IWC Demo

[Sihing73]

Hello Everyone,

Here is a demo done by my Sihing Julio Ferrer from Seattle performed at Microsoft for the Chinese New Year celebration/banquet for the Taiwanese Employees Association;

You will notice the forms are done a bit differently. Keep in mind this is a demonstration so consider accordingly. ;)

Enjoy:

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThFBRA7TIlg

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk-EnrLyAlo

[sanjuro_ronin]

I liked the forms, I liked how they were done.
Never been a fan of the "blindfolded" chi sao, but hey, to each their own.
Good stuff.

[chusauli]

I remember Chow Sifu in NYC. I can see the influences that led him to modify his system from what he originally learned.

It was a good presentation.

Happy Chinese New Year! Thank you for sharing!

[KPM]

Thanks for that Dave! I had never seen Chow Sifu's forms demo'd before. Very interesting!

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Sihing73;1076167]Hello Everyone,

Here is a demo done by my Sihing Julio Ferrer from Seattle performed at Microsoft for the Chinese New Year celebration/banquet for the Taiwanese Employees Association;

You will notice the forms are done a bit differently. Keep in mind this is a demonstration so consider accordingly. ;)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave- thanks for sharing the interesting demo video. I have 3 curiosities...
1. The forms are indeed done "differently" as you point out. Any brief reason as to why? Chow sifu or your Sihing had some key reasons?
2. Why is their shifting in the slt?
3 Why does the wu go forward?

No criticisms implied.

joy chaudhuri

[Sihing73]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave- thanks for sharing the interesting demo video. I have 3 curiosities...
1. The forms are indeed done "differently" as you point out. Any brief reason as to why? Chow sifu or your Sihing had some key reasons?
2. Why is their shifting in the slt?
3 Why does the wu go forward?

No criticisms implied.

joy chaudhuri

Joy,

No criticism taken. We actually have the forms both with and without shifting. The reason Sifu Chow added the shifting, and even a stepping version, was to introduce the way to move early on in the training. By practicing the movements with a shift or step you get an idea of how the actual technique can be utilized. For example, if you do the Bong Sau but turn the wrong way its lack of usefullness will be apparent. Also, by training the movement you learn to connect the entire body behind every technique. Of course, you can get these through the traditional forms as well, it just is not introduced as early on.

The Wu goes forward and the fook retracts because that is how, we feel, the actual application is used. The extending Wu is already in the CK anyhow, we just start it earlier in the SNT. Wu should always be extending and only retract due to the opponents force, you can learn this the traditional way also, just seems easier for some to grasp early on by extending rather than retracting.

My opinion on why Sifu Chow made these changes is that the felt that by introducing the idea of movement and the entrie body behind each technique early on, it allows students to be able to apply the art much earlier in their training. Of course, Sifu Chow would be a better choice to answer as to why HE made changes.

FWIW, I was trained the traditional way, even when I first started with Sifu Chow. The shifting SNT was not introduced in our system until around 2000 if I recall correctly.

Sifu Chow has always been very open to other approaches and has sought out many other WC Sifu and explored their approaches. He has also been working to integrate BJJ into his approach to WC.

I am not a "certified" instructor in his system, although I am of his lineage now and he is both my Sifu and my good friend. The reason is that I have decided to explore a slightly different route by integrating the Pekiti Tirsia and my current exploration of American Kuntao Silat into my approach rather than the BJJ.

[Sihing73]

Keith, Paul and Robert,

Thank your for the kind words.

Perhaps Sifu Chow is allowing his Wing Chun to "evolve". ;)

[Vajramusti]

Thanks for the explanations Dave.
Good wishes, Joy

[sanjuro_ronin]

Keith, Paul and Robert,

Thank your for the kind words.

Perhaps Sifu Chow is allowing his Wing Chun to "evolve". ;)

God I hope so !
If he is doing that ( and it seems he is) he is keeping to the tradition of WC and all other TMA.

[couch]

Keith, Paul and Robert,

Thank your for the kind words.

Perhaps Sifu Chow is allowing his Wing Chun to "evolve". ;)

Viva la revolution!

[chusauli]

Gu Lao WCK points can be practiced in shifting and stepping manner, so its natural that Yip Man WCK sets can be played in the same manner.

[LoneTiger108]

I agree that progress is good too. As long as there is understanding behind, what I see as, key changes. It sounds like the changes made here were thought through well enough.

Images of Wing Chun forms are simply that. How you evolve your own image is what interests me, and this evolution should come from within Wing Chun itself IMHO. What I see hear does that, with a litttle Wudang Heigung too (which I don't know what to make of really)

I also find it interesting that our moderator is now posting his own threads ;)

[Vajramusti]

I also find it interesting that our moderator is now posting his own threads ;)
-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't see a problem and his thread start up was interesting and about wing chun.

joy chaudhuri

[LoneTiger108]

-----------------------------------------------------------
I don't see a problem and his thread start up was interesting and about wing chun.

joy chaudhuri

Did I say I had a problem Joy?? I said I found it 'interesting' ;) I quite like the idea that Dave is promoting his Kung Fu Bruvs, but I do feel that if I posted a video of me or a student doing SLT sets similar to his I would be ridiculed in one way or another :eek:

I will say this though, I don't believe this is progressive Wing Chun, it's simply Wing Chun that has had time to grow. Like I said, I practise all forms in a set format that allows for this type of drilling (and more) but I wouldn't perform that as a whole form like done here as it tends to cause confusion in new students.

[Vajramusti]

Did I say I had a problem Joy?? I said I found it 'interesting'

(Interesting could mean many things. No worries))Joy


I quite like the idea that Dave is promoting his Kung Fu Bruvs, but I do feel that if I posted a video of me or a student doing SLT sets similar to his I would be ridiculed in one way or another :eek:

((I dont think that Dave was intentionally "promoting"-just getting a conversation going, me thinks. Ridicule?--
keyboard critics' work is easy by both- novices and ideologues. One listens and if one has confidence in what you are doing- one ignores the noise))Joy

I will say this though, I don't believe this is progressive Wing Chun, it's simply Wing Chun that has had time to grow. Like I said, I practise all forms in a set format that allows for this type of drilling (and more) but I wouldn't perform that as a whole form like done here as it tends to cause confusion in new students.

((I would not do it that way... but it is Chow sifu's evolution- ok by me.He has his reasons apparently as Dave explained. In our SLT there is a double punch in the section that has double handed motions-han, ding etc- to provide a foundation for building equalization of power from both sides.We don't move the feet and horse around. One can always move on to chum kiu or bj footwork if the slt structure is developed enough.)

joy chaudhuri

[Tom Kagan]

I practise all forms in a set format that allows for this type of drilling (and more) but I wouldn't perform that as a whole form like done here as it tends to cause confusion in new students.

I personally can pick out at least five of my sihings by name simply by watching their students and grandstudents do their forms. I can also spot a close Yip Man student by a simple flair movement in ChumKiu. Every teacher has them.

Regardless of any reasoning behind it, solo forms are just choreography. If the essence is the same, it doesn't cause confusion (assuming one knows what is the essence. :) ). On the contrary: the choreography shows a signature of the choreographer. At their best, such signatures are merely a pleasant momento of good times.


... but I do feel that if I posted a video of me or a student doing SLT sets similar to his I would be ridiculed in one way or another :eek:

This would depend on how goofy the choreography turns out. ;)

[Sihing73]

[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1076514] I do feel that if I posted a video of me or a student doing SLT sets similar to his I would be ridiculed in one way or another :eek:[QUOTE]

I would hope not. I will say that if you were, and I was aware of it, I would remove anyones post which did ridicule you, or anyone else, showing their interpretation of WC. Of course, if it takes me a day or two understand that I do not hit this forum every 10 minutes, like some seem capable of doing :p

[Phil Redmond]

In TWC the Wu is trained pulling back but applied going forward.

[Sihing73]

In TWC the Wu is trained pulling back but applied going forward.

Phil,

That is how it is taught in most "traditional" Wing Chun. When I first learned from Roy Undem, a student of Augustine Fong, the Wu was withdrawn with forward intent just as when I was taught WT. As a matter of fact when I first started with Sifu Chow the Wu was taugh retracting. It was only several years later that the form (SNT) was changed to an extending Wu. Kind of like the idea of training for how you would really use it, perhaps.

Like I said, you can learn to exert forward energy with a retracting Wu, however in application the Wu does go forward, unles the incoming energy forces the Wu to retract, would you agree?? Also, the extending Wu is found in the CK form, is this the same in TWC?

The only real advantage, if you want to call it that, to teaching and training the Wu to go forward from the beginning, imo, is that it presents the actual application earlier and may make the application more understandable in the beginning. Would you agree with this statement?

[Vajramusti]

Phil,

That is how it is taught in most "traditional" Wing Chun. When I first learned from Roy Undem, a student of Augustine Fong, the Wu was withdrawn with forward intent just as when I was taught WT. As a matter of fact when I first started with Sifu Chow the Wu was taugh retracting. It was only several years later that the form (SNT) was changed to an extending Wu. Kind of like the idea of training for how you would really use it, perhaps.

Like I said, you can learn to exert forward energy with a retracting Wu, however in application the Wu does go forward, unles the incoming energy forces the Wu to retract, would you agree?? Also, the extending Wu is found in the CK form, is this the same in TWC?

The only real advantage, if you want to call it that, to teaching and training the Wu to go forward from the beginning, imo, is that it presents the actual application earlier and may make the application more understandable in the beginning. Would you agree with this statement?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Dave- some passing comments:
1. Retracting wu in chum kiu? I don;t know what you are referring to.

2. To handle great force-the wu just doesn't go forward- it has to be springy without being weak. controlling the wu when it is coming back helps with developing the spring.There are other reasons as well.

3. Passing comment on a related threat on "evolution". It's a word with many possible meanings.
Of course things evolve. The fundamentals of wing chun are based on a considerably deep understanding of human structure and fundamentals of motion. The fundamentals of the skeleton has not changed that much for some time. Our understanding of applications, uses and training keeps evolving in a dialectical zig zag way.Here as elsewhere it's important to know the distinction between the baby and the bathwater.

joy chaudhuri

[Sihing73]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Dave- some passing comments:
1. Retracting wu in chum kiu? I don;t know what you are referring to.

2. To handle great force-the wu just doesn't go forward- it has to be springy without being weak. controlling the wu when it is coming back helps with developing the spring.There are other reasons as well.

3. Passing comment on a related threat on "evolution". It's a word with many possible meanings.
Of course things evolve. The fundamentals of wing chun are based on a considerably deep understanding of human structure and fundamentals of motion. The fundamentals of the skeleton has not changed that much for some time. Our understanding of applications, uses and training keeps evolving in a dialectical zig zag way.Here as elsewhere it's important to know the distinction between the baby and the bathwater.

joy chaudhuri

Joy,

I think you may have misread, I said the Extending Wu is introduced in CK not retracting.

All WC techniques, imo, should be "springy" able to adapt as different amounts of force are encountered.

Also, "evolution" does not always mean for the better.

[Vajramusti]

Joy,

I think you may have misread, I said the Extending Wu is introduced in CK not retracting.

All WC techniques, imo, should be "springy" able to adapt as different amounts of force are encountered.

Also, "evolution" does not always mean for the better.
----------------------------------
Dave- not being difficult- trying to understand your post. Where is the extending wu in chum kiu.
Do you mean the wu which backs up the bong? Before lan or kwan?
Springiness involves development of the springs. IMO. It's not just a mental thing.

I am doing wc right now so my post is short.
joy

[Sihing73]

Joy,

Yes the Wu which backs up the Bong. The Wu goes forward to support the second line of defense.

[Vajramusti]

Ok Dave.

joy

[LoneTiger108]

When I first learned from Roy Undem, a student of Augustine Fong, the Wu was withdrawn with forward intent just as when I was taught WT. As a matter of fact when I first started with Sifu Chow the Wu was taugh retracting. It was only several years later that the form (SNT) was changed to an extending Wu. Kind of like the idea of training for how you would really use it, perhaps.

Interesting chat about a forward intent in the Wusau. I noticed the distinct difference in your clip too. Of all the changes/evolutions, this could be the most damaging. Once the Wusau moves forwards it is no longer 'defense'. It takes on another personality that has another name.

Personally, and from my experience, I have a totally different idea of what the 1st set represents (even by calling it the 1st set gets confused looks lol!) so to change it to be moving in such a way is not doing what it says on the tin! Making changes to forms for the sake of an individuals 'application' idea seems a bit selfish imho.

I have also heard of the forward intent thingy and see far too much concentration on this method that is actually specific to 'looksau', not really for 'chisau'. Its used as a learning tool for beginners to feel eachothers weight and structures, so to implement it into everything is over using a simple strategy but I guess many translate it like this. But saying that, if it helps you get across your specific message then all is good!

My message is just different, especially concerning SLT.

[Sihing73]

Spencer,

Wu always has "forward intent" doesn't it?

Since the Wu does go forward in the 2nd form, why would it be wrong for it to go forward, even in the first?

Just interested in your POV as well. There is always danger in making changes and not everyone will agree. I would agree that change for changes sake is not such a good thing. In this case, I will defer to my sifu and his experience which is greater than my own.

[LoneTiger108]

Wu always has "forward intent" doesn't it?

Sorry I haven't got to this earlier, but work is overly busy and I've been dragged into other threads!!

Yes, I agree that Wusau is 'known' to have forward intent, but tell me what is intent?? Intent does not indicate in any way that the Wusau actually 'moves' forward. The reasoning behind most schools approach to the SBF set if to create an 'immovable' Wusau. If anything (and I coach this) whilst the Wusau remains immovable the body 'itself' moves forward. A surprise, snake like tactic if you will. For defense and avoidance, NOT attack.


Since the Wu does go forward in the 2nd form, why would it be wrong for it to go forward, even in the first?

If you're talking of the section I think you are, that Wusau is revolving 'with the body' and Bongsau. It doesn't move forward itself, the whole body is behind it moving forward.

I'm also interested in your thinking, as I am for many posters here Dave, so tell me exactly what is that section of Chum Kiu for to you?

Please also understand that my personal form does not look too much like anything I have seen on Youtube! When I've coached beginners it does, but once the idea and training from SLT go 'into' the other forms it looks a bit different fme. That is, if the SLT has also been trained, drilled and developed over time.

[Vajramusti]

IMO FWIW- forward intent is an over-used general term. And forward is a relative term depending on facing.

Different lineages can make their things work for them- which is ok by me.

joy chaudhuri

[JPinAZ]

IMO FWIW- forward intent is an over-used general term. And forward is a relative term depending on facing.

Different lineages can make their things work for them- which is ok by me.

joy chaudhuri

Without some type of fwd intent (toward my opponent's Centerline/COM/COG) there really can be no centerline at all. I don't think forward intent is over-used, it is key to WCK's centerline theory and energy concepts.
IMO, anyone who thinks fwd-intent is over-used or general really doesn't understand WCK. 'Making things work' and using/understanding WCK is too different things.

[Sihing73]

Sorry I haven't got to this earlier, but work is overly busy and I've been dragged into other threads!!

Yes, I agree that Wusau is 'known' to have forward intent, but tell me what is intent?? Intent does not indicate in any way that the Wusau actually 'moves' forward. The reasoning behind most schools approach to the SBF set if to create an 'immovable' Wusau. If anything (and I coach this) whilst the Wusau remains immovable the body 'itself' moves forward. A surprise, snake like tactic if you will. For defense and avoidance, NOT attack.


If you're talking of the section I think you are, that Wusau is revolving 'with the body' and Bongsau. It doesn't move forward itself, the whole body is behind it moving forward.

I'm also interested in your thinking, as I am for many posters here Dave, so tell me exactly what is that section of Chum Kiu for to you?

Please also understand that my personal form does not look too much like anything I have seen on Youtube! When I've coached beginners it does, but once the idea and training from SLT go 'into' the other forms it looks a bit different fme. That is, if the SLT has also been trained, drilled and developed over time.

Hello Spencer,

I was also involved in other things so I did not reply sooner. I almost missed this entirely :o

I guess the easiest way to explain what I mean by "forward intent" is that all of our movement or techniques are moving forward, if even slightly. They do not sit still and only retract when the energy coming in to meet them is great enough to move them back. For example, when you do a Bong Sau, your arm is shaped and moved into position by the energy coming from the opponent, they make you do Bong Sau. However, if that energy (punch) were to be removed than your Bong would spring forward towards the opponent. We used to practice this a lot to insure that the opponent did not feel any pushing from the Bong Sau but that the Bong would spring forward when pressure was removed. IMO the Taun Sau meets the incoming force and deflects it by its shape. However, if the Taun does not meet force, or the force is wimpy or very small, then the Taun can become a strike and hit the opponent. However, this is not the same thing as thinking that a Taun is a punch, the Taun, Bong and Wu etc are specific shapes used to deal with attacks and are based on the amount of energy presented. However, when your opponent provides little in the ways of incoming force or an obstruction they they all have the potential to become a strike. It is this springy forward energy that represents "forward intent" to me at least. Hope that helps explain what I am thinking and where I am coming from.

Using this model, the Wu Sau always goes forward and only retracts when meeting superior force. What I mean by that is that the Wu will retract, but only does so when the force met is too great to maintain structure without collapsing. IME the Wu can be used as a very nice strke as well as a defense.

In the section we seem to be discussing: both the Bong and Wu extend forward, imo. Of course both are done in coordination with the body, one of the things taugh at CK level is the coordination of body structure and movement. My thinking is that both are retracted slightly and then extended again as the body turns. The goal would be, for me, to have the extension of the arms in connection with the turn or shift of the body. CK introduces the idea of combining the techniques with both a shift or turn as well as with a step. Both have slightly different methods to accomplish their goal.

I hope that makes where I am coming from a bit clearer.

Oh one other thing: Just as all techniques in WC, and many other arts, can be strikes that does not mean that is their purpose. Kind of like you can use a screwdirver, for example, as a weapon to stab someone. While the screwdriver can be used to strike, that is not what it is designed for and, while it may work, there are other tools better designed for the use of striking or stabbing. ;)

[Vajramusti]

Of course in actual usage, the whole structure should move with forward intent.
However in development and the sil lim tao there is also it's own balance or yin/yang. Thus-
One hand punches forward while the other hand comes back into a sinking position without losing the line.

joy chaudhuri

[LoneTiger108]

I hope that makes where I am coming from a bit clearer.

Yes it does I think.


Oh one other thing: Just as all techniques in WC, and many other arts, can be strikes that does not mean that is their purpose. Kind of like you can use a screwdirver, for example, as a weapon to stab someone. While the screwdriver can be used to strike, that is not what it is designed for and, while it may work, there are other tools better designed for the use of striking or stabbing. ;)

This is kind of what I saw in your approach to a forward moving Wusau, and again to apply that feel and look into the 1st form when that type of movement is actually explored somewhere else still doesn't make sense to me. There are no repeated purposes in the sets of Wing Chun forms. Each one is unique imho.

Still, it looks as if we have a different idea about that specific set of CK too but that's what I find cool about this forum. I will always appreciate the differences as much as the similarities! ;)

[T.D.O]

Does the backwards fook still train the "elbow energy" going back like the wu does in SLT?


To me this would be the question.... or is as i'm asking it LOLz

[Sihing73]

Does the backwards fook still train the "elbow energy" going back like the wu does in SLT?


To me this would be the question.... or is as i'm asking it LOLz

I will speak for myself so as to not missspeak for Sifu Chow.

The fook is a feeling technique, it should ride the opponents energy and use the position of the elbow to redirect their force. When you decide to apply forward energy then it becomes a Jum Sau. While in the same family as Fook the application is different, ime. Same as with a Jut Sau which has slightly different energy, more of a jerk or pull/push down rather than a Jum which goes slightly down but is mostly forward.

For example, when performing Chi Sau, the elbow position of the Fook should, on its own, provide a bit of automatic redirection simply based on its structure. However, when you decide to make this an active technique the Fook changes into something else, Jum/Jut etc. The Fook is used to sense what is given and transforms, as needed, to deal with that energy and respond to it.

[T.D.O]

Think you've missed my point bud.....


I've all way's thought of the 3 prayers to budda as a way to train elbow energy (position of teq as well), so the wu going back would be training the elbow for later teq's like lap and jut. At least this was how i was taught....

[Sihing73]

Think you've missed my point bud.....


I've all way's thought of the 3 prayers to budda as a way to train elbow energy (position of teq as well), so the wu going back would be training the elbow for later teq's like lap and jut. At least this was how i was taught....

Please reread my post, I don't think I missed anything. You asked about whether the Fook was trained for forward energy, did I not answer that question?

The elbow is always being trained, the position and structure of the elbow, IE Immovable elbow theory, is trained in the form.

Please explain how the WU retracting translates to Lop or Jut. I always figured Jut to be one of the Fook family techniques. So by your example, if the WU retracting prepares you for Jut then I am of the idea that your Jut retracts and does not go forward, right? I mean that seems to be what you are saying. Also, the Lop coming from WU would continue forward energy so why would it be retracting in a WU?

[bennyvt]

I was always taught that you would normally use Wu sao while your hand is going back, ie you bring your hand back, they follow you and you then change to wu sao that would be pushed forward.

[T.D.O]

You asked about whether the Fook was trained for forward energy, did I not answer that question?


Sorry...... I'll try to make myself more clear. I asked about the opposite energy, Pulling back with the elbow. But i think i've sussed it out any way.




Please explain how the WU retracting translates to Lop or Jut.


Pulling back with the elbow, it's about the elbow energy rather than teq. Well for me any way..... There's a clip of Samule Kwok on youtube (i think) explaining what i'm on about (cause i'm not the best at that LOL)


if the WU retracting prepares you for Jut then I am of the idea that your Jut retracts and does not go forward, right? I mean that seems to be what you are saying.

AYE, exactly that..... Back and down from the elbow. Though this may be a very small movement.... Still goes back.




Jut Sau which has slightly different energy, more of a jerk or pull/push down rather than a Jum which goes slightly down but is mostly forward.



You seem to agree with it here...... Just saying :rolleyes:


Hope that clears it up..... Not much time. i'll try and get a link to that vid for you bud ;) when i've got the chance.

[Sihing73]

Hello TDO,

I find that when people meet they are often closer than may appear when discussing things online. I have met and done Chi Sau with Sam Kwok several years ago when Ip Chun was visiting NYC.

The point of how I do the Fook in the form is relative to how the fook is applied. The Fook, as I said, is a sensing technique and used to ride the opponents arm. You can see this in Chi Sau as the Fook does not go forward on its own, it may go forward as a result of sticking to the others arm, but it does not move forward on its own. When the Fook changes to Jum then it becomes a different animal and is more dynamic.

The elbow is what draws and presses the arm whether going forward or back.

[T.D.O]

Sorry can't find the vid.... was lookin yesterday and today. I think it might actually be on a DVD i have LOL


But it seems that the first section of SLT from Sifu chows point of view would be on the technique/application?


where as from mine it would be on building the elbow energy and in the begining stages of learning training the technique, not that i'm that knowledgeable :o I like to see things from all points of view to see if i'm thinking wrong!

[KPM]

The point of how I do the Fook in the form is relative to how the fook is applied.

Not a bad way to look at it. The movements in the forms should be the way they are applied in actuality. Now, considering that the Tan can go forward or back, the Wu can go forward or back, the Fook can go forward or back.....I would modify that section in the SLT form this way: 1. out with Fook, back with with Wu, 2. out with Wu, back with Fook, 3. out with Fook, back with Wu. The way I see it, the Fook is used as much with forward energy as it is with "withdrawing" energy. So just doing the SLT form with only a withdrawing Fook is not much different from doing it with only a forward Fook. But that's just me! :)

[bennyvt]

But even while the fook is going back is has forward force. I was always taught that if the tan in chi sao wasn't going forward (like you see people looking like they are driving a bus). The force of the fook should push the tan aside and turn into an attack. While I agree that the fook, jum sao and gun sao (sp?) are just variations of the same move I think the "technique" of fook sao stops when it actually goes back. Then I would call it a jut sao ie a backward movement of the elbow while pushing forward to create an eccentric movement to move the attack.
I think of the fook as a forward movement that blocks an attack on the inside of the arm but still has enough forward movement to turn striaght into an attack. Jum sao is a more jolting move done when the force of the attack is so much that the block needs more energy so an attack will have a slight pause because of the resulting force of the attack meeting the block. Gun sao is like a jum sao using what my teacher called the "resulting vector" to attack while blocking. My teacher understood physics but the way I understand is that if I aim to compensate for the force coming at me I can still hit the target.
I also think the Wu sao in chum kiu goes forward. I walways think about it as an elbow movement. The elbow goes forward to turn into the Wu sao. I like to think of a wu sao as an upside down bong. You push the elbow forward but you keep enough force in the wrist so you don't collapse.

[KPM]

But even while the fook is going back is has forward force.

---Something can't go forward and back at the same time. That violates the laws of physics and common sense. The Fook can go back with good structure which would prevent a force applied to it from collapsing it inward.

I was always taught that if the tan in chi sao wasn't going forward (like you see people looking like they are driving a bus). The force of the fook should push the tan aside and turn into an attack.

---Sure. That's because at that point in time the Fook would be going forward, or if stationary it would have forward pressure behind it.

While I agree that the fook, jum sao and gun sao (sp?) are just variations of the same move I think the "technique" of fook sao stops when it actually goes back.

----There is a fine line between a Fook and a Jut. You can follow an incoming force back with your Fook without changing the position of the hand and it technically remains a Fook rather than becoming a Jut. But I see what you are getting at and tend to agree that I don't see the primary application of the Fook as going back. So I'm not really sure about Chow Sifu's reason for changing it in the form.


I also think the Wu sao in chum kiu goes forward. I walways think about it as an elbow movement. The elbow goes forward to turn into the Wu sao. I like to think of a wu sao as an upside down bong. You push the elbow forward but you keep enough force in the wrist so you don't collapse.

---I agree!