Progression without Chi Sao, is it possible?

[Shaolinstudent]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

[hulkout]

There are a lot of things you can practice in Wing Chun that don't involve Chi Sao. These are the things that a lot of people neglect because it isn't as exciting. Footwork including taking different angles and 180 degree turns (Mobility is extremely important), shifting drills going through pak sao, tan sao, bong sao, etc, punching and kicking power using heavy bags and wallbags, stepping and punching. And during all this, always be aware of your centerline and make sure you face the opponent's centerline. For my drills, I use a broomstick to represent my opponent's centerline and I always face it. Sensitivity training from Chi Sao is of course necessary to really understand trapping and simultaneous attack and defense. But perfecting your punches, kicks, and footwork is an art all unto itself. Remember that the goal of Wing Chun is NOT to trap. The goal is to attack the opponent's centerline. Trapping helps you do that by making sure you can get the shot in. But there are times when you can just go right in and you don't even need to trap.

[Tom Kagan]

Why do you ask?

[Vajramusti]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short answer- no---you are likely to end up with something other than wing chun. Depends on whether you want to learn wing chun. There are other non wing chun styles and methods.
Later, there are many ways to do footwork with chi sao and moving. You should search for a decent teacher.
Buddy Wu may still be teaching near Cleveland.


joy chaudhuri

[SAAMAG]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

I'd say you could learn to use wing chun without the chi sao--but this is assuming of course that you're doing everything else in the wing chun curriculum like the partner drills, sparring, and the like; and if you're going to do that you might as well do the chi sao. To bottom line is that you need to work with PEOPLE to really excel in wing chun. To be honest the same is true of any style, but wing chun moreso because our style focuses on a range of fighting that requires high levels touch sensitivity to gain proficiency.

[anerlich]

IMO if you don't have chi sao, forms or points, dummy training and the weapons, you don't have Wing Chun.

Lots of people have learned to fight well enough without chi sao, but IMO they are then not practising Wing Chun.

[YungChun]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

I assume you are asking because you want to try and train without exposure to someone who can do ChiSao?

The answer is yes and no.

Yes, you can train some WCK elements both with and without a partner..if you know what they are..

No, it will never impart the same benefits of good ChiSao work.

It's tough to find good instruction.. Look hard and try to find the right place...

What do you want to get out of the training?

[HumbleWCGuy]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

Whole heartedly yes. My lineage rarely ever practices chi sao nor do we use the dummy. Everything is done out of movement. Chi sao serves as a distractor from more proven training methods. There is a reason why some of the best examples of WC are often done by people who aren't Self-proclaimed WC practitioners.

[MartialDev]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

Chi sao is not sparring. Wing Chun is not karate. Of course it is possible to advance in Wing Chun without learning chi sao.

What's the real question here? "My new teacher insisted that I learn the form first, but it is too boring..will someone please confirm that he is doing it wrong?" :p

Directory of Wing Chun schools in Ohio:
http://www.dojoscore.com/schools/browse/n:US/s:Ohio

[stonecrusher69]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)


IMO it's possible to advance in WC without chi sao but up to a point what can't be leaent in drills and sparring chisao must be used to develope those skills. How can you lean how to feel energy if you don do any chi sao type training? the better question would be do you need chi sao to fight and to that answer i would say no..

[Ultimatewingchun]

You can do wing chun without chi sao...but if you have real strong chi sao skills (and skills in other drills, wooden dummy, weapons, forms, etc.) - you have better wing chun.

[punchdrunk]

not all Wing Chun schools have the same chi sao format, some are a lot more like toi sao, and some don't seem to emphasize chi sao drills any where near as much as others. So can you progress without it? Yes, BUT why??? can a boxer progress without focus mitts? Important tools are used and should be kept by those who know how to use them.

[grasshopper 2.0]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

if you mean to use wing chun style of fighting without chi-sao...possibly..but i think time is better spent learning a non-chi sao fighting art like western boxing for example and go that route.

The answer you're looking for though..is no. chi-sao not only does the obvious like arm sensitivity, but the concept of structure and muscle building in a wing chun context can't be replicated or built upon any other way..no machine or drill can replicate the benefits, the physiological effects, of chi-sao training.

[Shaolinstudent]

I assume you are asking because you want to try and train without exposure to someone who can do ChiSao?

The answer is yes and no.

Yes, you can train some WCK elements both with and without a partner..if you know what they are..

No, it will never impart the same benefits of good ChiSao work.

It's tough to find good instruction.. Look hard and try to find the right place...

What do you want to get out of the training?



What I am wanting out of my training is to know that if anything happens around me, I can defend myself and my friends, if need be! What else can you want out of training, besides being able to beat people up?

[Lee Chiang Po]

Being able to beat people up is important. In order to defend one's self and his loved ones, he has to be able to beat people up. Simple as that. And yes, you can learn good Wing Chun fighting without chi sao as such. Actually, In my opinion, chi sao is just another drill. It is designed only to allow you to learn the proper way to apply certain pary techniques. The chi sao is exactly what it implies. It is training the chi or proper alignment and energy of these same techinques. I was told early in my training not to let it take on a life of its own. It is not fighting and does not lead to the ability to fight. It is just another drill. In order for you to actually learn the proper applications of what you learn you really need a friend to work with. Both can learn together. However, unless you have an understanding of such things you really need to find someone that can teach you.

[YungChun]

Actually, In my opinion, chi sao is just another drill. It is designed only to allow you to learn the proper way to apply certain pary techniques.


ChiSao covers a whole hell of a lot more than 'parry techniques'. It covers applications of most of the core WCK methods, tools and tactics in an alive dynamic fluid framework against resistance.

Any stand alone technique drill is what we call SunSao, a part of the whole without continuity and flow, it is dead.. ChiSao (poon sao) while limited is alive training, of the core WCK elements and method. It is not the first drill, nor the last.

[RGVWingChun]

So some of what I'm seeing here is that Chi Sau is a "pre set drill" with certain drills and combos that are performed....if this is the case then sure it is possible to progress in external movements that look like wing chun....

I believe Chi sau shouldn't be pre-determined in any way because a fight isn't...chi sau is the heart of wing chun training according to Great Grandmaster Ip Man...most of his emphasis in teaching came through chi sau training since there were other things that could be practiced solo like the forms. Personally I think that Chi sau is the bridge that connects the concepts contained in the forms to fighting. It is through chi sau that we understand elbow energy in a dynamic situation that is a self-defense situation, learning to flow and control our selves and an opponent.

In that respects I don't believe that Wing Chun can be properly learned or past down without Chi Sau. Those that don't practice chi sau I think are missing a vital aspect of training that has been one of the unique and defining aspects of Wing chun training.

My humble opinion,

Moses

[sanjuro_ronin]

For those that use chi sao as an indespensible tool,it isn't possible to progress in WC without it.
For those that DON'T use it that way, or at all, yes, it is possible to progress in WC without it.

[RGVWingChun]

So then the real issue seems to be is Chi Sau necessarily part of the cirriculum of wing chun? Can wing chun theories like "stick to what comes, follow what leaves, when hands are free strike directly" be practiced without chi sau? do they make sense apart from chi sau? Will those lineages that practice chi sau be better or worse than the ones that don't would be another interesting issue? Is one going to be a "bare bones" wing chun and the other more complete?

These seems to be the issues that will need to be dealt with if you have "chi sau'less" wing chun....

thinking out loud,

Moses

[Lee Chiang Po]

Any two man drill can be considered as chi sao. And I have noticed that some people go way to far with it. It becomes Wing Chun to them. Crossing arms with me will get you hit, no matter how much chi sao you do. Because I don't chi sao fair. I have done my share of chi sao, but I was warned very early on that it is a drill and not to let it take on a greater roll. Just rolling and rolling and then jumping with a surprise attack is not real chi sao either. In most cases it is taken advantage of by the person teaching. Rolling and rolling sets a pattern that anyone can use to breach a defense. If one wants to train take and give he can do it with a lot of different drills, but it is difficult to do without a partner that is willing to work with you.

[Matrix]

For those that use chi sao as an indespensible tool,it isn't possible to progress in WC without it.
For those that DON'T use it that way, or at all, yes, it is possible to progress in WC without it.I think in each case, that what is seen as "progress" would be quite different. Can you progress without chi sao? For me, chi sao is a MUST have, but that's just my personal point of view.


In that respects I don't believe that Wing Chun can be properly learned or past down without Chi Sau. Those that don't practice chi sau I think are missing a vital aspect of training that has been one of the unique and defining aspects of Wing chun training. I don't believe I could have said it much better myself. Chi sao is integral to the art. Take it away and you have something else. Call it what you want.

[Tom Kagan]

What I am wanting out of my training is to know that if anything happens around me, I can defend myself and my friends, if need be!Don't you find it a tad exhausting to worry about whether you can be a superhero?

[t_niehoff]

Chi sao is WCK with the training wheels on.

WCK's method is attached fighting, to control the opponent while striking him, and chi sao (and the other WCK drills/exercises) permit us to learn some of the skills, movements, actions, elements, tactics, etc. associated with attached fighting. In other words, it is a way to learn a skill set.

The problem with chi sao is that it is "with the training wheels on" -- and doesn't reflect what attached fighting will really be like, so that you can't develop those attached fighting aspects to any significant degree.

Can you learn these aspects without chi sao? Sure. You could learn them directly in a sparring platform. Just like you could learn to ride a bicycle without resorting to training wheels.

The problem with chi sao is the problem will all unrealistic drills/exercises: by its very nature, you are practicing doing things wrong.

[Vajramusti]

Chi sao is integral to the art. Take it away and you have something else. Call it what you want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True IMO.

joy chaudhuri

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think in each case, that what is seen as "progress" would be quite different. Can you progress without chi sao? For me, chi sao is a MUST have, but that's just my personal point of view.

That's just it, if YOU see chi sao is indispensable then it truly is.
Training that revolves around chi sao MUST make chi sao effective or the system can't be.
It is when chi sao "breaks down" that a system the is based around it, falls apart too.

[anerlich]

Chi sao is integral to the art. Take it away and you have something else. Call it what you want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True IMO.

joy chaudhuri

I concur with Joy.

[dirtyrat]

I studied a couple different systems of kung fu before having learned some wing chun from a friend. None of the fighting methods he showed me IMO required chi sao. I always thought you could do without.

Having said that, I do believed it would make for a valuable tool for refinement when the student reached more advanced levels.

[Matrix]

That's just it, if YOU see chi sao is indispensable then it truly is.That's what I'm saying. I don't pretend to have a lock on the truth. I think the original post is asking for an opinion. I am simply stating mine.


Training that revolves around chi sao MUST make chi sao effective or the system can't be.Of course. Replace "chi sao" with any other training method you have in mind and I would say this must be the case. Any training method that is integral to the system MUST be effective or the sytem can't be. It's circular logic.


It is when chi sao "breaks down" that a system the is based around it, falls apart too.Same here too. I just want to add that the problem starts when chi sao is seen as a means and end unto itself. In other words, the exercise becomes the end game. The end game is skill development, not to become good at chi sao. I think it's a critical and subtle distinction. But then again, it's only an opinion.

[YungChun]

The end game is skill development, not to become good at chi sao. I think it's a critical and subtle distinction. But then again, it's only an opinion.


Very true.. This is seen where folks will "find things" or "methods" that allow them to "win" in ChiSao, but actually has little or no connection to the skills we are trying to build in ChiSao.. They often will not see the difference between the two and go on their merry way "winning" in ChiSao. As a result they begin to remove any useful training elements and instead take advantage of the limits within an artificial construct--a drill.

The problem isn't ChiSao it's how ChiSao is used.

Choppy chop chop anyone? :p

[tigershorty]

not that bruce lee was like king of wing chun or anything ..but didn't he tell WSL that "chi sao is out"?

[YungChun]

not that bruce lee was like king of wing chun or anything ..but didn't he tell WSL that "chi sao is out"?

What does that even mean?

As far as I know when the $hit hit the fan, Bruce relied on his WCK more than anything else. He also maintained various WCK training elements including ChiSao even into his JKD stage.. Bruce in fact did a ChiSao demo at the Nationals in California where he showcased his new JKD.

[tigershorty]

i'm not sure what it meant, i was putting it out there in case anyone wanted to clarify. but i've been told by a few wing chun people he said that and i'm sure there was a reason why he did. that's all.
maybe it was a marketing thing remark or he thought westerners didn't relate to it, not sure.

no one is saying he didn't rely on wing chun or whatever assumptions you're making

[t_niehoff]

Chi sao is integral to the art. Take it away and you have something else. Call it what you want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

True IMO.

joy chaudhuri

It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art.

The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).

Training wheels on your bike may allow you learn some rudiments of riding, but it isn't riding the bike.

[-木叶-]

Is it possible to adavance in Wing Chun without having trained in chi sao. I know that is is a preset form of sparing to practice techniques learned in forms, but can u advance without it. If anyone can recommend good teachers in Northern Ohio I would be greatly appreciated. :-)

No, force sensitivity is important in close range combat.

[RGVWingChun]

It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art.

The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).

Training wheels on your bike may allow you learn some rudiments of riding, but it isn't riding the bike.

I agree that its not the "drill/exercise" itself but what what it teaches you, but the question seems to be can you develop "sensitivity" - or much broader, what wing chun seeks to teach - without doing a sensitivity/control drill? How do you develop contact reflexes without doing any sort of contact reflex training?

Chi Sau should be a means to an end, not the end itself....I think with that in mind for training, the unique method of chi sau develops the sensitivity (as well as other traits useful for fighting) that is pretty unique to Wing Chun's fighting concepts and method. I still maintain that without this training you are not doing wing chun...."stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct" is the principle....how do you do this principle if you don't understand the recieving and the sticking?

I personally think that the "skill" of wing chun is best understood through the chi sau training, otherwise you are left with simply a series of set techniques (this is presupposing that one trains chi sau with no set techniques but seeks to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself through the openings of the opponent's defenses and not as set techniques - which, in my opinion, is not chi sau). May as well be Krav Maga and for self defense you are left to memorize a series of techniques which you can only hope that in a real situation will be executed exactly as they were in your training or else you are training to be defeated because you have not trained for adaptation.

It is through Chi sau that one learns to flow and adapt to a changing situation and stimuli in the same way that "rolling" in jiu jitsu brings about their skill level to learn to apply the proper techniques for the proper situation. Would you have the skill of Jiu Jitsu without rolling? Probably not...likewise, could you have skill of Wing Chun without Chi Sau.

now, stepping out of bounds a wee bit.....I personally think that many who want do not incorporate Chi Sau in their Wing Chun training probably do not understand it and it becomes nothing more than a rote drill (which explains the "set techniques" and "routines" that ends up looking like a 2 man fighting form rather than freely flowing and applying techniques.

my humble opinion again,

Moses

[Matrix]

It's not the drill/exercise itself but what the drill/exercise teaches you that is integral to the art. Agreed. That's already been said previously.


The problems with all forms of unrealistic training (other than for conditioning) -- that is training not done under fighting conditions -- is that you can't help but practice the actions, movements, skills, etc. wrongly (not how you will perform them under fighting conditions). Thus, at best they are a waste of good training time and at worst counter-productive (actually making you worse).Why is conditioning an exception? Can't you get conditioning under fighting conditions too?
Of course sparring is also unrealistic training, since it is not a "real fight" or are there degrees of realism?

[Matrix]

As a result they begin to remove any useful training elements and instead take advantage of the limits within an artificial construct--a drill.

The problem isn't ChiSao it's how ChiSao is used.

Choppy chop chop anyone? :p Yes, that's it. Someone who allows themselves to experience the chi sao, rather than trying to win some game may in fact be the "winner" in the sense that they have learned something in the process.

Sorry, no choppy chop chop here. :)

[t_niehoff]

Agreed. That's already been said previously.


And your point is?



Why is conditioning an exception? Can't you get conditioning under fighting conditions too?


Of course you get conditioning by training realistically, but you can also develop your conditioning by not doing realistic training (running, skipping rope, hitting bags or mitts, etc.) whereas you can develop fighting skill except only by realistic training.



Of course sparring is also unrealistic training, since it is not a "real fight" or are there degrees of realism?

There's no such thing as "real fighting".

Realistic training develops realistic skills, i.e., skills that work under realistic conditions (in any sort of fighting). At its core, realsitic training involves dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is genuinely trying to overcome you (and not behaving in a contrived way).

[t_niehoff]

I agree that its not the "drill/exercise" itself but what what it teaches you, but the question seems to be can you develop "sensitivity" - or much broader, what wing chun seeks to teach - without doing a sensitivity/control drill? How do you develop contact reflexes without doing any sort of contact reflex training?


Chi sao isn't to develop "sensitivity" or "contact reflexes" -- it is a platform to teach/learn various contact skills. As chi sao is an unrealistic drill, any "reflexes" you develop will be wrong.

Good grapplers develop contact skills without doing chi sao -- how? By simply grappling. In other words, by using their contact skills in sparring.



Chi Sau should be a means to an end, not the end itself....I think with that in mind for training, the unique method of chi sau develops the sensitivity (as well as other traits useful for fighting) that is pretty unique to Wing Chun's fighting concepts and method. I still maintain that without this training you are not doing wing chun...."stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct" is the principle....how do you do this principle if you don't understand the recieving and the sticking?


Firstly, your translation of the kuit -- "stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct"-- is very, very wrong.

Secondly, chi sao does not develop "sensitivity". Sensitivity is nothing more than timing derived from our tactile sense. But you don't -- and can't -- develop timing from chi sao since your partner isn't behaving realistically (he is not fighitng you). What chi sao "develops" is a false timing.

Thirdly, all forms of unrealistic training involve (by definition) doing the actions, movements, and skills wrong. So, the more you do unrealsitic training (chi sao), the more you waste your time and the worse you get.

Fourthly, you can learn and/or develop functional skills by simply doing that skill realistically.



I personally think that the "skill" of wing chun is best understood through the chi sau training, otherwise you are left with simply a series of set techniques (this is presupposing that one trains chi sau with no set techniques but seeks to take advantage of every opportunity that presents itself through the openings of the opponent's defenses and not as set techniques - which, in my opinion, is not chi sau). May as well be Krav Maga and for self defense you are left to memorize a series of techniques which you can only hope that in a real situation will be executed exactly as they were in your training or else you are training to be defeated because you have not trained for adaptation.


If that's "all you are left with", then your WCK training was very, very incomplete.

WCK has a method, an organized, strategic approach to fighting (without which you are lost). It has various tools (skills and tactics) to implement that approach. It has a kuit to point you in the right direction. Instead of practicing the skills in an unrealsitic exercise that unrealstically represents contact/attached fighting, just learn and practice in contact/attached fighting.



It is through Chi sau that one learns to flow and adapt to a changing situation and stimuli in the same way that "rolling" in jiu jitsu brings about their skill level to learn to apply the proper techniques for the proper situation. Would you have the skill of Jiu Jitsu without rolling? Probably not...likewise, could you have skill of Wing Chun without Chi Sau.


Go fight some non WCK people while in contact/attached and see if that "looks" like chi sao. It won't. That tells you that chi sao is unrealistic training. To develop your WCK movement/actions into fighting skills you need to practice using them in contact/attached fighting, i.e., sparring.

That's what rolling is in BJJ -- rolling is using your BJJ skills in sparring.



now, stepping out of bounds a wee bit.....I personally think that many who want do not incorporate Chi Sau in their Wing Chun training probably do not understand it and it becomes nothing more than a rote drill (which explains the "set techniques" and "routines" that ends up looking like a 2 man fighting form rather than freely flowing and applying techniques.

my humble opinion again,

Moses

I practiced chi sao for 20 years before I realized that I had been wasting my time for 19 years! Once you can ride the bicycle with the training wheels on, it is time to take the training wheels off (and you don't even need the training wheels in the first place). Continuing to ride around with the training wheels on won't make you any better. You get better by just riding the bike.

Nothing is "rote" about sparring (which is riding the bike) -- all the functional martial arts use realistic sparring as their core platform for teaching/learning and for training (which is why they are functional).

[Matrix]

And your point is?.My point is that I'm agreeing with you about the drill and what is being taught by the drill. Also I'm mentioning that several others had already made the same point. Is that a problem?


Of course you get conditioning by training realistically, but you can also develop your conditioning by not doing realistic training (running, skipping rope, hitting bags or mitts, etc.) whereas you can develop fighting skill except only by realistic training.But aren't you wasting valuable training time by skipping rope instead of fighting?


There's no such thing as "real fighting".
That's why I put the term "real fighting" in quotes. I know you have an issue with this.


Realistic training develops realistic skills, i.e., skills that work under realistic conditions (in any sort of fighting). At its core, realsitic training involves dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is genuinely trying to overcome you (and not behaving in a contrived way).But if there's no such thing as a "real fight" then I guess by extension there should be no such thing as "realistic training". I agree with your point on a genuinely resisting opponent, by the way. I hope that's not a problem.

Peace
Bill

[t_niehoff]

But aren't you wasting valuable training time by skipping rope instead of fighting?


Yes and no.

In one sense, I see conditioning as preparing yoru body for the rigors of sparring (the skill development process).

I think that the "best" form of conditioning for fighting is fighting/sparring. And, you will need to fight/spar to develop your conditioning no matter what else you do. However, fighting/sparring carries a higher risk of injury than other forms of conditioning and by doing nonfighting forms of conditioning you can supplement your development in amore risk-free way.

Also, you can concentrate or focus more specifically on certain aspects of your body's condition outside of sparring.



That's why I put the term "real fighting" in quotes. I know you have an issue with this.

But if there's no such thing as a "real fight" then I guess by extension there should be no such thing as "realistic training". I agree with your point on a genuinely resisting opponent, by the way. I hope that's not a problem.

Peace
Bill

No, you miss the point. It isn't helpful to focus on some theoretical thing you call a "real fight" (which seems to vary among people) or various rulesets. What is helpful is to focus instead on what all "forms" of fighting have in common.

Fighting is simply when you face a genuine resisting opponent(s) who is trying to genuinely overcome you by physical force -- by striking or by grappling or by a combination of striking and grappling (focusing on emptyhand for the moment). That can range from a fight to the death to a scuffle.

We learn to deal with someoen genuinely trying to strike us (knock our block off) by dealing with someone genuinely trying to strike us (knock our block off) -- that is realsitic training. We learn to deal with someone genuinely trying to grapple with (and take down or submit) us by dealing with someone genuinely trying to grapple with us -- that is realsitic training. We learn to deal with someone trying to strike and grapple with us by dealingwith someone genuinely trying to strike and grapple with us -- that is realistic training.

It's easy to ID realistic training.

[Matrix]

No, you miss the point. It isn't helpful to focus on some theoretical thing you call a "real fight" (which seems to vary among people) or various rulesets. What is helpful is to focus instead on what all "forms" of fighting have in common.Hey T.
I deliberately wanted to go off on a strange tangent in my response, just to show how bizarre the logic can get. In other words, I was yanking your chain. Sorry about that.

Quite frankly I agree with a lot of what you have to say. I just disagree with the rigidity of your thinking. You've had a bad experience with chi sao, and therefore you feel that invalidates everyone elses experience with it. You know as well as I do that what is called "chi sao" varies widely from group to group.

I'm sorry that you feel that you've wasted 19 years of your life on something that you now feel is worthless. I think that explains alot about why you respond the way you do. Maybe in a few years, I will feel the same way, but based on my current POV, I highly doubt it.............. but I remain open to other ideas and thoughts.

Many thanks.
Bill

[Shaolinstudent]

Don't you find it a tad exhausting to worry about whether you can be a superhero?

Superhero! Not even close, most of my friends are very adept fighters, but some have not had a real fight in a long time and some never been in a fight there whole life. So yes, it could be me helping out the little guy but the little guy is my friend in thiis case. I would have a watching a friend fight someone twice their size who looks like they will eat tem afterwards. So if that makes me a "Superhero". Then I am.

[YungChun]

Good grapplers develop contact skills without doing chi sao -- how? By simply grappling. In other words, by using their contact skills in sparring.

Grapplers will also train from specific positions and conditions, IOW starting from a particular position of engagement.. And repeating that over and over in order to increase familiarity and focus on those conditions ...

Yes grapplers grapple but often don't strike while grappling.. So there goes your realism I guess eh? So then the training is useless right? LOL

This is what ChiSao is doing, it is taking certain conditions that can happen during fighting and recreating those conditions with greater frequency in order to focus on skill development wrt those conditions..




Thirdly, all forms of unrealistic training involve (by definition) doing the actions, movements, and skills wrong. So, the more you do unrealsitic training (chi sao), the more you waste your time and the worse you get.

If you really believe that then I don't think you have ever trained in anything approaching good WCK with ChiSao.. ChiSao is a platform where the student can train various WCK techniques and tactics in a controlled environment. And an environment that is alive, dynamic, where the partner resists and can also involve a partner trying to 'take your head off'... :)

The techniques and the conditions that WCK work in are a constant.. That means two things..

1. The tools/techniques of WCK are the tools and techniques--they are constants.

2. The conditions that call for a particular tool or action are also constants.

The conditions depend on energy and position and how the opponent or partner resists.. These physical conditions are constants..meaning the same conditions must exist for a given move to work no matter if it is a drill or a fight..


It's easy to see ChiSao as unrelated to the WCK fight if you don't understand what real ChiSao is and how it is supposed to be used..

The tactics are the tactics, the tools are the tools and what makes them work (conditions) are what they are and also don't change.. because they are generic (position/force vector)

ChiSao done correctly is simply a way to focus on the conditions, tools and tactics that WCK operates in--nothing more nothing less.. Just like the grapplers working from specific grappling positions and conditions from the perspective of a grappler--WCK does the same from the perspective of a WCK fighter.

Yes, we must fight and spar but this doesn't mean ChiSao somehow runs counter to how and what WCK does in fighting. If trained correctly and understood ChiSao works directly on many WCK elements that will be used in the fight exactly how they were designed to be used..

[HumbleWCGuy]

What does that even mean?

As far as I know when the $hit hit the fan, Bruce relied on his WCK more than anything else. He also maintained various WCK training elements including ChiSao even into his JKD stage.. Bruce in fact did a ChiSao demo at the Nationals in California where he showcased his new JKD.

Then, you would be incorrect. The further that Bruce went down the path of JKD the less viable he found chi sao and trapping.

[YungChun]

Then, you would be incorrect. The further that Bruce went down the path of JKD the less viable he found chi sao and trapping.

Then you heard wrong IMO..

From folks who worked closely with Bruce, including Dan Inosanto and others.. They all confirmed that although he played with lots of stuff, when things got serious he would almost always enter (into close range) and use close range tactics.. (WCK though call it whatever you like.)

Makes perfect sense to me because this is not only the thread that ran though everything he did but it is what he did the longest, it was still his specialty. Now to be clear this doesn't mean he didn't see its (WCK/ChiSao) limitations but it also doesn't mean he tossed it, since he didn't.

This is also supported in part by VIDEO from the Long Beach Nationals where he demonstrated Both JKD AND ChiSao. What this means is that ChiSao made it past his JunFan stage into his JKD (last) stage.. If that doesn't clear this up for you then nothing will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl2vxgCuPXY

Moreover, "trapping" as you call it is one of the ranges included in JKD and accounts for much of the training--including the training he gave to Lewis and Norris. Odd for something you claim he didn't find useful as time went on. The FMA influence in JKD later came from Dan, not Bruce. (see how we often go back to our roots..) :)

If you have any documentation or other evidence that says otherwise feel free to share.

[t_niehoff]

Grapplers will also train from specific positions and conditions, IOW starting from a particular position of engagement.. And repeating that over and over in order to increase familiarity and focus on those conditions ...


They start from REALISTIC positions, things that occur frequently in fighting. Chi sao is not realistic.



Yes grapplers grapple but often don't strike while grappling.. So there goes your realism I guess eh? So then the training is useless right? LOL


You don't get it. You don't need to put in every single variable to be realistic -- if that were the case, we could never train realistically. As I said, if you want to develop good grappling skill, for example, you do that by realistically grappling, by dealing with an opponent who is genuinely trying to defeat you in grappling and who is genuinely trying to resist you. You don't put in strikes so that you can focus exclusively on developing grappling skills (so you are not developing any striking skills). By so training, you develop realsitic grappling skills, and THOSE skills will work in any realsitic situation. If you want to develop striking skills, then you need to train those realistically.

Again, our focus shouldn't be on preparing for some theoretical, mythical, fantasy "real fight" but instead developing realistic skills that will work in any reaisitic encounter.



This is what ChiSao is doing, it is taking certain conditions that can happen during fighting and recreating those conditions with greater frequency in order to focus on skill development wrt those conditions..


No, chi sao is unrealistic, as your partner is not behaving like a genuinely resisting opponent would -- he is behaving artifically, in (poorly) programmed ways.

The easy way to see this is just to get some partners, start in contact, and fight. You will see that when you do that it doesn't "look" anything like chi sao. When you move in chi sao, you are not responding to or dealing with a person who is acting realistically, so your movement is unrealsitic. You are not developing how to move when fighting but rather how to move when playing chi sao. You may be using the same tools in each (fighting and chi sao) but you are not dealing with the same problems in each.



If you really believe that then I don't think you have ever trained in anything approaching good WCK with ChiSao.. ChiSao is a platform where the student can train various WCK techniques and tactics in a controlled environment. And an environment that is alive, dynamic, where the partner resists and can also involve a partner trying to 'take your head off'... :)


Whenever your partner is playing chi sao, he is behaving artifically. If you think otherwise, just get some nonWCK partners, start in contact/attached, and fight. Then compare it to your chi sao.

You are right that chi sao permits a student to learn and practice the various WCK tools. The problem is that you are practicing those tools in a manner that in no way "looks like " or corresponds to fighting. When you do chi sao you are dealing with chi sao problems and not fighting problems. And so, you are by doing chi sao practiding the WCK tools wrongly.

[t_niehoff]

Then you heard wrong IMO..

From folks who worked closely with Bruce, including Dan Inosanto and others.. They all confirmed that although he played with lots of stuff, when things got serious he would almost always enter (into close range) and use close range tactics.. (WCK though call it whatever you like.)


This is what Dan told me as well.

[Tom Kagan]

Superhero! Not even close, most of my friends are very adept fighters, but some have not had a real fight in a long time and some never been in a fight there whole life. So yes, it could be me helping out the little guy but the little guy is my friend in thiis case. I would have a watching a friend fight someone twice their size who looks like they will eat tem afterwards. So if that makes me a "Superhero". Then I am.

Wouldn't it be easier to smack some sense into your little friend with the napolean complex than worry about when he'll annoy someone on the football team again?

[HumbleWCGuy]

Then you heard wrong IMO..

From folks who worked closely with Bruce, including Dan Inosanto and others.. They all confirmed that although he played with lots of stuff, when things got serious he would almost always enter (into close range) and use close range tactics.. (WCK though call it whatever you like.)

Makes perfect sense to me because this is not only the thread that ran though everything he did but it is what he did the longest, it was still his specialty. Now to be clear this doesn't mean he didn't see its (WCK/ChiSao) limitations but it also doesn't mean he tossed it, since he didn't.

This is also supported in part by VIDEO from the Long Beach Nationals where he demonstrated Both JKD AND ChiSao. What this means is that ChiSao made it past his JunFan stage into his JKD (last) stage.. If that doesn't clear this up for you then nothing will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl2vxgCuPXY

Moreover, "trapping" as you call it is one of the ranges included in JKD and accounts for much of the training--including the training he gave to Lewis and Norris. Odd for something you claim he didn't find useful as time went on. The FMA influence in JKD later came from Dan, not Bruce. (see how we often go back to our roots..) :)

If you have any documentation or other evidence that says otherwise feel free to share.

You really need to get out of your fantasy world. If you investigated a bit further, you would know that Bruce lost faith in Chi Sao and trapping after sparring with Kareem Abdul Jabbar. These sparring matches took place after long beach.

The dirty little secret of JKD is that they continue to train trapping in spite of the fact that Bruce lost faith in it. "'Trapping' as [I] call it," is what many people call it, especially if they are involved in JKD, the topic of discussion.

Also, Dan Inosanto is on record as saying that the Jun Fan Boxing (what you probably think is JKD) was just what Bruce wanted taught taught at the schools to have something more palatable to people who had trained in karate points fighting. Jun Fan was quite a bit different from the Kickboxing that Dan and others practiced at Bruce's house.

[Vajramusti]

The family of new hybrid martial arts ranging from Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do to Brazilian Jujitsu and other styles spotlighted in No-Holds Barred matches.

That's the description of the mma forum- a good place to go -the way the thread is developing.
Ah...well.

joy chaudhuri

[HumbleWCGuy]

The family of new hybrid martial arts ranging from Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do to Brazilian Jujitsu and other styles spotlighted in No-Holds Barred matches.

That's the description of the mma forum- a good place to go -the way the thread is developing.
Ah...well.

joy chaudhuri

Bruce Lee is the most famous exponent of WC. He is held up as an example of WC's effectiveness. I think that is important to point out his criticism if we are going to try and hold up him as an example of the power of WC.

Edit:
Bruce Lee is an important figure in Martial Arts history. I should add that I do not agree with many of his criticism of TCMA. Moreover, he lived a short life pre-information age. Many of us on this board have access to better information about martial arts and possess more time in martial arts than Bruce Lee. Some of his criticism are outdated or were incorrect at the time.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=HumbleWCGuy;1002291]Bruce Lee is the most famous exponent of WC. He is held up as an example of WC's effectiveness. I think that is important to point out his criticism if we are going to try and hold up him as an example of the power of WC.

((WE? Who is we? Not me! Not lots of people I know! The forum is not the universe or a good sample thereof..having the same old discussion with 3-4 people on this forum-that's much of what's been happening. But many folks can't give up their net addiction))

joy chaudhuri

[HumbleWCGuy]

[QUOTE=HumbleWCGuy;1002291]Bruce Lee is the most famous exponent of WC. He is held up as an example of WC's effectiveness. I think that is important to point out his criticism if we are going to try and hold up him as an example of the power of WC.

((WE? Who is we? Not me! Not lots of people I know! The forum is not the universe or a good sample thereof..having the same old discussion with 3-4 people on this forum-that's much of what's been happening. But many folks can't give up their net addiction))

joy chaudhuri
Allow me to rephrase. If anyone is going to hold up Bruce Lee as an example of WC effectiveness, they must also consider his criticisms.

[YungChun]

You really need to get out of your fantasy world.

Okay "humble"...

I'll just say this..and will no longer respond to your BS.. You have no clue about what you post, you ignore evidence, can't amass any evidence yourself, make sweeping conclusions based on minutia, can't or don't read what folks write; miss the big picture of most topics and you come off like a noob.

You ignore what folks who know (who were actually there) say--and you are certainly not the least bit humble on any level.....

[YungChun]

They start from REALISTIC positions

Realistic from their perspective/style of fighting.. How likely are many of those starting points if their opponent was a MT fighter? What the MT fighter would do is "out of bounds" for their training..

Same thing in WCK training in ChiSao.. Yes some things are "out of bounds"...

The luk sao is only a starting point for positional neutrality.. It is comparable to a grappler's lock up that many use as a starting point, no opponent is going to do that for you..




If you want to develop good grappling skill, for example, you do that by realistically grappling..

And when WCK folks ChiSao and begin the interaction (beyond LukSao) they are actually doing WCK..

And let me be clear:

There is NO DIFFERENCE... Just because you relegate WCK techniques and use thereof to "unrealistic BS" does not make it so.. If two guys go at it in ChiSao (maybe they don't like each other or want to go hard) then once they are past the LukSao what do you think they are doing? Assuming they are trying to punish the opponent..? Hmmm?

For some reason if they start in contact, actually try to hit and control the other, this is "unrealistic" WCK drilling for you..!?!?!? Then all drilling is unrealistic and ChiSao is not special in this regard.

Yes it's a drill.. It is supposed to offer more flexibility..but that's the point of a drill.



by dealing with an opponent who is genuinely trying to defeat you in {snip}




and who is genuinely trying to resist you.


These two elements are present in ChiSao when folks play that way...

And this and the above elements are not something you did in ChiSao? (Y/N)

Oh, wait a minute.. Oh, I see the problem: Both are trying to use WCK so of course it's all BS and useless and unrealistic.. Sure it all makes sense now.. GMAFB!

I mean really.. That's the point of the training, to train WCK, not X..for God's sake.



You don't put in strikes so that you can focus exclusively on developing grappling skills


No $hit?

Sounds like why we don't do take-downs and boxing in ChiSao... But you'd attack that...yet for grappling work it's just dandy.. Seems rather prejudicial.



(so you are not developing any striking skills). By so training, you develop realsitic grappling skills, and THOSE skills will work in any realsitic situation.

Put a grappler only guy in his lockup with an undercover MT guy and then see what happens when the MT guy puts on the necktie and begins kneeing the crap out of the grappler... SURPRISE!!!

A drill of any kind in any method is not fighting.. One is cooperative, one is not.. No cooperative drill is a fight.. No cooperative drill is *realistic* in as much as it is not fighting and is cooperative.



No, chi sao is unrealistic, as your partner is not behaving like a genuinely resisting opponent would -- he is behaving artifically, in (poorly) programmed ways.

See.. For you, behaving like a WCK guy, is not realistic.. That's your problem.. The partner IS acting like a genuinely resisting WCK guy, (from in-contact--remember--where WCK is used) not like a genuinely resisting Boxer, MT guy, Grappler, MMA dude, and so you disqualify the WCK man.. Pretty silly coming from a WCK man....

These kinds of statements from you is akin to bashing your own art.



The easy way to see this is just to get some partners, start in contact, and fight. You will see that when you do that it doesn't "look" anything like chi sao.

Blanket statement.

If you start in contact with anyone there are a million variables.. This statement in not quantifiable and therefore meaningless.



When you move in chi sao, you are not responding to or dealing with a person who is acting realistically


False statement..and prejudicial.

You have automatically labeled anything the WCK guy does as "unrealistic".

That is what you are doing, you are saying here that a WCK man's tools, tactics, actions and reactions are by definition not realistic.. And while that may be true from a Boxer's POV it is not true for WCK's POV, sorry.

Now, that doesn't mean that all ChiSao and players are acting realistic and consistent with WCK it just means that it doesn't mean they aren't, don't or can't either.



so your movement is unrealsitic. You are not developing how to move when fighting but rather how to move when playing chi sao. You may be using the same tools in each (fighting and chi sao) but you are not dealing with the same problems in each.

You need to re-read my post..

While we can adapt tools, techniques and methods;

The tools do not change. The tools are the tools.

The techniques do not change.. The techniques are the techniques.

The conditions that allow our tools/techniques to work do not change. The conditions are the conditions..

This is the point of ChiSao, to train conditioned responses (*attacks* based on position and force. Position and force are generic and ARE what make up the *conditions* that dictate which WCK moves will work under resistance and in the moment.

Just as grapplers will initiate grappler vs grappler in cooperative work using their tools and techniques so do we in ChiSao.. And it can be as realistic (for a drill) as any other drilling in any other art... End of story..

[t_niehoff]

Realistic from their perspective/style of fighting.. How likely are many of those starting points if their opponent was a MT fighter? What the MT fighter would do is "out of bounds" for their training..


What is reaisitic isn't style specific -- realsitic means you are facing a genuinely resisting opponent who is trying to overcome you with physical force. Another way of looking at it is that your training/practice "looks" like your fighting.

Your art will have a certain focus (skill set), for example in BJJ it is the ground, but what they do within that focus is realsitic. In other words they practice dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is trying to overcome them with physical force (on the ground). That's why their rolling (training) looks just liek their fighting -- their training is fighting.



Same thing in WCK training in ChiSao.. Yes some things are "out of bounds"...

The luk sao is only a starting point for positional neutrality.. It is comparable to a grappler's lock up that many use as a starting point, no opponent is going to do that for you..


No, chi sao isn't realistic, and luk sao isn't anything like a grappler's lock up -- a grappler's lock up will actually happen in fighting, it is realistic, it occurs when facing someone who is genuinely trying to resist you and overcome you --you will never get the luk sao position in fighting. Never. It is completely artificial. Nor will your opponent leave his arms ourstretched for you to "cling to". Nor will he stand in YJKYM. Nor will he refrain from shooting in or trying to pummel in. Nor will he restrict himself to WCK-typepunches. Etc. Etc. Your chi sao, however you do it, will never "look" like fighting.

What wrestlers do you will actually see in fighting just as they do it in practice. That's how you know it is realistic.



And when WCK folks ChiSao and begin the interaction (beyond LukSao) they are actually doing WCK..

And let me be clear:

There is NO DIFFERENCE... Just because you relegate WCK techniques and use thereof to "unrealistic BS" does not make it so.. If two guys go at it in ChiSao (maybe they don't like each other or want to go hard) then once they are past the LukSao what do you think they are doing? Assuming they are trying to punish the opponent..? Hmmm?


They are still playing chi sao, they are both behaving unrealistically. If you believe your chi sao is realistic (and so corresponds to fighting), then just get some nonWCK people, start in contact and fight -- it should look just like your "normal" chi sao. We both know that it won't.



For some reason if they start in contact, actually try to hit and control the other, this is "unrealistic" WCK drilling for you..!?!?!? Then all drilling is unrealistic and ChiSao is not special in this regard.


Just having someone trying to hit you doesn't make a drill realisitic -- there is more to it than that. People spar all the time and their sparring isn't realistic.



Yes it's a drill.. It is supposed to offer more flexibility..but that's the point of a drill.


It's an unrealsitic drill, and so you are not developing realistic skills. It is WCK with the traiing wheels on -- it will only take you so far. It is beginner-level WCK.



These two elements are present in ChiSao when folks play that way...

And this and the above elements are not something you did in ChiSao? (Y/N)

Oh, wait a minute.. Oh, I see the problem: Both are trying to use WCK so of course it's all BS and useless and unrealistic.. Sure it all makes sense now.. GMAFB!

I mean really.. That's the point of the training, to train WCK, not X..for God's sake.


Chi sao doesn't "train" WCK. Riding around on a bicycle with training wheels is't bike riding "training" -- it's simply a way to learn to ride. The training commences when you take off the training wheels.



No $hit?

Sounds like why we don't do take-downs and boxing in ChiSao... But you'd attack that...yet for grappling work it's just dandy.. Seems rather prejudicial.


Put a grappler only guy in his lockup with an undercover MT guy and then see what happens when the MT guy puts on the necktie and begins kneeing the crap out of the grappler... SURPRISE!!!

A drill of any kind in any method is not fighting.. One is cooperative, one is not.. No cooperative drill is a fight.. No cooperative drill is *realistic* in as much as it is not fighting and is cooperative.


A good drill is a snippet of fighting. Here's the easy way to ID realistic drilling: realistic drills take a "snippet" of fighting -- something they are actually doing in fighting and you can see occurring in fighting -- and they keep repeating it under fighting conditions (against a genuinely resisting opponent).



See.. For you, behaving like a WCK guy, is not realistic.. That's your problem.. The partner IS acting like a genuinely resisting WCK guy, (from in-contact--remember--where WCK is used) not like a genuinely resisting Boxer, MT guy, Grappler, MMA dude, and so you disqualify the WCK man.. Pretty silly coming from a WCK man....


You are starting from the position that the WCK man will be doing "that" in fighting, and I am saying that he will not -- this is your theory, what you imagine he will be doing. It only works in chi sao because the other person is playing by chi sao rules, and those rules are not realsitic -- they are not how people really fight. People won't behave in contact like someone who does chi sao. So when you do chi sao you are not facing the resistances, the actions, the problems, etc. that you will be in fighting. So, you can't learn or practice dealing with those things. Put anyone in an attached fighting situation and have them fight and it won't "look" anything like chi sao.



These kinds of statements from you is akin to bashing your own art.


It's not the art, it is how it is taught and trained.



Blanket statement.

If you start in contact with anyone there are a million variables.. This statement in not quantifiable and therefore meaningless.


And none of them will look like chi sao! When you roll (start off on the ground and fight), there are a million variables, but you learn to deal with them BY dealing with them -- not by not dealing with them.



False statement..and prejudicial.

You have automatically labeled anything the WCK guy does as "unrealistic".


No, what I am saying is that the drill/exercise itself is unrealistic -- it is not "fighting" and doesn't correspond to what happens in fighting.



That is what you are doing, you are saying here that a WCK man's tools, tactics, actions and reactions are by definition not realistic.. And while that may be true from a Boxer's POV it is not true for WCK's POV, sorry.

Now, that doesn't mean that all ChiSao and players are acting realistic and consistent with WCK it just means that it doesn't mean they aren't, don't or can't either.


What I am saying is that when you practice in an unrealsitic environment (not under realistic fighting conditions), you are not developing fighting skills and are, by definition, doing it wrong.

Ideally, there should be a 1 to 1 to 1 correspondence between what you learn, what you practice, and your fighting -- you learn it as you will really do it, practice it as you will really do it, and do it in fighting just like you've learned and practiced. That's realistic, functional learning and training.



You need to re-read my post..

While we can adapt tools, techniques and methods;

The tools do not change. The tools are the tools.

The techniques do not change.. The techniques are the techniques.

The conditions that allow our tools/techniques to work do not change. The conditions are the conditions..


The tools of any martial art are what you use to play the game (fight). You only learn how to use the tools and play the game by playing the game (by fighting).



This is the point of ChiSao, to train conditioned responses (*attacks* based on position and force. Position and force are generic and ARE what make up the *conditions* that dictate which WCK moves will work under resistance and in the moment.


Wrong. And entirely theoretical. If you actually did any contact fighting, you'd know that isn't the case. Just go get some nonWCK sparring partners, start in contact, and try to fight while attached and you'll see how wrong you are. If you don't do that, you never will.

[YungChun]

Your art will have a certain focus (skill set), for example in BJJ it is the ground, but what they do within that focus is realsitic. In other words they practice dealing with a genuinely resisting opponent who is trying to overcome them with physical force (on the ground). That's why their rolling (training) looks just liek their fighting -- their training is fighting.

Same thing in ChiSao.. Both trying to "overcome" the other.. But for some odd reason you call it unrealistic.. Even though it's the same thing.. Both partners using what is in their art to overcome the other.. But for you, if in the case of WCK then it's unrealistic.no matter how it's done right?

See one set of rules for the other arts another set for WCK.. And that's BS.



No, chi sao isn't realistic, and luk sao isn't anything like a grappler's lock up -- a grappler's lock up will actually happen in fighting..

Sure it could happen but if the grappler isn't fighting someone who wants to lock up then no, it won't happen..



Nor will he stand in YJKYM. Nor will he refrain from shooting in or trying to pummel in. Nor will he restrict himself to WCK-typepunches. Etc. Etc. Your chi sao, however you do it, will never "look" like fighting.


WCK does not shoot, and we DO use WCK punches... See it's okay if grapplers only grapple, that's realistic, it's fine if Boxers only use boxing but if WCK folks only train wck in the drill then no it's unrealistic.. Total BS..

WCK fighting will not look like some other kind of fighting.. WCK will use WCK tools and techniques... TWO WCK folks will BOTH be using those..

In the DRILL of ChiSao both will be using WCK tools and techniques..



What wrestlers do you will actually see in fighting just as they do it in practice. That's how you know it is realistic.


So what *we* do is unrealistic.. And by *we* you mean WCK.. So what WCK does is unrealistic? Right.. And what do you "do" that is more realistic AND WCK?



They are still playing chi sao, they are both behaving unrealistically. If you believe your chi sao is realistic (and so corresponds to fighting), then just get some nonWCK people, start in contact and fight -- it should look just like your "normal" chi sao. We both know that it won't.


ChiSao is a drill with two WCK people trying to train WCK... How is this the same thing, and how would it look the same as a non WCK person and a WCK person fighting? These two things are not the same and so there is no relevance to these kinds of mis-comparisons.. You are using apple examples to prove your theory about bananas.

It is NOT the same thing.. Two wrestlers rolling is not going to look like a grappler fighting against a ground and pounder... So what? All your examples are severely flawed and you'd never win a real debate with this kind of bunk.

The fact is that WCK's tools and techniques are what they are and do not change.. Doesn't matter where or how they are used.



Just having someone trying to hit you doesn't make a drill realisitic -- there is more to it than that. People spar all the time and their sparring isn't realistic.

Straw man argumentation..

So you are comparing ChiSao to bad sparring.. irrelevant, you assume the "bad" to enable your "theory"..

It's not the drill it's how it's done.. Hard contact ChiSao done with continuity uses the same tools and techniques that WCK uses wherever and whenever it is in use--they don't change.



It's an unrealsitic drill, and so you are not developing realistic skills. It is WCK with the traiing wheels on -- it will only take you so far. It is beginner-level WCK.

It takes years to get good at it.. I doubt you are any good at it.. (and if you can't do it in a drill..well you know the rest..) It's also clear you don't have a clear understanding of it's purpose or how it relates to WCK fighting...



Chi sao doesn't "train" WCK. Riding around on a bicycle with training wheels is't bike riding "training" -- it's simply a way to learn to ride. The training commences when you take off the training wheels.


Good example..!

When you ride a bike with or without training wheels on you are still riding a bike, in exactly the same way you will with them (the training wheels) off..

The main difference is simply a safety net, true for both ChiSao and sparring. In ChiSao you use those tools and techniques you will use in fighting--it's that simple..



A good drill is a snippet of fighting.

ChiSao is a "snippet" of WCK fighting. Anyone can see that. No it does not address all things outside of WCK, but it was never intended to. Just like two grapplers rolling does not address other art's attacks.. They focus on their game, we focus on our game. That is the bottom line.



this is your theory, what you imagine he will be doing. It only works in chi sao because the other person is playing by chi sao rules, and those rules are not realsitic -- they are not how people really fight.


This has nothing to do with "how people fight".. It has to do with how WE fight.. Where WE means WCK people..

How many times must I say: The tools and the techniques are constants..

See on the one hand you watch videos and say, "That's not WCK because they are not using WCK tools and techniques.."

Then you say, "WCK tools and techniques will look nothing like that (what we all know) in real fighting because "boxers" don't do that, if it worked they would.."

Sounds to me like you are having some kind of cognitive dissonance.



People won't behave in contact like someone who does chi sao.

Who the F!#@# is talking about "people"? "People" pick their noses.. So F$@% what? We are talking about WCK training, which means WCK people doing WCK against WCK..

What other "people do" has nothing to do with what WCK does, with the exception of how they resist. People no matter who or what have two arms and two legs.. They can only resist or attack with their arms and legs..in a limited number of ways. ChiSao addresses any possible way bridges can resist in our space: Push; pull; sweep aside; lift; drop; grab; leave, etc.

Some folks even add in non WCK attacks to "check" the response..



So when you do chi sao you are not facing the resistances, the actions, the problems, etc. that you will be in fighting.

ChiSao is intended to teach how to deal with a sub-set of conditions in fighting.. We already covered the fact that when you roll you have the same issue..

But in this case, as in all others, with you, it's only BS (unrealistic resistance) if it's WCK people training WCK.. That triggers your button.. It's because we are not training MMA resistance in ChiSao, (which is asinine) THIS is your problem with it.. ChiSao is not MMA..... No style specific drill in any art deals with things outside that art.. Boxers don't train kicks, they don't train take-downs, nor do they train to defend against them..

Same thing if you have two WCK folks sparring.. They won't be grappling, they won't be boxing, they won't be rolling.... ChiSao is a DRILL-- a subset (snippet) of WCK fighting using WCK tools and techniques against another person doing the same! So somehow two folks trying to control and hit the other, both using WCK tools and techniques, making contact, etc, is not what they need to train for WCK fighting..



Wrong. And entirely theoretical.


No, YOU are wrong..

Any idiot knows that in-contact techniques require position, force and timing conditions to work, these conditions dictate what technique can/should be done--same as in grappling.. Ever heard "There is no submission without position"? Same exact thing.

Any move requires conditions to work, and the job of the fighter is to identify the "problem"/conditions and then apply the correct solution--this is what ChiSao programs with an alive and RESISTING partner.

It's clear to me you were never taught this and so this is why ChiSao is meaningless and useless to you--because the ChiSao you were taught is useless and meaningless..

If you are saying that WCK tools change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..

If you are saying that WCK techniques change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..

If you are saying that the conditions that allow WCK tools and techniques to work change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..



If you actually did any contact fighting, you'd know that isn't the case. Just go get some nonWCK sparring partners, start in contact, and try to fight while attached and you'll see how wrong you are.


You are confused... How and why would ChiSao, even hard core ChiSao which involves two WCK people look like what non WCK would do?

You always say things that contradict even your own BS..

"All anyone has is their own interpretation of WCK"... Right but unless we match what you think is right then we are wrong.. BS.

"Look to good fighters to know what works.." You can't learn WCK or even see examples of WCK by looking at things that ARE NOT WCK..

Go ahead and explain exactly how (any) of the tools, techniques and conditions of WCK change (post rolling--when the action begins) from use within ChiSao (unrealistic) to use in actual application. Thanks....

But, if you can't then your entire thesis is a complete load and your "case" is dismissed.

[RGVWingChun]

Chi sao isn't to develop "sensitivity" or "contact reflexes" -- it is a platform to teach/learn various contact skills. As chi sao is an unrealistic drill, any "reflexes" you develop will be wrong.

technically - and self defense experts agree here (Marc MacYoung, Rory Miller, etc...ALL martial arts TRAINING is unrealistic because its TRAINING. This is such a moot point that is being made here, seriously. And yet all these and other self defense experts advocate some form of contact reflex training similar to chi sau. But they are all quick to say that TRAINING is not the end, it is a means to an end. Chi Sau is not fighting, its training and as long as one can distinguish the difference and help to develop reflexes that are useful for fighting, there is something to be gained from it.


Good grapplers develop contact skills without doing chi sao -- how? By simply grappling. In other words, by using their contact skills in sparring.

So grappers get good at what they do by doing a drill that is particular to their art....hmmmm....so in the like manner, wouldn't a wing chun practioner get good at there art by doing the drill unique to their art?




Firstly, your translation of the kuit -- "stick to what comes, follow what leaves, hands free strike direct"-- is very, very wrong.

Relevance???


Secondly, chi sao does not develop "sensitivity". Sensitivity is nothing more than timing derived from our tactile sense. But you don't -- and can't -- develop timing from chi sao since your partner isn't behaving realistically (he is not fighitng you). What chi sao "develops" is a false timing.

Again, I think your concept of chi sau and mine is totally different here....I don't not train with "set techniques" or "drills". I don't do "structure 1" or anything like that....maybe if you had a better idea of how other people do chi sau you might think differently. I can only say that comments like these are made in ignorance of the training methods of others. We don't all do it the same way.


Thirdly, all forms of unrealistic training involve (by definition) doing the actions, movements, and skills wrong. So, the more you do unrealsitic training (chi sao), the more you waste your time and the worse you get.

Again, if you want to "train realistically" then training should cease and one should just fight....all TRAINING is unrealistic in that training is not actually fighting. Even when sparring each person is only willing to go so far so as not to actually hurt - or do something worse that each respective art is capable of doing - to their partner. All TRAINING can seek to do is to get us as close as possible to simulating real fighting. Chi Sau does this by addressing different possible hand to hand relationships (inside, outside, crossed, etc...). This way when hands cross in a fight one is not in "unfamiliar" or "untrained" territory but one is able to reflexively and instinctively respond to the energy being detected through the contact


Fourthly, you can learn and/or develop functional skills by simply doing that skill realistically.

Again, I think these kinds of comments are simply based on ignorance of the training methods of others. I'm sure that many other wing chun practitioners here can attest that they start to throw "real punches" at each other in their training to be able to do wing chun techniques against these.




If that's "all you are left with", then your WCK training was very, very incomplete.

More ignoranc and arrogance displayed here.


WCK has a method, an organized, strategic approach to fighting (without which you are lost). It has various tools (skills and tactics) to implement that approach. It has a kuit to point you in the right direction. Instead of practicing the skills in an unrealsitic exercise that unrealstically represents contact/attached fighting, just learn and practice in contact/attached fighting.



Go fight some non WCK people while in contact/attached and see if that "looks" like chi sao. It won't. That tells you that chi sao is unrealistic training. To develop your WCK movement/actions into fighting skills you need to practice using them in contact/attached fighting, i.e., sparring.

That's what rolling is in BJJ -- rolling is using your BJJ skills in sparring.

I recently had at it with a BJJ guy....a rodrigo Pinheiro guy....didn't go so well for him




I practiced chi sao for 20 years before I realized that I had been wasting my time for 19 years! Once you can ride the bicycle with the training wheels on, it is time to take the training wheels off (and you don't even need the training wheels in the first place). Continuing to ride around with the training wheels on won't make you any better. You get better by just riding the bike.

Nothing is "rote" about sparring (which is riding the bike) -- all the functional martial arts use realistic sparring as their core platform for teaching/learning and for training (which is why they are functional).

Sorry if this comes across as a bit hard, but I completely disagree with the conclusions here.

My humble opinion,

Moses

[t_niehoff]

The fact is that WCK's tools and techniques are what they are and do not change.. Doesn't matter where or how they are used.

Then you say, "WCK tools and techniques will look nothing like that (what we all know) in real fighting because "boxers" don't do that, if it worked they would.."

Sounds to me like you are having some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Who the F!#@# is talking about "people"? "People" pick their noses.. So F$@% what? We are talking about WCK training, which means WCK people doing WCK against WCK..

If you are saying that WCK tools change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..

If you are saying that WCK techniques change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..

If you are saying that the conditions that allow WCK tools and techniques to work change in real fighting vs ChiSao then give an example..

Go ahead and explain exactly how (any) of the tools, techniques and conditions of WCK change (post rolling--when the action begins) from use within ChiSao (unrealistic) to use in actual application. Thanks....

But, if you can't then your entire thesis is a complete load and your "case" is dismissed.

I snipped a bunch of stuff in your post to highlight to the essential thing you seem to be missing:

If your movement looks different when you spar/fight (actually apply your method against a genuinely resisting opponent that is trying to overcome you by direct physical force) than when you perform some drill or exercise, like chi sao, then you are drilling wrong, you are wasting your time, and you are developing bad habits.

That's because you are practicing moving one way to then move another.

By movement I don't mean just various individual movements but your total, overall movement.

Does your fighting look exactly like your chi sao? Does your chi sao look exactly like your fighting? No, because chi sao is NOT fighting, so it it not realistic and doesn't develop realsitic skill. Yes, WCK tools, techniques, movment, tactics (the pieces) -- tan sao, bong sao, etc. may be used in both chi sao and fighting, but you are not moving the same way, you are not putting the pieces together in the same way.

Look at the following clip, and pay attention to contact fighting starting at 28 seconds in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imjmLWj5WCU

That's what contact, attached fighting is going to look like. That's what you need to prepare for. It's not going to look like chi sao -- where you partner behaves in an artifical, unrealistic way. That's where you are going to need to make your WCK tools work.

Does chi sao prepare you for that? No. You could do chi sao your entire life and it wouldn't prepare you. What does prepare you? Doing it. Sparring/fighting in that environment and trying to work out for yourself (or with the help of someone who has already done the work) of how to make your art work -- how to put the pieces together. That's what we do every time we train. And we've spent hundreds of hours doing it.

I told you to go find some nonWCK people and start in contact and fight, and try to apply your WCK. You'll see how much your chi sao has helped you. If you won't do that, you will never know.

[RGVWingChun]

What does prepare you? Doing it. Sparring/fighting in that environment and trying to work out for yourself (or with the help of someone who has already done the work) of how to make your art work -- how to put the pieces together. That's what we do every time we train. And we've spent hundreds of hours doing it.
.


If this statement is true, then ALL MARTIAL ARTS should be abandoned and one should NEVER train to fight, they should just fight on pure instinct without theory, without thought given to strategy, etc....

Sparring and fighting are still not the same thing...sparring still presupposes that the other guy is not trying to take your head off and or mame you or kill you like a real fight....sparring uses gloves or protective gear whereas fighting does not...figting is "bareknuckle" and no holds barred. Real fighting may use weapons of convenience like broken bottles, a knife, the curb of a sidewalk, multiple attackers, maybe even a gun....if "the only thing that prepares you is doing it" then logically your are saying forget training, just go pick a fight and see how you come out....

Moses

[m1k3]

If this statement is true, then ALL MARTIAL ARTS should be abandoned and one should NEVER train to fight, they should just fight on pure instinct without theory, without thought given to strategy, etc....

Sparring and fighting are still not the same thing...sparring still presupposes that the other guy is not trying to take your head off and or mame you or kill you like a real fight....sparring uses gloves or protective gear whereas fighting does not...figting is "bareknuckle" and no holds barred. Real fighting may use weapons of convenience like broken bottles, a knife, the curb of a sidewalk, multiple attackers, maybe even a gun....if "the only thing that prepares you is doing it" then logically your are saying forget training, just go pick a fight and see how you come out....

Moses

No, he's not saying that. He is saying train as close to fighting as you can. Make it realistic where your opponent is trying beat you. Use sporting rules to keep it safe but still put out a real effort. We do that all the time in BJJ. Does it develop my striking skills, no way, but it does give me very good grappling skills. It gives me a change to feel what it is like when someone is grappling me with the intent of winning. If I wanted to add striking I would do some MMA traing also but I don't really care to do that.

You can't train some things that happen in a fight but that doesn't mean you shouldn't put forth some realistic sparring at lots of different ranges.

Try reading why Kano choose the approach he did to Judo. The bottom line is that it works better than the traditional training methodologies.

[RGVWingChun]

No, he's not saying that. He is saying train as close to fighting as you can. Make it realistic where your opponent is trying beat you. Use sporting rules to keep it safe but still put out a real effort. We do that all the time in BJJ. Does it develop my striking skills, no way, but it does give me very good grappling skills. It gives me a change to feel what it is like when someone is grappling me with the intent of winning. If I wanted to add striking I would do some MMA traing also but I don't really care to do that.

You can't train some things that happen in a fight but that doesn't mean you shouldn't put forth some realistic sparring at lots of different ranges.

Try reading why Kano choose the approach he did to Judo. The bottom line is that it works better than the traditional training methodologies.

I agree with making training as close to reality as you can, but the fact remains that all training is just that: training. Chi sau is training....when I chi sau and teach chi sau I don't use "set structures" like a lot of people do and I'm sure there are plenty other out there that don't....we make attempts to truly control the other person and make use of the wing chun hand techniques in dynamic situations - not ones that are predictable.

I'm really not sure of Mr. Niehoff's chi sau background and how it was trained, but I think his understanding of it and mine are quite different and that is where I think he is drawing his conclusions from about the necessity of chi sau as I think his logic, if properly applied, would lead to the end of all martial art training.

Perhaps Mr. Niehoff would care to refine his position and say that training chi sau IN A CERTAIN WAY can be dangerous and antithetical to fighting just as "rolling" in BJJ the wrong way can be antithetical to real fighting as well. Chi Sau addresses certain instances in fighting - not all of fighting; in the same manner rolling in BJJ addresses ground/grappling aspects of fighting....

Again, my humble opinion

Moses

[YouKnowWho]

The day when WC guys can integrate head lock, reverse head lock, overhook, underhook, bear hug, waist control. arm wrapping, ... into their Chi Sao training, they may bring their art into a new dimension.

[SAAMAG]

Why can't you integrate it? Perhaps you wouldn't do it in chi sao, as that it training a different skill set, but there's no reason you can't do it with your spontaneous drilling and sparring.

[RGVWingChun]

The day when WC guys can integrate head lock, reverse head lock, overhook, underhook, bear hug, waist control. arm wrapping, ... into their Chi Sao training, they may bring their art into a new dimension.

I personally integrate joint locks when I can get em which would include getting to various chokes and small joint manipulation for added control to strike an opponent easier....

as per the hooks, if the other guy has correct energy, you leave that center and something should be coming through it! So I probably wouldn't hook in chi sau per se.....but I've had people try....keeps you on your toes

Moses

[YouKnowWho]

as per the hooks, if the other guy has correct energy, you leave that center and something should be coming through it! So I probably wouldn't hook in chi sau per se.....but I've had people try....keeps you on your toes.

The underhook is the counter for the overhook and vise verse. If you do it right, you should be able to disable both of your opponent's arms. Since your chest is touching your opponent's chest, your center line is not exposed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfGgSTNqqB0&feature=player_embedded#

[SAAMAG]

While I agree the overhooks are a good controlling move, his sweep technique I wouldn't recommend on the concrete, not so smart to slam your own knees on the ground like that without a mat and kneepads.

I personally like the over under because it works well to throw and off balance the opponent better (for me) than the double overhooks.

[Ultimatewingchun]

The day when WC guys can integrate head lock, reverse head lock, overhook, underhook, bear hug, waist control. arm wrapping, ... into their Chi Sao training, they may bring their art into a new dimension.

***BEEN advocating this kind of thing for several years now.

And quite frankly, I believe that wing chun's future (for some wing chun people anyway)...will include this kind of thing as part of their regular curriculum.

The close quarters that wing chun fighting prefers, and of course the limb-to-limb bridging in chi sao and other related drills - that trains contact reflexes, balance manipulation, "trapping", very close range short punches and straight blasts, palm strikes, elbow strikes, etc...

can all work together nicely with headlocks, underhooks, overhooks, w h i z z e r s, knee strikes, bear hugs, waist control, etc - like the above quote mentions...and even bring, in other words, a new dimension to mma fighting: ie.- wing chun. :cool:

And the wrestling/grappling brings a new dimension to wing chun; similar to, but even beyond, imo:

weng chun...

the sister art that emphasizes standing arm locks, throws, sweeps, etc.

A great case for keeping chi sao as part of one's wing chun curriculum, actually - in addition to the more conventional reasons.

[YouKnowWho]

I personally like the over under because it works well to throw and off balance the opponent better (for me) than the double overhooks.
I agree that one arm overhook (for pulling) while another arm underhook (for lifting) is much better strategy than double overhook or double underhook. The nice thing about overhook and underhook is you can throw your opponent by either just single overhook or single underhook. It's the 1st thing that you learn when you train no-gi situation.

[anerlich]

The day when WC guys can integrate head lock, reverse head lock, overhook, underhook, bear hug, waist control. arm wrapping, ... into their Chi Sao training, they may bring their art into a new dimension.


A new dimension called pummelling.

Personally, I think when you get to the range where most of that stuff is worked it's not "chi sao" any more, it's "pummelling". But you can transition both ways between the two.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Transitioning back-and-forth between chi sao and pummeling. :eek:


Hummm...Good point. :D

[YungChun]

If your movement looks different when you spar/fight (actually apply your method against a genuinely resisting opponent that is trying to overcome you by direct physical force) than when you perform some drill or exercise, like chi sao, then you are drilling wrong, you are wasting your time, and you are developing bad habits.


I don't.. and it isn't.

In ChiSao there are a variety of ways to play...

One way to play is to play as you fight. That is the way I normally train.. When I was sparring (before I did WCK) I learned what you call free movement elements.. I simply view the ChiSao work as inside fight training with WCK, which as far as I can see was the point. As I said, once you get past the LukSao it's attack time. My attacks will be whatever is needed in any case when I encounter the opponent be it a drill nor not. I don't switch gears and go into fake movement mode or real movement mode, with some level of control excepted in sparring or ChiSao.



Does your fighting look exactly like your chi sao? Does your chi sao look exactly like your fighting?

One fight does not look like another..

If Joe who does martial art X.. Why he could just kill me instantly and you'd see none of my cool moves.. Or maybe the guy really sucks and I enter and beat him silly.. Then it would look another way. So what?

A good WCK man is a reflection of his opponent, he complements him and finds the weak link in his defense.

I think I already covered this above. so let me ask you:

If you don't think your ChiSao is like your fighting (inside contact WCK fighting) then why don't you simply do it--move--whatever you want--the same way ? Even if you want to add things in that are not from WCK..you could do that too.. (I'll bet you rely more on the non-WCK stuff as it is) Or you could just use WCK tools, couldn't you? Or is THAT what makes it "unrealistic" using only WCK tools?

In any case I always try to move as I would in fighting or sparring, I see no difference once you move past the initial rolling, which I grant you will not happen in fighting.. Otherwise you are correct there would be no point if you don't move the same way; have the same goals, etc.. So while ChiSao can be trained as you would fight it can also be broken down into parts, done more slowly, or with whatever focus you want.. This is the flexibility of the drill, which is very much alive, does not use dead patterns and each player is free to resist his little heart out... :)





Look at the following clip, and pay attention to contact fighting starting at 28 seconds in


Real fighting using WCK should look like "Fred" and "Bill" wrestling and clinching..?

Sorry but that just won't fly... Let one of those guys go study under a decent WCK teacher (we'll make him) and then let them go at it.. I can guarantee it won't look the same..


So since you can use the tools, tactics, techniques in ChiSao and clearly the tools are the tools, etc... And you have failed to show WCK techniques as different in application or even any WCK techniques in application: THIS CASE IS DISMISSED! :p

[LSWCTN1]

A new dimension called pummelling.

Personally, I think when you get to the range where most of that stuff is worked it's not "chi sao" any more, it's "pummelling". But you can transition both ways between the two.

i have it on good information that Chen village push hands is the same thing.

almost all train it as an esoteric exercise, however the 'correct' way is this 'pummeling' you talk about.

[Frost]

I agree that one arm overhook (for pulling) while another arm underhook (for lifting) is much better strategy than double overhook or double underhook. The nice thing about overhook and underhook is you can throw your opponent by either just single overhook or single underhook. It's the 1st thing that you learn when you train no-gi situation.

the problem being is that if you have an overhook and an underhook than so does your opponent, if you have double underhooks then you are on the attack and your opponent the defense and you have many more attacks to use than they do.

the main reason you drill the single over and underhook position in no gi is because its what happens alot in fights, it is not the ideal position by any means hence you are taught to try to swim for dounble if possible,

[Frost]

i have it on good information that Chen village push hands is the same thing.

almost all train it as an esoteric exercise, however the 'correct' way is this 'pummeling' you talk about.

makes you wonder why people looking to train infighting don't just drop the esoteric and just pummel

[Frost]

While I agree the overhooks are a good controlling move, his sweep technique I wouldn't recommend on the concrete, not so smart to slam your own knees on the ground like that without a mat and kneepads.

I personally like the over under because it works well to throw and off balance the opponent better (for me) than the double overhooks.

most of the time with that takedown your weight lands on the opponent not you...and if he has double underhooks you are scr^wed and have to do anything to get out of it even smack the knee lol

i agree over/under is better than double overhooks, double overhooks are what you do if you were silly enough to give him both underhooks and you are in big trouble

[goju]

The day when WC guys can integrate head lock, reverse head lock, overhook, underhook, bear hug, waist control. arm wrapping, ... into their Chi Sao training, they may bring their art into a new dimension.

this was brilliant

and should apply to all the arts with the sticky hand excercises

[Vajramusti]

From Goju's signature line:

The Internet: A place where your inner retard can run wild.

Often true!

[sanjuro_ronin]

i have it on good information that Chen village push hands is the same thing.

almost all train it as an esoteric exercise, however the 'correct' way is this 'pummeling' you talk about.

Chen push-hands tends to be more like greco-roman wrestling at times, LOL !

[t_niehoff]

I agree with making training as close to reality as you can,


You don't get it either.

You see training and reality (the fight) as two different things -- they're not, or at least they shouldn't be. You develop any skill BY REQLLY DOING THAT SKILL. There is no other way. You become a better swimmer by swimming, a better skier by skiing, etc. To talk about "making your training as close to swimming as possible" is silly.



but the fact remains that all training is just that: training.


Training has two dimensions, conditioning and skill development. Training for skill development is practicing the skill itself. When you don't practice the skill itself, you can't get better at the skill.



Chi sau is training....


No. Chi sao isn't training, it is an exercise/drill to LEARN certain attached fighting skills. Is riding a bicycle with the training wheels on "training" -- does it make you a better bike rider? No. You can do chi sao your whole life and you will never develop any significant fighting skills. Is that your definition of training?



when I chi sau and teach chi sau I don't use "set structures" like a lot of people do and I'm sure there are plenty other out there that don't....we make attempts to truly control the other person and make use of the wing chun hand techniques in dynamic situations - not ones that are predictable.


It doesn't matter how you do chi sao or teach chi sao, it isn't and can't be realsitic -- you will and can never develop fighting skill from chi sao. All chi sao can do is teach you that actions, but it can't help you work outhow to use those in fighting since your opponent isn't fighting you.



I'm really not sure of Mr. Niehoff's chi sau background and how it was trained, but I think his understanding of it and mine are quite different and that is where I think he is drawing his conclusions from about the necessity of chi sau as I think his logic, if properly applied, would lead to the end of all martial art training.

Perhaps Mr. Niehoff would care to refine his position and say that training chi sau IN A CERTAIN WAY can be dangerous and antithetical to fighting just as "rolling" in BJJ the wrong way can be antithetical to real fighting as well. Chi Sau addresses certain instances in fighting - not all of fighting; in the same manner rolling in BJJ addresses ground/grappling aspects of fighting....


ANYTIME your movement-- your total, overall movement -- is different in your drill or exercise than it is in fighting, you are drilling or exercising wrongly, you are wasting your time, and you are developing bad habits.

Why does BJJ look in training (rolling) just like it does in fighting? Because rolling is fighting, and you move in rolling just like you will in fighting. Same with boxing or MT. All the functional arts do the same thing, make sparring (fighting) the core of their training -- so that they are practicing their target skill (they fight to develop their ability to fight). Or, to put it another way, realistic skills come from realistic training.

I put up a clip showing you what contact/attached fighting will be like. That is what you are trying to prepare for. Chi sao won't prepare you for that. Chi sao will give you the tools to control the clinch, but it can't show you how to put them together to control the clinch. To put it another way, chi sao can teach you the how the pieces move, but now how to play the game. You learn to play the game, and get better palying the game, by playing the game. Chi sao and fighting are two different games.

[t_niehoff]

I don't.. and it isn't.

In ChiSao there are a variety of ways to play...

One way to play is to play as you fight. That is the way I normally train.. When I was sparring (before I did WCK) I learned what you call free movement elements.. I simply view the ChiSao work as inside fight training with WCK, which as far as I can see was the point. As I said, once you get past the LukSao it's attack time. My attacks will be whatever is needed in any case when I encounter the opponent be it a drill nor not. I don't switch gears and go into fake movement mode or real movement mode, with some level of control excepted in sparring or ChiSao.


You can't play chi sao as you would fight -- if that were the case, then it would be fighting/sparring.

Go get some nonWCK people, start in contact, and fight -- if you don't do that you will never see. You are stuck in your theory, what you imagine it is going to be like. I just spent two hours last night sparring in the clinch: it's nothing, NOTHING, like chi sao.



One fight does not look like another..


Yes, they do. When you see ground fighting, for instance, you will see the same problems, the same movement, etc. from fight to fight.



If Joe who does martial art X.. Why he could just kill me instantly and you'd see none of my cool moves.. Or maybe the guy really sucks and I enter and beat him silly.. Then it would look another way. So what?

A good WCK man is a reflection of his opponent, he complements him and finds the weak link in his defense.


That's just bullsh1t theory, part of your imagination. You have an idea, a theory, a fantasy of how you imagine fighting is going to be -- but you are wrong. Go find some nonWCK people, start in contact and just fight, and you'll see that you are wrong. Until you do that, you will be forever stuck.



I think I already covered this above. so let me ask you:

If you don't think your ChiSao is like your fighting (inside contact WCK fighting) then why don't you simply do it--move--whatever you want--the same way ? Even if you want to add things in that are not from WCK..you could do that too.. (I'll bet you rely more on the non-WCK stuff as it is) Or you could just use WCK tools, couldn't you? Or is THAT what makes it "unrealistic" using only WCK tools?


You don't need to do chi sao to learn WCK -- that's just the classical way.

Chi sao teaches you the attached actions, movement, tactics of WCK but it doesn't teach you how to use them in attached fighting because you are not dealing with someone who is fighting you (doing the things people will do in fighting). You are not learning when, where, etc. the various actions will really work in fighting. You are not facing genuine fighting problems. If you actually did attached fighitng, you'd know all this.



In any case I always try to move as I would in fighting or sparring, I see no difference once you move past the initial rolling, which I grant you will not happen in fighting.. Otherwise you are correct there would be no point if you don't move the same way; have the same goals, etc.. So while ChiSao can be trained as you would fight it can also be broken down into parts, done more slowly, or with whatever focus you want.. This is the flexibility of the drill, which is very much alive, does not use dead patterns and each player is free to resist his little heart out... :)


You are lost.

Look, go get some nonWCK people, start in contact and fight, really fight -- see if you "move" anything like you do in chi sao, see if you can make your contact skills work.

Are you willing to do that or not?

If not, you will never learn WCK. You will have the curriculum, but not the art.



Real fighting using WCK should look like "Fred" and "Bill" wrestling and clinching..?

Sorry but that just won't fly... Let one of those guys go study under a decent WCK teacher (we'll make him) and then let them go at it.. I can guarantee it won't look the same..


Either of those guys would run over you. They'd destroy you in seconds. And that's because if you are not already doing it, you won't be able to do it. If you aren't already facing guys fighting you, you won't be able to deal with them.

That's what a fight in the clinch is going to look like. That's what you need to prepare for. You prepare for it by doing it, by facing it, etc.



So since you can use the tools, tactics, techniques in ChiSao and clearly the tools are the tools, etc... And you have failed to show WCK techniques as different in application or even any WCK techniques in application: THIS CASE IS DISMISSED! :p

You have just outlined your theoretical, fantasy idea -- chi sao permits you to practice the tools of WCK, in fighitng you will use those same tools, ergo (your reasoning -- and I use that term loosely -- goes) chi sao prepares you for fighting.

What you don't grasp is that chi sao and fighting are two different games, and how you will use those tools will be very different. You can go all kinds of things, get away with all kinds of things, not face all kinds of things, etc. in chi sao that you do in fighting. The only way to appreciate this is by doing it -- that's why I keep telling you to get some nonWCK partners, start in contact, and fight. You'll then see.

[Frost]

You don't get it either.

Chi sao will give you the tools to control the clinch, but it can't show you how to put them together to control the clinch. To put it another way, chi sao can teach you the how the pieces move, but now how to play the game. You learn to play the game, and get better palying the game, by playing the game. Chi sao and fighting are two different games.

if that is the case why not just learn those controls through pummeling (a drill that is actually functional and used in fighting) and not bother with chi sao?

[t_niehoff]

if that is the case why not just learn those controls through pummeling (a drill that is actually functional and used in fighting) and not bother with chi sao?

My point is that you don't need chi sao. In fact, I think at best chi sao is simply a way to teach beginners how to perform that actions, movement, tactics of wCK (to develop coordination, etc.).

However, pummeling is used to obtain and move between close body clinch controls (the smother range of the clinch) -- and those mainly permit takedowns not striking. WCK mainly uses the "outer range" of the clinch, where hand-fighting takes place, which permits strking (controlling while striking), and it's close body controls are more like MT.

[Frost]

My point is that you don't need chi sao. In fact, I think at best chi sao is simply a way to teach beginners how to perform that actions, movement, tactics of wCK (to develop coordination, etc.).

However, pummeling is used to obtain and move between close body clinch controls (the smother range of the clinch) -- and those mainly permit takedowns not striking. WCK mainly uses the "outer range" of the clinch, where hand-fighting takes place, which permits strking (controlling while striking), and it's close body controls are more like MT.

Probably some confusion when i say pummel i mean all ranges of clinch fighting, swimming for underhooks and body locks, hand fighting, controlling the neck hitting etc

this seems to me a much more efficent way to train this range than using a drill that is not very practical and does not cross over to real fighting cery well

[YouKnowWho]

the problem being is that if you have an overhook and an underhook than so does your opponent, if you have double underhooks then you are on the attack and your opponent the defense and you have many more attacks to use than they do.

the main reason you drill the single over and underhook position in no gi is because its what happens alot in fights, it is not the ideal position by any means hence you are taught to try to swim for dounble if possible,
I'll turn that over hook into arm wrap instead (hand control the elbow and arm pit control the wrist). Your overhook can also change into a nice head lock.

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7828/headlock.jpg

IMO, the underhook is not superior than overhook or the other way around. The underhook has the lifting advantage, but the overhook has the cracking advantage (if you put the back of your palm on your opponent's chest, you can put pressure on his elbow joint - single overhook).

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5746/crackpu.jpg

[t_niehoff]

Probably some confusion when i say pummel i mean all ranges of clinch fighting, swimming for underhooks and body locks, hand fighting, controlling the neck hitting etc

this seems to me a much more efficent way to train this range than using a drill that is not very practical and does not cross over to real fighting cery well

I don't disagree.

As I said, if your movement, your total, overall movement, in your drills/exercises is different than your fighting/sparring, then your training is wrong, you are wasting your time, and you are developing bad habits.

[YouKnowWho]

This thread is just like a discussion of "how to integrate a striking art and a throwing art". There are a lot of new ideas that have not been fully developed yet.

[Frost]

I'll turn that over hook into arm wrap instead (hand control the elbow and arm pit control the wrist). Your overhook can also change into a nice head lock.

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7828/headlock.jpg

IMO, the underhook is not superior than overhook or the other way around. The underhook has the lifting advantage, but the overhook has the cracking advantage (if you put the back of your palm on your opponent's chest, you can put pressure on his elbow joint - single overhook).

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5746/crackpu.jpg

grabbing the head in a no gi match is a very silly thing to do, it gives the opponent yor back and is too easy to defend

The underhook not only has the lifting advantage it also give you access to the lower body and legs, something the overhook does not allow
hence it is superior its why wrestling and grappling coaches put so much emphasis on it.

[m1k3]

grabbing the head in a no gi match is a very silly thing to do, it gives the opponent yor back and is too easy to defend

The underhook not only has the lifting advantage it also give you access to the lower body and legs, something the overhook does not allow
hence it is superior its why wrestling and grappling coaches put so much emphasis on it.

I agree, probably the best thing you can pull out of an overhook, other than swimming for a better position, is a wh1zzer.

Underhooks just give a wider range of options.

[YouKnowWho]

grabbing the head in a no gi match is a very silly thing to do, it gives the opponent yor back and is too easy to defend.

Not if you have developed a strong head lock (it's not easy to develop). When your opponent's head goes one direction, the rest of his body will follow.

[m1k3]

Gracie JJ must teach at least 8 defenses against the headlock. Unless you are grabbing it to set up a quick throw its not a real high percentage move against someone who knows how to grapple.

[YouKnowWho]

Gracie JJ must teach at least 8 defenses against the headlock. Unless you are grabbing it to set up a quick throw its not a real high percentage move against someone who knows how to grapple.

In SC, there are more than 20 different counters that can be used to against a head lock. The reason that people had developed so many counters for it because it is an important skill in SC. One thing that you have to be careful is to spring one of your opponent's left leg back (force your opponent into a bow-arrow stance) when you get him into a right arm head lock. This way he cannot pull you back. Even your opponent can pull you back, if your head lock is strong, you can still make him to tap out on the ground.

When you squeeze around your opponent's temple or jaw, his skull will feel like to explore and his eye balls will feel like to pop out. I had been squeezed by my teacher's head lock before. Believe me, it was very scary. Not only he was the strongest person that I have met in my lifetime, his head lock was unbelievable strong. The amount of pain took all my defense away right at that moment (I do believe that my body can take a lot of pain). It was just my personal experience to share here (not trying to argue with you guys :)).

[Frost]

Gracie JJ must teach at least 8 defenses against the headlock. Unless you are grabbing it to set up a quick throw its not a real high percentage move against someone who knows how to grapple.

what he said, it also gives me what i want access to your body without your arms in the way, its just too easy to shrung your shoulders and bump your way out of, i am sure if someone is strong it will hurt, but unless you are against a new guy its just too low percentage a move to use

[Frost]

In SC, there are more than 20 different counters that can be used to against a head lock. The reason that people had developed so many counters for it because it is an important skill in SC. One thing that you have to be careful is to spring one of your opponent's left leg back (force your opponent into a bow-arrow stance) when you get him into a right arm head lock. This way he cannot pull you back. Even your opponent can pull you back, if your head lock is strong, you can still make him to tap out on the ground.

When you squeeze around your opponent's temple or jaw, his skull will feel like to explore and his eye balls will feel like to pop out. I had been squeezed by my teacher's head lock before. Believe me, it was very scary. Not only he was the strongest person that I have met in my lifetime, his head lock was unbelievable strong. The amount of pain took all my defense away right at that moment (I do believe that my body can take a lot of pain). It was just my personal experience to share here (not trying to argue with you guys :)).

fair enough and its not argueing its just discussion from two different view points based on different experiences :)
:), maybe if i had met someone like that i would have a diffrent view on the head lock, but as it is i have rolled with national level judo guys and very strong rugby guys as well as competed in no gi, and the head squeeze can be a pain but its IMO just too easy to defend and get past to actually use against some good

[Frost]

this was brilliant

and should apply to all the arts with the sticky hand excercises

the problem is when you add it into sticky hands you realise how little time is actually spent in the chi sao range and how unimportnat it is from a combat point of view, and you tend to buypass it altogether so end up straight to clinch training

[goju]

the problem is when you add it into sticky hands you realise how little time is actually spent in the chi sao range and how unimportnat it is from a combat point of view, and you tend to buypass it altogether so end up straight to clinch training

which can be fine chinese based arts should have their fare share of throwing tripping and stand up grappling but its often neglected

the goju stickyhands had done better with this we often transition from the sticky hands into throws or singles and doubles into a few subs but it still needs more to added to it

they were as ive heard supposedly heard going to add the judo curriculum to our karate style but i guess it didnt pan out which is unfortnate because it would have rounded it out even more

[YouKnowWho]

fair enough and its not argueing its just discussion from two different view points based on different experiences :)
:), maybe if i had met someone like that i would have a diffrent view on the head lock, but as it is i have rolled with national level judo guys and very strong rugby guys as well as competed in no gi, and the head squeeze can be a pain but its IMO just too easy to defend and get past to actually use against some good
I agree! For people who does not train head lock, their head lock will be so easy to counter. All you need to do is to pick him up by holding on his waist. The moment that his feet is off the ground, his head lock will be useless. You can then throw him over your head (Gung Le did that a lot)

Sorry for the side track on this thread. "Head lock" is my favor move and I love to discuss all counters against "head lock".

[Vajramusti]

Another thread gone south!!

joy chaudhuri

[RGVWingChun]

Another thread gone south!!

joy chaudhuri

yeah, no kidding....

Moses

[YungChun]

You can't play chi sao as you would fight -- if that were the case, then it would be fighting/sparring.


Your brain circuits are short circuiting..

Do you see that you are in complete contradiction of you own theories? Everyone should note the absurdity of what you say here when you spout this kind of nonsense.

Boxers do all kinds of drills which you have said does use the same movement as they use in fighting.. YET those drills are not fighting.. This completely refutes the above brain f art assertion you have made.. And in truth the rest of your argument is just as flimsy and brain f artsy..

This underscores all your brain f arts because these "problems" that you talk about and your rules only apply to WCK classical training, to which you apply a different (prejudicial) standard...



That's just bullsh1t theory, part of your imagination. You have an idea, a theory, a fantasy of how you imagine fighting is going to be -- but you are wrong. Go find some nonWCK people, start in contact and just fight, and you'll see that you are wrong. Until you do that, you will be forever stuck.


Did that years ago.. Your mental and physical limits, which you have placed on yourself do not apply to anyone but you.

You have a twisted view of the art; plain and simple.



Chi sao teaches you the attached actions, movement, tactics of WCK but it doesn't teach you how to use them in attached fighting because you are not dealing with someone who is fighting you (doing the things people will do in fighting).


See you can't elaborate on this.. Because if you do everyone would see that you are not doing WCK... Of course you will never show what you do because IMO of that very reason.

The best Terence can do is hold up MMA fighting as "realistic WCK fighting"... This is another brain f art... Anyone can see the folly here..

You hold up MMA fighting as what WCK should look like even though you know very well that those folks are not doing WCK. (can't show what you can't do)

Your teacher holds up pummeling as what good ChiSao should look like instead of simply showing good ChiSao.. (can't show what you can't do)

Can we see the pattern? The folly? The BS? The lack of real WCK knowledge?

The key is that there is no WCK here, in any of these "examples" and that's because the poster (T) knows nothing of WCK; never got decent instruction, and/or has completely abandoned WCK for MMA.. He calls it WCK because he can recite some WCK sayings while he does MMA..

Terence you are on the wrong forum.. Go to the MMA forum and extol the virtues of your take on "Dirty Clinch Fighting" which you have created using a book you got from an old CMA teacher. (oh wait a minute someone may have beat you to it...)



You are not learning when, where, etc. the various actions will really work in fighting. You are not facing genuine fighting problems. If you actually did attached fighitng, you'd know all this.
{snip}
(All fights look the same)
Yes, they do. When you see ground fighting, for instance, you will see the same problems, the same movement, etc. from fight to fight.

There is not one way to fight, not all fights look the same this is another brain f art... A boxer does not fight like a MT guy, who does not fight like a BJJ, who does not fight like a WCK man... Brain f arts make all this the same when you need it to be and different when the fog clears.



What you don't grasp is that chi sao and fighting are two different games, and how you will use those tools will be very different. You can do all kinds of things, get away with all kinds of things, not face all kinds of things, etc. in chi sao that you do in fighting. The only way to appreciate this is by doing it -- that's why I keep telling you to get some nonWCK partners, start in contact, and fight. You'll then see.

We can see the folly here with changes made in the *type* of Brain f art.



What you don't grasp is that Pad Work and fighting are two different games, and how you will use those tools will be very different. You can do all kinds of things, get away with all kinds of things, not face all kinds of things, etc. in Pad Work that you do in fighting. The only way to appreciate this is by doing it -- that's why I keep telling you to get some non-Boxing partners, start in Boxing Range, and fight. You'll then see.


You can't even explain how the movement is different in ChiSao vs. Fighting... In truth you should be training the same mechanics, but focusing on WCK specfic problems.

Boxers fight against other boxers.. and do so within their own limited rule-set and limited use of tools.. But that is valid...and if they can do that then we can do the same thing and be just as valid.. All arts have method v that method training and so do we --JUST LIKE OTHER TRAINING IN ALL OTHER ARTS DO!

Your case is dismissed and you are remanded to the local brain f art clinic for not less than six (6) months..

[m1k3]

Another thread gone south!!

joy chaudhuri

Sorry, I must disagree. The possibility of chi sao including more pummeling, clinch work and take downs seems like a natural progression. In addition removing the resetting back to the start after someone gains an advantage and going with a more continuous flow would be a possible modification also. These changes could be additions to, not replacements for, chi sao as it now stands.

Of course this all depends on how you view your wing chun.

[YungChun]

Sorry, I must disagree. The possibility of chi sao including more pummeling, clinch work and take downs seems like a natural progression. In addition removing the resetting back to the start after someone gains an advantage and going with a more continuous flow would be a possible modification also. These changes could be additions to, not replacements for, chi sao as it now stands.

Of course this all depends on how you view your wing chun.

I don't think there is anything wrong with adding in whatever you want to ChiSao (the platform).. However once you go into MMA type clinch work you have left the realm of what WCK is.. WCK is not a clinch art, in terms of what MMA clinching is.. Victor also made this clear when he speaks of "Not using WCK in the clinch" but rather using other methods and tools..

WCK does not trap its own hands in this manner.. That is not WCK, which is a different idea. Now if you can't maintain your range and use your WCK, find yourself in the clinch or on the ground then you WILL need these other options.. But let's be clear: They are OTHER options.

[t_niehoff]

Your brain circuits are short circuiting..

Do you see that you are in complete contradiction of you own theories? Everyone should note the absurdity of what you say here when you spout this kind of nonsense.

Boxers do all kinds of drills which you have said does use the same movement as they use in fighting.. YET those drills are not fighting.. This completely refutes the above brain f art assertion you have made.. And in truth the rest of your argument is just as flimsy and brain f artsy..


Those drills are mainly for conditioning, not developing skill (which is what I'm talking about). You learn to box by boxing, not by hitting the focus mitts.

But, that's besides the point -- how you move in chi sao ain't nothin' like how you need to or will move in fighting.



This underscores all your brain f arts because these "problems" that you talk about and your rules only apply to WCK classical training, to which you apply a different (prejudicial) standard...


No, I'm referring to how we humans learn and develop athletic skills. Using that as our standard, we can then examine any form of learning/training.



Did that years ago.. Your mental and physical limits, which you have placed on yourself do not apply to anyone but you.

You have a twisted view of the art; plain and simple.


No, you didn't. If you had, you'd know better.



See you can't elaborate on this.. Because if you do everyone would see that you are not doing WCK... Of course you will never show what you do because IMO of that very reason.

The best Terence can do is hold up MMA fighting as "realistic WCK fighting"... This is another brain f art... Anyone can see the folly here..

You hold up MMA fighting as what WCK should look like even though you know very well that those folks are not doing WCK. (can't show what you can't do)

Your teacher holds up pummeling as what good ChiSao should look like instead of simply showing good ChiSao.. (can't show what you can't do)

Can we see the pattern? The folly? The BS? The lack of real WCK knowledge?


When you fight in contact/attached, it will not "look" like chi sao. Your opponent will not be doing what your chi sao partner does -- he's going to be doing all kinds of things but none of which your chi sao partner does. He will do what the guys in the clip I posted were doing. And if you haven't trained to deal with those things -- those nonchi sao things -- you won't have an answer.

Robert has very good chi sao. Both he and I would toss you around like a rag doll in chi sao. Alan and his guys have "won" chi sao tournaments. But we all know that chi sao isn't anything like fighting -- because we've all done what you ahven't done: just started in contact and fought.

I posted a clip showing you what fighting in contact will look like. You can also see it in any MMA fight or MT fight. So why can't we see anyone --ANYONE -- whose fighting looks like their chi sao? Hmmm? Why don't you show us? Or point us to anyone whose chi sao does look like their fighting?

Well, you can't because your views are based in fantasy.



The key is that there is no WCK here, in any of these "examples" and that's because the poster (T) knows nothing of WCK; never got decent instruction, and/or has completely abandoned WCK for MMA.. He calls it WCK because he can recite some WCK sayings while he does MMA..


WCK, like boxing or wrestling or BJJ, can stand on its own, but to be a well-rounded fighter, you need to cross-train and make WCK part of a larger game. But, I am talking for the moment only about WCK.

The fight is going to be what it is -- when you fight on the ground, it doesn't matter what style you do, it's going to look a certain way. You can't get around that. So, you need to prepare for that. It's the same with the clinch or attached fighting: it is going to look a certain way whether you want it to or not.



Terence you are on the wrong forum.. Go to the MMA forum and extol the virtues of your take on "Dirty Clinch Fighting" which you have created using a book you got from an old CMA teacher. (oh wait a minute someone may have beat you to it...)



I'm on the right foum, just it is populated by people like you -- people who practice fantasy WCK.



There is not one way to fight, not all fights look the same this is another brain f art... A boxer does not fight like a MT guy, who does not fight like a BJJ, who does not fight like a WCK man... Brain f arts make all this the same when you need it to be and different when the fog clears.


There is a commonality (what things work, don't work, problems, mistakes, ways of moving, etc.) in the three phases or ranges of fighting: stand-up, in clinch, and on the ground. Whatever art we do needs to address that commonality. Yes, different arts focus on developing different skill sets or variations within skill sets.



We can see the folly here with changes made in the *type* of Brain f art.


I understand it is difficult for you to see what I am talking about from your fantasy WCK POV. Do yourself a favor: get some nonWCK partners, start in contact, and just fight. You'll see. And,hey, why don't you tape it so that you can show the world that you are right and that your fighting looks like chi sao!



You can't even explain how the movement is different in ChiSao vs. Fighting... In truth you should be training the same mechanics, but focusing on WCK specfic problems.


What part of this don't you understand -- if your opponent moves differently, doesn't do what someone in chi sao does, how can your movement -- which needs to respond to what he is doing -- look the same as chi sao? If you are in bridge contact, for instance, and your partner simply grabs both your arms with both his arms and starts pummeling in for a body lock, and just responds to whatever you are doing by grabbing you, pulling you in, etc. are you going to move like you do in chi sao? If you partner just disengages contact but stays in range and starts throwing hooks, overhands, and haymakers, are you going to be moving like you do in chi sao? I could go on and on.

Yes, you need to learn to use your WCK tools to deal with these situations, but doing chi sao won't prepare you since you aren't facing them.



Boxers fight against other boxers.. and do so within their own limited rule-set and limited use of tools.. But that is valid...and if they can do that then we can do the same thing and be just as valid.. All arts have method v that method training and so do we --JUST LIKE OTHER TRAINING IN ALL OTHER ARTS DO!

Your case is dismissed and you are remanded to the local brain f art clinic for not less than six (6) months..

The boxing ruleset, while limited to standing punching, is realistic in that your opponent can throw just about any sort of punch (they don't throw wild, silly punches since they get punished). Boxing corresponds to what actually happens in stand-up (albeit limited to punching). Chi sao does not correspond to what happens in the clinch.

Look, aikido has its own randori -- free, dynamic practice/training where the participants try to use their aikido techniques. And it may be OK as a way to learn the movement, techniques, tools of aikido. But it isn't realistic, it doesn't correspond to what will really happen in fighting. You can tell because it doesn't look like fighting. Your view is that in both randori and fighting you are using the tools of aikido, that force is force, that position is position, etc. so ther should be no difference. But there is. Randori doesn't prepare you for fighting, you won't ahve developed the ability to use your aikido tools against "real" attacks, what someone fighting you will really do. How can you develop this ability? By fighting and trying to use your aikido skills.

[m1k3]

I don't think there is anything wrong with adding in whatever you want to ChiSao (the platform).. However once you go into MMA type clinch work you have left the realm of what WCK is.. WCK is not a clinch art, in terms of what MMA clinching is.. Victor also made this clear when he speaks of "Not using WCK in the clinch" but rather using other methods and tools..

WCK does not trap its own hands in this manner.. That is not WCK, which is a different idea. Now if you can't maintain your range and use your WCK, find yourself in the clinch or on the ground then you WILL need these other options.. But let's be clear: They are OTHER options.

So what do you do as wing chun player who finds themselves in this situation? You say that WCK is not a clinch art but to be effective in the US wouldn't it almost have to be? Look at the number of adult males who have played football and wrestled at a competitive level, now include the numbers of those who train BJJ, Judo and MMA. It would seem to me any martial art that fails to take this into account is leaving a large hole in its game.

I realize that WCK developed in a particular place and time as an effective style for that place and time but to not account for the spread of the art into other places with other ideas about fighting and to not evolve to handle the situation of dealing with what is to be found here and now makes the art more about preserving tradition and culture and less about fighting.
Even the military, as slow as it evolves, makes modifications and updates to its H2H programs to take into consideration the changes and updates in fight science.

Just my 2 cents.

[YungChun]

Those drills are mainly for conditioning, not developing skill (which is what I'm talking about). You learn to box by boxing, not by hitting the focus mitts.


I agree and ChiSao is more dynamic than are pads.




When you fight in contact/attached, it will not "look" like chi sao. Your opponent will not be doing what your chi sao partner does -- he's going to be doing all kinds of things but none of which your chi sao partner does.

This is false.. There are a limited number of ways to resist... You can train them... You can also add in more.. But despite this you dismiss it all out of hand, despite the fact that it contains many of the elements you point to, like resistance, no dead patterns.. You are simply dismissing the drill out of hand..



He will do what the guys in the clip I posted were doing.

So two guys doing/showing MMA clinch fighting is what a WCK fighter looks like fighting anyone?

Complete load.



Robert has very good chi sao. Both he and I would toss you around like a rag doll in chi sao.

Put your money where your mouth is..

I'd be happy to let you show me (Now Mr. ChiSao master).

I have heard who is how good....and I can see..

If you or he wanted to compare hands with the best folks I know I have no doubt you'd get thrown out a window along with your teacher..and anyone else you can dig up. Sadly it will never happen--nor will we ever see either of you doing anything.

[Frost]

I don't think there is anything wrong with adding in whatever you want to ChiSao (the platform).. However once you go into MMA type clinch work you have left the realm of what WCK is.. WCK is not a clinch art, in terms of what MMA clinching is.. Victor also made this clear when he speaks of "Not using WCK in the clinch" but rather using other methods and tools..

WCK does not trap its own hands in this manner.. That is not WCK, which is a different idea. Now if you can't maintain your range and use your WCK, find yourself in the clinch or on the ground then you WILL need these other options.. But let's be clear: They are OTHER options.

which is why its a false enviroment ...if you are a close in fighting system then you have to include some form off attached hitting (and this is what the clinch is attached hitting) if you are training hand contact drills of any kind and not following the natural logical progression into clinch fighting you are being false, people do not simply stand there and trade punches at close range, they grab, hit and throw thats just the nature of fighting.

and as for bringing boxing drills into the arguement its very silly really. hat drills are you talking about? Bag work skipping, pad work? you have to draw a distinction between conditioning drills and training drills. when you skip you are working conditioning and maybe footwork, when you work the bag you are using the same footwork hand work and body structure you use in a fight (can the same be said about chi sao).

When drilling on the pads you are working timing co-ordination awareness and footwork/angling, you are using the same movements you would in a fight: the same body structure same slips same bobing etc and if the caoach is good he will be firing back at you like a fighter would getting you to move cover and evade just l;ikeyou would in a fight (again can the same be said about sticking hands).

And when you spar you bring all those things into the equation the footwork and body position and timing learned from the pads, the power and combinations learned on the bag, and the conditioning from skipping running and bag work and guess what you look the same as you did drilling ...again does your sparring look like your chi sao if not why not and might there be a better way to train?

[Frost]

Sorry, I must disagree. The possibility of chi sao including more pummeling, clinch work and take downs seems like a natural progression. In addition removing the resetting back to the start after someone gains an advantage and going with a more continuous flow would be a possible modification also. These changes could be additions to, not replacements for, chi sao as it now stands.

Of course this all depends on how you view your wing chun.


Some view wing chun as an art only a lucky few got, which many practise wrong but are unwilling or can't say how it should be practised correctly beyond a few general posts...makes you wonder why they actually post on threads :D

[YungChun]

which is why its a false enviroment ...

If you think that close range must be all about the MMA clinch then you're on the same page with T and sorry I don't agree. Moreover, anyone who knows what WCK is can tell you the same thing--WCK uses a different method. Don't agree with it? Fine.



if you are a close in fighting system then you have to include some form off attached hitting (and this is what the clinch is attached hitting) if you are training hand contact drills of any kind and not following the natural logical progression into clinch fighting you are being false, people do not simply stand there and trade punches at close range, they grab, hit and throw thats just the nature of fighting.

A paragraph needs to be more than one enormous sentence.

WCK has the tools and techniques it has.. It does not attempt to cover every kind of attached clinch model.. WCK does not trap its own hands.. Anyone who suggests it does, does NOT understand what WCK is.



and as for bringing boxing drills into the arguement its very silly really. hat drills are you talking about? Bag work skipping, pad work? you have to draw a distinction between conditioning drills and training drills. when you skip you are working conditioning and maybe footwork, when you work the bag you are using the same footwork hand work and body structure you use in a fight (can the same be said about chi sao).

Not sure what this means... Please be specific..

We move in ChiSao exactly the same way we move in inside fighting.. If we didn't and did it one way in a drill and then another way in fighting then THAT wouldn't make much sense.. I am personally interested in training to move the way I want to move in fighting.. That's Basic Training 101.

[m1k3]

But as a WCK fighter what do you do when you find yourself in a clinch? Just because you don't want to clinch doesn't mean your opponent doesn't.

[sanjuro_ronin]

What it seems to be coming down to is, can you fight effectively at close rage, without Chi Sao?
And the answer is YES.
Many other systems do.
BUT, that is only IF we see Chi sao as merely Chi sao ( the exercise) and no Chi Sao the principles and concepts.
:p

[m1k3]

What it seems to be coming down to is, can you fight effectively at close rage, without Chi Sao?
And the answer is YES.
Many other systems do.
BUT, that is only IF we see Chi sao as merely Chi sao ( the exercise) and no Chi Sao the principles and concepts.
:p

There you go being reasonable again. Are you looking for some sort of ban?
:D

[sanjuro_ronin]

There you go being reasonable again. Are you looking for some sort of ban?
:D

I'm a moderator, I can't be banned !!!!
BBBWWAAHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[YungChun]

But as a WCK fighter what do you do when you find yourself in a clinch? Just because you don't want to clinch doesn't mean your opponent doesn't.

Not sure if this was addressed to me?

If so, I answered it above and many times before..

[kungfublow]

So what do you do as wing chun player who finds themselves in this situation? You say that WCK is not a clinch art but to be effective in the US wouldn't it almost have to be? Look at the number of adult males who have played football and wrestled at a competitive level, now include the numbers of those who train BJJ, Judo and MMA. It would seem to me any martial art that fails to take this into account is leaving a large hole in its game.

I realize that WCK developed in a particular place and time as an effective style for that place and time but to not account for the spread of the art into other places with other ideas about fighting and to not evolve to handle the situation of dealing with what is to be found here and now makes the art more about preserving tradition and culture and less about fighting.
Even the military, as slow as it evolves, makes modifications and updates to its H2H programs to take into consideration the changes and updates in fight science.

Just my 2 cents.

Well with this logic then many other systems are in touble too. Karate, kickboxing and MT, most forms of Kung fu and the list could go on and on. I don't think that one art will have all the anwers to every situation. WC is a stand up fighting art. It has little to no ground work as far as I can tell. That doesn't mean the answers that it does have are no good. There isn't one art to rule them all ( a little lord of the rings for those nerds out there) I think if you want to be an effective fighter you need to cross train on some level. You want ground work go take BJJ. But then BJJ will not teach you how to stand up. You need to find those skills in another art. WC is not the military where if you don't know what to do in a situation you die. It's about learning a specific set of skills and then applying them to the bigger picture.

[YungChun]

So what do you do as wing chun player who finds themselves in this situation? You say that WCK is not a clinch art but to be effective in the US wouldn't it almost have to be? Look at the number of adult males who have played football and wrestled at a competitive level, now include the numbers of those who train BJJ, Judo and MMA. It would seem to me any martial art that fails to take this into account is leaving a large hole in its game.

I realize that WCK developed in a particular place and time as an effective style for that place and time but to not account for the spread of the art into other places with other ideas about fighting and to not evolve to handle the situation of dealing with what is to be found here and now makes the art more about preserving tradition and culture and less about fighting.
Even the military, as slow as it evolves, makes modifications and updates to its H2H programs to take into consideration the changes and updates in fight science.

Just my 2 cents.

Just saw this one quoting me..


I had addressed this in the very post you quoted...

Just as the new guy said... Everything under the sun is not to be found in WCK... That's the nature of an art--it HAS it own nature, not all the answers, that is up to YOU..

WCK has a very broad range of tools but it doesn't cover the whole fight picture.. That is up to the FIGHTER.

[YungChun]

What it seems to be coming down to is, can you fight effectively at close rage, without Chi Sao?
And the answer is YES.
Many other systems do.
BUT, that is only IF we see Chi sao as merely Chi sao ( the exercise) and no Chi Sao the principles and concepts.
:p

The question seems to be if the things you train in ChiSao are used in fighting..

If the answer is yes then ChiSao is useful, if the answer is no then it's not.

I see it as very useful, however I also see it and other elements as potentially detrimental if the role of the drill, how it's done and applied, and overall fight picture is not covered correctly.

My POV was different from some others.. When I came in I didn't come in looking for a style, so much as any way I could find to make my sparring/fighting better... I found many useful ideas and elements. Then later I got more interested in the art.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The question seems to be if the things you train in ChiSao are used in fighting..

If the answer is yes then ChiSao is useful, if the answer is no then it's not.

I see it as very useful, however I also see it and other elements as potentially detrimental if the role of the drill, how it's done and applied, and overall fight picture is not covered correctly.

My POV was different from some others.. When I came in I didn't come in looking for a style, so much as any way I could find to make my sparring/fighting better... I found many useful ideas and elements. Then later I got more interested in the art.
I went into WC from Kyokshin, from Boxing, from Judo.
I brought a set of skills that made me look at WC and Chi sao in a far from typical view of most training with me.
I used what I knew worked for me and discarded the rest.
Chi sao was no different, I used what I felt I needed and discared the rest.
May not be the ideal thing for a WC guy, but worked great for a Fighter.

[YungChun]

I went into WC from Kyokshin, from Boxing, from Judo.
I brought a set of skills that made me look at WC and Chi sao in a far from typical view of most training with me.
I used what I knew worked for me and discarded the rest.
Chi sao was no different, I used what I felt I needed and discared the rest.
May not be the ideal thing for a WC guy, but worked great for a Fighter.

Great background Paul.

Hey you use whatever you can and works for you.. Of all the ChiSao stuff I only used maybe 15%-25% in fighting--technique wise, not including overall attributes.. But my sense of the art was that those in the past who were good at it used but a handful of all the options available.

Others need to realize that WCK may not have all the answers.. Some students get very disappointed when they hear this. It's just reality.. In fact IMO most WCK has little or no answers because it's not trained correctly.. Even when you get better training the truth is the fighter has to do the work of finding out what he's missing and then getting that into his game.. There are a ton of combative skills that would take many life times to master.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Great background Paul.

Hey you use whatever you can and works for you.. Of all the ChiSao stuff I only used maybe 15%-25% in fighting--technique wise, not including overall attributes.. But my sense of the art was that those in the past who were good at it used but a handful of all the options available.

Others need to realize that WCK may not have all the answers.. Some students get very disappointed when they hear this. It's just reality.. In fact IMO most WCK has little or no answers because it's not trained correctly.. Even when you get better training the truth is the fighter has to do the work of finding out what he's missing and then getting that into his game.. There are a ton of combative skills that would take many life times to master.

Agreed, 100%

[MartialDev]

Some view wing chun as an art only a lucky few got, which many practise wrong but are unwilling or can't say how it should be practised correctly beyond a few general posts...makes you wonder why they actually post on threads :D

When someone can't make their art work, there are a few possible explanations.

They haven't finished learning it.
What they learned is wrong.
Nobody could ever possibly make it work (AKA "not my fault").


In order to protect their self-esteem, some people will struggle to convince everyone of option number 3. Because only by successfully convincing others, can they conquer their own insecurities.

(Observation courtesy of Eric Hoffer, one of Bruce Lee's favorite thinkers (http://www.martialdevelopment.com/blog/tag/eric-hoffer/).)

[SAAMAG]

When someone can't make their art work, there are a few possible explanations.

They haven't finished learning it.
What they learned is wrong.
Nobody could ever possibly make it work (AKA "not my fault").


In order to protect their self-esteem, some people will struggle to convince everyone of option number 3. Because only by successfully convincing others, can they conquer their own insecurities.

(Observation courtesy of Eric Hoffer, one of Bruce Lee's favorite thinkers (http://www.martialdevelopment.com/blog/tag/eric-hoffer/).)

Looks like Hoffer ran into Terrence at some point.

[RGVWingChun]

When someone can't make their art work, there are a few possible explanations.

They haven't finished learning it.
What they learned is wrong.
Nobody could ever possibly make it work (AKA "not my fault").


In order to protect their self-esteem, some people will struggle to convince everyone of option number 3. Because only by successfully convincing others, can they conquer their own insecurities.

(Observation courtesy of Eric Hoffer, one of Bruce Lee's favorite thinkers (http://www.martialdevelopment.com/blog/tag/eric-hoffer/).)

Well I didn't want to say it, but I was totally thinking all this =P

Moses