greater focus) -- and by learning I mean to be able to perform it comfortably and reliably. But you can't develop realsitic skill in an unrealistic environment.

You can train things in isolation (take snippets of the fight and turn them into drills). But again, if you work in an unrealistic environment in isolation, then you won't develop realistic skills. '

Again, START WITH RESULTS (in fighting). Who is getting really good results? Boxers, wrestlers, MMAists, etc. What are they doing to get those results? How can you adapt that to what you do?

But don't start with theory, especially the theory of people who aren't able to show any significant results in fighting, i.e., TCMAists.

[Hendrik]

Q
uote:
1. tai chi practitioners initially practice the postures very slowly. because tai chi power also involves total body movement/coordination and complete relaxation, they move slowly to get the movements burned into their brains and to learn to relax (because tension while moving is a very common thing that they need to learn to resist)


This above is a 1000% misleading. and clueless.






That's the theory, but it doesn't work that way. You can't develop fast or powerful or explosive movements by practicing slowly. Modern sport science has proved that beyond a doubt. You've provided a perfect example of a trainng method that has been completely refuted by modern research, by sport science, and by their own results, yet people continue to train that way and continue, like you, to believe it despite the evidence. That sort of training is pure crap.


It is true what above describe doesnt work. Even the Theory is totally misleading.
HOwever, TCMA IMA is not this totally, Absolutely not as the above.







Quote:
they are training in a way that does not 100% mirror a live situation but the training does not inhibit their application


Again, the above make no sense totally at all. This type of view is 100000% not accord to IMA or Taiji and totally goes in an OPPOSITE direction of Taiji or IMA.




Sure it does. As I explained above. Not only that, but you can see that from their own results -- out of all the millions of tai ji practitioners, where is there evidence that any are competent fighters?

The idea above is NOThing to do with TaiJi or IMA but someone's ignorance speculative Idea.

Draw conclusion on the above ideas is also blind speculation without knowing what is reality.


There are lots of Combat competent Taiji player. I wont use the ADJECTIVE fighters here because Fighters doesnt mean a thing.



I migrate this post to "why internal art fails ?" thread.

[Yoshiyahu]

I see what your saying Niehoff...But your missing Pacman's point or maybe your not. Pacman i believe he saying is there is too side to a coin...

1.Realistic partner training and sparring to build your ability to apply your tools of WC .

2.Indiviual tedious solidary training to refine and program muscle memory.


For instance three ways to work on your punches...

1. Punch the air = Yin
2.Punch a 200lbs heavy bag = Yang
3.Punch a resistancing opponent = Realistic condition for fighting


*Punching the air with various different strikes is a Yin way of training. It builds the muscle memory. Going into a semi dreamy or meditative state allows you to envision new applications when faced with an opponent. Also this Yin practice is something you can do that will actually build some power in your punches. But since you have no actual resistance but the wind. Punching the air is really a soft way to build power and conditioning while punching.

**Punching a heavy bag requires money and space. You need money to buy the bag and fill it and space to set it up. Punching the heavy bag gives you alot of resistance and will build your power up quicker. If you have a bag your weight or greater that means eventually you will be able to punch someone with that much pressure. The heavier the bag the better. Punching the heavy bag is over and over again is very taxing at first. But over time you build up your wind(chi) and can hit the bag faster, harder and longer than when you first began. At first the bag didn't move. Now after diligent practice you got it swaying. That means if you can move 200lbs of sawdust,sand and cloth when you hit someone 180lbs or 170lbs they hit. If you move up to 300lbs or 400lbs bag any one weighing 250 or less will be hurt if you land your blow. Not to mention the fact that if you can move a two hundred pound bag with your fist and feet then your adversary knees and face will be hurt.

***Punching a resisting opponent teaches you how to execute the technique. But if you never practice punching the WC way before you will constantly punch wrong and maybe hurt your hand. If you have no Martial Arts experience at all your punching will be off with out first training. Many people I see throw thier fist inverted or slightly tilted. Their thumbs are up and often jam their thumbs when punching. But if you have Air training you will have proper technique which means your less prone to injuries. Also if you practice with a heavy bag that means you have developed power so when you hit someone it will actually injure them more than usual. But with Resisting opponents you are learning how utilize timing, power and speed in the most advantageous way. With out a partner to test your technique out on you will lacking a key opponent to fighting. Which is fighting.

But Neihoff I just wanted you to know that Drilling, Chi Sau and Forms go hand in hand with actual fighting and sparring!



I've heard that before. But that is simply a theory -- there's no evidence to support that it is true.

One of the main problems with TCMA and WCK is that people go about things in the wrong direction. They always will say if you do this or that it will make you better skilled, a better fighter, etc. What they don't do -- but functional martial arts do --is SHOW THE RESULTS FIRST, then say if you want this result, do what I'm doing. The former (TCMA) way is purely theoretical and, not suprisingly, we never see the results; the latter (functional) way doesn't rely on theory or argument as to why or whether it works.



That's the theory, but it doesn't work that way. You can't develop fast or powerful or explosive movements by practicing slowly. Modern sport science has proved that beyond a doubt. You've provided a perfect example of a trainng method that has been completely refuted by modern research, by sport science, and by their own results, yet people continue to train that way and continue, like you, to believe it despite the evidence. That sort of training is pure crap.



Sure it does. As I explained above. Not only that, but you can see that from their own results -- out of all the millions of tai ji practitioners, where is there evidence that any are competent fighters?



Again, this makes no sense. If you want to practice "follow through" at close range, then just do that.



Again, this is your theory, what you believe is true. But that doesn't make it true. The only way to know is to go fight with some competent fighters and see if you can do what you train to do.



Working in a unrealistic environment is fine for learning a skill (because it is difficultto learn something under the stress of fighting and because it permits greater focus) -- and by learning I mean to be able to perform it comfortably and reliably. But you can't develop realsitic skill in an unrealistic environment.

You can train things in isolation (take snippets of the fight and turn them into drills). But again, if you work in an unrealistic environment in isolation, then you won't develop realistic skills. '

Again, START WITH RESULTS (in fighting). Who is getting really good results? Boxers, wrestlers, MMAists, etc. What are they doing to get those results? How can you adapt that to what you do?

But don't start with theory, especially the theory of people who aren't able to show any significant results in fighting, i.e., TCMAists.

[m1k3]

At first the bag didn't move. Now after diligent practice you got it swaying.

Just a little note, if the bag is "swaying" then you are not hitting it with the best technique. The punch should bend the bag, not swing it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Just a little note, if the bag is "swaying" then you are not hitting it with the best technique. The punch should bend the bag, not swing it.

Correct, you want it to "buckle", not swing, swing = push.

[Knifefighter]

Going into a semi dreamy or meditative state allows you to envision new applications when faced with an opponent.

Which is exactly why so many people who train this way end up with completely unrealistic fantasy applications of what they imagine will work.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Which is exactly why so many people who train this way end up with completely unrealistic fantasy applications of what they imagine will work.

Hey, don't knock it, a good acid trip is awesome !!
:D

[t_niehoff]

I see what your saying Niehoff...But your missing Pacman's point or maybe your not. Pacman i believe he saying is there is too side to a coin...

1.Realistic partner training and sparring to build your ability to apply your tools of WC .

2.Indiviual tedious solidary training to refine and program muscle memory.


For instance three ways to work on your punches...

1. Punch the air = Yin
2.Punch a 200lbs heavy bag = Yang
3.Punch a resistancing opponent = Realistic condition for fighting


*Punching the air with various different strikes is a Yin way of training. It builds the muscle memory. Going into a semi dreamy or meditative state allows you to envision new applications when faced with an opponent. Also this Yin practice is something you can do that will actually build some power in your punches. But since you have no actual resistance but the wind. Punching the air is really a soft way to build power and conditioning while punching.

**Punching a heavy bag requires money and space. You need money to buy the bag and fill it and space to set it up. Punching the heavy bag gives you alot of resistance and will build your power up quicker. If you have a bag your weight or greater that means eventually you will be able to punch someone with that much pressure. The heavier the bag the better. Punching the heavy bag is over and over again is very taxing at first. But over time you build up your wind(chi) and can hit the bag faster, harder and longer than when you first began. At first the bag didn't move. Now after diligent practice you got it swaying. That means if you can move 200lbs of sawdust,sand and cloth when you hit someone 180lbs or 170lbs they hit. If you move up to 300lbs or 400lbs bag any one weighing 250 or less will be hurt if you land your blow. Not to mention the fact that if you can move a two hundred pound bag with your fist and feet then your adversary knees and face will be hurt.

***Punching a resisting opponent teaches you how to execute the technique. But if you never practice punching the WC way before you will constantly punch wrong and maybe hurt your hand. If you have no Martial Arts experience at all your punching will be off with out first training. Many people I see throw thier fist inverted or slightly tilted. Their thumbs are up and often jam their thumbs when punching. But if you have Air training you will have proper technique which means your less prone to injuries. Also if you practice with a heavy bag that means you have developed power so when you hit someone it will actually injure them more than usual. But with Resisting opponents you are learning how utilize timing, power and speed in the most advantageous way. With out a partner to test your technique out on you will lacking a key opponent to fighting. Which is fighting.

But Neihoff I just wanted you to know that Drilling, Chi Sau and Forms go hand in hand with actual fighting and sparring!

Dude, you don't have a clue. Seriously. Not a clue. Everything you wrote is utter nonsense. Nor do you understand anything that I have written.

[Yoshiyahu]

Which is exactly why so many people who train this way end up with completely unrealistic fantasy applications of what they imagine will work.

Yes but you must refine your unrealistic fantasy with real life applications against a struggling opponent. What works is real. What doesn't work is fantasy.




Dude, you don't have a clue. Seriously. Not a clue. Everything you wrote is utter nonsense. Nor do you understand anything that I have written.


Did you notice the first thing I said???

Don't you agree in actual training outside of sparring and two man drills?

[Ali. R]

Seat belt is a great present from God.
as it says, buckle up and dont be a dummy.

Hendrik, that’s always good advice…;)


Ali Rahim.

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, that’s always good advice…;)


Ali Rahim.

But I dont take it seriously until I got into trouble..... hahaha. speak about my foolishness.

[t_niehoff]

Yes but you must refine your unrealistic fantasy with real life applications against a struggling opponent. What works is real. What doesn't work is fantasy.


No, it doesn't work that way. You can't take some unrealsitic fantasy and "refine it" to the point it will work. Rather, you need to start with things that work. You can spend your whole life training things that don't work and they will never work.



Did you notice the first thing I said???

Don't you agree in actual training outside of sparring and two man drills?

Yes, I read what you wrote and you don't know what you are talking about.

If you want to learn how to really train a martial art, go train with some good (proven) fighters and fight trainers.

You'd do well to listen to knifefighter (Dale), he's a BJJ BB and has fought MMA. His opinions are worthy of consideration.

[Ali. R]

No one is going to war constantly in his or her daily walks of life, and training the fighting arts correctly doesn’t consist of that mentality (what works and what don’t), because all one will do is throw away half of the art -or- system in which he or she trains in…

Instead of spending ones time on trying to figure out what works and what don’t, one should be spending it homing in -or- developing ones fundamentals to a very high and natural upstanding, then one can subconsciously react upon reaction naturally and with ease …

Then take that concept or mentality with you to each level that you may enter within your fighting system in which you train, and you shouldn’t have a problem with what a form may bring to you…

Because one should be able to relate to what’s going on in all level of the system that way (no short cuts)…


Ali Rahim.

[t_niehoff]

No one is going to war constantly in his or her daily walks of life, and training the fighting arts correctly doesn’t consist of that mentality (what works and what don’t), because all one will do is throw away half of the art -or- system in which he or she trains in…


This is silly reasoning. Imagine if you told someone "you're not going to spend your life doing nothing but playing tennis, so you shouldn't be concerned if everything in your tennis traiing method works or not, because if you are concerned with that you'll end up throwing half the tennis method out."

You learn a tennis system to play tennis, to prepare you for playing tennis. If there are parts of it that doesn't work, why keep it? And if half of what you do doesn't work, then you are training to fail.

This is true for ANY athletic endeavor.



Instead of spending ones time on trying to figure out what works and what don’t, one should be spending it homing in -or- developing ones fundamentals to a very high and natural upstanding, then one can subconsciously react upon reaction naturally and with ease …


Fundamentals ARE things that work. If they don't work, then they aren't fundamental, i.e., necessary to "play" the game or do the activity.



Then take that concept or mentality with you to each level that you may enter within your fighting system in which you train, and you shouldn’t have a problem with what a form may bring to you…

Because one should be able to relate to what’s going on in all level of the system that way (no short cuts)…
Ali Rahim.

Complete theoretical nonsense which demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of athletic training.

[Hendrik]

You can't take some unrealsitic fantasy and "refine it" to the point it will work. Rather, you need to start with things that work. You can spend your whole life training things that don't work and they will never work.

Exactly!



You can spend your whole life training things that don't work and they will never work.

and you also can spend your whole life training things that will never happen and they will never happen.

Both are a wasting of life and fantasy based.

[Ali. R]

But,

I wouldn’t worry about that, because if I learn to play tennis, I would want to learn it pretty much inside and out before I get in a serious match with someone…

The same with a street fight because things in life can be avoided until one is ready to deal with those situations with full knowledge and true understanding…

When I train, I don’t train it to be athletic, but I’m training it to be a good practitioner…

Far as being athletic, I’m not competing for anything ( most here are not as well) and I have other things that can help me with that (been there done that)…

I know this is highly stupid to most; but I’m already athletic and all I need to do is learn and master the information that is giving to me to gain knowledge, this way I can relate to things that are new to me in the system in which I train…

Just like in life, if one cannot read or write literally, it would be very hard to broaden ones horizon; in other words; get the knowledge first then live life successfully…

I’m already athletic, so I just train for knowledge… The more you know and truly understand (with in any system dealing with life) the more you can adapt with the real world…

I know by taking ones time to learn something and developing it to usefully knowledge and taking that knowledge in which one as gained, then making it useful in ones everyday life is nonsense and fantasy for most here…

But isn’t that the human way, far as knowledge and education is concerned?

The only difference is that executing ones knowledge in everyday life is less stressful then fighting, but I have that cover because I’m already athletic…

Knowledge is knowledge nothing more, and that is king...

[Ali. R]

I don’t train to make things work, I train for the knowledge and true understanding of the system, then what comes out just comes out, and half of the things that we learn in any school we sometimes never use…

But I will always have that knowledge that I may use or not based on what life gives me (react upon reaction), but never once tossing that hard-earned education away, because it will always be there when I need it to come out naturally, to go on living life…

And if I throw it away (knowledge) I’ll never have that mental reference or guide for the next level, but will only fall more off track…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[Pacman]

Correct, you want it to "buckle", not swing, swing = push.

this is not true for all cases. if you hit any bag hard enough it will buckle and swing.

imagine what would happen if you punched one of those tiny 40lb bags.

[Pacman]

Don't you agree in actual training outside of sparring and two man drills?

he doesnt. he thinks that by sparring , and only sparring, from the get go you will become a great fighter.

everything that isnt fighting is fantasy

well...terrence is big into evidence so i say he unveil the doors to his super secret underground fight club and show us what its all about. well, at least show us a vid of his superior skills

[t_niehoff]

I don’t train to make things work, I train for the knowledge and true understanding of the system, then what comes out just comes out, and half of the things that we learn in any school we sometimes never use…


It's funny how TCMA brainwashes people. WCK, or any fighting method, is an athletic activity -- like any other athletic activity with the same commonalities.

You can't get any knowledge or understanding beyond the superficial level EXCEPT by making things work. Skill doesn't come from knowledge and understanding -- it is the other way round, that knowledge and understanding comes from skill, from being able to do something well. The process you go through developing skill -- practice actually doing the activity itself -- is what provides that knowledge and understanding.

People who try, and believe, that they can "understand" a martial art without fighting are like people who believe they can understand surfing without actually surfing or understand swimming without getting in a pool and swimming or undestand BJJ without grappling. It doesn't work taht way.



But I will always have that knowledge that I may use or not based on what life gives me (react upon reaction), but never once tossing that hard-earned education away, because it will always be there when I need it to come out naturally, to go on living life…

And if I throw it away (knowledge) I’ll never have that mental reference or guide for the next level, but will only fall more off track…



The ONLY way to get to the "next level" in a fighting method is by and through quality sparring/fighting. Someone can know how to slip a punch and understand the theory behind it -- being able to do it against a good opponent who is trying to pound you is something entirely different. And as with all physical skills, whether the knowledge remains with you the rest of your life doesn't mean your skill will -- skill declines when you stop doing it. Stop sparring/fighting and your skill declines.

[t_niehoff]

he doesnt. he thinks that by sparring , and only sparring, from the get go you will become a great fighter.


Look at how boxing, BJJ, judo, wrestling, MT, etc. train. They figured it out. And that's why they regularly produce top level practitioners.

Fighting/sparring is what we are training to do, right? That's the skill we are trying to develop, right? Well, the only way to develop a skill is by doing that skill.



everything that isnt fighting is fantasy


No, but everything that isn't based on reality (fighting) is fantasy.



well...terrence is big into evidence so i say he unveil the doors to his super secret underground fight club and show us what its all about. well, at least show us a vid of his superior skills

Dude, I've never claimed to be anything special -- I'm just a guy trying to develop. I also do BJJ. I roll (spar) twice a week for two hours in BJJ. That's how you develop skill. I don't claim to be a great BJJ fighter, and I know that I'll never be a great BJJ fighter. But that's not the point. If I didn't do that (the rolling), I'd never develop any skill. It's the exact samething in WCK.

[Ali. R]

No one said anything about not being active or fighting we are highly active, and we spar all the time when one as reached that level, yes; boxing ring and all…

I have had boxers fight wing chun guys and wing chun guy fighting boxers at my school, it’s always apart of my curriculum (3 days a week)…

We fight; fight and fight some more only after the knowledge is gained…

It’s crazy to think that wing chun people don’t spar and I’ve been doing wing chun for almost over 30 years and have been sparring all this time…

I’ve had my first recorded boxing match at 8 years of age and have been fighting all of my life, so I know the benefits of sparring as well…

But in my class you need the knowledge first before you get in that ring…

And it should be that way for all schools and camps…

I don’t know anyone that get their driver license two weeks later after seeing a car for the first time…

Usually one is riding the back set in a buckle down chair…


Take care,


Ali Rahim

[Ali. R]

Everything that I said above apply to my boxers as well… My boxing trainer wouldn’t let me in the ring or anybody else four that matter for a year and a half, because he didn’t want anyone to get in there and get hurt from being uneducated…


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

I’ve just called my old boxing trainer; he said “the reason why a boxing trainer don’t let the young boxer get in the ring to early is that the kid could get seriously hurt his first time out”…

And that’s coming for a man that’s 72 years of age and has been in the boxing game for over 60 years…

And most of all it shows respect to the trainer and respect to his fellow fighters by not trying to get in there uneducated and fighting like a Wildman…

And I do the same in my wing chun classes as well (education first)…

I wouldn’t let a jailhouse lawyer handle my murder case, especially if he hadn’t passed the bar yet (uneducated), that’s asking for nothing but trouble (death) …

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[t_niehoff]

No one said anything about not being active or fighting we are highly active, and we spar all the time when one as reached that level, yes; boxing ring and all…

I have had boxers fight wing chun guys and wing chun guy fighting boxers at my school, it’s always apart of my curriculum (3 days a week)…

We fight; fight and fight some more only after the knowledge is gained…


Of course a person needs to learn the fundamentals of any sport or athletic activity before they can "play the game" -- this is true of boxing or judo or WCK, and also true of basketball and tennis and etc.


However, it shouldn't take long to learn the fundamentals.



It’s crazy to think that wing chun people don’t spar and I’ve been doing wing chun for almost over 30 years and have been sparring all this time…


I don't believe you've been doing any quality (high intensity and with competent fighters) sparring with WCK based on some of the things you say about WCK. Anyone who does that kind of work will know the sorts of things you can and cannot get away with. Moreover, I always wonder when people put up all kinds of videos of their "practice" of WCK but don't show any sparring.



I’ve had my first recorded boxing match at 8 years of age and have been fighting all of my life, so I know the benefits of sparring as well…

But in my class you need the knowledge first before you get in that ring…

And it should be that way for all schools and camps…


As I said, I'm not saying you don't need to learn the fundamentals of a sport or fighting method before you play the game. But, as they say, you learn to box by boxing. Not by not boxiing.

[Ali. R]

I’m nothing special but I’m experienced and can teach it as well...

Boxing: tournaments, semi pro and pro fighting for over 20 years active in the ring…

Wing Chun: Over 15 chi sao heavy contact tournaments only lost one by disqualification…

Many open challenges here in Kentucky as well…

I have spar right in front of my students well over 7 different tournament fighters (black belts) all in one-day people that I’ve never seen before in my life and won all 7…

And have shamed a bjj group here in Kentucky that stopped training here in my area…

And didn’t get hit not one time, and I’m sure that it’s some people that can verified that here on this forum…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

No it doesn’t take long to learn fundamentals, but it does to master them…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[t_niehoff]

I’m nothing special but I’m experienced and can teach it as well...

Boxing: tournaments, semi pro and pro fighting for over 20 years active in the ring…

Wing Chun: Over 15 chi sao heavy contact tournaments only lost one by disqualification…


Were can I check out your Golden Gloves record?

With regard to WCK, that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. Chi sao, no matter how you do it, isn't fighting -- it's an unrealistic, artificial exercise/platform for learning/teaching. Saying that you've participated in chi sao tournements is like saying you're been in bicycle-with-the-training-wheels-on races. How well you do in a chi sao tournament says absolutely nothing about your WCK skill, i.e., your ability to fight with WCK. People who do quality sparring with WCK will know that and won't use those things as evidence of skill or knowledge.



Many open challenges here in Kentucky as well…

I have spar right in front of my students well over 7 different tournament fighters (black belts) all in one-day people that I’ve never seen before in my life and won all 7…


Here we go again, everyone wants to TELL you but never SHOW you. Look, I don't care if anyone ever puts up videos of WCK (particularly since 99.9% of them are crap) but the only videos that show anything significant are sparring videos -- anyone can do the forms, anyone can do the drills, anyone can do demos, anyone can talk theory, etc.



And have shamed a bjj group here in Kentucky that stopped training here in my area…

And didn’t get hit not one time, and I’m sure that it’s some people that can verified that here on this forum…


What are you talking about?

[t_niehoff]

No it doesn’t take long to learn fundamentals, but it does to master them…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

Sure it does. WCK, boxing, BJJ, MT, etc. aren't just comprised of isolated physical skills. They are physical skills that all work together within a tactical framework to defeat an opponent. In simpler terms, you have the necessary physical skills (fundamentals) that you need to play the game. So you ahve two parts, the fundamentals and the game itself. The "game playing" - whether boxing or fighitng - can't be learned or developed by not playing the game. The physical skills can't be integrated into the game without playing the game. Mastering the fundamentals requires that you use those skills in playing the game -- since you can't really learn how to perform them or use them outside of playing the game.

WCK is no different than any other physical activity or sport. Look at basseball or basketball or whatever -- you don't have people not playing the game until they "master": the fundamentals. In fact, athletes don't even talk that way. You learn the fundamentals of baseball and play the game. Are Little Leagers masters of the fundamentals? Are high school players masters of the fundamentals? If people never played baseball until they mastered the fundamentals, we'd never have any good baseball players.

[Ali. R]

Honestly, I don’t now where you can find that stuff when I was boxing there were no computers to find such records and I never won a golden glove, I went one time and lost (politics) and just moved on after that, and fought at many local gyms to get ready for the next level…

But I’m only speaking about what I’ve posted just before this one, we are just talking and you seem to very angry why?

Please stay on subject we are not talking video clips here...


Here we go again, everyone wants to TELL you but never SHOW you. Look, I don't care if anyone ever puts up videos of WCK (particularly since 99.9% of them are crap) but the only videos that show anything significant are sparring videos -- anyone can do the forms, anyone can do the drills, anyone can do demos, anyone can talk theory, etc.

100% of your posting is that way with no proof at all just talk and angry talk as well, but I never called you a lair to win a debate that’s a cop out where I’m from, please let’s not fight, lets just be civil with each other...

I would be happy to show you a sparring clip if you can back up all of your talk with no proof with a clip as well, then you can make a lair out of me…

untill then be safe and take care,


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

We fight and we do play the game, why do you insist on taking that away from us, when we do this three times a week...:confused:

My wing chun guys box as well and spar with there wing chun too...

I have a boxing gym with all the trimmings...


Ali Rahim...

[t_niehoff]

Honestly, I don’t now where you can find that stuff when I was boxing there were no computers to find such records and I never won a golden glove, I went one time and lost (politics) and just moved on after that, and fought at many local gyms to get ready for the next level…

But I’m only speaking about what I’ve posted just before this one, we are just talking and you seem to very angry why?


I'm not angry, I'm just don't accept claims people make without evidence. yOU brought up your boxing "record" as evidence to support your views. Right? So why is it inappropriate to question your "record"?



Please stay on subject we are not talking video clips here...


My point with regard to the videos is that if someone, like you, is going to take the time to tape all sorts of videos of themselves and their school but they don't record any sparring, it suggests to me that sparring isn't a significant part of their WCK practice - even if they claim it is.



100% of your posting is that way with no proof at all just talk and angry talk as well, but I never called you a lair to win a debate that’s a cop out where I’m from, please let’s not fight, lets just be civil with each other...


I'm not angry. If I had to describe my emotion it would be mild amusement.

I don't make any claims about myself. I don't try, like you, to use my "record" as proof my view is correct. Just the opposite: I don't think I'm special in any way or that people should follow what I say because I say it. Instead, I say look at what good, proven fighters do and good, proven fight trainers say about training to fight and listen to them (and not people who don't fight but have theories of how to train or do it). They have proved that they know what they are talking about. Then apply their knowledge, their insights to your WCK training. Better yet, go visit some of these people yourself and train with them.

And I am being civil. Where have I been uncivil?




I would be happy to show you a sparring clip if you can back up all of your talk with no proof with a clip as well, then you can make a lair out of me…

untill then be safe and take care,


Back up what talk? That all good fighters esseniailly train the same way? And that if you don't train that way, you can't develop significant skill?

[t_niehoff]

We fight and we do play the game, why do you insist on taking that away from us, when we do this three times a week...:confused:

My wing chun guys box as well and spar with there wing chun too...

I have a boxing gym with all the trimmings...


I find it difficult to reconcile many of your theoretical views of WCK with your claim that you are regularly sparring with your WCK. That's all.

[Ali. R]

I never made a claim (all fact), but if you want to call me a lair that’s cool, because I have nothing to prove on the Internet…

By you saying there are things that don’t work and things that do, that’s nothing but a claim without proof as well, what makes your words have more authority over my words, when you do even train wing chun?

I like you a lot; because we need poster like you here to keep things interesting, you are welcome to my home anytime to see what I have to say about that subject…

Obviously it’s a subject that most don’t understand (wing chun and sparring) and that’s for many different reasons…

But if you come, you can stay at my home or I can set up a room for you, and we will do whatever you want too; we don’t have to get too rough unless that’s something you want to do…

You are not that far away, so let’s be friends and figure this stuff out together, and I promise you, I’ll show you what you’re looking for while you watch it in action first hand…

You’re welcome anytime to stay here with my family and I; let’s prove it together, then you can report your finding to everyone here…

I hope you are one that really searches for the true, and not just hot air…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

First we were talking about how to work the wing chun knowledge, then it went right to my creditability way off subject, which have nothing to do with anything really... But for some reason it always goes there, and that’s ok too…

Sometimes the best why to destroy the message is to destroy the massager…

Hope to see you soon,


Ali Rahim.

[Tom Kagan]

My understanding of the chinese character "chi" as used in "chi sao" is that it pertains to the characteristic of adhering -- like two pieces of rice "stuck" together.


in chinese the 'chi' of chi sau means to stick.

not sticking. totally wrong

the point is to stick to the other person


Interesting: I'd only ever heard of the 'adhering' definition before... is it 黐?


Correct, the Chinese character is the one for "adhering" as Mr. Punch points out.


黐 - chi
[1] stick sth to/on/together, especially using a sticky substance such as glue
[2] stick with; stay close to

Analogy:

Sticky hands: Eating watermelon and not washing your hands afterward.

Sticking hands: Throwing cooked spaghetti against the kitchen backsplash to see if it's done.


How do you avoid arm chasing?

Stop trying to be sticky with your training partner. Instead, (drumroll here) try to STICK'EM.


Considering how this topic went south since I last checked it, suddenly I'm hungry.

[Ali. R]

This is one of my favorite chi sao clips, maybe because I’m with some of my favorite students…

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

Enjoy or not, but stay happy,:D


Ali Rahim.

[Hardwork108]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

For me the chi sao training has more than one aspect. On a basic level and as a beginner one learns and gets used to the "in your face proximity" with an opponent. He will also learn to maintain his correct structure/roots etc. under ever increasing pressure as well as develop understanding of their purpose and function within the concepts of Wing Chun.


Then one learns to feel the opponents intent through the bridge, that is, develops SENSITIVITY and "LISTENING" abilities. These abilities, together with "SOFTNESS", are abilities that one goes on to tune and then fine tune for the rest of ones kung fu life.

On another level, chi sao is a good "bridge" to sparring or San Sao. How hard one's san sao training and the ranges (eg. long or ground) will depend on one's school.

One more thing. Chi sao is not seen as just a phase of training, meaning that it is not forgotten when one goes on to sparring practice.

[Yoshiyahu]

How does the chi sau help with fighting? When does chi sau skills relate to fighting?


For me the chi sao training has more than one aspect. On a basic level and as a beginner one learns and gets used to the "in your face proximity" with an opponent. He will also learn to maintain his correct structure/roots etc. under ever increasing pressure as well as develop understanding of their purpose and function within the concepts of Wing Chun.


Then one learns to feel the opponents intent through the bridge, that is, develops SENSITIVITY and "LISTENING" abilities. These abilities, together with "SOFTNESS", are abilities that one goes on to tune and then fine tune for the rest of ones kung fu life.

On another level, chi sao is a good "bridge" to sparring or San Sao. How hard one's san sao training and the ranges (eg. long or ground) will depend on one's school.

One more thing. Chi sao is not seen as just a phase of training, meaning that it is not forgotten when one goes on to sparring practice.

[Hardwork108]

How does the chi sau help with fighting? When does chi sau skills relate to fighting?

Good question.

As one gets better at chi sao and hence the exercise intensifies it becomes more "free" and mobile with stepping/angles etc. As one's sensitivity increase one will feel attacks happening before they actually happen and will be able to jam. Once openings are sensed then the opening is attacked with the attacker stepping in, taking his opponent's space and disrupting his structure while hitting (even grappling as in kum-na/chiña) until the opponent is out of the game.

Once necessary skills are gained through this type of chi sao then it can move on to free sparring while sticking to the WC ways and concepts.

All aspects of the above explanation are relevant to fighting.:)

[Pacman]

Look at how boxing, BJJ, judo, wrestling, MT, etc. train. They figured it out. And that's why they regularly produce top level practitioners.

Fighting/sparring is what we are training to do, right? That's the skill we are trying to develop, right? Well, the only way to develop a skill is by doing that skill.



believe it or not i think we agree. i think we are both saying that any training that is not applicable is a waste of time.

you have said "anything that is not fighting is a waste of time" but since your favorite arts listed above do other things besides just pure sparring i dont think you mean exactly that.

the difference is that i know that chi sau is directly applicable to fighting. you dont think so. i also believe that qigong and other forms of internal training are applicable to fighting. you don't.



Dude, I've never claimed to be anything special

you actually have. you have a super secret muay thai i mean wing chun fight club that is full of competent fighters. you have fought many competent fighters and continue to do so on a regular basis. in a nutshell you have experience that others here don't. you use this to bolster your credibility above others here and to act as a "know it all" and enlightened one on fighting training.

thats why you are able to call other's opinions fantasy and to call people like yoshiyahu idiot.

since you like evidence too, i think its only reasonable to produce some evidence to back up your rep here.

[Pacman]

i completely agree

sometimes if people start fighting too early w/o knowledge of WC principles and theories they will develop bad habits in opposition to carrying out those WC principles and theories in a fight


No one said anything about not being active or fighting we are highly active, and we spar all the time when one as reached that level, yes; boxing ring and all…

I have had boxers fight wing chun guys and wing chun guy fighting boxers at my school, it’s always apart of my curriculum (3 days a week)…

We fight; fight and fight some more only after the knowledge is gained…

It’s crazy to think that wing chun people don’t spar and I’ve been doing wing chun for almost over 30 years and have been sparring all this time…

I’ve had my first recorded boxing match at 8 years of age and have been fighting all of my life, so I know the benefits of sparring as well…

But in my class you need the knowledge first before you get in that ring…

And it should be that way for all schools and camps…

I don’t know anyone that get their driver license two weeks later after seeing a car for the first time…

Usually one is riding the back set in a buckle down chair…


Take care,


Ali Rahim

[Pacman]

Chi sao, no matter how you do it, isn't fighting -- it's an unrealistic, artificial exercise/platform for learning/teaching.

you are right. when you say chi sau you are referring to the basic chi sau training where you link arms first and then go. this is unrealistic to a certain extent because few people are going to willingly touch hands with you. i agree, its not a completely realistic environemnt

however chi sau, when referring to the actual moves and the principles of sticking to on opponent are not just an exercise and unrealistic. are you saying the actual moves are unrealistic and useless?

in addition to practicing chi sau, you should also train to be able to apply it to a live situation.

[Ali. R]

LOL…

The funk hits the fan when your opponent throws a shot or makes his first block; from there usually I’m three too four strikes ahead of him because of chi sao…

When I make bridge contact from a fight, I’ll feel ones intension from his hands to his feet…

And every technique or movement has a name in form and in application when I do chi sao which are the same movements that I’ll do in a fight...

Because those movements were taught to me in form and in application first, and I didn’t figure out those moves when playing chi sao, I already knew them and just brought them along with me in my chi sao training…

And I’m positive that’s the way it happens to any certified wing chun instructor (real)…
Chi Sao is most defiantly a bridge to higher understanding in combat…


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

The concept of jamming slicing and wedging has always been apart of the wing chun system, and those three elements helps the ideal of controlling ones strikes or blocks to a automatic feel of sensitivity dealing with the ulna and radius…

This is how the skeleton or structure finds the automatic connection of sensitivity when fighting by jamming slicing and wedging…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

Oh I forgot to add; it won’t work if the hands cannot stays soft and the mind calm, usually that comes with time and practice and of course with a teacher that understands and has no problem answering your question…

Take care,


Ali Rahim.

[t_niehoff]

you are right. when you say chi sau you are referring to the basic chi sau training where you link arms first and then go. this is unrealistic to a certain extent because few people are going to willingly touch hands with you. i agree, its not a completely realistic environemnt

however chi sau, when referring to the actual moves and the principles of sticking to on opponent are not just an exercise and unrealistic. are you saying the actual moves are unrealistic and useless?

in addition to practicing chi sau, you should also train to be able to apply it to a live situation.

The drill/exercise we call chi sao and gor sao is unrealsitic and artificial because it is not realistic -- it is not performed under fighting conditions and your partner is not behaving like he will in a fight. Because it is not realistic, you cannot significantly develop realistic skills, the ability to perform the movements, tactics, etc. under fighting conditions. Once you accept that realistic fighting skills ONLY come from realistic training, and realistic training is training done under fighting conditions (genuinely resisting opponent using high levels of force to overcome you), you can see these things for what they really are.

There is a kuit: chi sao mo lien fa sik – don’t practice flowery techniques in chi sao practice. A "flowery technique" is one that won't work in fighting, although it will work in chi sao (if they didn't work in chi sao,there would be no reason to warn people to avoid them). The only way to know what is or is not a flowery technique or a valid "principle" is by and through fighting -- if you can do it in fighting (and against competent fighters) then it is by definition not fa sik. The rub is, however, that you can't tell what is or is not fa sik through chi sao -- you can't know what will work in fighting through chi sao.

[t_niehoff]

believe it or not i think we agree. i think we are both saying that any training that is not applicable is a waste of time.

you have said "anything that is not fighting is a waste of time" but since your favorite arts listed above do other things besides just pure sparring i dont think you mean exactly that.


Realistic fighting skills come only from fighting. The fighting (realsitic training) is what builds and develops skills (beyond the superficial level). However, we can learn new skills, condition ourselves, etc. through unrealistic training.



the difference is that i know that chi sau is directly applicable to fighting. you dont think so. i also believe that qigong and other forms of internal training are applicable to fighting. you don't.


Hionestly, it doesn't matter what anyone believes. People believe all kinds of nonsense. What matters is evidence. People say this or that is applicable, this or that will work, etc. BUT these people aren't saying "I'm fighting with competent people and I find this is applicable or this or that works." The former is simply theory, what someone imagines (fantasizes) if true; the latter is reality, what someone is actually doing.



you actually have. you have a super secret muay thai i mean wing chun fight club that is full of competent fighters. you have fought many competent fighters and continue to do so on a regular basis. in a nutshell you have experience that others here don't. you use this to bolster your credibility above others here and to act as a "know it all" and enlightened one on fighting training.

thats why you are able to call other's opinions fantasy and to call people like yoshiyahu idiot.


The guys in our group all train with competent nonWCK fighters outside the group. Why do I emphasize "competent fighters"? Because of "junk." Junk is a wrestler's term for stuff that works at low levels of competition but fails against good, solid wrestlers (with good attributes and skills). It's like practicing your ground game only with beginners -- you'll find all kinds of stuff works against them but when you try it with solid grapplers, it fails. By training with solidly skilled people, you avoid the junk. It forces you to use solid stuff, develop good habits, etc. And we all get together to compare notes, to try and figure out how to make our WCK work better, etc. I think this is what everyone needs to do.

And I'm not saying that I'm some great fighter (I know I'm not since I train with some good people) or that how I use my WCK is the only way to do it -- in fact, I know it's not. But what I read on this forum is almost entirely theory, beliefs, etc. of people who I can tell by what they say (and sometimes show) aren't getting out and seeing if their theory, beliefs, etc. are valid or not.



since you like evidence too, i think its only reasonable to produce some evidence to back up your rep here.

I have no rep and I don't want one. It's the same as if everyone was talking about how to train to swim or how people should swim, and I just kept saying, "get in the pool and see for yourself." Base your views on what you can do in the pool instead of in your imagination.

[Ultimatewingchun]

That's the title of this thread, yeah?

Okay...well this is why !!! :cool:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPkI9oKv6Iw


Dirty ol' man... ;) :D

[Hardwork108]

That's the title of this thread, yeah?

Okay...well this is why !!! :cool:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPkI9oKv6Iw


Dirty ol' man... ;) :D

Wow!:eek:

I had no idea that t_niehoff was a woman.:D

Now I know why she hates Wing Chun, she is just no good at it.:D

[Pacman]

The drill/exercise we call chi sao and gor sao is unrealsitic and artificial because it is not realistic -- it is not performed under fighting conditions and your partner is not behaving like he will in a fight. Because it is not realistic, you cannot significantly develop realistic skills, the ability to perform the movements, tactics, etc. under fighting conditions.

chi sau is unrealistic because you start off in a close range chi sau position. that is the only unrealistic part of the drill. other than that your opponent is real. he is really trying to hit you and vice versa.

because of that you must also learn how to engage your opponent to put him into a range and position where you can use your techniques.

if you are saying it is unrealistic because non WC fighters will not use chi sau and therefore your chi sau skills will be useless i disagree. if they do not know sticky hands at a close range you will be at an advantage.

if you practice sticky hands with a competent WC fighter you will dominate someone who does not know how to defend against it. you will be too close and thus too fast for him to stop

[Pacman]

But what I read on this forum is almost entirely theory, beliefs, etc. of people who I can tell by what they say (and sometimes show) aren't getting out and seeing if their theory, beliefs, etc. are valid or not.



well you have said this to me and i don't say anything based on pure theory or imagination. who does this?

[t_niehoff]

chi sau is unrealistic because you start off in a close range chi sau position. that is the only unrealistic part of the drill. other than that your opponent is real. he is really trying to hit you and vice versa.


This is the same as saying aikido's randori is realistic because people are "really" trying to strike. It's not. And that's because aikido practitioners don't behave realistically (like people do in fighting). Same with chi sao.

An easy way to see this is get some nonWCK person, start in contact, and have him fight you. You will see it looks, feels, etc. NOTHING like chi sao. The only reason chi sao "works" is because both sides stick to chi sao "rules" (with both sides trying to do chi sao or gor sao).

If you were fighting, you'd KNOW this. The mere fact that you don't know it tells me you aren't fighting.



because of that you must also learn how to engage your opponent to put him into a range and position where you can use your techniques.

if you are saying it is unrealistic because non WC fighters will not use chi sau and therefore your chi sau skills will be useless i disagree. if they do not know sticky hands at a close range you will be at an advantage.


Your views are not based on doing it, but on your imagining (fantasy) how it "should" work. Do yourself a favor and see. Go find yourself a nonWCK person, start in contact, and fight. Have your opponent really try to bash your skull, wrestle you to the ground, etc. Wear protective gear and go at 90-100%. See whether your chi sao contact skills work in that environment, see if chi sao training gives you some "advantage". Do that work -- then come back and tell me what you've found out.

Until you do that, you are just fantasizing.



if you practice sticky hands with a competent WC fighter you will dominate someone who does not know how to defend against it. you will be too close and thus too fast for him to stop

That's pure fantasy. It's fantasy because you are not saying this is what you do or have done (you fight and consistently do this) but it is what how you believe (fatasize) it will be.

[t_niehoff]

well you have said this to me and i don't say anything based on pure theory or imagination. who does this?

Everything you say is pure theory and fantasy.

Look, if someone is fighting and reporting their observations of their fighting (I am able to do this, I find this works, etc.) that is reality.

When someone's views are informed not by fighting, then it is informed by speculation and fantasy.

That's the test.

When someone gives a view, just ask yourself -- what informs that view? Is it their personal experience fighting with their WCK (particularly with competent nonWCK fighters)? If not, then it is fantasy, theory.

[sanjuro_ronin]

if you practice sticky hands with a competent WC fighter you will dominate someone who does not know how to defend against it. you will be too close and thus too fast for him to stop

Why would someone that doesn't know "sticky hands" be doing "sticky hands" with you?
Wouldn't they be trying to hit you or kick you or clinch up with you or take you down or even throw pixie dust in your face and prance away singing " I am the walrus" ?

[taojkd]

Why would someone that doesn't know "sticky hands" be doing "sticky hands" with you?
Wouldn't they be trying to hit you or kick you or clinch up with you or take you down or even throw pixie dust in your face and prance away singing " I am the walrus" ?

Agreed.

This is why i think chi sao should be done as a two-man set drill or like a counter punching drill in boxing, that has a clearly defined structure to it. Neither a two man set nor counter punching drills are "alive", and chi sao should be the same.

Improve structure, timing, and sensitivity but then SPAR afterwards. This is why i cant stand doing competitive chi sao with people. Its alive, but not really...your hitting, but not really. Everyone has their own notion of what chi sao is and a notion of "success" in their minds or whatever rules of chi sao they do.

Thai Boxing:
Pads and footwork
Counter Punching Drills
Clinch (Sensitivity Drills) Drills (yes, MT has them)
Spar.

WC:
Forms, pads, footwork
Lat Sau/Gor Sau-type Drills (Garn, Pak, Bong, Jum etc) against combination's.
Chi Sao Drills for sensitivity, structure, timing.
Spar.

Chi Sao aint sparring. If you want to practice trapping hands or in-fighting then start from a clinch position and spar. Same as with MT. There's clinch sensitivity drills and then there's also clinch sparring.

I am the walrus? lolz

[Pacman]

Why would someone that doesn't know "sticky hands" be doing "sticky hands" with you?
Wouldn't they be trying to hit you or kick you or clinch up with you or take you down or even throw pixie dust in your face and prance away singing " I am the walrus" ?

whoa. i see now why there is such a big disconnect on this topic

there is a fundamental difference in what we think of chi sau.

in my view, sticky hands is a set of skills, a set of techniques. you can use sticky hands on someone even if they arent using sticky hands on you. in fact its even easier if that is the case because they will not know how to defend against it.

apparently you and some others are under the impression that sticky hands requires two people who know sticky hands

[bennyvt]

hey t. Who are there great fighters you 'fight' against. I dont mean spar. I mean who do you fight. Atare he you dont fight them you are only saying what you have found out about sparing. Sparing has rules, pros and cons like chi sao. Both are an exercise to practice parts of a fight. Unless you actually fight on a regular basis them you are just talking theory like every one you have a go at. You always say you have to fight to be called a fighter then talk about sparing. And no i dont fight either. Dont go out and i work at nights but i spar with various people that do mt, shootefighting, boxing etc. But i dont fight them..

[t_niehoff]

I never said I train with "great" fighters. I train with competent, skilled fighters -- I, and the other guys in my group, have crosstrained at a MMA school, a muay thai school, a BJJ school, a boxing gym, etc. That's my point-- you need to take your WCK and your theories and go visit and train with good people, because they will have solid fundamentals and decent attributes. To put it crudely, you learn and develop your fighting (WCK) skills by getting your ass whipped and so you need to seek out people who can whip your ass.

[sanjuro_ronin]

whoa. i see now why there is such a big disconnect on this topic

there is a fundamental difference in what we think of chi sau.

in my view, sticky hands is a set of skills, a set of techniques. you can use sticky hands on someone even if they arent using sticky hands on you. in fact its even easier if that is the case because they will not know how to defend against it.

apparently you and some others are under the impression that sticky hands requires two people who know sticky hands

Actually, the drill requires two people that know Chi sao, how else are you going to do the drill?

[sanjuro_ronin]

I never said I train with "great" fighters. I train with competent, skilled fighters -- I, and the other guys in my group, have crosstrained at a MMA school, a muay thai school, a BJJ school, a boxing gym, etc. That's my point-- you need to take your WCK and your theories and go visit and train with good people, because they will have solid fundamentals and decent attributes. To put it crudely, you learn and develop your fighting (WCK) skills by getting your ass whipped and so you need to seek out people who can whip your ass.

You will always learn more about yourself and your MA when you get your butt kciked than when you do the butt kicking.
Rule of thumb, if you are "beating" people up on a regular basis at your gym/school, find better people to fight against.

[chusauli]

Amen!

In losing, you get more.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Amen again. The higher the calibre of the people you work with and against - the better you get.

[Tom Kagan]

It seems the same axiom, when applied to the quality of people's posts, does not hold true.

[Ali. R]

Amen!

In losing, you get more.

Man, I had my a$$ handed to me (seems like) millions of times before I even had a real fight in my life, every Saturday morning my father use to get the game neighborhood teens to have matches in our backyard (16oz gloves) and on average the teens that I fought with were four too five years older…

That’s one of the reasons why I ran with the older gang members after my father’s death…

And God is my secret judge, I was never touched in high school after one fight no one tried me; I guess it’s because the knowledge that I picked up as a very young kid, and I was the one who fought the bullies every chance I had, because no one else would give me action…

But one should always be learning something when sparring anyway, well I did each time…

Those were the good old days…


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

Let me but it this way; the “nerds” loved me, because I could never stand seeing someone getting bullied, and that’s on the real…;)


Ali Rahim.

[Ali. R]

While I’m at it,

I will never forget the humiliation that I’ve gotten from my wing chun brothers, all Cantonese and no taller then 5’5 140lb’s, I’ve gotten black eyes a broken wrist and everything; my uncles ‘Woo John’, ‘Dook and Mr. Lee all workers from my teachers restaurant…

Outside of Mr. Woo (my Sifu) those were the worst but kicking that I every had in my life, I’ve went home with a purple chest almost daily, and I will always love them for that… Their pressure is what made my wing chun come too life…

I know that they read this forum sometimes and I would love too thank them…

Believe me I was terrified for a while and then I was able too keep up years later…



Ali Rahim.

[Knifefighter]

please no bickering on this thread!

lets hear other people's opinions on it and what it is to them

I wonder why it is called 'chi sao' (sticky hands) and not 'kui sau' (bridge hands). as i understand it our chis sau is not a sticky hand exercise whatsoever. its a bridge training exercise

i will elaborate, but i want to hear other peoples opinions on this too

Chi sao is a method of tricking people into believing they are learning to fight. It is a great method for stringing students along to be able to take their money over extended periods of time.

[Pacman]

Actually, the drill requires two people that know Chi sao, how else are you going to do the drill?

thats my point. chi sau is not just a drill. its a skill. period.

when you want to practice it with a partner then you can look at it like a drill. just like when you do some light sparring with a partner you can look at fighting like a drill.

but if you use your sparring skills, i.e. fighting skills, on someone who doesn't know or want to fight it still works right? in fact, if the person doesnt know how to fight its easier to kick his ass

same thing.

if you want to use chi sau (which is defined as sticking to an opponent to slow down or trap him) skills on someone who does not know how to defend against it, then it makes it easier for you to use those skills.

[TenTigers]

if you want to use chi sau (which is defined as sticking to an opponent to slow down or trap him) .

I really don't see it as that, so much as I see it as a way to develop the sensitivity to feel your opponent's hand, and then slip and run to strike, while maintaining the ability to choke off and/or listen to his movement.

I think many people get hung up on the trapping, and think that is the whole idea. When you watch or touch someone who has good chi-sao skill, they don't trap nearly as much as one would think. More like they slip in and you trap yourself, because they have closed you off, and angled themselves where you don't have the strike..

[Pacman]

Chi sao is a method of tricking people into believing they are learning to fight. It is a great method for stringing students along to be able to take their money over extended periods of time.

actually i think its a great topic on the forums to show how much someone doesn't know squat about wing chun.

but seriously, the reason that many people think the way you do is because the typical Hong Kong method of training:

teach sil lum tao. teach sticky hands. forget learning how to actually apply them in a real situation, forget WC principles and use force against force and chung choi your opponent to as he tries to chung choi you to .

then you realize your WC is useless as all you learned to do was chung choi

then you have the new approach in the states, which tries to rectify the HK method, which is a superset of the HK method but includes:

mixing muay thai and boxing with WC because WC as taught to you was ineffective and call what you do, which is basically kickboxing with a centerline punch, WC because you follow some abstract and general WC principle like "keeping to the center" and having a "solid structure"

as evidence of the latter i submit this video full of cheesy guitar riffs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krg4k8uB4E8

[Pacman]

I really don't see it as that, so much as I see it as a way to develop the sensitivity to feel your opponent's hand, and then slip and run to strike, while maintaining the ability to choke off and/or listen to his movement.

I think many people get hung up on the trapping, and think that is the whole idea. When you watch or touch someone who has good chi-sao skill, they don't trap nearly as much as one would think. More like they slip in and you trap yourself, because they have closed you off, and angled themselves where you don't have the strike..


i do agree it involves that too, and that is very important thanks for pointing it out. but the most important concept is sticking to someone, i.e. always maintaining contact even when striking

[TenTigers]

which is what I was basically trying to convey here:



I really don't see it as that, so much as I see it as a way to develop the sensitivity to feel your opponent's hand, and then slip and run to strike, while maintaining the ability to choke off and/or listen to his movement.

[Knifefighter]

but if you use your sparring skills, i.e. fighting skills, on someone who doesn't know or want to fight it still works right? in fact, if the person doesnt know how to fight its easier to kick his ass

same thing.

if you want to use chi sau (which is defined as sticking to an opponent to slow down or trap him) skills on someone who does not know how to defend against it, then it makes it easier for you to use those skills.

If that is the case, then you should be able to walk into pretty much any boxing or MMA environment and easily dominate since almost all of those guys have no inkling of how chi sao works.

[Knifefighter]

as evidence of the latter i submit this video full of cheesy guitar riffs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krg4k8uB4E8

That is pretty much the way fighting with you WC is going to look, no matter where you are from.

If you think yours is better, please post a clip of you doing it. Of course, I can tell from your posts that you never come close to actually mixing it up like those guys do.

[sanjuro_ronin]

thats my point. chi sau is not just a drill. its a skill. period.

when you want to practice it with a partner then you can look at it like a drill. just like when you do some light sparring with a partner you can look at fighting like a drill.

but if you use your sparring skills, i.e. fighting skills, on someone who doesn't know or want to fight it still works right? in fact, if the person doesnt know how to fight its easier to kick his ass

same thing.

if you want to use chi sau (which is defined as sticking to an opponent to slow down or trap him) skills on someone who does not know how to defend against it, then it makes it easier for you to use those skills.

Chi Sao is a drill and the only skill set you develop is doing chi sao with someone else doing chi sao.
The only way to apply chi sao outside the drill is to do it in a hard contact environment with a resisting opponent that is trying to take your head off.

[dirtyrat]

[QUOTE=The only way to apply chi sao outside the drill is to do it in a hard contact environment with a resisting opponent that is trying to take your head off.[/QUOTE]

How dramatic. I don't know about anybody else around here, but I don't go around trying to take my classmate's head off. Though if anyone in my old kung fu club had that kind of attitude the head instructor would tell one of us to straighten him out.

That said, with properly structured sparring drills you can learn a lot about fighting so long one keeps in mind that the limitations of the drills.

[Knifefighter]

How dramatic. I don't know about anybody else around here, but I don't go around trying to take my classmate's head off. Though if anyone in my old kung fu club had that kind of attitude the head instructor would tell one of us to straighten him out.
The fact that this seems unreasonable to you means that you are going to be in big trouble the first time you face someone who is actually trying to do that.


That said, with properly structured sparring drills you can learn a lot about fighting so long one keeps in mind that the limitations of the drills.

What you will learn is how to do light sparring drills.

[grasshopper 2.0]

If ur chi-sao'ing someone in a fight, I think ur in lots of trouble. A fight with a good chunner should not look like a fight with a chunner - in fact it is ugly, little sticking and lots of hitting (not neccessarily chain punching). There is no bong sao or tan sao or chain punching neccessarily. It should look ugly but effective in the sense that ur still standing or could get away from the attacker.

Wing chun is simply a vehicle to teach us how to hit a moving, resisting target. It is not to teach us how to stick,lap or bong someone to submission.

[dirtyrat]

[Knifefighter;942300]The fact that this seems unreasonable to you means that you are going to be in big trouble the first time you face someone who is actually trying to do that.


Wrong! Already had to use it a few times in the past few years. In class you're trying to LEARN. Your classmate is there to help you. If you're constantly trying to go all out you're not learning anymore, or at the very least your growth will only go so far. I had fights since I was kid. The only difference with kung fu is the different way I use my tools. In a real fight you should just cut loose and let your instincts take over. Its easy. Problem with most guys is they're THINKING too much. Or maybe they're conflicted about fighting like a lot Christians are.

They're scared s***less so they're not paying attention. They're thinking "What should do? What am I gonna do? Is that a fist flying at my face??"

That said most fights can be avoided if you know how to de-escalate the situation.

[dirtyrat]

What you will learn is how to do light sparring drills.

Wrong again. If you re-read my post, I said "properly structured sparring drills".

Drill with resistance. Drills that teaches principles and concepts to overcome that resistance. That said, I never meant to imply that we never go full tilt. I personally rather use my brains for what they were meant to do.

[Hardwork108]

well you have said this to me and i don't say anything based on pure theory or imagination. who does this?

Well these are theories for t_niehoff because he has never actually trained real kung fu and hence he has no direct experience nor references for the aspects he calls theories" and "imagination".

[Hardwork108]

whoa. i see now why there is such a big disconnect on this topic

there is a fundamental difference in what we think of chi sau.

in my view, sticky hands is a set of skills, a set of techniques. you can use sticky hands on someone even if they arent using sticky hands on you. in fact its even easier if that is the case because they will not know how to defend against it.

apparently you and some others are under the impression that sticky hands requires two people who know sticky hands

EXCELLENT POST!

Every knucklehead in this forum should print out that description and put on their wall and read it again and again!

The "sticking" skills are a constant that should be part of any genuine wing chun (some Mantis, Five Ancestor Fist, etc.) practitioner's arsenal. Chi sao practice develops these skills that also contain "softness" and "listening" abilities!

Thank you Pac Man.:)

[Hardwork108]

While I’m at it,

I will never forget the humiliation that I’ve gotten from my wing chun brothers, all Cantonese and no taller then 5’5 140lb’s, I’ve gotten black eyes a broken wrist and everything; my uncles ‘Woo John’, ‘Dook and Mr. Lee all workers from my teachers restaurant…

Outside of Mr. Woo (my Sifu) those were the worst but kicking that I every had in my life, I’ve went home with a purple chest almost daily, and I will always love them for that… Their pressure is what made my wing chun come too life…

I know that they read this forum sometimes and I would love too thank them…


Wow, sifu Ali, it seems that your Wing Chun training was rather hardcore.:)


I hope that Mr "Functional" t_niehoff is reading this post. I believe that he believes that WC is fantasy martial arts....lol.

[Hardwork108]

Chi sao is a method of tricking people into believing they are learning to fight. It is a great method for stringing students along to be able to take their money over extended periods of time.


I see that you are back with your obnoxious posts again.

Why don't you go and train some actual Wing Chun for a few years and then come back here and post, as presently all you have managed to do is make an idiot out of yourself.

[Hardwork108]

Why would someone that doesn't know "sticky hands" be doing "sticky hands" with you?
Wouldn't they be trying to hit you or kick you or clinch up with you or take you down or even throw pixie dust in your face and prance away singing " I am the walrus" ?
:rolleyes:

[Pacman]

If that is the case, then you should be able to walk into pretty much any boxing or MMA environment and easily dominate since almost all of those guys have no inkling of how chi sao works.

well are big IFs involved. IF you are qualified in using chi sau. and IF you can apply it in a live situation then yes you will have an advantage in a boxing match.

[Pacman]

That is pretty much the way fighting with you WC is going to look, no matter where you are from.

If you think yours is better, please post a clip of you doing it. Of course, I can tell from your posts that you never come close to actually mixing it up like those guys do.

these guys show little skill, just agression. they are like kamikazes. it is not hard to do that.

how long must you train before you are able to walk into another person throwing chain punches and throw chain punches of your own? not very long

[grasshopper 2.0]

Ya I think so too. I would say that the typical "chain puncher" is reflective of "elementary" wing chun. Competent wing chun shouldn't look like that.

It's just that chain punching is rather easy to do, which is why its easy to rely on that one thing. Making ur wing chun dynamic, using "un-wing chun" moves within wing chun principles is **** difficult.

[bennyvt]

I think we all agree that just doing chi sao wont teach you everything you need for a fight. Although gor sao is more like a fight it still has limits, so does sparing. It comes down to the word "fighter". T seems to have a problem with people because as he sees it they are not real fighters. There have been several conflicting reasons. They don't fight (reasonable), they don't spar with fighters( sparing is not fighting), they dont "roll" with grapplers (this is also a highly restricted drill).
I have always said that you should train with other styles. Hence why Yip man, WSL, etc always taught the people that went out and fought with it. It was through these fights that theories evolved into what we learn today.
I view chi sao like the other side of sparing (meaning ground stand up etc). Chi sao teaches that small percentage of a fight when both hands are in contact, this happens so little in a normal fight unless the guy is at or better then your level.This teaches to be able to control a person so you can get a shot in. Sparing tends to be more of an getting out and into the right range unless you can extend your punches and control the head (tends to be a bit dangerous, only do this periodicly to test what is happening.
On the idea of "training with better people makes you better". My teacher taught me that if you want to be better at defence get someone who is slightly better then you. If you want better attack then get someone who is slightly worse then you. This means that when you attack you wont just go for it without covering because he will be able to get you. If the person is heaps better then you he will just beat you up and you will only learn how to defend without being able to counter. The idea is you need to be able to attack as the person will normally defend but they are good enough to catch any problems that you have. If you are heaps better then them you will just attack and leave opening another better person could get you on.

[grasshopper 2.0]

I would say that chi sao, funnily enough, teaches u not to stick - but simply to hit. Although, it may appear that it teaches u how to deal with an opponent where u have two hands on them, this is really not the point of it. Instead its to show us what the best method or path to take to hit the guy - whether u have one hand on him or two. Chi sao reflexes kick that split second and contact is made. It is nothing but for a fraction of a millisecond - not viewable from an observer and doesn't resemble wing chun. It just looks like the chunner took the easiest path with the right timing to land the blow.

[Mr Punch]

well are big IFs involved. IF you are qualified in using chi sau. and IF you can apply it in a live situation then yes you will have an advantage in a boxing match.
LOLORAMA! :D

Pure fantasy. Go ahead and try it: you'll get your stupid ****ing head knocked off.

[Mr Punch]

Ya I think so too. I would say that the typical "chain puncher" is reflective of "elementary" wing chun. Competent wing chun shouldn't look like that.

It's just that chain punching is rather easy to do, which is why its easy to rely on that one thing. Making ur wing chun dynamic, using "un-wing chun" moves within wing chun principles is **** difficult.Pretty much agreed.

[Ali. R]

Wow, sifu Ali, it seems that your Wing Chun training was rather hardcore.:)


I hope that Mr "Functional" t_niehoff is reading this post. I believe that he believes that WC is fantasy martial arts....lol.


How are you doing hardwork, I missed your posting here on this forum but when I went back through some threads as well as this one, I see that you’re still right is light with your statements and you’ll always be funny as h3ll… When I see your name on the front page of this forum; I hurry up and click (good person)…

You’re right, sometime I think about training with those guys and all I can do is shutter, and every time I look at a small Asian person, I think on how much a fool I was for even thinking because of my size that I could man handle those guys; but that was way far from the truth…

And I still call them my uncles as we speak…

Take care,


Ali Rahim

[Knifefighter]

Wow, sifu Ali, it seems that your Wing Chun training was rather hardcore.:)

Notice how, while he has many clips of demos, there has never been a single clip of him actually mixing it up with a resisting opponent. There's a reason for this and it isn't because he is skilled.

[Knifefighter]

Wrong again. If you re-read my post, I said "properly structured sparring drills".

Drill with resistance. Drills that teaches principles and concepts to overcome that resistance. That said, I never meant to imply that we never go full tilt. I personally rather use my brains for what they were meant to do.

Please post a clip of you going "full-tilt".

[Knifefighter]

well are big IFs involved. IF you are qualified in using chi sau. and IF you can apply it in a live situation then yes you will have an advantage in a boxing match.

Please enter a boxing match and post the clip of you doing this.

[Knifefighter]

Ya I think so too. I would say that the typical "chain puncher" is reflective of "elementary" wing chun. Competent wing chun shouldn't look like that.

It's just that chain punching is rather easy to do, which is why its easy to rely on that one thing. Making ur wing chun dynamic, using "un-wing chun" moves within wing chun principles is **** difficult.

Please post a clip of you using your "dynamic, competent" WC against resisting opponents.

[Knifefighter]

Of course, we all know that none of the above will ever post a clip of themselves actually mixing it up. They have hours and hours of demo material, but somehow never can come up with a single clip of actually going hard against another opponent who is also going hard. The reason is obvious.

[Hardwork108]

Notice how, while he has many clips of demos, there has never been a single clip of him actually mixing it up with a resisting opponent. There's a reason for this and it isn't because he is skilled.

All of the sifus I trained under had great fighting abilities, skills and experience. They would sometimes teach a given technique and site actual experiences to demonstrate their fighting applications. However, these sifus do not have video clips of themselves actually fighting and would never put them up to prove anything to people like you.

By the way, why don't you put up a video clip of yourself being polite and intelligent?

[grasshopper 2.0]

Hey Knife Fighter - ya i'm working on this. I used to "mix it up" with the MMA guys in my university days (i was president of the MMA club up there) and i learned a lot from them. They were all a great group of guys and we were open in trying to help each other while respecting each person's art. I was able to hold my own (frustrating the hell out of them) and that also meant being thrown on the ground too! it was REALLY good experience for me.

Let me see if i can dig something up. i might be able to find something from my instructor - we have BJJ guys in the class and back in the early 2000's when BJJ was the "in" art, these guys really tried to take him down. If it weren't for this, i'd have my doubts about WT too.

As for myself, i'm trying to find some MMA guys who are willing to do this..and figure out schedule and at the same time, build a friendly relationship.

Stay tuned.

PS: knife figher - when you say fully resistant partner, do you mean someone who is fully trying to defend himself from my attacks, or someone who is trying to knock me out as well?

What's your background guy? i appreciate your skepticism and i think it's incredibly healthy and needed for us "chunners".

[Tensei85]

How are you doing hardwork, I missed your posting here on this forum but when I went back through some threads as well as this one, I see that you’re still right is light with your statements and you’ll always be funny as h3ll… When I see your name on the front page of this forum; I hurry up and click (good person)…

You’re right, sometime I think about training with those guys and all I can do is shutter, and every time I look at a small Asian person, I think on how much a fool I was for even thinking because of my size that I could man handle those guys; but that was way far from the truth…

And I still call them my uncles as we speak…

Take care,


Ali Rahim

Mr Ali,

Its great to read your posts again! Glad to see your doing well, hows training? and teaching?

All the best,

[Knifefighter]

Let me see if i can dig something up. i might be able to find something from my instructor - we have BJJ guys in the class and back in the early 2000's when BJJ was the "in" art, these guys really tried to take him down. If it weren't for this, i'd have my doubts about WT too.

As for myself, i'm trying to find some MMA guys who are willing to do this..and figure out schedule and at the same time, build a friendly relationship.



LOL @ having to "dig something up". Like 99.9% of WC guys, you've got clips of your demos but nothing at all of actually mixing it up pretty much always means you're not mixing it up.

[Knifefighter]

They would sometimes teach a given technique and site actual experiences to demonstrate their fighting applications.
Translation: They were guys who had never actually fought, but tricked their students into believing they had.