Gaun sao / Jum sao

[k gledhill]

I'm trying to steer away from my way versus your way, or more superior, less superior etc...and simply get down to techniques in your system and ..missing from your system. I have been shown jum sao as a strike utilizing the inner arm on the centerline as the arm strikes forwards in one flowing action, not one , two. I know some use it as a block for tan...

I can start by saying the system I started learning under a direct student of Yip Man , who was a large man , taller than most Chinese, didnt have the jum sao in his methods and adopted gaun sao punches as a primary low section parry with strikes. The SLT did not contain jum sao in the latter 3 rd section .
Now My current instructors , instructor also a direct student of Yip Man , but of somewhat smaller stature is the opposite, with Jum sao being a cornerstone of the striking systems elbow unity of Tan sao and Jum sao. And also using gaun sao. Both Jum and gaun in 3rd section of SLT.

One system develops a completely different fighter from the other. Focus in chi-sao different, for the lack of jum striking , wu wrist blocking. Centerlines dictate hand positions in one , cnterline dictates wrists in the other...subtle shift but worlds apart.

I found this article I have seen before while learning the first method with gaun sao. It refers to the jum sao and gaun sao. The Jum sao has been , imo, eliminated from use by several lineages/teachers I have come across over the last 25 years. Leading me to wonder how its removal has 'changed' the system as mentioned in the article from a sophisticated striking angling fighting system, to a more commonly seen method of block and strike with blasting punches. read on :

~

There are many people claiming to teach Ving Tsun, and as many different “versions” of Ving Tsun as there are teachers, or so it seems. The reasons for these variations are many and complex, one factor which immediately springs to mind being that there are at least three or four different systems of Chinese boxing which take the name Ving Tsun (though the Chinese characters may differ). At least two of these appear to have originated in or around the city of Fatsaan (Foshan in the Mandarin dialect), the southern Chinese city where Grandmaster Ip Man of the Hong Kong-style first studied the system under his teacher, Chan Wa Sun, who in turn had learnt from the most celebrated of Ving Tsun “ancestors”, Leung Jan, the undefeated “King of Ving Tsun”, a man who is said to have been very protective when it came to passing on his skills.

Herein lies just one of the many causes of today’s confusion, that Leung Jan in fact may have taught two interpretations of the same art in order to preserve its uniqueness, one to his own sons (whom he hoped would inherit and pass on his skills), and a somewhat less sophisticated method to “Chan the money-changer”, the man under whom Grandmaster Ip Man began his Ving Tsun training.

If we are to believe the stories handed down through history concerning Leung Jan and his attitude to teaching “outsiders”, it is therefore possible that Leung (who was an intelligent, educated man) did in fact “simplify things” for his not so bright, but physically powerful student Chan, who, it has been said, was a far more gifted fighter than he was a thinking man. What Chan learnt and made use of was a cruder, less sophisticated, but nevertheless very effective form of Ving Tsun.

He of course went on to dispatch his opponent, after which he and Grandmaster Ip got into some heavy discussion about what had transpired.

Two events in recent Ving Tsun history tend to lend substance to this belief. One of these is the well-known story of how Grandmaster Ip was easily defeated by Leung Bik, the son of Leung Jan. According to the story (which has, it must be said, been thrown into some doubt in recent years) said to have been told by Grandmaster Ip himself, and retold by many of his students over the years, he suffered his first and possibly only defeat at the hands of an old man whom he had challenged while a student in Hong Kong during the early part of this century. To cut a long story short, Ip Man was to learn that his opponent was the son of his own teacher’s teacher, and Ip Man in turn became Leung’s student during which time he was taught a much more refined and subtle approach to Ving Tsun, something which may well have influenced what he was to teach to his own students later on.

The second event, which is not so widely known, except to students of the late Sifu Wong Shun Leung (and anyone who attended his seminars on the Siu Nim Tau form over the years), concerns the fact that Sifu Wong’s “version” of the first form contains an extra movement in the third section. The following story explains this fact. While fighting a rather stubborn opponent during one of Sifu Wong’s many celebrated “contests”, his opponent, in a fit of desperation and at the point of exhaustion, dropped to one knee and lashed out with a punch which Sifu Wong attempted to deflect with the Jam Sau movement contained within Siu Nim Tau form. Because the attack was so low, the Jam Sau only partially deflected the blow which then struck Wong in the upper thigh, leading to an injury which nagged him for months. He of course went on to dispatch his opponent, after which he and Grandmaster Ip got into some heavy discussion about what had transpired.

As a result of this discussion, Grandmaster Ip advised his students to include the technique known as Gaan Sau in place of the Jam Sau, previously found in this section of the form. Prior to this time, the Gaan Sau technique was only seen in the Biu Ji and Muk Yan Jong (Wooden Dummy) forms. Sifu Wong decided that both techniques were important (especially in view of the fact that the Jam Sau is an integral part of the basic single-hand Chi Sau exercise), and so continued to include both, while most, if not all of his contemporaries (the instructors of today) dropped the “old” technique in favour of the “new” one.

According to Sifu Wong, Grandmaster Ip had explained to him that the Jam Sau movement had been taught to him by Leung Bik, his second teacher, who had been a very small man and had not needed to make much use of the lower action Gaan Sau. Chan Wa Sun, on the other hand, being a taller man, would often make use of the lower action, as many of his opponents had been smaller than himself, and therefore were more likely to hit lower. Grandmaster Ip, being more influenced by his second teacher, Leung Bik, had therefore altered his form accordingly. Jam Sau is also a much more subtle action than the Gaan Sau movement and therefore less likely to be included in the arsenal of a man like Chan who tended to just blast his opponents out of his way.

It has often been suggested, though not proven by any means, that Ip Man taught in a fairly un-systematic way, tending to pass on skills according to the student’s size, reach and so on. It is also said that he didn’t have much time for his slower, less intelligent or less diligent students, and actually taught few people the entire system in person. This, in turn, possibly led to the fact that many people learnt by observing others training, rather than at first-hand, and that quite a few of these individuals actually learnt a “second-hand” or even “third-hand” version of Ving Tsun, filling the gaps in their knowledge with guesswork based on what they could recall seeing others do, or even worse, making it up out of their own imagination. This, of course, gave rise to the variations in technique (and the interpretation of these techniques) extant today amongst instructors of the same generation, not to mention those of their younger Ving Tsun brothers and sisters.

[mvbrown21]

Thanks for stopping the fanboi stuff Kev, at least temporarily ;)

It's a very interesting article and this is the kind of stuff I enjoy but I'm not quite sure what kind of response you're looking for. I know that we use Jum sau quite a bit in our system. I personally probably use it too much sometimes.......

I don't know, can you rephrase you're point maybe in a form of a question?

thanks

[k gledhill]

Well I was never taught 'jum' sao elbow in or striking using the energy of it....my old sifu was a big guy. Then meeting a 'student' of WSL it was the opposite all jum striking fluid attacking, cutting line strikes ...like night and day. One sophisticated the other blocking with one hand ala gaun while the other hit along side. A more common theme.
Just curious if anyone else has this gaun/jum missing or is used a s asystematic striking idea along with tan elbows etc...

Also wondered if there was 'favoritism' by YM towards giving time to some and as mentioned in the article, less to others.

[FongSung]

What you are talking about it similar to an earlier post about Fuk Sao, were I talked about controlling and hitting at the same time- "riding" (keeping contact with) the opponents arm whilst striking.
Punching, jum sao etc can be used the same way - meet the opponents attack with the forearm (elbow down ofcourse) then ride his forearm to continue to strike him. As long as the elbow down his attack will be guided to the side and slighty down. This is the first 2 person practise I was taught.

Is this what you mean?

[mvbrown21]

Also wondered if there was 'favoritism' by YM towards giving time to some and as mentioned in the article, less to others.

I can't speak for anyone about that, but I can share this from a Ho Kam Ming interview

"Question: Did Yip Man teach anybody else besides you the complete system of Wing Chun?
Master Ho: Everyone learned the whole system, but it depends upon the individual whether he can digest the system or not. That’s a different story. If I give all of you a subject and ask you to write a composition, you’ll write your own way. Some will write differently than others. It’s the same idea. Also, it depends how long you learn the system. If one learns the three forms in two weeks and someone else learns the forms in three years–the difference is already there. In the Wing Chun system, there’s only three forms, one dummy form, Six and a half point Staff, and Bot Jaam Do set. If you want to learn the motions, it’ll take you a half year. But if a good student takes his time and learns the forms correctly, a little is better than one who learns too much.

Question: Did grandmaster Yip Man teach the students at the beginning of his teaching career differently than near the end?
Master Ho: Of course there’s a difference in the way of his teaching. For example, when you just graduate from college and begin to teach, you have little experience. But from then onward, you learn better. Just like teaching Kung Fu; at the beginning you’re less experienced. Your way of teaching will improve."

____

I've also heard it put by Sigung Fong this way in an interview -

"Q.What was the basic environment in which you learned from Master Ho and do you teach the same way?

I learned the old fashioned way, required a lot of patience on my part and his part. For learning a simple but deep art it helps to have complete faith in the teacher, to practice hard and long, to listen and understand and also to test and see if the art works. Thus when a good student is ready a good teacher will teach him things.

Just as Master Ho learned all the forms from Yip Man so I learned all the forms from Master Ho. Just as Master Ho had a long relationship with Yip Man so also I have had a long relationship with Master Ho which has continued to this date. The nature of both relationships were and are such that some of the teaching has been public and the rest private. This is not uncommon in the Chinese Gung Fu tradition.

Teaching methods however can be adjusted given changing conditions and the background of the students. Yip Man had to adjust from the mainland to the Hong Kong environment. Ho adjusted for Macao. I had to deal with different conditions in the US. So I ended up organizing a curriculum carefully, giving more explanations and illustrations for purposes of communication in the USA. While I have adjusted my teaching methods, the Wing Chun principles are the same. Again, when the student is ready, I show them greater depths of the art.

Q. Do you do your forms in exactly the same way as Yip Man and Ho Kam Ming?

Depends again on how you look at it. For Americans I have tried to organize the teaching curriculum so that they can follow a little better than they would otherwise. As part of the organization of the curriculum, I have put back some things in the forms here and there that they would otherwise miss. In the old way you eventually got everything. In today's context it helps to have a curriculum. The principles of Wing Chun are exactly the same. The principles of Wing Chun were created by a long line of teachers. But teaching methods vary: the expressions have aspects that are unique to the specific teacher......

.......I learned the pole applications from Ho Kam Ming first and absorbed them thoroughly. Then for teaching purposes I put important motions in a logical fashion into a form for organized teaching. Forms are text books and teachers organize texts for the same subject sometimes differently"


Hope this helps Kev :)

[k gledhill]

Thanks just trying to figure out why of all the schools I've visited most do a wrist dropping hand in Chi Sao like I did
I'm wondering if the added length was adopted due to the lack of elbow use ....so if guys where thinking Jim was weak or??
It was lost?

[Vernon]

FYI, the article was written by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/ving_tsun_by_definition.htm

[CFT]

Thanks just trying to figure out why of all the schools I've visited most do a wrist dropping hand in Chi Sao like I did
I'm wondering if the added length was adopted due to the lack of elbow use ....so if guys where thinking Jum was weak or??
It was lost?My previous school practiced the system Yip Man taught his Foshan students. The response to the straight palm in 'dan chi sao' was a jum sao rather than the wrist drop like you have described.

Prior to that school (much prior), I had practiced the wrist drop. I like the jum better.

[Vajramusti]

FYI, the article was written by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/ving_tsun_by_definition.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much ado about little perhaps in KG's post .Just a fact- I have trouble understanding his points at times.. I really am not being personal.

WSL had his own interactions with Ip man. Not my business to comment on that.David's essays on WSL are always informative.

Ho Kam ming had his own considerable interaction with Ip Man over a long period of time..


Jam and gan were part of Ho Kam Ming's wing chun from the start and the same for
Fong Chi Wing(Augustine Fong). In the organization of the slt..there are good reasons for jam and gan to be where they are in the sequence of the form..

joy chaudhuri

[k gledhill]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much ado about little perhaps in KG's post .Just a fact- I have trouble understanding his points at times.. I really am not being personal.

WSL had his own interactions with Ip man. Not my business to comment on that.David's essays on WSL are always informative.

Ho Kam ming had his own considerable interaction with Ip Man over a long period of time..


Jam and gan were part of Ho Kam Ming's wing chun from the start and the same for
Fong Chi Wing(Augustine Fong). In the organization of the slt..there are good reasons for jam and gan to be where they are in the sequence of the form..

joy chaudhuri
But you use wrist dropping in Chi Sao, right?

[k gledhill]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Much ado about little perhaps in KG's post .Just a fact- I have trouble understanding his points at times.. I really am not being personal.

WSL had his own interactions with Ip man. Not my business to comment on that.David's essays on WSL are always informative.

Ho Kam ming had his own considerable interaction with Ip Man over a long period of time..


Jam and gan were part of Ho Kam Ming's wing chun from the start and the same for
Fong Chi Wing(Augustine Fong). In the organization of the slt..there are good reasons for jam and gan to be where they are in the sequence of the form..

joy chaudhuri

I have been shown a jumstrike as a response to tan.
Awkward at first due to reprogramming the wrist drop. But the. Striking distance also changed closer from wrist to wrist, it became forearm to forearm ...



Yea its d p & e veratti article

[mvbrown21]

Hey Kev,

As much as you don't like my flow videos, pay close attention to myself in the "wing chun flow, pt. 1" video on my YouTube page. I think you'll see me using that concept of forearm to forearm, hence closer attacking distance concept quite often. I'm the one in the white shirt. I know it's a long video but there's quite a few different concepts in there that you might appreciate if you watch closely.

[Vajramusti]

But you use wrist dropping in Chi Sao, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go again with your erroneous pre- conceptions "Wrist dropping"? your term- not mine.
Does NOT capture what I do. Why not just do what you do or prefer to so rather than making broad generalizations about others.

joy chaudhuri

[k gledhill]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go again with your erroneous pre- conceptions "Wrist dropping"? your term- not mine.
Does NOT capture what I do. Why not just do what you do or prefer to so rather than making broad generalizations about others.

joy chaudhuri

sorry Joy :D how would you describe the action out there at the wrist ? Im not trying to **** you off , promise :D

[Vajramusti]

sorry Joy :D how would you describe the action out there at the wrist ? Im not trying to **** you off , promise :D
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What "action out there at the wrist"-- your own straw man creation!!

joy chaudhuri

[CFT]

I think this perfectly illustrates what Kevin is calling the 'wrist dropping' action: http://youtu.be/F6827x3VUpY

Lui Ming Fai (HKM lineage) performing dan chi sau with a student: http://youtu.be/_EczHW4zXjw
Seems like the same 'wrist dropping', but definite elbow energy there unlike the 1st example.

[k gledhill]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What "action out there at the wrist"-- your own straw man creation!!

joy chaudhuri

okay your response in chi-sao to a tan sao when it moves forwards to hit you, how do get shown to stop that happening from fook sao ?

[Vajramusti]

okay your response in chi-sao to a tan sao when it moves forwards to hit you, how do get shown to stop that happening from fook sao ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question is not stated clearly.
Are you talking about dahn chi sao as a timing training or literally(quoting you) tan sao coming in as a hit..

we have different beats and timings..one possibility- if I can control the line- I will just hit.The tan sao won't make it.
The response is alive and not mechanical

joy chaudhuri

[k gledhill]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question is not stated clearly.
Are you talking about dahn chi sao as a timing training or literally(quoting you) tan sao coming in as a hit..

we have different beats and timings..one possibility- if I can control the line- I will just hit.The tan sao won't make it.
The response is alive and not mechanical

joy chaudhuri

yes dan chi-sao ...basic exchange, tan ><fook what next ?

sorry I do a lot of responding on my phone with clumsy thumbs.

[k gledhill]

I think this perfectly illustrates what Kevin is calling the 'wrist dropping' action: http://youtu.be/F6827x3VUpY

Lui Ming Fai (HKM lineage) performing dan chi sau with a student: http://youtu.be/_EczHW4zXjw
Seems like the same 'wrist dropping', but definite elbow energy there unlike the 1st example.

Yes, you nailed it with the clips. not jum sao, I also did this in one version, as I see it a very common idea, but no jum sao versus tan sao. ...leads to striking attacking not possible with out the jum development....:confused: so why are so many doing this down wrist action ? we dont use it sparring to a tan sao ?
It isnt a strike its a receiving action. From my own experience, it eliminates any hip connection that jum elbow develops. ie the elbow isnt striking forwards, it is coming back as the hips thrust forwards...in fighting the elbows get driven forwards in unison with strikes, then naturally return to jut at the elbow strike starting point of jum...iow no retraction of the elbow behind the fixed position from SLT.....so why is everyone doing it ?

[mvbrown21]

The Liu Ming Fai example posted above by CFT pretty much sums it up in a basic application and in practice.

The idea is to redirect the energy if you can, from what I've been taught, and to only redirect your body structure and perform "slicing in" as you call it if you absolutely have to when on the outside line.

Take for example the opposite exercise from this position where the other guy punches while you're in tan position. You ride the punch in until your elbow structure takes over and it, almost magically really, redirects the punch outwards. You don't just guide it out like some people do. Takes almost no effort no matter how strong the punch is. Now with this one you can "slice it" because you have the inside line and you can simply punch out if you wanted to redirecting there punch off the line. For us that would be an appropriate time to use the application the WSL guys do a lot. But when your in the fook sau position and he palms in, that would be an inappropriate time to "slice in" without some kind of control. The reason being because your opponent can take advantage of having the inside line against you. You commit yourself when you "slice in" because you have to use explosive energy to make it work properly. Anytime you're committed you automatically have a weakness that can be used against you. A common way I've seen to deal with a "slice in" from the outside is to go into an inside facing and redirect their energy past your own structure and strike out at the same time. Usually you'll either successfully hit them or knock them off balance at the least if they block it.

That's the problem I see personally the most with the immoveable elbow theory. You're committed in most of the movements and risk your balance. Don't get me wrong, it's very effective against a lot of things and has it's place but a good WC guy who knows how to control will use that to their advantage.

[mvbrown21]

Joy makes a good point that, yeah, if you have the line it doesn't matter, my previous post was in reference to 'creating' the line by "slicing in" from the outside

[YouKnowWho]

When you use downward jum sao to against an upper cut, how do you prevent your opponent from borrowing your downward force and changes his upper cut into a hook punch to your head? This is the reason that I don't like to use "hard block".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2c6icIhRQc

[CFT]

The idea is to redirect the energy if you can, from what I've been taught, and to only redirect your body structure and perform "slicing in" as you call it if you absolutely have to when on the outside line.When you have the fuk sao position you are on the outside so what is wrong with 'cutting in' with the jum?

I think the reason why people do the 'wrist drop' is because the straight palm they are working againt is performed too low. The 1st video I linked to - the straight palm is to the lower abdomen. The palm should be a continuation of the tan - to the throat or face - maintaining the outward deflection caused by the elbow of the tan sao. I think this is the same action in the wooden dummy form.

IMO, both the tan and the fuk sao in dan chi sao are rather neutral. I feel only the punch/bong and palm/jum involves any exchange of force. But the punch/palm/bong/jum are all training the action of the elbow. The tan and fuk seem to me to function more as transitional positions.


Take for example the opposite exercise from this position where the other guy punches while you're in tan position. You ride the punch in until your elbow structure takes over and it, almost magically really, redirects the punch outwards. You don't just guide it out like some people do. Takes almost no effort no matter how strong the punch is. Now with this one you can "slice it" because you have the inside line and you can simply punch out if you wanted to redirecting there punch off the line. For us that would be an appropriate time to use the application the WSL guys do a lot. But when your in the fook sau position and he palms in, that would be an inappropriate time to "slice in" without some kind of control. The reason being because your opponent can take advantage of having the inside line against you. You commit yourself when you "slice in" because you have to use explosive energy to make it work properly. Anytime you're committed you automatically have a weakness that can be used against you. A common way I've seen to deal with a "slice in" from the outside is to go into an inside facing and redirect their energy past your own structure and strike out at the same time. Usually you'll either successfully hit them or knock them off balance at the least if they block it.I don't see how you are 'slicing in' from the inside? From the outside yes. What do you mean by inside facing?


That's the problem I see personally the most with the immoveable elbow theory. You're committed in most of the movements and risk your balance. Don't get me wrong, it's very effective against a lot of things and has it's place but a good WC guy who knows how to control will use that to their advantage.I don't really see why immoveable elbow means risking your balance? You'd only lose balance if you are reaching. Maintaining correct distance is another of the things you work in chi sao.

[lance]

I'm trying to steer away from my way versus your way, or more superior, less superior etc...and simply get down to techniques in your system and ..missing from your system. I have been shown jum sao as a strike utilizing the inner arm on the centerline as the arm strikes forwards in one flowing action, not one , two. I know some use it as a block for tan...

I can start by saying the system I started learning under a direct student of Yip Man , who was a large man , taller than most Chinese, didnt have the jum sao in his methods and adopted gaun sao punches as a primary low section parry with strikes. The SLT did not contain jum sao in the latter 3 rd section .
Now My current instructors , instructor also a direct student of Yip Man , but of somewhat smaller stature is the opposite, with Jum sao being a cornerstone of the striking systems elbow unity of Tan sao and Jum sao. And also using gaun sao. Both Jum and gaun in 3rd section of SLT.

One system develops a completely different fighter from the other. Focus in chi-sao different, for the lack of jum striking , wu wrist blocking. Centerlines dictate hand positions in one , cnterline dictates wrists in the other...subtle shift but worlds apart.

I found this article I have seen before while learning the first method with gaun sao. It refers to the jum sao and gaun sao. The Jum sao has been , imo, eliminated from use by several lineages/teachers I have come across over the last 25 years. Leading me to wonder how its removal has 'changed' the system as mentioned in the article from a sophisticated striking angling fighting system, to a more commonly seen method of block and strike with blasting punches. read on :

~

There are many people claiming to teach Ving Tsun, and as many different “versions” of Ving Tsun as there are teachers, or so it seems. The reasons for these variations are many and complex, one factor which immediately springs to mind being that there are at least three or four different systems of Chinese boxing which take the name Ving Tsun (though the Chinese characters may differ). At least two of these appear to have originated in or around the city of Fatsaan (Foshan in the Mandarin dialect), the southern Chinese city where Grandmaster Ip Man of the Hong Kong-style first studied the system under his teacher, Chan Wa Sun, who in turn had learnt from the most celebrated of Ving Tsun “ancestors”, Leung Jan, the undefeated “King of Ving Tsun”, a man who is said to have been very protective when it came to passing on his skills.

Herein lies just one of the many causes of today’s confusion, that Leung Jan in fact may have taught two interpretations of the same art in order to preserve its uniqueness, one to his own sons (whom he hoped would inherit and pass on his skills), and a somewhat less sophisticated method to “Chan the money-changer”, the man under whom Grandmaster Ip Man began his Ving Tsun training.

If we are to believe the stories handed down through history concerning Leung Jan and his attitude to teaching “outsiders”, it is therefore possible that Leung (who was an intelligent, educated man) did in fact “simplify things” for his not so bright, but physically powerful student Chan, who, it has been said, was a far more gifted fighter than he was a thinking man. What Chan learnt and made use of was a cruder, less sophisticated, but nevertheless very effective form of Ving Tsun.

He of course went on to dispatch his opponent, after which he and Grandmaster Ip got into some heavy discussion about what had transpired.

Two events in recent Ving Tsun history tend to lend substance to this belief. One of these is the well-known story of how Grandmaster Ip was easily defeated by Leung Bik, the son of Leung Jan. According to the story (which has, it must be said, been thrown into some doubt in recent years) said to have been told by Grandmaster Ip himself, and retold by many of his students over the years, he suffered his first and possibly only defeat at the hands of an old man whom he had challenged while a student in Hong Kong during the early part of this century. To cut a long story short, Ip Man was to learn that his opponent was the son of his own teacher’s teacher, and Ip Man in turn became Leung’s student during which time he was taught a much more refined and subtle approach to Ving Tsun, something which may well have influenced what he was to teach to his own students later on.

The second event, which is not so widely known, except to students of the late Sifu Wong Shun Leung (and anyone who attended his seminars on the Siu Nim Tau form over the years), concerns the fact that Sifu Wong’s “version” of the first form contains an extra movement in the third section. The following story explains this fact. While fighting a rather stubborn opponent during one of Sifu Wong’s many celebrated “contests”, his opponent, in a fit of desperation and at the point of exhaustion, dropped to one knee and lashed out with a punch which Sifu Wong attempted to deflect with the Jam Sau movement contained within Siu Nim Tau form. Because the attack was so low, the Jam Sau only partially deflected the blow which then struck Wong in the upper thigh, leading to an injury which nagged him for months. He of course went on to dispatch his opponent, after which he and Grandmaster Ip got into some heavy discussion about what had transpired.

As a result of this discussion, Grandmaster Ip advised his students to include the technique known as Gaan Sau in place of the Jam Sau, previously found in this section of the form. Prior to this time, the Gaan Sau technique was only seen in the Biu Ji and Muk Yan Jong (Wooden Dummy) forms. Sifu Wong decided that both techniques were important (especially in view of the fact that the Jam Sau is an integral part of the basic single-hand Chi Sau exercise), and so continued to include both, while most, if not all of his contemporaries (the instructors of today) dropped the “old” technique in favour of the “new” one.

According to Sifu Wong, Grandmaster Ip had explained to him that the Jam Sau movement had been taught to him by Leung Bik, his second teacher, who had been a very small man and had not needed to make much use of the lower action Gaan Sau. Chan Wa Sun, on the other hand, being a taller man, would often make use of the lower action, as many of his opponents had been smaller than himself, and therefore were more likely to hit lower. Grandmaster Ip, being more influenced by his second teacher, Leung Bik, had therefore altered his form accordingly. Jam Sau is also a much more subtle action than the Gaan Sau movement and therefore less likely to be included in the arsenal of a man like Chan who tended to just blast his opponents out of his way.

It has often been suggested, though not proven by any means, that Ip Man taught in a fairly un-systematic way, tending to pass on skills according to the student’s size, reach and so on. It is also said that he didn’t have much time for his slower, less intelligent or less diligent students, and actually taught few people the entire system in person. This, in turn, possibly led to the fact that many people learnt by observing others training, rather than at first-hand, and that quite a few of these individuals actually learnt a “second-hand” or even “third-hand” version of Ving Tsun, filling the gaps in their knowledge with guesswork based on what they could recall seeing others do, or even worse, making it up out of their own imagination. This, of course, gave rise to the variations in technique (and the interpretation of these techniques) extant today amongst instructors of the same generation, not to mention those of their younger Ving Tsun brothers and sisters.

I know what you mean the name of certtain wing chun hand techniques in geeral can be confusing too . Anyway gaun sao if I ' m not mistaken is basically known as downward block . If someone throws a punch at your lower area of the body like ribcage area or stomach , gaun sao is design to block that kind of attack , paired off with a strike to the face with a vertical palm strike or vertical fist strike .
Jum Sao is basically used to cut into your opponent ' s strike comming the lower part of the body , the difference is that jum sao since you ' re using the elbows as a way to generate to chop downward just like the way you would perform the technique , you use the side area of the hand much like the way you would chop down into your opponents oncomming attack if it ' s a punch to your lower ribcage area or stomach area . At the time you cut into your opponents attack regardless of right or left hand , you can use the other hand to strike the opponent with a strike of your choice to the upperbody area like face , neck , or jaw area .

Sifu Wong Shun Leung even tested out IP Man ' s techniques in the streets of HK , some fights he lost some fights he lost . Sifu Wong although he lost some fights , he began to analyze the techniques which he used in the fight and lost .
All the wing chun techniques which Sifu Wong learned from Ip man which caused him to lose a fight , he modified it and made it his way , it ' s still WC techniques , but he modified it his way and again tested it out in the streets and began winning fights again . Sifu Wong also trained GM William Cheung too , but eventually GM Cheung also went teaching on his own too , he modified his Chum Kil too , to make it work for him .

[k gledhill]

all food for thought...as the article mentions.

[Vajramusti]

Looks can deceive, Luis is not 'Wristing" whatever that means-- the key is the right degree of sinking the elbow. BTW I was there when he was demonstrating with Leung.
You can jam, wu or jut--- depends on fine tuning of skills and timing.Lui has flowed with many top flight HK wc folks including the much respected WSL- no one up manship intended.
You know is correct on this one- you have to watch out for a hook if too much force is used on the tan.

joy chaudhuri

[k gledhill]

Looks can deceive, Luis is not 'Wristing" whatever that means-- the key is the right degree of sinking the elbow. BTW I was there when he was demonstrating with Leung.
You can jam, wu or jut--- depends on fine tuning of skills and timing.Lui has flowed with many top flight HK wc folks including the much respected WSL- no one up manship intended.
You know is correct on this one- you have to watch out for a hook if too much force is used on the tan.

joy chaudhuri

force in the tan ? explain ?

[Vajramusti]

force in the tan ? explain ?
------------------------------------------------------------------The tan can turn into an outside whipping punch- analogous to a a hook-if whatever is used to "block" the tan-- a jam or whatever has too much force on it.You know who post alludes to that.
There are variations of dahn chi sao to demonstrate just that.

joy chaudhuri

[mvbrown21]

I don't see how you are 'slicing in' from the inside? From the outside yes. What do you mean by inside facing?

I don't really see why immoveable elbow means risking your balance? You'd only lose balance if you are reaching. Maintaining correct distance is another of the things you work in chi sao.

You're taking the line over when on the inside by punching out. It's ill advised to take over the line while on the outside, if the line is truly covered, by attack alone.

Inside facing is footwork. It's where you step out just enough for the incoming force to clear your structure and pivot to the inside and like joy said you can use an outside whipping punch or something of the sort to strike out. It's very fast.

I was referring to the immovable elbow theory in the sense that the WSL guys use it with the 'slicing in'

[lance]

When you use downward jum sao to against an upper cut, how do you prevent your opponent from borrowing your downward force and changes his upper cut into a hook punch to your head? This is the reason that I don't like to use "hard block".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2c6icIhRQc

Hello ,

I know what you mean , I saw the youtube clippings that was GM William Cheung doing the WC technique at that seminar . In that situation of the use the right jum sao against the opponent ' s left uppercut , you can move in with a left vertical fist punch to the face . If the opponent throws a punch with his right hand , borrowing your force , you turn your left vertical fist strike into a left downward pak sao , setting your opponent up into a double trapping technique . Where you use your left pak sao pinning your opponent ' s left jand over his right hand , and you can use a right vertical fist punch to the face , but you ' ll have toi remain putting a slight pressure with left pak sao onto his right arm , then that way the opponent can ' t move . In WC they what they call single and double trapping hands .

Other than that if I jum sao that right uppercut of the opponent with my right hand , and that right vertical fist came out , I would step back so that I can either trap that right punch with a left downward pak sao with a right vertical fist punch to his face with my right hand .

These are my ideas to your thread , other than that if you come up with your own ideas then you can use those ideas too .

Take Care

[YouKnowWho]

All your solutions are valid. My concern is, "Why create a problem and then try to fix it afterward?" It's better not to give your opponent that chance.

Your opponent's hand comes close to you, you knock it away. Your fingers grow on your hands for good reason.

[lance]

All your solutions are valid. My concern is, "Why create a problem and then try to fix it afterward?" It's better not to give your opponent that chance.

Your opponent's hand comes close to you, you knock it away. Your fingers grow on your hands for good reason.

Hello again ,

What problem ? If you know the answer to this situation , why ask about it on your thread ? You ' re thread sounds innocent like you need some answers but , you you know the answers already , you just want to run people down .

[YouKnowWho]

Hello again ,

What problem ? If you know the answer to this situation , why ask about it on your thread ? You ' re thread sounds innocent like you need some answers but , you you know the answers already , you just want to run people down .
When I asked a question, I had my own answer but I also like to hear other's answer too. Other's answer may point out something that I may not pay enough attention to.

One way for meaningful discussion is just to ask question and expect different answers. The discussion can get into different areas depending on the answer. This way we can get into deeper level discussion instead of just on the surface level discussion.

It's not always good to say,

- "Your sh!t is fake, and here's why...", or
- "One shoulde never ..." or
- "It's wrong to ...", or
- "I don't believe ...", or
- ...