St.louis Kung Fu Stan does Yip Man SLT

[Yoshiyahu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZT0VbsnJSE&feature=channel


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtkaSNBK6D8


I am sorry I posted the wrong Sil Lim Tao video...Heres the correct link...this links above is not Yip Man Sim Lin Tao!

[Knifefighter]

That was a joke, right?

[Wayfaring]

Didn't we go through a whole round of this before with these videos? People posted opinions / critiques, Yoshiyahu got upset and started issuing challenges for Stan? People started talking about merits pro and con of fighting in public parks.

What's another round of this supposed to accomplish?

[Xiao3 Meng4]

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58058

Merge

[Knifefighter]

Didn't we go through a whole round of this before with these videos? People posted opinions / critiques, Yoshiyahu got upset and started issuing challenges for Stan? People started talking about merits pro and con of fighting in public parks.

What's another round of this supposed to accomplish?

I'm sure that was a joke also.

[t_niehoff]

He seems to have changed the name of what he used to call the YKS SLT to the Yip Man SLT (btw, YM does a Siu Nim Tao -- Yip changed the name of the first form) -- but regardless of what he calls them, they are simply terrible.

[stan4900]

t niehoff where is your video. I gess you dont have one. I have just demonstrated Yuen Kay San Si Lim Tao and Yip Man Sil Lim Tao. As you can see they are diferent I am waiting to see your video are You just a talker, from what I see you are just a talker. You havebeen on this forum for a long time and knowone have ever seen any of your work but You talk big. lets get together stop hiding come on out and post a video. I know you are afraid and your cheerleader need to post a video aswell.

[Xiao3 Meng4]

t niehoff where is your video. I gess you dont have one. I have just demonstrated Yuen Kay San Si Lim Tao and Yip Man Sil Lim Tao. As you can see they are diferent I am waiting to see your video are You just a talker, from what I see you are just a talker. You havebeen on this forum for a long time and knowone have ever seen any of your work but You talk big. lets get together stop hiding come on out and post a video. I know you are afraid and your cheerleader need to post a video aswell.

A) How the hell is that Yip Man ANYTHING

B) It's exactly the same form, actually exactly the same VIDEO, as the one posted earlier by Yoshiyahu claiming that it shows Yuen Kay San SLT.

C) How the hell is that Yuen Kay San ANYTHING

[Knifefighter]

t niehoff where is your video. I gess you dont have one. I have just demonstrated Yuen Kay San Si Lim Tao and Yip Man Sil Lim Tao. As you can see they are diferent I am waiting to see your video are You just a talker, from what I see you are just a talker. You havebeen on this forum for a long time and knowone have ever seen any of your work but You talk big. lets get together stop hiding come on out and post a video. I know you are afraid and your cheerleader need to post a video aswell.

He's a talker and you are a guy who does goofy demos. Not much difference. Neither one shows much actual ability.

[stan4900]

Enought talk where is your video. I dont want to talk to you where is your video. Let it speak for its self I know you are weak, I know you can barley can do a sil lim Tao form or you cant do one at all. If any cheerleader wants to cheer put your video on you tube so I can see. If you dont have one then just shut up and watch the master at work.

[Knifefighter]

Enought talk where is your video. I dont want to talk to you where is your video. Let it speak for its self I know you are weak, I know you can barley can do a sil lim Tao form or you cant do one at all. If any cheerleader wants to cheer put your video on you tube so I can see. If you dont have one then just shut up and watch the master at work.

Hey, stan... how about one with actual full contact sparring? Oh, that's right. You've never done that.

[stan4900]

Oh how do you know? Do you know me and if you do why are you hiding. Step up be a man. If I put one on you would say it wasnt real unless the other person I was fighting was wrestler or MMA fighter. Hey I know you are one,How about you. I know T-niehoff the coward slid you in like it means something but it dont.I am talking on a Wing Chun forum but MMA is looking for fight on our forum you dont even have a you tube Sil Lim tao Video. You are just looking for fight. I know I can give you one if you are not scared on my terms. I know you cant do Siu Lim Tao and have the nerve to try to tell me whats not right. Where is your Video. Lets just setup a match but when we do bring that t niehoff along. The out of sight cheerleader Oh I will have him proform Siu Lim Tao and you do it to I know you cant.

[t_niehoff]

t niehoff where is your video. I gess you dont have one.


You're right, I don't make videos of myself. I don't see the point in making WCK videos.

That I don't make videos proves what? That I don't know the forms? That I don't know crap when I see it?



I have just demonstrated Yuen Kay San Si Lim Tao and Yip Man Sil Lim Tao.


No, you have demonstrated that you don't really know either set.



As you can see they are diferent


So?



I am waiting to see your video are You just a talker, from what I see you are just a talker. You havebeen on this forum for a long time and knowone have ever seen any of your work


Really? No one? What about my sifu? What about Rene, Marty, Dave McKinnon to name a few? Who here on this forum has ever met you?

A forum is for talking, hence the name: discussion forum.

If you don't want criticism then don't upload videos and then go to forums and post the links. When you do that, you are asking for comment. And if you think people are only going to pat you on the back, then you are delusional.



but You talk big. lets get together stop hiding come on out and post a video. I know you are afraid and your cheerleader need to post a video aswell.

I like how guys like you -- who upload sh1t -- have only one retort: where is your video? You can't do anything else. You can't defend what you do.

Why do I need to post a video of myself doing the forms? There are already tens of thousands of videos of knuckleheads doing the forms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7KxuDYfpSQ

I'm sure that if they redo it, you'll be added to the collection.

[Knifefighter]

I know you cant do Siu Lim Tao and have the nerve to try to tell me whats not right.

LOL... you should give lessons on how to do "belly-dancing Si Lum Tao."

[Xiao3 Meng4]

Oh how do you know? Do you know me and if you do why are you hiding. Step up be a man. If I put one on you would say it wasnt real unless the other person I was fighting was wrestler or MMA fighter. Hey I know you are one,How about you. I know T-niehoff the coward slid you in like it means something but it dont.I am talking on a Wing Chun forum but MMA is looking for fight on our forum you dont even have a you tube Sil Lim tao Video. You are just looking for fight. I know I can give you one if you are not scared on my terms. I know you cant do Siu Lim Tao and have the nerve to try to tell me whats not right. Where is your Video. Lets just setup a match but when we do bring that t niehoff along. The out of sight cheerleader Oh I will have him proform Siu Lim Tao and you do it to I know you cant.

Hmm...

sounds to me like YOU'RE the one looking for a fight... specifically with Mr. Niehoff. I wonder, at what point does this kind of thing become harassment?

It also sounds like your idea of fighting is to have a form competition. Odds are you'd lose, by the way - in both traditional form tournaments and modern sport combat competition.

Unless they had a skunk junk prize. You could share it with Jeetsao and RedJunkRebel.

[t_niehoff]

BTW, Stan, the YM SNT -- no matter how poorly it is performed (and your form is performed really poorly) -- has certain signature elements, things like starting with the left hand or left side - left punch, there is a huen sao after each punch, there is none of that "stuff" (whatever you are doing) after the punch and before the sam bai fut section, again that section ends with a huen sao (not what you are doing which is a poor excuse for a lop sao), the whole first part of the SNT is done slowly, none of the actions are to move outside of your body line (see 36 seconds in and how your arm has crossed your body, your elbow is up, and your arm is outside your body line by about a foot for an example of what I am talking about), the stamping palm section (gum sao) is done with a single arm on the sides and with double palms on the front and rear, the fak sao is done to the side not overhead, you've left out the lan sao that follows, etc. -- I could go on and on, but the point is clear: this is not the choreography that Yip Man used in his SNT.

[goju]

LOL... you should give lessons on how to do "belly-dancing Si Lum Tao."


And you can give lesssons on how to drukenly stumble around in a park judging by your video. Hey you can both team up and offfer a two for one deal! do it!:D

[stan4900]

Where is your video I dont want to talk to you. I just want to see what you do one with your Siu Lim Tao the other with your full contact fighting. Like I said before you talk big Cheerleader. Let every one see what you do. I am not going to responde back anymore. You know where I am at post your video on you tube. Jacks of all trades masters of none.

[stan4900]

And you can give lesssons on how to drukenly stumble around in a park judging by your video. Hey you can both team up and offfer a two for one deal! do it!:D

First get that makeup off your face a real man dont need makeup I am hard core I can never be soft. You think you are good looking but you look like ***. Post a video of your Skils and then we will talk. You put a 1983 picture of yourself on line, you look like Little Richard not a fighter. Nothing related to Martials arts but you are a great fighter Ha! Like I said before where is your video with your forms and Fighting you dont have one AND you are no fighter.

[Syn7]

wow, youre wound up pretty tight, huh... relax... you dont have to fight everyone that disses you...

i dont think that pic is of himself...

[Jorge]

wow, youre wound up pretty tight, huh... relax... you dont have to fight everyone that disses you...

i dont think that pic is of himself...

LOLOLOLOL..... I love this place!

[goju]

First get that makeup off your face a real man dont need makeup I am hard core I can never be soft. You think you are good looking but you look like ***. Post a video of your Skils and then we will talk. You put a 1983 picture of yourself on line, you look like Little Richard not a fighter. Nothing related to Martials arts but you are a great fighter Ha! Like I said before where is your video with your forms and Fighting you dont have one AND you are no fighter.

why the hell did you quote me with this response? i wasnt talking to you dummy:D

[goju]

i dont think that pic is of himself...


or is it!:eek:

[Syn7]

nah, youre a whiteboy...;)

[Wayfaring]

First get that makeup off your face a real man dont need makeup I am hard core I can never be soft.

I'm supposed to take this seriously after seeing some 50 yr old out of shape dude posting up videos of Form #1 in WCK? Hard core? You mean like hard core after the McDonald's drive thru, right?

Here's a clue. "Hard core" videos of fighters look something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8pVpTvyQCI

[couch]

"When using Pak Sao, avoid the inner gate." - Moy Yat Kuen Kuit

[LSWCTN1]

"When using Pak Sao, avoid the inner gate." - Moy Yat Kuen Kuit

funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate... ! :D

i know the reasoning behind it, however.

[t_niehoff]

funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate... ! :D

i know the reasoning behind it, however.

Can you tell me WHY (the reason behind it) pak avoids the inner gate?

[Tom Kagan]

funny thing is, one of our basic chi sao drills uses a pak to the inner gate... ! :D

i know the reasoning behind it, however.
Since the Kuen Kuit refers to your hands and not your opponent's, I suspect that one of your "basic chi sao drills" actually does not go counter to the adage. Regardless of whether you actually use an indoor PakSao as one of your "basic chi sao drills", I am skeptical of the reasoning. If you could, please describe your basic PakSao drill and the reasoning behind its "indoor" status from your point of view.

[LSWCTN1]

Since the Kuen Kuit refers to your hands and not your opponent's, I suspect that one of your "basic chi sao drills" actually does not go counter to the adage. Regardless of whether you actually use an indoor PakSao as one of your "basic chi sao drills", I am skeptical of the reasoning. If you could, please describe your basic PakSao drill and the reasoning behind its "indoor" status from your point of view.

45 degree pak (its the only one we do...)
the pak arm cuts above the opposing arm to pak the opposite (obvs!) taking that one off line for that ones opposing arm to strike... the pak forearm jams the opponents arm like lan would, but not lan energy...

only when the opponent makes the mistake on the opposite hand and comes too low...

the defense to it is mun? then the continuation would be to open with the thumb part of the retreating hand and indoor pak again

if that makes sense? if not i'll try to find a video somewhere


Can you tell me WHY (the reason behind it) pak avoids the inner gate?

if my understanding is correct, then pak doesnt come to you opponents inside gate becaue if one hand is defending then the other should be attacking... thus making your arms crossed

[Tom Kagan]

LSWCTN1: As I suspected, your description of your "basic chi sao drill" does not run counter to the Kuen Kuit. Whatever your reasoning as to why your "basic drill" would not align with essentially a "basic rule of thumb", it stems from a flawed premise.

[t_niehoff]

if my understanding is correct, then pak doesnt come to you opponents inside gate becaue if one hand is defending then the other should be attacking... thus making your arms crossed

What are you trying to accomplish (your objective, goal) when you perform a pak sao?

[Yoshiyahu]

Hey Yea Kung Fu Stan Pointed out to me that I had posted the wrong video up. I meant to post the Yip Man video up...

I got the right up now...anyone wants to see Stan doing Yip Man SLT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZT0V...eature=channel

sorry for posting the wrong video..I like his energy in this video!

also what did u guys think about the few applications!


He seems to have changed the name of what he used to call the YKS SLT to the Yip Man SLT (btw, YM does a Siu Nim Tao -- Yip changed the name of the first form) -- but regardless of what he calls them, they are simply terrible.


A) How the hell is that Yip Man ANYTHING

B) It's exactly the same form, actually exactly the same VIDEO, as the one posted earlier by Yoshiyahu claiming that it shows Yuen Kay San SLT.

C) How the hell is that Yuen Kay San ANYTHING

[LSWCTN1]

What are you trying to accomplish (your objective, goal) when you perform a pak sao?

in this drill its to open a gap after the opponent has made a mistake. But sometimes displacement, sometimes press, depends on the 'feeling'? i guess...

in essence; i always want to be able to hit, without being hit :D

[t_niehoff]

in this drill its to open a gap after the opponent has made a mistake. But sometimes displacement, sometimes press, depends on the 'feeling'? i guess...

in essence; i always want to be able to hit, without being hit :D

Thanks. That's what I thought.

[LSWCTN1]

Thanks. That's what I thought.

in line with your methods?

[t_niehoff]

in line with your methods?

No. Pak sao is a way of establishing a bridge (you can't "slap" something you are already in contact with), and ideally should join, cut-off an opponent's offense, and break his structure.

As such, pak sao doesn't bat or knock force away - like what Stan is doing.

[LSWCTN1]

No. Pak sao is a way of establishing a bridge (you can't "slap" something you are already in contact with), and ideally should join, cut-off an opponent's offense, and break his structure.

As such, pak sao doesn't bat or knock force away - like what Stan is doing.

sounds similar to me... :confused:

pak can be an 'oh sh!t' reaction when you have seen something late (from the initial attack, for example)

or it can be the press that i also mentioned. if done at the 45 degree (second one in most snt's) it will invariably be fooking with their structure and stealing it from them

i have shared correspondance with Robert, as i am interested in seeing his method first hand. the more i see (hear) of it the more similar it sounds

[t_niehoff]

sounds similar to me... :confused:


No, it's night and day.



pak can be an 'oh sh!t' reaction when you have seen something late (from the initial attack, for example)

or it can be the press that i also mentioned. if done at the 45 degree (second one in most snt's) it will invariably be fooking with their structure and stealing it from them


You seem to be thinking of pak sao as some "reaction" or defense -- it's not, It's not a block or a parry. It is an ATTACK.

Pak sao is a slapping hand that connects and drives through and into your opponent's center, breaking his structure and setting up control.

It has nothing to do with any 45 degree angle.

Is this how you train to do it? Because if not, then you won't be able to do it. Every time I perform a pak sao, my intent and objective is to destroy my opponent's structure -- nothing less.



i have shared correspondance with Robert, as i am interested in seeing his method first hand. the more i see (hear) of it the more similar it sounds

What Robert teaches is simply WCK.

[LSWCTN1]

What Robert teaches is simply WCK.

and not etiquette

[t_niehoff]

and not etiquette

Where was I impolite in our discussion here?

[LoneTiger108]

You seem to be thinking of pak sao as some "reaction" or defense -- it's not, It's not a block or a parry. It is an ATTACK.

Pak sao is a slapping hand that connects and drives through and into your opponent's center, breaking his structure and setting up control.

It has nothing to do with any 45 degree angle.

Is this how you train to do it? Because if not, then you won't be able to do it. Every time I perform a pak sao, my intent and objective is to destroy my opponent's structure -- nothing less.

This is getting frustrating as I have to agree with T AGAIN! :mad:

I will say though, that this explanation of paksau is an 'ultimate', or the 'ideal' way to use it as an attack. BUT that isn't to say it can not be a defense, or a reaction to an attack as long as it's used to regain the control and not simply as a deflection.

T - If you use paksau in the way you describe, do you end up 'following' through (staying in contact) to apply pressure to their structure??

[LSWCTN1]

Where was I impolite in our discussion here?

dont worry, i was just being fascetious :D

but incidentally, maybe my explanation is incorrect but i agree with you and Spencer...

can i ask; how do you perform this with the firsk snt pak, to the shoulder. IME working against a 50/50 weighted boxers, for example would be a parry and taking them to overextend

although you said its an attack, i believe this is just a by product of tying them up with the pak, and isnt necessarily the intention...

[couch]

You seem to be thinking of pak sao as some "reaction" or defense -- it's not, It's not a block or a parry. It is an ATTACK.

Pak sao is a slapping hand that connects and drives through and into your opponent's center, breaking his structure and setting up control.

It has nothing to do with any 45 degree angle.

Is this how you train to do it? Because if not, then you won't be able to do it. Every time I perform a pak sao, my intent and objective is to destroy my opponent's structure -- nothing less.


Nice contribution. Good stuff, man.

[LoneTiger108]

dont worry, i was just being fascetious :D

but incidentally, maybe my explanation is incorrect but i agree with you and Spencer...

can i ask; how do you perform this with the firsk snt pak, to the shoulder. IME working against a 50/50 weighted boxers, for example would be a parry and taking them to overextend

although you said its an attack, i believe this is just a by product of tying them up with the pak, and isnt necessarily the intention...

Personally, and don't quote me as representing the whole Lee Shing family on this one, the paksau you explain and where you're drawing that from in SLT is incorrect. That set (commonly saam bai fut?) is used to develop circling and encircling strengths - huen and wan. It's a common misunderstanding as far as I can see, but my SLT does tend to 'flow' much more than what I generally see out there. Circular AND straight lines instead of just straight lines and 45 degree angles!

As far as using paksau to deflect? I would say that as long as it hurts the guy and destabilizes his attack it is doing what it is designed to. This itself doesn't always need you to follow through and control. My opinion of course! :D

[t_niehoff]

dont worry, i was just being fascetious :D

but incidentally, maybe my explanation is incorrect but i agree with you and Spencer...

can i ask; how do you perform this with the firsk snt pak, to the shoulder.

IME working against a 50/50 weighted boxers, for example would be a parry and taking them to overextend

although you said its an attack, i believe this is just a by product of tying them up with the pak, and isnt necessarily the intention...

You are thinking of the pak sao as a parry (he throws a punch and you bat it away, like cuffing in boxing) -- it's not. This is not WCK's method.

The movement you describe (in the first section of the SNT) is not really a pak sao (although many mislabel it since it has the "shape" of a pak sao): it is a "supporting palm" and is generally used after you are already in contact.

To give you an example, your opponent has attached to you with a neck grabbing hand with his right hand. You want to get your left arm inside to regain control but his elbow is (correctly) down and in so that you have no room. You use this movement by quickly pushing his elbow "outward" with your right hand as you thread in your left arm (tan sao).

[t_niehoff]

This is getting frustrating as I have to agree with T AGAIN! :mad:

I will say though, that this explanation of paksau is an 'ultimate', or the 'ideal' way to use it as an attack. BUT that isn't to say it can not be a defense, or a reaction to an attack as long as it's used to regain the control and not simply as a deflection.


When I said "attack" I was referring that your intention/objective when performing it is to destroy the opponent's structure -- this of course also acts as defense -- not to only stop him from hitting you or to "open" lines.



T - If you use paksau in the way you describe, do you end up 'following' through (staying in contact) to apply pressure to their structure??

The kuit tells us, Mo Kiu Jee Jouu Kiu - If there is no bridge, erect one. The pak sao is to "erect" a bridge. Once I have a bridge, I use the bridge to destroy his structure. (If I am very good, I can dap, jeet and chum in "one" action). Precisely how I do that will depend on what my opponent gives me (the contact tells me how to break his structure). For example, if when I perform a pak sao and I feel him resist the pressure, I may change to jut sao to break his structure that way.

[wtxs]

He seems to have changed the name of what he used to call the YKS SLT to the Yip Man SLT (btw, YM does a Siu Nim Tao -- Yip changed the name of the first form) -- but regardless of what he calls them, they are simply terrible.

So right that you are Mr. T, the demos are worst then terrible, they are shameful! It's such disrespect and disgrace to himself and lineage, possibly had learn from an unqualified teacher is no excuse, even some of the bad youtube demos are better.

If I was dead ... I would be turning over in my grave.:o

Stan my man, this forum is the wrong place to look for warm fuzzies, it is well known for kicking your arse when you are down or other wise, peace.:D

[shawchemical]

You are thinking of the pak sao as a parry (he throws a punch and you bat it away, like cuffing in boxing) -- it's not. This is not WCK's method.

The movement you describe (in the first section of the SNT) is not really a pak sao (although many mislabel it since it has the "shape" of a pak sao): it is a "supporting palm" and is generally used after you are already in contact.

To give you an example, your opponent has attached to you with a neck grabbing hand with his right hand. You want to get your left arm inside to regain control but his elbow is (correctly) down and in so that you have no room. You use this movement by quickly pushing his elbow "outward" with your right hand as you thread in your left arm (tan sao).

No. you're wrong. Even more wrong than stan.

The names are VERBS, not nouns. Fromt he position you describe, your choice of action uses far more movement than needed, and wont affect the man grabbing you enough. Better to Jum the elbow and use his attachment as a fulcrum.

[duende]

No. you're wrong. Even more wrong than stan.

The names are VERBS, not nouns. Fromt he position you describe, your choice of action uses far more movement than needed, and wont affect the man grabbing you enough. Better to Jum the elbow and use his attachment as a fulcrum.

Have to agree with Shawn on this one. We actually use a sinking high gan sau to achieve the very same thing. This does often lead into a chum sau too btw.

We only pack sau to the side against parallel arms to extend an opponent's bridge anf open up a controlled flank on that same parallel side.

[LSWCTN1]

Have to agree with Shawn on this one. We actually use a sinking high gan sau to achieve the very same thing. This does often lead into a chum sau too btw.

We only pack sau to the side against parallel arms to extend an opponent's bridge anf open up a controlled flank on that same parallel side.

sounds? like the drill i described

[t_niehoff]

No. you're wrong. Even more wrong than stan.

The names are VERBS, not nouns. Fromt he position you describe, your choice of action uses far more movement than needed, and wont affect the man grabbing you enough. Better to Jum the elbow and use his attachment as a fulcrum.

Yes, I know they are verbs (as I have previously pointed out many times, thank you). I am using them as actions.

And its funny that you think my example uses "too much movement" and "won't effect the man grabbing you" -- since this is something that muay thai and wrestlers also both do all the time in fighting, is high percentage, and has proven to work time and time again. When someone has a superior position and control over you, you need to first break that control, before trying to "effect the man grabbing you."

[duende]

sounds? like the drill i described

Could very well be.. I'm a bit late to the discussion, and need to go back and read the earlier posts.

What I'm referring to is basically the opening of the third section in the wooden dummy form.

Best

[Saboi Osmosis]

who is Stans Sifu?