Define Sticking

[WC1277]

By now, most of you, if you've read any of my recent posts, should have a somewhat clear understanding of the way in which I understand "To Stick". So I would like to know how others may have their understanding since this forum seems to be largely void of talk about the foundational skill that WC is based off of.

So what is sticking to you?

[YouKnowWho]

Again, I don't understand why this thread is created in Wing Chun section. All TCMA use "sticky" concept.

"To stick" is to use your body to connect your opponent's body so you can sense your opponent's intention. When your opponent's body move, you can continue your "sticking" by "following" him, or you can ternimate your "sticking" and break the connection.

No matter how strong that your "sticking" may be, it's just too easy for your opponent to break it. IMO, "to hook" is much better than "to stick".

Too many people talk about "arm sticky". Not enough people talk about "leg sticky".

[k gledhill]

May be your WC view is just too narrow. I'm more interesting in the TCMA view than just WC view, Taiji virew, or ...

I have read your posts, you're informed about a lot of things, But I can also read that you're not thoroughly informed about VT either... no biggee Im just saying you sound confused about certain ideas. Sure we feel things, but the chi-sao isnt to feel arms or legs to control them and stick to their directions so they cant hit us by turning and redirecting them...iow we arent trying to be ultimate blockers ....ultimate strikers, more like.

[YouKnowWho]

IMO, the "sticky" principle is to guide your opponent's arm into a "temporary" spot that won't be in your striking path. You may

- continue that contact while your punch land on your opponent's face.
- disconnect that contact if you think that your striking can be faster than your opponent's recovering.

The WC principle "连消带打(Lian Xiao Dai Da) - block and strike back at the same time." is to integrate "消(Xiao) - sticky block" and strike as one move. This is the major difference between the TCMA and boxing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qa6L6y-Iig&feature=related

[Graham H]

Just define it Kevin....

"stickyness" in Ving Tsun is a paradox! What is the point in defining it when most people think it is about sensing energy and moving your opponents limbs around?The reason for this Ving Tsun paradox is simple.......misinterpretation and misunderstanding.

If you had no idea of Ving Tsun at all but were to view two people practicing what would you conclude?

Ask your self this question.....why do we spend 90% of our training time practicing chi sau and in a fight there is no chi sau. The components developed in chi sau are always used but the sticky aspect becomes redundant.

The idea of "sticky arms" and "sticky legs" have become Ving Tsun's own worst enemy. The ineffectiveness of the sticky idea in a real fight has led to many Teachers to add in different ideas to support an already useless foundation.

Bruce Lee himself disregarded the idea of chi sau eventually but was it because he was lacking in knowledge from only a short time training under wong shun leung or because he realised that it does more damage than good if misunderstood?

I cannot define the word "sticky" in Ving Tsun because there is no such idea. It's just a name given to a drill because of how it looks and not what purpose it serves.

......and here is the problems it can cause. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxgvYvhss5A

GH

[k gledhill]

"stickyness" in Ving Tsun is a paradox! What is the point in defining it when most people think it is about sensing energy and moving your opponents limbs around?The reason for this Ving Tsun paradox is simple.......misinterpretation and misunderstanding.

If you had no idea of Ving Tsun at all but were to view two people practicing what would you conclude?

Ask your self this question.....why do we spend 90% of our training time practicing chi sau and in a fight there is no chi sau. The components developed in chi sau are always used but the sticky aspect becomes redundant.

The idea of "sticky arms" and "sticky legs" have become Ving Tsun's own worst enemy. The ineffectiveness of the sticky idea in a real fight has led to many Teachers to add in different ideas to support an already useless foundation.

Bruce Lee himself disregarded the idea of chi sau eventually but was it because he was lacking in knowledge from only a short time training under wong shun leung or because he realised that it does more damage than good if misunderstood?

I cannot define the word "sticky" in Ving Tsun because there is no such idea. It's just a name given to a drill because of how it looks and not what purpose it serves.

......and here is the problems it can cause. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxgvYvhss5A

GH

I concur .

[Sean66]

Graham hit it on the nail.

If you no know nothing about wing chun and you look at two people training chi sau, you will think that the focus is to maintain arm contact. But this is just because both are directing their force toward the center of the other at the same time, so the contact is not broken.

The purpose of the drill is primarily to develop a good "delivery system" for the horizontal punch and, secondarily, to practice different methods of continuing the attack (principal lat sau chik chung) using pak sau, jut sau, etc.

Check out 0:20 in the video that I recently posted. Two students are doing chi sau. When one student takes away his hand, the other strikes instinctively forward. This is lat sau chik chung. If his focus were in controlling the others arm, he would never be able to strike forward. His hand would instead fall down and to the right at second 0:22.

It's just like in taijiquan tui shou, YouKnowWho. If you only focus on ting jin (listening skill) and hua jin (deflecting skill), you will never develop your fa jin (issuing force skill). If you watch two taiji practitioners practicing in this way you will see two people just circling hands and remaining "stuck" to each other. All Yin and no Yang, if you will.

Listening and deflecting skills are certainly a part of wing chun, but are not ends unto themselves. They are means to an end....to hit the other guy while simultaneously controlling his position and protecting yourself.

[k gledhill]

On the point of not doing chi sao when we fight....how many try to use two arms extended to fight while standing like turning statues ? Why ? Same reason they will try to stick....misunderstandings in transmission.
Just because your sifu is well known or has 8,000,000
Dvds, doesnt mean he knows what he is doing....:D

[Graham H]

I we analyse the correct reasons why there is this arm contact in Ving Tsun it truly is a great piece of combat engineering for developing the body for the fight. Using another person in a very specific way to aid the development of Ving Tsun skill is excellent thinking. Fortunately for myself, Kev and Sean there are still small groups of people where the knowledge has trickled down without too much BS being added to the equation. I think we have all seen our fair share of tripe.

Nonsense is nonsense no matter how you dress it up. ;)

GH

[Hardwork108]

May be your WC view is just too narrow. I'm more interesting in the TCMA view than just WC view, Taiji view, or ...

+1

Intitially one should perhaps train his given TCMA style in isolation in order to build enough understanding of it, but eventually the time comes to WIDEN the horizons and to see the common ground one shares with other TCMA arts and concepts.

Unfortunately, a lot of the WC marketing has involved brainwashing people into believing that it is somehow "more efficient", "more fight oriented" or "more evolved" than other TCMA, and that is where many WC practitioners narrow mindedness starts, because the fact is that there are higher level TCMAs out there (Hsing I, Pakua, Five Ancestor Fist, etc.), while WC keeps suffering from the "standardized for easy franchising" syndrom and the usual "we are evolved kung fu" one, which usually results in narrow mindedness we see in forums such as this one.

Yes, "sticking" is a common - and as usual misunderstood by many - TCMA concept, because as usual, different "sub-lineages" of Wing Chun will have different understaning of it, but of course, the truth is always constant.:)

[Vajramusti]

May be your WC view is just too narrow. I'm more interesting in the TCMA view than just WC view, Taiji virew, or ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is your privilege- but you are often off the mark in understanding wing chun, despite it's diversity.

[Vajramusti]

By now, most of you, if you've read any of my recent posts, should have a somewhat clear understanding of the way in which I understand "To Stick". So I would like to know how others may have their understanding since this forum seems to be largely void of talk about the foundational skill that WC is based off of.

So what is sticking to you?
__________________________________________________
A simple definition is unlikely to do justice to explaining stickng-it's more of a process than a static event. A common element in wing chun sticking is maintaining control with a wing chun perspective of good structure. Without good chi sao foundations -what happens may be something else-- kickboxing, karate. etc.

Controlling contact happens in many good martial arts..chi sao involves learning to that with wing chun motions and concepts.It's a prelude to figthing- but not fighting.

I know, I know more noise will come.After all kfo for the most part is just an unregulated-most of the time-internet forum... not serious.

[Robinhood]

Sticking is not two guys pushing at each other, it is more like the name, something is attached to you and you can't get it off of you.

It would be more like one guy is yang the other is yin, not yang to yang, or yin to yin.

If you try to stay light and follow the other guy, that is NOT STICKING.

[YouKnowWho]

If his focus were in controlling the others arm, he would never be able to strike forward. His hand would instead fall down and to the right at second 0:22.

It's just like in taijiquan tui shou, YouKnowWho. If you only focus on ting jin (listening skill) and hua jin (deflecting skill), you will never develop your fa jin (issuing force skill). If you watch two taiji practitioners practicing in this way you will see two people just circling hands and remaining "stuck" to each other. All Yin and no Yang, if you will.

Listening and deflecting skills are certainly a part of wing chun, but are not ends unto themselves. They are means to an end....to hit the other guy while simultaneously controlling his position and protecting yourself.
You have just pointed out several important points here. Thanks for sharing your though. It can help this discussion to go into deeper level.

I'm not saying Taiji push hand should be a model that WC sticky hand should copy. The Taiji PH is just like a "diaper" to be used on a new born baby. After you have used it to develop your Tinjin, you no longer need it. Since Tinjin will stay with you for the rest of your life, you don't need to polish it everyday. You are right that no matter how good that you are in your sticky skill, you just can't sticky your opponent to death. You will need "finish moves" to end a fight.

I think we have redirect the discusion of this thread. This thread is "Define sticking - how sticky principle can be used in combat". Whether the WC "sticky hand" uses enough "sticky" principle or not is individual's choice. I prefer "hooking" instead of "sticking" myself. By using "sticking", my opponent can break it if he wants to. By using "hooking", it's much harder for him to break it.

Of course when you use one hand to control your opponent's arm, you have only one hand to punch back. But at the same time, your opponent only has one arm to block your punch. Since you can pull your opponent's body toward your punch to cause a "head on collusion", you may knock your opponent down with 1 punch instead of many punches.

The "sticky" and "chain punches" are complete different principles. The sticky is like a rifle that shot 1 shot at a time. The chain punches is like machine gun than shot many bullets.

In the following clip at 0.40, he uses right Tan Shou to block his opponent's right punch. He then use his right hand to pull his opponent's arm "away from his striking path" and return with a left punch at his opponent's face. At that moment if he lets go his opponent's right wrist control hand, he can start his chain punches right at that moment. If his opponent can block his 1st or 2nd punch, he may have to use his stiky principle again. There is no gurantee there.

In other wirds, the "sticky" can be used to "set up" your chain punches. There is no conflict between these 2 principles at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qa6L6y-Iig&feature=related

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1144161] After you have used it to develop your Tinjin, you no longer need it. Since Tinjin will stay with you for the rest of your life, you don't need to polish it everyday. iples. The sticky is like a rifle that shot 1 shot at a time. The chain punches is like machine gun than shot many bullets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------You are trying to import non wc sticking concepts into wc chi sao.Mixing apples and oranges. Tinjin is only one of the skills that is developed in chi sao.Among other things when done right you learn ampng other things- when not to stick.

[YouKnowWho]

A common element in wing chun sticking is maintaining control with a wing chun perspective of good structure.
Sticking = maintaining control

Are we talking about the samething here? Is that the wrist control at 0.40?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qa6L6y-Iig&feature=related


You are trying to import non wc sticking concepts into wc chi sao.Mixing apples and oranges.

Why do you think that "连消带打(Lian Xiao Dai Da) - block and strike back at the same time." is not WC? I have always believed it's the kernal of the WC system, which is as important as the WC "center line" theory. The action "消(Xiao) - sticky, follow, deflect, yield, borrow force, ..." is sticky.

Please point out the difference between WC "sticking" principle vs. general TCMA "sticking" principle. It may be interest to see the difference just for the sake of this discussion.

The sticky principle is used to increase your own safty. It doesn't come free. It will slow down your offense. It's a trade off whether you want to die with your opponent, or you want to send your opponent to hell but you don't want to go there yourself.

[WC1277]

"stickyness" in Ving Tsun is a paradox! What is the point in defining it when most people think it is about sensing energy and moving your opponents limbs around?The reason for this Ving Tsun paradox is simple.......misinterpretation and misunderstanding.

If you had no idea of Ving Tsun at all but were to view two people practicing what would you conclude?

Ask your self this question.....why do we spend 90% of our training time practicing chi sau and in a fight there is no chi sau. The components developed in chi sau are always used but the sticky aspect becomes redundant.

The idea of "sticky arms" and "sticky legs" have become Ving Tsun's own worst enemy. The ineffectiveness of the sticky idea in a real fight has led to many Teachers to add in different ideas to support an already useless foundation.

Bruce Lee himself disregarded the idea of chi sau eventually but was it because he was lacking in knowledge from only a short time training under wong shun leung or because he realised that it does more damage than good if misunderstood?

I cannot define the word "sticky" in Ving Tsun because there is no such idea. It's just a name given to a drill because of how it looks and not what purpose it serves.

......and here is the problems it can cause. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxgvYvhss5A

GH

Who said anything about using chi sau in a fight? You still didn't answer the question.

[WC1277]

__________________________________________________
A simple definition is unlikely to do justice to explaining stickng-it's more of a process than a static event. A common element in wing chun sticking is maintaining control with a wing chun perspective of good structure. Without good chi sao foundations -what happens may be something else-- kickboxing, karate. etc.

Controlling contact happens in many good martial arts..chi sao involves learning to that with wing chun motions and concepts.It's a prelude to figthing- but not fighting.

I know, I know more noise will come.After all kfo for the most part is just an unregulated-most of the time-internet forum... not serious.

Good post.

[Hardwork108]

If you only focus on ting jin (listening skill) and hua jin (deflecting skill), you will never develop your fa jin (issuing force skill). If you watch two taiji practitioners practicing in this way you will see two people just circling hands and remaining "stuck" to each other. All Yin and no Yang, if you will.

The "two people just circling" in taiji has its roots in another "development" methodology which is not really talked about with outsiders. Of course, having said that, I would add that 99.9% people who just "circle" with their hands don't really know what they are doing.

So, they are not getting the benefit of what you were referring to, but neither are they getting the benefit of the variation of the pushing hand exercise. ;)

[Wayfaring]

So what is sticking to you?

To me sticking is wing chun's uniquely branded approach to achieving what is universally sought after in fighting skills:

1) Maintaining proper range - the proper distance to strike your opponent with force
2) Maintaining advantageous angle - the proper angle where you can strike your opponent but they have to make a correcting move before they can strike you.
3) Balance - You are in a balanced position to be able to move or strike at will with all of your limbs and body aligned for good structure and movement. Your opponent is not so balanced.
4) Control of Centerline

The chi sau practice, which is taught and progressed differently between families of WCK but some concept of it is in all WCK, is the primary introductory exercise to start to develop a feel for the above #1-#4. IMO a vast majority of WCK practitioners never progress beyond this basic exercise to be able to express #1-#4 in a free striking unrestricted movement fashion, and instead dilute the original intent of the exercise into little games of supposed skill. Thus the exercise itself supplants the skill it is supposed to develop and the additional skillsets that are only developed in an unrestricted movement scenario are never learned.

Sticking also involves the pursuit and finishing factor, or steel or cutting elements taught in TCMA or WCK. Once you have control of your opponent's centerline you pursue and attack along it to the end of finishing.

So that's what sticking means to me.

[Robinhood]

You have just pointed out several important points here. Thanks for sharing your though. It can help this discussion to go into deeper level.

I'm not saying Taiji push hand should be a model that WC sticky hand should copy. The Taiji PH is just like a "diaper" to be used on a new born baby. After you have used it to develop your Tinjin, you no longer need it. Since Tinjin will stay with you for the rest of your life, you don't need to polish it everyday. You are right that no matter how good that you are in your sticky skill, you just can't sticky your opponent to death. You will need "finish moves" to end a fight.

I think we have redirect the discusion of this thread. This thread is "Define sticking - how sticky principle can be used in combat". Whether the WC "sticky hand" uses enough "sticky" principle or not is individual's choice. I prefer "hooking" instead of "sticking" myself. By using "sticking", my opponent can break it if he wants to. By using "hooking", it's much harder for him to break it. J

Of course when you use one hand to control your opponent's arm, you have only one hand to punch back. But at the same time, your opponent only has one arm to block your punch. Since you can pull your opponent's body toward your punch to cause a "head on collusion", you may knock your opponent down with 1 punch instead of many punches.

The "sticky" and "chain punches" are complete different principles. The sticky is like a rifle that shot 1 shot at a time. The chain punches is like machine gun than shot many bullets.

In the following clip at 0.40, he uses right Tan Shou to block his opponent's right punch. He then use his right hand to pull his opponent's arm "away from his striking path" and return with a left punch at his opponent's face. At that moment if he lets go his opponent's right wrist control hand, he can start his chain punches right at that moment. If his opponent can block his 1st or 2nd punch, he may have to use his stiky principle again. There is no gurantee there.

In other wirds, the "sticky" can be used to "set up" your chain punches. There is no conflict between these 2 principles at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qa6L6y-Iig&feature=related

What does this have to do with sticking ?, these are just speed exercises and not a good example of much more than basic slap training.

Also holding onto to someone is not sticking.

[YouKnowWho]

What does this have to do with sticking ?, these are just speed exercises and not a good example of much more than basic slap training.

Also holding onto to someone is not sticking.
It has nothing to do with sticking. The chain punches is used when you decide to break your "sticking" (cross over your bridge, and destroy your bridge). But I won't call that "slap". When your opponent attacks you like this, it can scare the sh!t out of you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1dh_x2rqKc&feature=player_embedded

I did say that I prefer "hooking" than "sticking". When you grab on your opponent, your opponent is not going anywhere. That will be a complete different discussion.

[Robinhood]

It has nothing to do with sticking. The chain punches is used when you decide to break your "sticking" (cross over your bridge, and destroy your bridge). But I won't call that "slap". When your opponent attacks you like this, it can scare the sh!t out of you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1dh_x2rqKc&feature=player_embedded

I did say that I prefer "hooking" than "sticking". When you grab on your opponent, your opponent is not going anywhere. That will be a complete different discussion.

That's what happens when you stay right in front of the gun.

When you grab someone, you are not going any where either, and you are down one arm.

[YouKnowWho]

When you grab someone, you are not going any where either, and you are down one arm.
Why do you want to go anywhere when you grab someone? You are at the place where you want to be.

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/222/octopusl.jpg

[Robinhood]

Why do you want to go anywhere when you grab someone? You are at the place where you want to be.

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/222/octopusl.jpg

Maybe that is where he wants you to be, works both ways. Who ever makes the first move is at a disadvantage.

[Graham H]

Who said anything about using chi sau in a fight? You still didn't answer the question.

Your question has been answered but because you have an incorrect idea of Ving Tsun you can't see it!

GH

[Yoshiyahu]

Maybe that is where he wants you to be, works both ways. Who ever makes the first move is at a disadvantage.

Actually in Wing Chun he who makes the first move has the advantage...

He who attacks first usually wins the fight!

[WC1277]

Your question has been answered but because you have an incorrect idea of Ving Tsun you can't see it!

GH

Actually, you didn't answer it. You basically just made the epidemy of a strawman argument. I'm not expecting an answer that's similar to mine but an actual description would be nice...

[nasmedicine]

IMO, the "sticky" principle is to guide your opponent's arm into a "temporary" spot that won't be in your striking path

or rather, so that you will not be in front of their striking path...

[nasmedicine]

Ask your self this question.....why do we spend 90% of our training time practicing chi sau and in a fight there is no chi sau. The components developed in chi sau are always used but the sticky aspect becomes redundant.

Well said and this is 100% the case. Simply train with someone who can box (say 4 months of boxing training, having proper footwork and decent timing) and one will see what GH is referring to. The skills that you train during chi sao practice can be very very useful however the actual "sticking component" goes out the window when fighting skilled opponents, especially ranged fighters (boxer, tkd/kick boxing/muay thai...etc)

[YouKnowWho]

the actual "sticking component" goes out the window when fighting skilled opponents, especially ranged fighters (boxer, tkd/kick boxing/muay thai...etc)
Unless you are in the clinching situation. In striking range, the sticking may only last for 1/4 second - connect bridge, cross bridge, destroy bridge.

I believe to use your opponent's leading arm to "jam/trap" his back arm is a very important TCMA concept. If you can push your opponent's leading arm (at the elbow joint) to cross over his back arm, not only you can control his leading arm, you also control his back arm at the same time. This will give you one free arm to strike while your opponent has no free arm to block/deflect your strike. We can see that at 0.48 in this clip. His opponent's left arm is jamed/trapped by his own right arm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMzZL7MEqq0&feature=related

Even boxers use this principle. If a boxer keeps moving toward his opponent's side door, he can avoid his opponent's powerful back hand cross or hook. The only difference between a TCMA guy does other than the boxer is to use his hand to "push" his opponent's leading arm elbow joint for 1/4 second. I do believe the elbow joint is a much better contact point than the wrist control. When you control your opponent's wrist, his elbow can still hit you. When you control his elbow, his arm is disabled.

[Hendrik]

Sticking = maintaining control

Are we talking about the samething here? Is that the wrist control at 0.40?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qa6L6y-Iig&feature=related



Why do you think that "连消带打(Lian Xiao Dai Da) - block and strike back at the same time." is not WC? I have always believed it's the kernal of the WC system, which is as important as the WC "center line" theory. The action "消(Xiao) - sticky, follow, deflect, yield, borrow force, ..." is sticky.

Please point out the difference between WC "sticking" principle vs. general TCMA "sticking" principle. It may be interest to see the difference just for the sake of this discussion.

The sticky principle is used to increase your own safty. It doesn't come free. It will slow down your offense. It's a trade off whether you want to die with your opponent, or you want to send your opponent to hell but you don't want to go there yourself.



Why do you think that "连消带打(Lian Xiao Dai Da) - block and strike back at the same time." is not WC? I have always believed it's the kernal of the WC system, which is as important as the WC "center line" theory.

That is a concept in Wing Chun but not the kernal of the WC system. Wing Chun has a Kernal with is as important as the center line concept. but it is not the above.



The action "消(Xiao) - sticky, follow, deflect, yield, borrow force, ..." is sticky.

Xiao is only one concept. thus, it is not all.

[nasmedicine]

Unless you are in the clinching situation. In striking range, the sticking may only last for 1/4 second - connect bridge, cross bridge, destroy bridge.

I believe to use your opponent's leading arm to "jam/trap" his back arm is a very important TCMA concept. If you can push your opponent's leading arm (at the elbow joint) to cross over his back arm, not only you can control his leading arm, you also control his back arm at the same time. This will give you one free arm to strike while your opponent has no free arm to block/deflect your strike. We can see that at 0.48 in this clip. His opponent's left arm is jamed/trapped by his own right arm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMzZL7MEqq0&feature=related

Even boxers use this principle. If a boxer keeps moving toward his opponent's side door, he can avoid his opponent's powerful back hand cross or hook. The only difference between a TCMA guy does other than the boxer is to use his hand to "push" his opponent's leading arm elbow joint for 1/4 second. I do believe the elbow joint is a much better contact point than the wrist control. When you control your opponent's wrist, his elbow can still hit you. When you control his elbow, his arm is disabled.

you are correct, I often find the "sticking" of my chi sao most useful when rolling with my BJJ friends (hence why I didn't mentioned any grappling arts, kinda wanted to avoid making this a Wing Chun vs. BJJ discussion). It has allowed me to get out of some pretty sticky situations, lol (i know corny). As far as boxing you are correct there again, however that type of boxing is frowned upon by boxing purest's, I was referring to pro boxing (where the back hand is not often seen/encountered, in all the pro matches I've watched I've only see it used 2 times) and not the type of boxing that would be encountered in the street or in an MMA setting (where you would more likely see a back hand/spinning back hand thrown).

[Wayfaring]

Also holding onto to someone is not sticking.

So there is are differences between WCK sticking and clinch skills from grappling arts that I see.

The difference is the aim or goal. WCK's goal is to control the opponent - range, angle, balance, centerline to be able to strike them most effectively.

Grappling arts goal is to close all distance and take the opponent down. There may be a couple of similarities, but there are more differences.

[YouKnowWho]

So there is are differences between WCK sticking and clinch skills from grappling arts that I see.

The difference is the aim or goal. WCK's goal is to control the opponent - range, angle, balance, centerline to be able to strike them most effectively.

Grappling arts goal is to close all distance and take the opponent down. There may be a couple of similarities, but there are more differences.
The sticky principle used by a "striker" is short and temporary. In the following clip, you can see that the connection was broken when the punch was landed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_MHB7Ox1Sc

If a "grappler" uses the same combo, the connection will be continued "during and after" his opponent is taken down to the ground.

In either situations, the "set up" could be the same.

[k gledhill]

arrrghhh !

[WC1277]

arrrghhh !

So, you and the PB crowd are essentially saying that there is absolutely no reason to ever "stick" in application ever? Even if it doesn't involve chasing? That out of all of ip man's students, there was only one who saw the application of sticking as a chi Sao only thing? That ip man himself implied to this individual that sticking is absolutely useless outside of chi Sao? That over 20 different ip man lineages including HKM, Hawkins Cheung, Moy Yat, TST, and others are completely and utterly confused in their own pursuit of what they learned from their Sifu? Sure, there are many who get the "sticking" concept wrong and it shows, sticking is a by-product of good structure not a seeking, but you are being ignorant, at best, to say "sticking" in application is non-existent in Ip Man WC. I've see many use it successfully in real fights from my school alone. HKM himself, produced more fighters than any other student. Ip man is quoted as saying "If you want fighters, go see HKM, I have no fighters here."

At the end of the day, you can say WSL or PB "evolved" THEIR version for better or for worse but to claim something didn't exist from the beginning of the Ip Man line is completely baseless and you suffer being the odd man out. I'd like to see you tell that to some of the first and second gen. students who are still alive. Keep that face palm for yourself....

[Graham H]

So, you and the PB crowd are essentially saying that there is absolutely no reason to ever "stick" in application ever? Even if it doesn't involve chasing? That out of all of ip man's students, there was only one who saw the application of sticking as a chi Sao only thing? That ip man himself implied to this individual that sticking is absolutely useless outside of chi Sao? That over 20 different ip man lineages including HKM, Hawkins Cheung, Moy Yat, TST, and others are completely and utterly confused in their own pursuit of what they learned from their Sifu? Sure, there are many who get the "sticking" concept wrong and it shows, sticking is a by-product of good structure not a seeking, but you are being ignorant, at best, to say "sticking" in application is non-existent in Ip Man WC. I've see many use it successfully in real fights from my school alone. HKM himself, produced more fighters than any other student. Ip man is quoted as saying "If you want fighters, go see HKM, I have no fighters here."

At the end of the day, you can say WSL or PB "evolved" THEIR version for better or for worse but to claim something didn't exist from the beginning of the Ip Man line is completely baseless and you suffer being the odd man out. I'd like to see you tell that to some of the first and second gen. students who are still alive. Keep that face palm for yourself....

Maybe WSL/PB did/have evolved the system in which case they have improved in far beyond those other lineages you have stated above IMO. The "sticky" idea is useless but can be effective in a classroom with other students in chi sau. I know good chi sau people that can do many things whilst arms on arms but when contact is broken they walk about like egyptian mummies trying to make arm contact again. That is not real life.

At the end of the day what counts in fighting is how consistently hard you can hit your opponent whilst preventing being hit yourself. Skill, timing, mobilty, punching power and punching precision are what win fights NOT sticking to and/or manipulating arms.

One thing that cannot be denied is that WSL was a fighter so he will have encountered certain aspects of Ving Tsun that maybe did not work in real fights. Maybe he changed them or threw them out completely. Clever people can see sh!t for what it is. For some other people in Ip Man's school maybe they were not so clever. Its a shame Ip Po Ching passed away so early. It would been intetresting to see how things compared but as for your certain other "seniors"...........................nah! better off going to a good boxing club.
GH

[GlennR]

It would been intetresting to see how things compared but as for your certain other "seniors"...........................nah! better off going to a good boxing club.
GH

Awesome G, when are we seeing you at the club ;)

[Graham H]

Awesome G, when are we seeing you at the club ;)

Ive had my stint in the boxing ring mate and I would surely push people in that direction rather than go to most WC clubs!! ;)

G

[k gledhill]

So, you and the PB crowd are essentially saying that there is absolutely no reason to ever "stick" in application ever? Even if it doesn't involve chasing? That out of all of ip man's students, there was only one who saw the application of sticking as a chi Sao only thing? That ip man himself implied to this individual that sticking is absolutely useless outside of chi Sao? That over 20 different ip man lineages including HKM, Hawkins Cheung, Moy Yat, TST, and others are completely and utterly confused in their own pursuit of what they learned from their Sifu? Sure, there are many who get the "sticking" concept wrong and it shows, sticking is a by-product of good structure not a seeking, but you are being ignorant, at best, to say "sticking" in application is non-existent in Ip Man WC. I've see many use it successfully in real fights from my school alone. HKM himself, produced more fighters than any other student. Ip man is quoted as saying "If you want fighters, go see HKM, I have no fighters here."

At the end of the day, you can say WSL or PB "evolved" THEIR version for better or for worse but to claim something didn't exist from the beginning of the Ip Man line is completely baseless and you suffer being the odd man out. I'd like to see you tell that to some of the first and second gen. students who are still alive. Keep that face palm for yourself....

Have you ever stared into one of those 3-D images with just abstract dots and shapes that as you focus past the surface you suddenly see a simple image clearly ?
Well that is my view of the reasons for the current issues regarding VT today.
Many students never saw the image under the abstract drills, forms, dummy, etc...Leaving them with only one recourse, to interpret the dots and abstractions as best they could.
Its not their fault they didnt see the image its imo simply due to the fact that they werent told to look for it.
IOW if I show you a bunch of forms and drills and never share a common goal or image as your aim, you will never look for it....

The image we all share is right before you as you do the drills , forms, YOU WC1277 are doing pretty much the same things I am, the only thing that is missing is a common image to share as our goal under the abstraction ....

I would never have seen it but for P Bayer, its no secret either.

Its all in the mind and how we connect the information, the modules of drills to functional use outside the drill...

No matter how long some stare at the surface they wont be able to penetrate past the confusion of drills, and sticking or not sticking, etc...

I have seen the image , so has Graham, Sean and many others...its not a secret. We all can see past the abstract.

Its pointless getting into a ****ing match.

[Phil Redmond]

So basically here's what I'm getting from the PB followers posts. PB is correct and everyone else is wrong. Is anyone else getting that? Where are the PB fighters? I'm more into how you fight than how you do chi sau in vids against students who aren't really trying to hit you back.

[k gledhill]

So basically here's what I'm getting from the PB followers posts. PB is correct and everyone else is wrong. Is anyone else getting that? Where are the PB fighters? I'm more into how you fight than how you do chi sau in vids against students who aren't really trying to hit you back.

Not right wrong, just a different perspective...depending where YOU are on the learning curve is what you can see ...or not.

[Phil Redmond]

Not right wrong, just a different perspective...depending where YOU are on the learning curve is what you can see ...or not.
I sense a little hint of condescension in your statement. With regards to the learning curve I can see a major cross lineage WC rule broken in lots of the chi sau video clips you've posted. And that is Mo Yuk Jang (immovable elbow). So much for being higher on the learning curve in that regard.

[Vajramusti]

I sense a little hint of condescension in your statement. With regards to the learning curve I can see a major cross lineage WC rule broken in lots of the chi sau video clips you've post. And that is Mo Yuk Jang (immovable elbow). So much for being higher on the learning curve in that regard.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil- you area a better person than me in conversing with the two PB guys. I find their repetitious posts way past boring. Mostly, I just ignore them.

[Phil Redmond]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil- you area a better person than me in conversing with the two PB guys. I find their repetitious posts way past boring. Mostly, I just ignore them.
I hear you Joy. When your cup is full... well you know the rest. ;)

[WC1277]

I find it amusing that Graham and Kevin assume that sticking is seeking out arms to touch and control, which is so far from the truth. There are schools that promote that and yes, is not correct, but to assume that's what sticking is in application shows the lack of exposure to legitimate WC teaching. It's like a Protestant saying all Catholics worship the Pope because he's the head of that religion. True for some, but wrong for many.

[k gledhill]

Oh well.......never mind.

[kung fu fighter]

sticking is a by-product of good structure not a seeking

I agree with this 100%, and having personally touched hands with Philip Bayer student Kevin Gledhill, I can tell you he definately has structure, they just don't stick continously, they prefer to clear and hit as oppose to prolong sticking.

[Hardwork108]

I sense a little hint of condescension in your statement. With regards to the learning curve I can see a major cross lineage WC rule broken in lots of the chi sau video clips you've posted. And that is Mo Yuk Jang (immovable elbow). So much for being higher on the learning curve in that regard.

You think that is bad, then ask the PB guys about their take as regards the elbow STRIKE methodologies! lol!

[Phil Redmond]

You think that is bad, then ask the PB guys about their take as regards the elbow STRIKE methodologies! lol!
Nah, that's ok I'll leave that one alone. We are friends here I hope.

[Graham H]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I find their repetitious posts way past boring. Mostly, I just ignore them.

That's a good thing.

GH

[GlennR]

That's a good thing.

GH

Whats a good thing is that there is different takes on WC in my opinion.

The ONLY measuring stick here is effectiveness.... fight results. Period

If you dont beleive in knees/elbows, fine, but show the world you can fight without them.
If you think "sticking: is a big part of your WC , great, just be able to utilise it when you fight.

If you are so hung up on someone elses WC being different to yours... go see a counsellor.
Its all still WC

To highlight how childish this whole argument is, the great Joe Frazier died this week.
I wont rehash his story but will bring up one thing. Look at any of the 3 fights he had with Ali and notice the striking difference between their styles.
Frazier low, bobbing weaving and predominantly hooking. Ali upright jabbing, crossing... throwing uppercuts against Joes low stance.
Very very different approaches BUT still boxers

They just have a different approach.

So why dont we all agree that there is, as the two great men ive just mentioned would agree, different approaches which often give amazingly similar outcomes.

GlennR

[Phil Redmond]

Whats a good thing is that there is different takes on WC in my opinion.

The ONLY measuring stick here is effectiveness.... fight results. Period

If you dont beleive in knees/elbows, fine, but show the world you can fight without them.
If you think "sticking: is a big part of your WC , great, just be able to utilise it when you fight.

If you are so hung up on someone elses WC being different to yours... go see a counsellor.
Its all still WC

To highlight how childish this whole argument is, the great Joe Frazier died this week.
I wont rehash his story but will bring up one thing. Look at any of the 3 fights he had with Ali and notice the striking difference between their styles.
Frazier low, bobbing weaving and predominantly hooking. Ali upright jabbing, crossing... throwing uppercuts against Joes low stance.
Very very different approaches BUT still boxers

They just have a different approach.

So why dont we all agree that there is, as the two great men ive just mentioned would agree, different approaches which often give amazingly similar outcomes.

GlennR
I couldn't have said that better. Instead of living in our little WC bubbles we should be open to other possibilities. I do TWC but that doesn't mean other WC lineages are not good. If fact I know guys outside my lineage that make their WC work for real and that's all that matters. Don't live in a box....;)

[k gledhill]

Whats a good thing is that there is different takes on WC in my opinion.

The ONLY measuring stick here is effectiveness.... fight results. Period

If you dont beleive in knees/elbows, fine, but show the world you can fight without them.
If you think "sticking: is a big part of your WC , great, just be able to utilise it when you fight.

If you are so hung up on someone elses WC being different to yours... go see a counsellor.
Its all still WC

To highlight how childish this whole argument is, the great Joe Frazier died this week.
I wont rehash his story but will bring up one thing. Look at any of the 3 fights he had with Ali and notice the striking difference between their styles.
Frazier low, bobbing weaving and predominantly hooking. Ali upright jabbing, crossing... throwing uppercuts against Joes low stance.
Very very different approaches BUT still boxers

They just have a different approach.

So why dont we all agree that there is, as the two great men ive just mentioned would agree, different approaches which often give amazingly similar outcomes.

GlennR

comparing Joe to Ali, is like a caveman with a club and a surgeon with scalpel :D

just saying I would work on the scalpel skills if I wasnt built like a wall.

[GlennR]

I couldn't have said that better. Instead of living in our little WC bubbles we should be open to other possibilities. I do TWC but that doesn't mean other WC lineages are not good. If fact I know guys outside my lineage that make their WC work for real and that's all that matters. Don't live in a box....;)

What ive noticed over the years Phil is that different lineages enphasise different things.

The TWC guys ive trained with seem to prefer a slightly longer range with more side stepping/ flanking... the WSL guys are more up the middle... the TST guys like to stick and control more... some kick, some hardly kick...its horse for courses and each can fit if matched with the appropriate exponent.

Matching body types and personalaties helps IMO. Using Ali/Frasier again.. those guys were perfectly matched in regards to their personal attributes and adopted styles.

So if youre in mid sentence bagging out another lineage that didnt work for you.. maybe, just maybe, it was you that was you that was the problem and not the style.

GlennR

[GlennR]

comparing Joe to Ali, is like a caveman with a club and a surgeon with scalpel :D

just saying I would work on the scalpel skills if I wasnt built like a wall.

Me thinks you need a better understanding of boxing to regard Frazier as a caveman.

After all, the caveman belted the surgeon 1st time round

[Hardwork108]

What ive noticed over the years Phil is that different lineages enphasise different things.

The TWC guys ive trained with seem to prefer a slightly longer range with more side stepping/ flanking... the WSL guys are more up the middle... the TST guys like to stick and control more... some kick, some hardly kick...its horse for courses and each can fit if matched with the appropriate exponent.

Matching body types and personalaties helps IMO. Using Ali/Frasier again.. those guys were perfectly matched in regards to their personal attributes and adopted styles.

So if youre in mid sentence bagging out another lineage that didnt work for you.. maybe, just maybe, it was you that was you that was the problem and not the style.

GlennR

Ok, this is a general statement, but the lineage I practice uses all the above elements, depending on the necessity of a given situation.

[Hardwork108]

Nah, that's ok I'll leave that one alone. We are friends here I hope.

Friends, but unfortunately sometimes with agendas, it seems.....;)

[k gledhill]

Me thinks you need a better understanding of boxing to regard Frazier as a caveman.

After all, the caveman belted the surgeon 1st time round

theres a lot to be said for speaking quietly and carrying a big club too :D

[GlennR]

theres a lot to be said for speaking quietly and carrying a big club too :D

Yeh, big clubs rock. ;)

Heres a question for you Kev... would you say PB VT is more like Alis style or Joes if you had to make a comparison?

[k gledhill]

Yeh, big clubs rock. ;)

Heres a question for you Kev... would you say PB VT is more like Alis style or Joes if you had to make a comparison?

Ali, float 'n' sting , move 'n' angle, but with Thomas The Hit man Hearns arms :D

[Hardwork108]

Yeh, big clubs rock. ;)

Heres a question for you Kev... would you say PB VT is more like Alis style or Joes if you had to make a comparison?

It is probably similar to both, as just like boxing PB people don't use elbows....LOL!


Seriously though, I know the question was not for me, but I believe that all WC was designed to be "surgical". :)

[GlennR]

Ali, float 'n' sting , move 'n' angle, but with Thomas The Hit man Hearns arms :D

Thanks for that, and boy couldnt hearns hit, but from my experience with WSL guys here in Oz i would have said they were more frazier-like in their approach..... constant pressure.

[Hardwork108]

Thanks for that, and boy couldnt hearns hit, but from my experience with WSL guys here in Oz i would have said they were more frazier-like in their approach..... constant pressure.

I thought that all Wing Chun was about constant pressure - flowing and "flooding" through your enemy with constant intensity?

[GlennR]

I thought that all Wing Chun was about constant pressure - flowing and "flooding" through your enemy with constant intensity?

You missed my earlier point.... some emphasise certain aspects more than others IMO.

As an example, TWC guys dont seem to have the same forward pressure as WSL guys BUT seem a bit lighter on their feet with more lateral movement, thats my experience anyway.

Sure, the TWC guys have forward pressure but they dont focus on it as much as other lineages.... doesnt stop making it WC though.

Frazier was all about forward and pressure, Ali wasnt.... still boxers though

GlennR

[k gledhill]

Thanks for that, and boy couldnt hearns hit, but from my experience with WSL guys here in Oz i would have said they were more frazier-like in their approach..... constant pressure.

guilty myself before I learned a more angular approach with counter attacking.

[GlennR]

guilty myself before I learned a more angular approach with counter attacking.

Thats interesting Kev.... so youd view PBVT and a counterstriking style rahter than offensive?

[k gledhill]

Thats interesting Kev.... so youd view PBVT and a counterstriking style rahter than offensive?

Its no less offensive, it sets guys up to over extend , cross arms, turn to reface from over momentum loss of balance...over quickly. There is no eggbeater from hell approach with a lead leg.

[GlennR]

Its no less offensive, it sets guys up to over extend , cross arms, turn to reface from over momentum loss of balance...over quickly. There is no eggbeater from hell approach with a lead leg.

You just described a counterstriker ;)

Thats my take on WC as well.... and youre right, counterstrikers can be very offensive

[Phil Redmond]

Since I have a varied WC background I see good in many WC "interpretations". But I don't think I have the "Holy Grail" as Kevin and Graham feel they do.

[k gledhill]

Since I have a varied WC background I see good in many WC "interpretations". But I don't think I have the "Holy Grail" as Kevin and Graham feel they do.

not the holy grail, the elbow grail....:D

[Phil Redmond]

not the holy grail, the elbow grail....:D
Not according to the chi sau/o clips I've seen. I can make a clip explaining immovable elbow that is a principle across lineages if you'd like. :)

[Phil Redmond]

I just did a google search and found a few Wing Chun schools that understand Mo Yuk Jiang/Bot Doan Jiang . Maybe I don't have t make a clip after all.

[Phil Redmond]

Kev, I'd put money on the fact that you could show me something useful and I could show you something useful. It's the nature of the martial "arts". There goes the I got the real deal idea. During a single class I can show students to cover a jab differently based on their size, speed, etc. Fighting is individual. I'd hate to have a student body of carbon copy robots. Sometimes I learn a new way to teach something based on what a student is able to pull off under pressure. I think pretty highly of my fighting ability yet I don't think I know it all. That's one thing you could learn from me. ;)

[k gledhill]

Not according to the chi sau/o clips I've seen. I can make a clip explaining immovable elbow that is a principle across lineages if you'd like. :)


I know lineages refer to it but few if any fight with it.....:D

[k gledhill]

Kev, I'd put money on the fact that you could show me something useful and I could show you something useful. It's the nature of the martial "arts". There goes the I got the real deal idea. During a single class I can show students to cover a jab differently based on their size, speed, etc. Fighting is individual. I'd hate to have a student body of carbon copy robots. Sometimes I learn a new way to teach something based on what a student is able to pull off under pressure. I think pretty highly of my fighting ability yet I don't think I know it all. That's one thing you could learn from me. ;)

I am still trying for a Sunday, are you there this weekend with thanks giving etc...

[Phil Redmond]

I know lineages refer to it but few if any fight with it.....:D
I know I did. And our students attempt to since that's how they're taught.

[Phil Redmond]

I am still trying for a Sunday, are you there this weekend with thanks giving etc...
I'm not available this Sunday. I'm available Sat. in Chinatown though.

[Graham H]

Since I have a varied WC background I see good in many WC "interpretations". But I don't think I have the "Holy Grail" as Kevin and Graham feel they do.

Ahhhhhh the old "interpretations" chestnut. :rolleyes:

So you go and see one Sifu who claims to be taught by a well known "senior" of Wing Chun. As you have never met this "senior" you take the word of the Sifu and carry on happy thinking you are learning some good Wing Chun. Then all of a sudden you meet the "senior" by chance and find out that what you are learning is, apart from a few subtlties, nothing like it. When you question the Sifu his excuse is "this is MY interpretation". In other words you may have had a few lessons to correct an already poor understanding of Wing Chun then you sell it to the masses and push more lies and BS onto a new generation.

Interpretation eh Phil??? I don't think so! Get down from out the clouds or is that what you tell your students?

Interpretation is a good excuse for not knowing jack sh1t!

....and it goes on and on and on and on.......................

GH

[Graham H]

....................BUT just because the version of WC is flawed does not turn people into pussies! People can fight without WC.

GH

[Jim Roselando]

Phil,


Don't waste your time with these guys. All they do is talk about their so-called Street "Fighting" art and demo nothing more than WC drills/training. Chi Sao, Gor Sao, Lop Sao, Pole boring boring and BORING. Not one clip demo'ing anything other than WC exercises with their own students. YAWN.... :rolleyes:

If they gloved up with any other art they would get a rude wake up call. We all know that won't happen. :eek: Even WSL said he mainly used Western Boxing and a Chain Punch in most of his fights. BUT, at least he fought. Too bad Kevin & Graham don't follow WSL's lead. If they did, they might actually mix it up with people who train to mix it up. That would be more in tune with the WSL way.


Back to lurk mode.


Peace,

[k gledhill]

Phil,


Don't waste your time with these guys. All they do is talk about their so-called Street "Fighting" art and demo nothing more than WC drills/training. Chi Sao, Gor Sao, Lop Sao, Pole boring boring and BORING. Not one clip demo'ing anything other than WC exercises with their own students. YAWN.... :rolleyes:

If they gloved up with any other art they would get a rude wake up call. We all know that won't happen. :eek: Even WSL said he mainly used Western Boxing and a Chain Punch in most of his fights. BUT, at least he fought. Too bad Kevin & Graham don't follow WSL's lead. If they did, they might actually mix it up with people who train to mix it up. That would be more in tune with the WSL way.


Back to lurk mode.

R
Peace,

Ah, yes Jim speaks, yawn....

[Jim Roselando]

Kev,

If the truth hurts......

I feel your pain......

[Graham H]

Phil,

Too bad Kevin & Graham don't follow WSL's lead. If they did, they might actually mix it up with people who train to mix it up. That would be more in tune with the WSL way.


Back to lurk mode.


Peace,

Yeah that's right! I'll just go and organize a bunch of illegal street fights to prove my worth shall I? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Don't bother replying saying I should get in the ring because rules and regulations don't allow me to punch you in the throat and poke your f***ing eyes out!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

You were better off in lurk mode!

GH

[Jim Roselando]

G,

In the words of KFO's long lost Mr. T: Spoken like a true non-fighter.

Ah yes. All those street lethal wc moves that restrict you from doing your thanggggggg...... What? You cannot knock someone out with your fist?

ROFLMAO

hahaha

Go back to WC lala land.......

ROFLMAO

JR




Yeah that's right! I'll just go and organize a bunch of illegal street fights to prove my worth shall I?

Don't bother replying saying I should get in the ring because rules and regulations don't allow me to punch you in the throat and poke your f***ing eyes out!!!

You were better off in lurk mode!

[k gledhill]

Kev,

If the truth hurts......

I feel your pain......

Oh gosh, you got me...your so wise, I bet when you f a r t it sounds ike flutes playing ; )

[k gledhill]

G,

In the words of KFO's long lost Mr. T: Spoken like a true non-fighter.

Ah yes. All those street lethal wc moves that restrict you from doing your thanggggggg...... What? You cannot knock someone out with your fist?

ROFLMAO

hahaha

Go back to WC lala land.......

ROFLMAO

JR




Yeah that's right! I'll just go and organize a bunch of illegal street fights to prove my worth shall I?

Don't bother replying saying I should get in the ring because rules and regulations don't allow me to punch you in the throat and poke your f***ing eyes out!!!

You were better off in lurk mode!



So.....jim, those 5 minute recovery timeouts in ufc if you get a finger in the eye or kicked in the nutz are not required ?
Funny but it looks like those real fihgters felt real pain...

Wait I know ! You practice iron eye and ballock retraction..my bad.

[Jim Roselando]

Here comes all the lame excuses...... hahaha ;)

I can't jab your eyes with my deadly Biu Jee finger poke. I can't kick your nuts with my no shadow lifting kick. My lethal sun punch is possibly illegal. Too much recovery time or it would have been over etc. etc. etc .......... :rolleyes:

***

Here is a simple fact for you. What you are not able to do to your opponent they are also not able to do to you! :eek: (eye, groin etc.) Now, the good thing is both people are able to punch each other so that seems like a fair playing field.....

Too funny!

ROFLMAO

hahaha

[Wu Wei Wu]

I used to really respect WSL line of Wing Chun. I'm afraid that its just becoming one big parody now.

Suki

[Sean66]

Jim,

I've sparred plenty against people from other styles. Used to have open sparring day every saturday in my old school in Germany. People from other kung fu styles, kick boxing, lutta livra and boxing came. Was great. I'm trying to organize a bi-monthly open sparring session here in Lille as well. Maybe we'll get it up and running in Spring 2012.

The experience is always great (and necessary), and serves to show what problem areas to work on. But it's never been a "wake up call" in the sense that I say, "Oh crap, what I've been doing for the past several years is just unrealistic BS".

Perhaps that's because my teacher, Michael Kurth, also has no qualms about mixing it up with people from other styles, and his teacher, Philipp Bayer, has definitely fought his share of fights with "un-cooperative" opponents, that's for sure.

Sorry that there's no video material for you. When I organize those sparring sessions I'll make a point of filming some.

By the way, Biu Gee is not about "finger poking" in the PB lineage.

Kevin and Graham have also had there experiences using their wing chun on da streetz....just because there is no video on youtube does not make these experiences null and void.

[k gledhill]

Here comes all the lame excuses...... hahaha ;)

I can't jab your eyes with my deadly Biu Jee finger poke. I can't kick your nuts with my no shadow lifting kick. My lethal sun punch is possibly illegal. Too much recovery time or it would have been over etc. etc. etc .......... :rolleyes:

***

Here is a simple fact for you. What you are not able to do to your opponent they are also not able to do to you! :eek: (eye, groin etc.) Now, the good thing is both people are able to punch each other so that seems like a fair playing field.....

Too funny!

ROFLMAO

hahaha

Not as amusing as your ignorance...; )

[Phil Redmond]

Ahhhhhh the old "interpretations" chestnut. :rolleyes:

So you go and see one Sifu who claims to be taught by a well known "senior" of Wing Chun. As you have never met this "senior" you take the word of the Sifu and carry on happy thinking you are learning some good Wing Chun. Then all of a sudden you meet the "senior" by chance and find out that what you are learning is, apart from a few subtlties, nothing like it. When you question the Sifu his excuse is "this is MY interpretation". In other words you may have had a few lessons to correct an already poor understanding of Wing Chun then you sell it to the masses and push more lies and BS onto a new generation.

Interpretation eh Phil??? I don't think so! Get down from out the clouds or is that what you tell your students?

Interpretation is a good excuse for not knowing jack sh1t!

....and it goes on and on and on and on.......................

GH
What you do is also an interpretation of Wing Chun. You're no different from anyone else. It is clear now that you believe you have the real, true, WC. It's you that should come down from the clouds. And since you have it all there's no need for you to communicate with people of lesser knowledge. :rolleyes:

[Phil Redmond]

Jim, . . . . . . .By the way, Biu Gee is not about "finger poking" in the PB lineage. . . . . .
So you guys never strike to the eyes? Also, with no disrespect to PB I thought it was WSL lineage. I never know PB had his own lineage.

[Hardwork108]

So you guys never strikes to the eyes?
LOL!
The plot thickens! Let me get this. They have no elbow and knee strikes, as such, and now we find out that they have no finger strikes either.:confused:


Also, with no disrespect to PB I thought it was WSL lineage. I never know PB had his own lineage.

Phil, the way things are going now, Graham will have his own lineage in a few years or so. LOL!

Of course, by then Graham would have "evolved" the system, or made discoveries about what WC is "really" all about, so get prepared for the totally Central Line Wing Chun lineage of no fist; no palm; no elbow; no kick; no knee - the "functional" way, when the only weapon is the "realz" Central Line" weapon of the head butt!

We will be told that you cannot get more Central Line than the head and you don't need any other weapons, and that WC is about simplicity and etc..... LOL!

[Phil Redmond]

LOL!
The plot thickens! Let me get this. They have no elbow and knee strikes, as such, and now we find out that they have no finger strikes either.:confused: . .
I must have missed any posts where they say there are no elbow strikes in WC.
I do know that Biu Jee means darting/thrusting fingers in Cantonese. And not counting the Biu Jee form there are left and right rear elbow strikes in the first form so I can't see why they'd say that there are no finger strikes or elbows which are two good weapons.

[nasmedicine]

I used to really respect WSL line of Wing Chun. I'm afraid that its just becoming one big parody now.

Suki

you should not base your respect of a particular lineage based on the activities/behavior of those in this forum. There are still many proper and capable WSL practitioners out there. PB's interpretation is not the end all be all of WSL's wing chun, especially the interpretation of WSL>PB's WC from those who post on this forum.

[YouKnowWho]

the "realz" Central Line" weapon of the head butt!
Guess who is the master for that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlFppF10wg4

[k gledhill]

WSL fighting gets worse everyday , we must su ck at fighting....:D or we are so confident ? hmm let me think :D

[trubblman]

The assertion
By the way, Biu Gee is not about "finger poking" in the PB lineage. can be interpreted in a number of ways. I am assuming he means that there are more ideas in Biu Gee quite apart from finger poking but finger poking is a part of Biu Gee. But if he is saying that there is no finger poking in Biu Gee then that assertion is clearly wrong.

[k gledhill]

I agree you should all seek out other methods than YM>WSL>PB with so much more to offer.....now be off with you :D sticky leg and sticky pole await you ! think about it , nobody can touch you as you stand on one leg fending off those bad guys with beer bottles, stick to them so they just plain give up trying :D Whip out that sticky pole and show them whos the king. dont forget sticky knives yes the secrets out !! learn the never before seen sticky knives versus sticky pole techniques ....Elmers glue will have nothing on you ~!!!!! 12 easy payments of $499.99 :)

All thos DVD's , slurp :) get those CC ready along with mebership fee' s multi level grading fee's , um testing fee's, uniform fee... e oh yeah....special advanced dummy courses, advanced instructor courses...did I say fee ;)

BUT WAIT !! we also have knee strikes AND 12 versions of an ELBOW strike that YM>WSL>PB dont have [ fools ;)] if only hey had what weeee have , come over here and spend money with us not them...we have more stuff we added...:D:D:D


A couple of quotes from some dude, Leonard, something,...? Decaprio, no...Da Vinci , eh whatever his name is :D

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.”

[Hardwork108]

I must have missed any posts where they say there are no elbow strikes in WC.

You can find them very early on in the following thread ....LOL!:
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1140548#post1140548

Make sure you are sitting down, when you are reading it. LOL!



I do know that Biu Jee means darting/thrusting fingers in Cantonese.


And not counting the Biu Jee form there are left and right rear elbow strikes in the first form so I can't see why they'd say that there are no finger strikes or elbows which are two good weapons.

What you say is a matter of commonsense and a well rounded understanding of Wing Chun. However, we are in an internet forum, so we need to take the "wisdom" we are exposed to, with a pinch of salt.

FWIW, powerful finger strikes (and grabs) are traditional weapons that are used against wrestlers, also.

Of course, it goes without saying that these weapons have to forged, otherwise one is in more danger of hurting himself, then his opponent.

[trubblman]

So what is sticking to you?

To me sticking means to be close enough to the opponent to be able to attack, defend or counter attack without having to close the gap (or shoot the gap or using entry technique) to the opponent. Although I do think that a good martial artist may be able to remain in touch contact with opponent without telegraphing the fact. That would be a very skilled martial artist. But to my mind actually touching is not necessary. Please note that this is my functional definition of sticking and subject to revision.

[Hardwork108]

Guess who is the master for that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlFppF10wg4

LOL. That PB guy has students everywhere......:eek:

[k gledhill]

The assertion can be interpreted in a number of ways. I am assuming he means that there are more ideas in Biu Gee quite apart from finger poking but finger poking is a part of Biu Gee. But if he is saying that there is no finger poking in Biu Gee then that assertion is clearly wrong.

As the man said "SLAP!!!" dont concentrate on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glory....;) move your eyes back to the elbow, behold ~!

[k gledhill]

LOL. That PB guy has students everywhere......:eek:

Reminds of a time outside a bar on the Kings rd. Chelsea, London ....I saw one guy I knew from the area fight 2-3 guys with nothing but headbutts, crazy but he won the fight just dove headfirst at each one :D

[Hardwork108]

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.”

Those who "see", know that when one trains simplicity, but without the required substance then he is indulging in empty shell shallowness. ;)

[trubblman]

As the man said "SLAP!!!" dont concentrate on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glory....;) move your eyes back to the elbow, behold ~!

As the man ( Voltaire ) said: Witty sayings prove nothing.

[Hardwork108]

Reminds of a time outside a bar on the Kings rd. Chelsea, London ....I saw one guy I knew from the area fight 2-3 guys with nothing but headbutts, crazy but he won the fight just dove headfirst at each one :D

Isn't there a place, town or street where the PB students have not infiltrated!!!!:eek:

I guess Kensington and Chelsea is not known for the quality of its street fighters. The guy must have been some builder who had stayed behind for a few drinks....:p

[k gledhill]

Those who "see", know that when one trains simplicity, but without the required substance then he is indulging in empty shell shallowness. ;)

some are too busy with all that 'substance' to see , even when shown ...

your turn :D

[k gledhill]

As the man ( Voltaire ) said: Witty sayings prove nothing.

Tell Bruce Lee , not me mate , he said it.....;) did Voltaire do VT ?

[trubblman]

Tell Bruce Lee , not me mate , he said it.....;) did Voltaire do VT ?

I know Bruce Lee said it but he was not the first to say it. He just stole it, like he did the be like water quote. Voltaire didnt do VT but his point was that people who resort to pithy sayings have not proved anything except how witty they believe they are.

[Hardwork108]

some are too busy with all that 'substance' to see , even when shown ...

your turn :D
The "secret" is in the substance, not in the shell..............;)

[YouKnowWho]

So you guys never strike to the eyes?

In TCMA form, fingers strike with palm facing

- down is a symbol for eyes attack (ex, WC Biu Gee).
- up is a symbol for throat attack (ex, Taiji snake extend tongue).

[k gledhill]

I know Bruce Lee said it but he was not the first to say it. He just stole it, like he did the be like water quote. Voltaire didnt do VT but his point was that people who resort to pithy sayings have not proved anything except how witty they believe they are.

Voltaire has a long list of witty sayings too...I guess he just "eagle clawed" everyone one night at the local pub witticism contest with that last one ...

Oh yeah ! well ..."Witty sayings prove nothing !" :D check please ! :D

[Yoshiyahu]

Voltaire has a long list of witty sayings too...I guess he just "eagle clawed" everyone one night at the local pub witticism contest with that last one ...

Oh yeah ! well ..."Witty sayings prove nothing !" :D check please ! :D

I see chi sau and chi gerk as preparation for when you are in a clinch aka chi sau range where you have contact your reflex actions will take over. I see bridging the gap techniques as means to entering into the range to utlize those contact reflexes. I see sticking as a way to advoid loosing close combat range so you can continue to control and attack your opponent simultanesously!!!

I SEE PHILLIP BAYER STICKING TO HIS OPPONENT WHEN HE DOES DEMOSTRATIONS DO YOU?

[k gledhill]

I see chi sau and chi gerk as preparation for when you are in a clinch aka chi sau range where you have contact your reflex actions will take over. I see bridging the gap techniques as means to entering into the range to utlize those contact reflexes. I see sticking as a way to advoid loosing close combat range so you can continue to control and attack your opponent simultanesously!!!

I SEE PHILLIP BAYER STICKING TO HIS OPPONENT WHEN HE DOES DEMOSTRATIONS DO YOU?

If I show you, then you can see what I see, but until I show you, you cannot know and will not know what to look for, so cannot see it alone. What you see is not what I have been shown and now see, see ? ...follow ? :D

[GlennR]

Yeah that's right! I'll just go and organize a bunch of illegal street fights to prove my worth shall I? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Don't bother replying saying I should get in the ring because rules and regulations don't allow me to punch you in the throat and poke your f***ing eyes out!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

You were better off in lurk mode!

GH

Look out Jim..... he's unleashing his deadly no-rules death techniques!!!!

Honestly Graham, you do rabbit on like a frustrated 13yo

[kung fu fighter]

The essence of sticking is staying with what comes, excort what goes, and strike forward when freed, Sticking is a tool to train timing and control.

[nasmedicine]

The essence of sticking is staying with what comes, excort what goes, and strike forward when freed is the sticking, Sticking is a tool to train timing and control.

Well put Navin

[Hardwork108]

The essence of sticking is staying with what comes, excort what goes, and strike forward when freed is the sticking, Sticking is a tool to train timing and control.


....and to control and finish your opponent. :)

[Hardwork108]

By the way, sticking is not only a Wing Chun concept as other TCMAs use that methodology.

[Sean66]

Hey guys,

First off, by "PB lineage" I mean the ving tsun kung fu passed from WSL to Philipp and from Philipp to his students.

Secondly, regarding finger gauging/poking. Of course fingers can be used in this manner in a combat situation. We have fingers, so we can use them. Just like knees and elbows and head butts, for that matter. Ving Tsun is all about using the right tool for the right situation.

Fingers can be used to attack the eyes after a vertical palm strike, or the thumb can be used to gauge the eye after a horizontal palm strike, for example. Or as Youknowwho noted, to attack eyes and throat.

Elbows can be used to make space to punch, like in laan sau, or to free yourself from having an elbow trapped because you made the mistake of trying to use it out of the proper distance, or for striking in whatever direction.....it just has to all follow basic Ving Tsun concepts, like using the closest weapon to attack the closest target.

BUT there is a much deeper meaning behind the "Darting Fingers" of Biu Gee. For those of you who haven't already read it, check out this article by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/1989/biu-ji-ving-tsun’s-misunderstood-form

Here is an example of how to use biu sau as shown by Gary Lam:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWAmX9vU7dU&feature=related

And as far as sticking goes, if you mean systematically controlling the opponent's space and attacking possibilities by angling and cutting him off, and if you mean instinctively attacking when the way is free and continuing the attack when met with an obstacle, then, yes, there is sticking.

[Hardwork108]

Hey guys,

First off, by "PB lineage" I mean the ving tsun kung fu passed from WSL to Philipp and from Philipp to his students.

Secondly, regarding finger gauging/poking. Of course fingers can be used in this manner in a combat situation. We have fingers, so we can use them. Just like knees and elbows and head butts, for that matter. Ving Tsun is all about using the right tool for the right situation.

Fingers can be used to attack the eyes after a vertical palm strike, or the thumb can be used to gauge the eye after a horizontal palm strike, for example. Or as Youknowwho noted, to attack eyes and throat.

Elbows can be used to make space to punch, like in laan sau, or to free yourself from having an elbow trapped because you made the mistake of trying to use it out of the proper distance, or for striking in whatever direction.....it just has to all follow basic Ving Tsun concepts, like using the closest weapon to attack the closest target.

BUT there is a much deeper meaning behind the "Darting Fingers" of Biu Gee. For those of you who haven't already read it, check out this article by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/1989/biu-ji-ving-tsun’s-misunderstood-form

Here is an example of how to use biu sau as shown by Gary Lam:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWAmX9vU7dU&feature=related

And as far as sticking goes, if you mean systematically controlling the opponent's space and attacking possibilities by angling and cutting him off, and if you mean instinctively attacking when the way is free and continuing the attack when met with an obstacle, then, yes, there is sticking.

Do you train various elbow strike - upward elbow, downward elbow, backward elbow, etc.?

[k gledhill]

Hey guys,

First off, by "PB lineage" I mean the ving tsun kung fu passed from WSL to Philipp and from Philipp to his students.

Secondly, regarding finger gauging/poking. Of course fingers can be used in this manner in a combat situation. We have fingers, so we can use them. Just like knees and elbows and head butts, for that matter. Ving Tsun is all about using the right tool for the right situation.

Fingers can be used to attack the eyes after a vertical palm strike, or the thumb can be used to gauge the eye after a horizontal palm strike, for example. Or as Youknowwho noted, to attack eyes and throat.

Elbows can be used to make space to punch, like in laan sau, or to free yourself from having an elbow trapped because you made the mistake of trying to use it out of the proper distance, or for striking in whatever direction.....it just has to all follow basic Ving Tsun concepts, like using the closest weapon to attack the closest target.

BUT there is a much deeper meaning behind the "Darting Fingers" of Biu Gee. For those of you who haven't already read it, check out this article by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/1989/biu-ji-ving-tsun’s-misunderstood-form

Here is an example of how to use biu sau as shown by Gary Lam:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWAmX9vU7dU&feature=related

And as far as sticking goes, if you mean systematically controlling the opponent's space and attacking possibilities by angling and cutting him off, and if you mean instinctively attacking when the way is free and continuing the attack when met with an obstacle, then, yes, there is sticking.

sounds like my kind of 'sticking' / shadowing ;)

[Yoshiyahu]

sounds like my kind of 'sticking' / shadowing ;)

You agree with sean?

So whats the deal?

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . . . BUT there is a much deeper meaning behind the "Darting Fingers" of Biu Gee. For those of you who haven't already read it, check out this article by David Peterson:

http://www.wslwingchun.com/1989/biu-ji-ving-tsun’s-misunderstood-form

Here is an example of how to use biu sau as shown by Gary Lam:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWAmX9vU7dU&feature=related

And as far as sticking goes, if you mean systematically controlling the opponent's space and attacking possibilities by angling and cutting him off, and if you mean instinctively attacking when the way is free and continuing the attack when met with an obstacle, then, yes, there is sticking.
I saw the Biu Sao clip. But I was referring to Biu Ji not Biu Sao. Also, I do understand that the Biu Ji form has things that contradict WC principles because sometimes it's necessary to do so. The Fahk Saos to the side are one example. The article by David Peterson covers what I understand the form to be. So though forms may look different it's still WC. WSL WC people are not the only ones who understand what Biu Ji is about.

[k gledhill]

You agree with sean?

So whats the deal?

Great minds think alike....Voltaire's younger brother said that ; )

[k gledhill]

Bill Jee are survival techniques
applied by Ving Tsun practitioners.
Their aim is to surpass the limitations of the system.
Each situation should be looked
on as relative (separate, new).
One should not keep a tenacious hold of the rules of the
system and on restrictions resulting from these rules.

Wong Shun Leung

and more...:
It is worth noting that the application of Bil Jee techniques is wrong in situations when we can fight freely in accordance with the rules of the Ving Tsun system. Copying such situations in many publications by dozens of instructors testifies to the fact that, in the times of the grand master Yip Man, there were few students who really learned and comprehended this form. And this, for sure, was not because the master kept it "secret".
Thus, the study of Bil Jee begins when a practitioner has learned the first two forms, often the form of the long pole and about sixty five movements of the wooden dummy. Thanks to this not only does a trainee have strong technical bases, but also substantial physical power.
The Bil Jee form contains many techniques which are already exercised during the performance of the Siu Lim Tao and Chum Kiu forms. These three basic forms of the system were contrived in such a way that now they are connected with one another. In other words, they permeate one another. Moves of a given form enable us to assume control of techniques included in a preceding form, which makes a closed circle.

[YouKnowWho]

The Zimen system also has the 标指(Biao Zhi) type of training. Except your palms is facing side way (right palm face to your left, and right palm face to your right). When your shoulder joint, elbow joint, and wrist joint are all loosen up, you energy (I won't call it Qi) can flow smoothly from your back all the way to your finger tips, you will be able to achieve your "maximum" striking speed.

In Taiwan, the mantis guy loved to challenge the Baji guys because the mantis guys had good speed. The Zimen guys also loved to challenge the mantis guys because they had super speed.

Maybe the WC 标指(Biao Zhi) was created for the same reason - to develop the maximum striking speed. When your hand are not holding fist or palm, you can achieve the maximum relaxation, your maximum relaxation then will give you the maximum speed.

[Sean66]

Phil,

I NEVER suggested that WSL people were the only ones that understand the concepts behind Biu Gee.

All I'm saying is that the development of "deadly finger strikes" and eye gauges is not the purpose of the form. I guess, simply put, the purpose is to encourage is to "think outside the box" when necessary.

[GlennR]

Phil,

I NEVER suggested that WSL people were the only ones that understand the concepts behind Biu Gee.

All I'm saying is that the development of "deadly finger strikes" and eye gauges is not the purpose of the form. I guess, simply put, the purpose is to encourage is to "think outside the box" when necessary.

No you didnt Sean, but your WSLPB brothers in arms did..... again and again.

Can i ask you a question (you seem a reasonable guy) , why do Kevin and Graham feel that have to consistently have to beat their WSLPB chests to the detriment of everyone here??

Im thinking maybe you have an insight into this

GlennR

[Graham H]

Look out Jim..... he's unleashing his deadly no-rules death techniques!!!!

Honestly Graham, you do rabbit on like a frustrated 13yo

Same age as your step dad?

GH

[Vajramusti]

No you didnt Sean, but your WSLPB brothers in arms did..... again and again.

Can i ask you a question (you seem a reasonable guy) , why do Kevin and Graham feel that have to consistently have to beat their WSLPB chests to the detriment of everyone here??

Im thinking maybe you have an insight into this

GlennR

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insecurity!!! Best ignored.

[k gledhill]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insecurity!!! Best ignored.

So why don't you ignore it ?

[GlennR]

Same age as your step dad?

GH

Oh Graham, you witty chap

I hope your deadly-street-death-techniques are sharper than your humour

Kisses!

[Phil Redmond]

No you didnt Sean, but your WSLPB brothers in arms did..... again and again.

Can i ask you a question (you seem a reasonable guy) , why do Kevin and Graham feel that have to consistently have to beat their WSLPB chests to the detriment of everyone here??

Im thinking maybe you have an insight into this

GlennR
I agree. Sean seems reasonable. Unlike those who think they have the best Wing Chun.

[Sean66]

Guys,

I try to be reasonable, and that's why I really don't care to comment on the possible motivations of others.

I will say, though, that both Graham and Kevin have been around a lot longer in the wing chun scene than I have. They've experienced more teachers and were exposed to many different ideas of wing chun before encountering Philipp Bayer. Ideas that they found, ultimately, to be less than desirable as far as efficiency and clarity go.
Don't forget that both have shared many insights into the WSL/PB way of wing chun on this forum.

And don't take their British humor too personally, I guess.

You know, I think if we were all to meet up and share a pint we'd have a whale of a time!

(Sorry about the off-topic. Actually, my comments here should probably be erased by the moderator.)

[Graham H]

Unlike those who think they have the best Wing Chun.

Yes I do or I wouldn't have moved around so much to try and find something that I felt was any good. You got a problem with that just because your system sometimes comes under fire?

In a nutshell Phil I would even entertain the idea of TWC. I have seen it, talked to people who were part of it and made my decision based on factual information. A little better than the likes of you, joy et al that make your assumptions based on video footage on YouTube. One guy has recently left William Chenug and gone to PB along with 300 students.

I personally think that what PB has to offer is in a different solar system compared to what I have learnt previously. Ip Ching, Ip Chun, Fong, Foshan, Victor Kan, and other teachers of the WSL way. I have enough experience with LT/KK guys from my time in Germany from guys that have left LT and gone to PB.

You give me the name of another lineage and I will go.....simple! I'm not full of hot air no matter what you may conclude from this forum.

If anybody on this forum from overseas were to come to the UK to give semiars I would be there like a shot to see what they are made of.

GH

[Vajramusti]

Yes I do or I wouldn't have moved around so much to try and find something that I felt was any good. You got a problem with that just because your system sometimes comes under fire?

In a nutshell Phil I would even entertain the idea of TWC. I have seen it, talked to people who were part of it and made my decision based on factual information. A little better than the likes of you, joy et al that make your assumptions based on video footage on YouTube. One guy has recently left William Chenug and gone to PB along with 300 students.

I personally think that what PB has to offer is in a different solar system compared to what I have learnt previously. Ip Ching, Ip Chun, Fong, Foshan, Victor Kan, and other teachers of the WSL way. I have enough experience with LT/KK guys from my time in Germany from guys that have left LT and gone to PB.

You give me the name of another lineage and I will go.....simple! I'm not full of hot air no matter what you may conclude from this forum.

If anybody on this forum from overseas were to come to the UK to give semiars I would be there like a shot to see what they are made of.

GH
--------------------------------------------------
Gee-repetition of above and similar does not make it true for others. For you and K ok!.

[Frost]

9 Pages of rants and insecurities mainly by 2 guys who don’t post any clips of themselves doing anything, always seem to chest beat about their deadly street fighting days (did one of them really raise the finger to the eyes argument again) and have to put snide comments in about the superiority of their brand of wing chun (which again doesn’t have ANY clips of its self in full contact action…well one clip and the guy lost)

I nominate this thread as the most pointless one on the whole forum (which is saying something)

Oh and please don’t pass of what they are doing as just English humour, that’s aninsult to the English its snide, silly and condescending, that’s not considered humour not even in the UK

[Graham H]

--------------------------------------------------
Gee-repetition of above and similar does not make it true for others. For you and K ok!.

Correct and its the same reason why most men stay in a marriage that should have been over long ago. They are even thick or scared! :D

GH

[Sean66]

Does moderation even exist on this board?

Please erase everything that is off-topic here!

Including this **** post!

[Mr. Chang]

Pure or impure Wing Chun, whatever beats an opponent is good Wing Chun – Duncan Leung

[YouKnowWho]

Pure or impure Wing Chun, whatever beats an opponent is good Wing Chun – Duncan Leung

Black cat or white cat, whatever catches mice is good cat - Deng Xiaoping

[Mr. Chang]

Wing Chun is pragmatic, discuss the reality from the theory without having tasted the reality is a fallacy, and among practitioners of wing chun is very common.

[nasmedicine]

Wing Chun is pragmatic, discuss the reality from the theory without having tasted the reality is a fallacy, and among practitioners of wing chun is very common.

well said.

[GlennR]

Guys,

I try to be reasonable, and that's why I really don't care to comment on the possible motivations of others.

I will say, though, that both Graham and Kevin have been around a lot longer in the wing chun scene than I have. They've experienced more teachers and were exposed to many different ideas of wing chun before encountering Philipp Bayer. Ideas that they found, ultimately, to be less than desirable as far as efficiency and clarity go.
Don't forget that both have shared many insights into the WSL/PB way of wing chun on this forum.

And don't take their British humor too personally, I guess.

You know, I think if we were all to meet up and share a pint we'd have a whale of a time!

(Sorry about the off-topic. Actually, my comments here should probably be erased by the moderator.)

Thanks for the reply Sean...... your in France yes?

[GlennR]

I nominate this thread as the most pointless one on the whole forum (which is saying something)

Well put it on the "pointless" thread Frosty ;)

[GlennR]

Correct and its the same reason why most men stay in a marriage that should have been over long ago. They are even thick or scared! :D

GH

Or unable to find another wife dum enought to take them hey G?? ;)

[Grumblegeezer]

Guys,

I try to be reasonable, and that's why I really don't care to comment on the possible motivations of others...

You know, I think if we were all to meet up and share a pint we'd have a whale of a time!

(Sorry about the off-topic. Actually, my comments here should probably be erased by the moderator.)

First, I respect your "reasonable" attitude. I wish more folks around here had a bit of the same humility and would accept that there is no one absolute "right" interpretation that fits everybody. And, if you really want to promote your point of view, you don't usually succeed by insulting others! Personally, I'd heard great things about Philip Bayer, but some of his other followers on this forum certainly are "off-putting" with their arrogance to say the least.

On the other hand, I'd certainly be up for that pint! And, although I am opinionated about WC/VT/WT, I've had a lot of people show me a thing or two, and I'm genuinely interested in seeing the other side of things. That's why I hang out on this forum.

Finally, as to the moderation issue... although a certain amount of thread-drift is normal, even necessary in any decent discussion, you have a point. I mean, does anybody even remember the OP anymore? Something about defining sticking... maybe we all should start by sticking to the point!

[Yoshiyahu]

Three Things that is primarily not emphasized in Westernize Wing Chun is:

Sticking, Bridging and controlling...

Also sensitivity is another thing most WC people dont seem to rely on when inclose.


The key is to always be attacking and striking. If you focus on striking and creating openings to strike your opponent body with then you will be sticking.

WC Sifu's who teach to never back away, always advance and jamm your opponent space is inadvertantly teaching you to stick.

Fighting is way different than chi sau. In chi sau the main goal is not to destoy your opponent. its to develop sensitivity and learn how your WC techniques work by feeling different energies your opponent gives you. Chi Sau teaches you how to redirect and turn off force from the bridge. It also teaches you how to create openings from the bridge...


Most fights don't start with a bridge exactly. They start from the outside. An sparring usually always starts off with a Gap. So one needs to bridge the gap. But once the gap is bridged thats where skills learn in chi sau come in.

First off you need senstivity to be effective. Secondly you need to practice bridging, sticking, and trapping outside of chi sau and san shou drills!


Practice order to develop sticking, controlling and trapping.

1.Chi Sau
2.San Shou drills with out a bridge
3.lite sparring
4.hard sparring
5.spar with none wing chun guys

You may not be very good at it or even be able to apply sticking, controlling and trapping when you first started but the more you practice trying to do it in sparring with non-wing chun fighters ie boxers. The better you will become at it.

The problem is sparring is not a real fight. Most people are too concern about loosing or not winning that they throw out the baby and the bath water. Remember when you first learn Chi sau or for tai chi players push hands how you sucked at it...Now think about how beginners are to you now. How you can dominate them in tui shou or chi sau.

What if you took the skills those two drills teach you an perfected them in sparring.


Sticking is not holding a non-aggressive and passive partners hand who is waiting on you to feed him a technique so he can feel your energy and redirect it...That is chi sau or a drill where you develop different aspects of your wing chun.

Sticking in a combat situtation is always following your opponent when he attempts to escape or retreat. If you stick to him then you will occupy his center and inner gates.


Your opponent is not going to give you his hand, nor will be trying to bridge with you...Bridge with your fist to his face, if he covers or uses his hands to obstruct your punch bridge with it and redirect it and reconnect your fist with his face. The goal is to hit your opponent. The bridge is made when you make contact. Everytime your opponent strikes and you intercept your bridiging. Everytime you push your opponent off balance, damage his structure or punch his face you are sticking.

occupy any space with your fist and jam your opponent with constant attacks...

In street fights the most aggressive opponent wins by sticking...Usually the winner sticks to other one and constantly hits him with his fist. At the same time he is controlling his body and not letting him get counter strike in. This is a WC concept. Many can't do it because they dont practice it. A street fighter who can do it usually develops this by instinct and having lots of fights. Discovering that it works he uses it as second nature over time from so much experience.

The more aggressive fighter usually wins.

Have you ever seen a fight where a guy was all over the guy you wanted to win and your guy who you had money on got dropped because he couldnt hit the other guy back. Thats because when your being stucked to its hard to counter. Its not easy to turn around the situtation when your space is jammed and your being stucked too like glue. Think of being stuck to or clinged to like when a ballon has static electricity. What ever makes contact with it will stick to. Your head,chest, arms, pelvic area etc...lol...

Do the same when fighting be like the ballon charged with static. When your opponent takes a step back charge in with three steps forward an jam his space with flying fist. When your opponents covers with his hands in the way use his rigid structure to manipulate his body so you can kick or punch him where you want to. Always be the aggressor, the attacker and the dominant one. The best way to accomplish this goal is to always attack first. If you attack first to gain control you will be the one sticking in the first place. Don't wait on your opponent to attack. Be offensive.



By now, most of you, if you've read any of my recent posts, should have a somewhat clear understanding of the way in which I understand "To Stick". So I would like to know how others may have their understanding since this forum seems to be largely void of talk about the foundational skill that WC is based off of.

So what is sticking to you?

[Yoshiyahu]

All good view points of sticking....

Here are some videos of non- wing chun guys sticking!

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

bridging the gap by a street fighter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF5Pg0ub1yI

Dominate and control

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



__________________________________________________
A simple definition is unlikely to do justice to explaining stickng-it's more of a process than a static event. A common element in wing chun sticking is maintaining control with a wing chun perspective of good structure. Without good chi sao foundations -what happens may be something else-- kickboxing, karate. etc.

Controlling contact happens in many good martial arts..chi sao involves learning to that with wing chun motions and concepts.It's a prelude to figthing- but not fighting.

I know, I know more noise will come.After all kfo for the most part is just an unregulated-most of the time-internet forum... not serious.


Sticking is not two guys pushing at each other, it is more like the name, something is attached to you and you can't get it off of you.

It would be more like one guy is yang the other is yin, not yang to yang, or yin to yin.

If you try to stay light and follow the other guy, that is NOT STICKING.


To me sticking is wing chun's uniquely branded approach to achieving what is universally sought after in fighting skills:

1) Maintaining proper range - the proper distance to strike your opponent with force
2) Maintaining advantageous angle - the proper angle where you can strike your opponent but they have to make a correcting move before they can strike you.
3) Balance - You are in a balanced position to be able to move or strike at will with all of your limbs and body aligned for good structure and movement. Your opponent is not so balanced.
4) Control of Centerline

The chi sau practice, which is taught and progressed differently between families of WCK but some concept of it is in all WCK, is the primary introductory exercise to start to develop a feel for the above #1-#4. IMO a vast majority of WCK practitioners never progress beyond this basic exercise to be able to express #1-#4 in a free striking unrestricted movement fashion, and instead dilute the original intent of the exercise into little games of supposed skill. Thus the exercise itself supplants the skill it is supposed to develop and the additional skillsets that are only developed in an unrestricted movement scenario are never learned.

Sticking also involves the pursuit and finishing factor, or steel or cutting elements taught in TCMA or WCK. Once you have control of your opponent's centerline you pursue and attack along it to the end of finishing.

So that's what sticking means to me.


So there is are differences between WCK sticking and clinch skills from grappling arts that I see.

The difference is the aim or goal. WCK's goal is to control the opponent - range, angle, balance, centerline to be able to strike them most effectively.

Grappling arts goal is to close all distance and take the opponent down. There may be a couple of similarities, but there are more differences.


I find it amusing that Graham and Kevin assume that sticking is seeking out arms to touch and control, which is so far from the truth. There are schools that promote that and yes, is not correct, but to assume that's what sticking is in application shows the lack of exposure to legitimate WC teaching. It's like a Protestant saying all Catholics worship the Pope because he's the head of that religion. True for some, but wrong for many.

[JPinAZ]

Three Things that is primarily not emphasized in Westernize Wing Chun is:

Sticking, Bridging and controlling...

Also sensitivity is another thing most WC people dont seem to rely on when inclose.

Really?? WC doesn't focus on sticking, bridging, controlling or sensitivity?

Are these guesses, or based on your own personal experience? If on your own experience, how many WC practitioners or sifus have you trained with outside of your own group?
Please give us some insite as to how you've come to this rediculous conclusion, otherwise you are just blowing hot air.

BTW, what is 'Westernized WC' anyway? :confused:

[JPinAZ]

My thoughts on WC 'sticking' in a general sense:

We only 'stick'/chi when we have too. What that means it, if our opponent causes us to stick we do, but only to achieve our end goal, which is to hit. WC practitioners don't look to 'be sticky' for the sake of sticking - this IMO would be chasing hands. 'Sticking' is our reaction to our opponents ability to stop us from hitting whether they are using a cover, block, grab, etc. We only stick because there is something that has to be dealt with and we need to influence them. If our opponents hands drop to his sides, should we still try to stick? No, we simply hit!

By sticking to our opponent when forced too, we are looking to create a position of advatage from which we can hit with proper structure, facing and distance control. We may stay in contact (stick) to further assist in having infuence over our opponent's COG using proper leverage to continue to attack, but by sticking we are still looking to cause a distortion and influence our opponents facing, structure and balance for that one reason: to strike.

One example of when not to stick: our opponent is off balance and I can hit with both hands equally without interuption (basically, you have cleared a line of attack, they are off balance and you are in the proper space and facing). This is one of the only times an actual 'chain punch' might be seen from a WCK practitioner - when one punch can follow another unhindered.

[anerlich]

Three Things that is primarily not emphasized in Westernize Wing Chun is:

Sticking, Bridging and controlling...

Also sensitivity is another thing most WC people dont seem to rely on when inclose.


IMO all these things are overemphasised in Westernize [sic] WC.

[Yoshiyahu]

IMO all these things are overemphasised in Westernize [sic] WC.

how so? I not use to seeing many non-chinese wc guys utilize sticking, controlling and senstivity. There are few but what you see publically over the net is not the case...Infact alot of WC people on here speak against those three concepts which leads me to believe most WC out there is simply glorified kick boxing a.k.a. unattached fighting!


Really?? WC doesn't focus on sticking, bridging, controlling or sensitivity?

Are these guesses, or based on your own personal experience? If on your own experience, how many WC practitioners or sifus have you trained with outside of your own group?
Please give us some insite as to how you've come to this rediculous conclusion, otherwise you are just blowing hot air.

BTW, what is 'Westernized WC' anyway? :confused:


Just opinion on what i see many people doing on youtube. Just an opinion not really personal experience. I am not basing it off sifus who actually fight with WC because those in my area actually use the three concepts Im speaking of...But those who I hear in other forums and see in videos online shows me most people utilize WC as an outside fighting style that uses counters more so than offensive prememtive attacks. In other words you simply wait with your guards up for your opponent to attack first then intercept his attack in mid swing to take his centerline. Oppose to just attacking first to take his center line. The whole idea of sitting there like a duck ready to be snuff is ridiculous to me.

But yet and still its my assumption and we know assumptions are like A-holes...everyone has one!

I could be wrong with opinion I can accept that...Just saying it seems those who are more than three people removed from an actual chinese sigung seem to lack sticking, attached fighting and basic controlling with senstivity...There are a few who exceptions out there on youtube...but im merely speaking of majority and what i hear you all saying!

[Yoshiyahu]

interesting analogy. I actually agree with most of it...My disagreement would be when your hitting your opponent you are sticking to him are you not. I guess your view of sticking is different than mines. I dont see sticking as merely touching his arms just for the sake of touching. Nor do i see sticking as not hitting. I believe one should stick or cling to an opponent as they hit. In otherwords where every your opponent goes you stick to him like glue. dont give him space to move. You do not stick merely with your hands but your entire structure. You use your entire structure to stick as you hit. Whole body power. Staying connected to your opponent ie fist to his face. He gives you a bridge when he strikes or places an obstruction in your path to hit. Sticking is far more than merely bridging. Bridges have to do with the hands. An there are times when the bridge is broken correct. But you are still sticking. A bridge is apart of stick but the bridge is not be-all-end-all to sticking. You can stick with out bridge. You can stick to an opponent who has his hands behind his back. You can stick to an opponent who hands are down to his side!


I guess i need to know what is your definition of stick?



My thoughts on WC 'sticking' in a general sense:

We only 'stick'/chi when we have too. What that means it, if our opponent causes us to stick we do, but only to achieve our end goal, which is to hit. WC practitioners don't look to 'be sticky' for the sake of sticking - this IMO would be chasing hands. 'Sticking' is our reaction to our opponents ability to stop us from hitting whether they are using a cover, block, grab, etc. We only stick because there is something that has to be dealt with and we need to influence them. If our opponents hands drop to his sides, should we still try to stick? No, we simply hit!

By sticking to our opponent when forced too, we are looking to create a position of advatage from which we can hit with proper structure, facing and distance control. We may stay in contact (stick) to further assist in having infuence over our opponent's COG using proper leverage to continue to attack, but by sticking we are still looking to cause a distortion and influence our opponents facing, structure and balance for that one reason: to strike.

One example of when not to stick: our opponent is off balance and I can hit with both hands equally without interuption (basically, you have cleared a line of attack, they are off balance and you are in the proper space and facing). This is one of the only times an actual 'chain punch' might be seen from a WCK practitioner - when one punch can follow another unhindered.


On another Note let me give my definition of Stick!!!

adhere: to hold fast or stick by or as if by gluing, suction, grasping, or fusing. To cause to stick fast.

similiar to WC idea of sticking a.k.a. adhere. b.k.a. clinging too


Swarmers/in-fighter

In-fighters/swarmers (sometimes called "pressure fighters") attempt to stay close to an opponent, throwing intense flurries and combinations of hooks and uppercuts. A successful in-fighter often needs a good "chin" because swarming usually involves being hit with many jabs before they can maneuver inside where they are more effective. In-fighters operate best at close range because they are generally shorter and have less reach than their opponents and thus are more effective at a short distance where the longer arms of their opponents make punching awkward. However, several fighters tall for their division have been relatively adept at in-fighting as well as out-fighting. The essence of a swarmer is non-stop aggression. Many short in-fighters utilize their stature to their advantage, employing a bob-and-weave defense by bending at the waist to slip underneath or to the sides of incoming punches. Unlike blocking, causing an opponent to miss a punch disrupts his balance, permits forward movement past the opponent's extended arm and keeps the hands free to counter. A distinct advantage that in-fighters have is when throwing uppercuts where they can channel their entire bodyweight behind the punch; Mike Tyson was famous for throwing devastating uppercuts. Julio César Chávez was known for his hard "chin", punching power, body attack and the stalking of his opponents. Some in-fighters, like Mike Tyson, have been known for being notoriously hard to hit. The key to a swarmer is aggression, endurance, chin, and bobbing-and-weaving.

Notable in-fighters include Laszlo Papp, Mike Tyson, Harry Greb,[22] Jack Dempsey,[23] Rocky Marciano,[24] Joe Frazier, Jake LaMotta, David Tua, Ricky Hatton and Julio César Chávez; this style was also used by fictional boxer Makunouchi Ippo.


The difference is in WC we use our arms to defend against strikes. In boxing they use bob and weave. Look at some of Mike Tyson greatest knockouts...Everytime he bobs imagine he is bridging an simultaneously hitting. When ever your stick or cling to your opponents. Your arms protect or defend the center line...Your arms connect or stick as result of your whole body as unit to sticking to your opponent. Bridges are made when you strike or intercept an opponent attacks.

Retain what comes in = I throw a hook and you Bil Sau & lop da or tan da. In other words you intercept and turn off the force or redirect my energy!


send off what retreats = when i draw back you stick, cling, or adhere to. You add force with my retreating hand kinda of like Tui Shou in tai chi. When I retreat you cling to me with attacks striking and adding force to my new open doors. My Reaction time will be slowed as i retract my punching hand leaving me open for a split second. Send off what retracts or add to it.

Rush in on loss of hand contact = If your ever in a sitituation where you totally loose contact you re-established the bridge by rushing in aggressively to take my centerline with vicious attacks. You pressure me like swarm boxer to create openings. But at the same time if counter strike you receive and then send of as i retract. The only time your not sticking to me is when you rush in on loss of contact. The first two you are engaged in a bridge and you are sticking to my center. Even when you chain punch you should be sticking to me. True the chain punch is not really bridging unless you know how to use the chain punch to dissolve your opponents bridge to slip in to his defenses. But the chain punch is still sticking because you stay inclose and control my center. If you have my centerline you are sticking/adhereing to me. You chain punch to make contact. If you are simply chain punching in the air your tactics are futile. Only Chain Punch with the intention to make contact with onslaught. Like Uzi you only shoot it when your close enough to your opponent to unleash it. So it is with the chain punch. The chain punch should be a beating to the face...Thats the sole purpose in my opinion!


other variations of the saying:


"Greet what arrives, escort what leaves and rush upon loss of contact"


As force comes, it should be recieved and kept. It is never resisted or knocked away, but accepted and adhered to.As force goes, its acommpanied and added to. When loss of contact occurs, or the body is crossed, charge straight down the meridian line.



Yun Hoi: Well that last phrase is the old saying. The modern way common now is: “if the hand is free and line clear, strike”. It’s: “Loy lau hoi sung, lut sau jik chung”. This tells us to retain what's coming in, send off what's being withdrawn, and attack when your hand is free. Sifu used to say you welcome the guest at the door, you see them to the door as they leave and if they don’t come to the door but are walking past, you go out to greet them. Yes, the yiu ku do comment on this. A bit more advice is added. The yiu ku say: as force is presented, it should be received and the limb captured. Never resist it or knock it away, but accept it and stick to it. As force is drawn back, accompany it and add to it. When loss of contact occurs, or the hand crosses the centre line, attack straight down the centre line.

[JPinAZ]

Three Things that is primarily not emphasized in Westernize Wing Chun is:

Sticking, Bridging and controlling...

Also sensitivity is another thing most WC people dont seem to rely on when inclose.


Just opinion on what i see many people doing on youtube. Just an opinion not really personal experience. I am not basing it off sifus who actually fight with WC because those in my area actually use the three concepts Im speaking of...But those who I hear in other forums and see in videos online shows me most people utilize WC as an outside fighting style that uses counters more so than offensive prememtive attacks.


That's cool that you admit this is just an opinion based on what you see on youtube. What I am reading from what you wrote above, only the people in your area use things like sticking, bridging, control and sensitivity??
Besides that, I hope you realize how you come off when you stupidly lump a lot of WCK practitioners together (and many that post here) by making broad, generalizing statements like above as if they are fact - 'specially when you are only basing them off of some youtube videos and not any real world experience :rolleyes:


I not use to seeing many non-chinese wc guys utilize sticking, controlling and senstivity.


Just saying it seems those who are more than three people removed from an actual chinese sigung seem to lack sticking, attached fighting and basic controlling with senstivity...There are a few who exceptions out there on youtube...but im merely speaking of majority and what i hear you all saying!

What the he11 does the race of a student or the race of one's sigung/sifu/whatever have to do with anything?? Race has nothing to do with one's ability to teach or learn anything in this world. You're really starting to show your ignorance and are getting pretty insulting IMO.
You'd be smart to drop this race thing right now and maybe reconsider the idiotic things you are saying here before you dig a hole you can't get out of (and you're already starting to get over your head already) .

[Yoshiyahu]

I can respect your views...an im sorry you feel offended...if you read my previous post where i qouted others from this forum...they are all on the same page of sticking, bridging and contolling. I am in no way saying All WC people on the forum does use the adherence or bridging or controlling...I merely pointing out those who disagree with sticking or bridging as something archaic and uselesss and dont use it in their WC...AS for stupidly lump alot of WCK together...that made me laugh...your slight insult was funny to me...But i guess you feel as I attack you racial because i stated WC is chinese art...an the closer one is to actual line descendant the more authenic it seems to be...I know there are exceptions to the rule...Im simply saying when i see westerners take asian art from gung fu to karate...alot of the original stuff gets water down due to lack of understanding, different view points in western thought and eastern thought. Or merely to adapt to other western styles they are familiar with.

"For instance blocking a hook with a tan sau" is what such alteration. But i am sorry you find what i say insulting...I am no way saying one race is better than other...Im simply saying those westerners who train directly with pan nam, ip chun, ip ching, samuel kwok, william cheung, randy williams, robert chu, gary lamb. are any westerner who is only two or three lines away seem to have more authenic way of teaching and cover some of the things I dont see alot of WC covering on youtube...


i cant speak for your sifu, sigung or even you. I dont know what you do. I never touched hands with you. I never seen your WC or even met your sifu. I not saying your WC has to be good wc because you closer to a direct descendant. Im just saying alot of things that traditionallly chinese in the martial arts is done with what I have seen...

Again this is my opinion. Its not a fact. Its not rationalization or generalization this is merely an opinion. Again i could be wrong...i am willing to accept that...


AGAIN SORRY IF YOU FEEL IM BEING RACIAL...THAT IS MY INTENT AT ALL.


That's cool that you admit this is just an opinion based on what you see on youtube. What I am reading from what you wrote above, only the people in your area use things like sticking, bridging, control and sensitivity??
Besides that, I hope you realize how you come off when you stupidly lump a lot of WCK practitioners together (and many that post here) by making broad, generalizing statements like above as if they are fact - 'specially when you are only basing them off of some youtube videos and not any real world experience :rolleyes:





What the he11 does the race of a student or the race of one's sigung/sifu/whatever have to do with anything?? Race has nothing to do with one's ability to teach or learn anything in this world. You're really starting to show your ignorance and are getting pretty insulting IMO.
You'd be smart to drop this race thing right now and maybe reconsider the idiotic things you are saying here before you dig a hole you can't get out of (and you're already starting to get over your head already) .

[anerlich]

Just opinion on what i see many people doing on youtube. Just an opinion not really personal experience.

You aren't doing your credibility any good here.

[Yoshiyahu]

You aren't doing your credibility any good here.

I dont expect credibility from people I dont know....

ne way just on here sharing my personal view points!!!

[Paul T England]

Sticking is not just a wing chun concept, exactly the same principle exists in most other Chinese Martial Arts. Tai chi and Northern Praying Mantis for example.

You don't stick for the whole exchange, its a brief moment in time where you stick rather than letting your opponent dis-engage.

Poon Sau or Push Hands are platforms/frameworks for using your sticking skills but you will never see push hands or chi sau platforms in a real fight. Take a photo of an exachange in Chi Sau or Push hands and you will see that if the same two people spar! IMHO

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[Yoshiyahu]

Correct. very good post...No one is going to fight doing chi sau or poon sau...your a sitting duck to get hit. same with the push hands waiting to join. Very good points indeed.

Please elaborate in a fight how do you stick?


what is sticking to you accroding wc and how does it differ from other chinese martial arts?



Sticking is not just a wing chun concept, exactly the same principle exists in most other Chinese Martial Arts. Tai chi and Northern Praying Mantis for example.

You don't stick for the whole exchange, its a brief moment in time where you stick rather than letting your opponent dis-engage.

Poon Sau or Push Hands are platforms/frameworks for using your sticking skills but you will never see push hands or chi sau platforms in a real fight. Take a photo of an exachange in Chi Sau or Push hands and you will see that if the same two people spar! IMHO

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[JPinAZ]

interesting analogy. I actually agree with most of it...My disagreement would be when your hitting your opponent you are sticking to him are you not. I guess your view of sticking is different than mines. I dont see sticking as merely touching his arms just for the sake of touching.

Did you read a dang thing I said?? when did I ever say my view of sticking is merely touching his arms for sake of touching his arms?? Quite the opposite, and I even went as far to say that sticking for the sake of sticking is chasing hands and IMO very wrong. Seriously, I'm trying to give you a chance here, but you still can't even read what I write!

Again, please read this carefully (and also reread my previous posts), my idea of chi is, I chi if I have to - if no chi, hit! (something you seemed to have agreed with me saying in the past...)

And Again, I only stick when I am forced to deal with something that is impeeding my fwd progress. My opponent does something that I have to react to by controlling/sticking to the bridge. Whether I use gate theory to clear the obstruction, or box theroy, or something else. And, if I still need to controll my opponent's COG/facing while I strike, then by all means I still might stick to a bridge while I hit to keep control.
BUT, if I hit him, he's falling back and off balance, I just fill space and hit until either he's down, or the space gets refilled by him. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Sticking is only a way to cause a distortion in my opponent's bridge so I can get back to the task at hand - punching him :D

And actually, no, you are not sticking to him if you are hitting him if you're arms are unimpeeded. You're just hitting him. Sticking to him would mean my elbow has no recoil in the punch. And, after I cycle one time thru left and right, both of my fists would be sticking to his face. that's just dumb ;)


Nor do i see sticking as not hitting. I believe one should stick or cling to an opponent as they hit.

Sometimes this is very necessary, but not always. If you are ALWAYS looking for this, you are chasing the bridge/hand. What if you knock him back and he's wide open? Do you really need to grab him to continue hitting him?
But, I say this from experience and understanding of the systme, not belief ;)


In otherwords where every your opponent goes you stick to him like glue. dont give him space to move. You do not stick merely with your hands but your entire structure. You use your entire structure to stick as you hit. Whole body power. Staying connected to your opponent ie fist to his face. He gives you a bridge when he strikes or places an obstruction in your path to hit. Sticking is far more than merely bridging. Bridges have to do with the hands. An there are times when the bridge is broken correct. But you are still sticking. A bridge is apart of stick but the bridge is not be-all-end-all to sticking. You can stick with out bridge. You can stick to an opponent who has his hands behind his back. You can stick to an opponent who hands are down to his side!

Actually, bridges do not have to do with only the hands. The rest of what you are talking about actually IS about bridging IMO. we can bridge with our wrists, forearms, elbows, body, knees, legs, etc. Not all are equal depending on the situation, but all can be consided a 'bridge'. Very simply put, a bridge is something that connecst 2 things right? Where is it said that only means the hands?

The rest of your idea about sticking when no bridge is really about occupying space and fwd energy concepts from my POV of HFY. while I agree your tactic is sound, I think your usages of the terms is skewed.


On another Note let me give my definition of Stick!!!

adhere: to hold fast or stick by or as if by gluing, suction, grasping, or fusing. To cause to stick fast.

similiar to WC idea of sticking a.k.a. adhere. b.k.a. clinging too

Sure, that is A definition of stick. But that doesn't mean that we look to do that constantly! Only when needed. You are forgetting application in that definition, as well as length and necessity to stick.
FWIW, I never realy look to 'cling' to my opponent. In my experience, when someone grabs'clings it is usally because they are afraid/scared of being hit.


The difference is in WC we use our arms to defend against strikes. .......... Your arms protect or defend the center line...Your arms connect or stick as result of your whole body as unit to sticking to your opponent. Bridges are made when you strike or intercept an opponent attacks.

Agree for the most part. But you said bridges only refers to hands.. This sounds to be in conflict with that statement.

[JPinAZ]

You don't stick for the whole exchange, its a brief moment in time where you stick rather than letting your opponent dis-engage.
..........
Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

I agree 100% with this statement. Haha, sometimes I word things a lot less simply that I could :)

[YouKnowWho]

Sticking is not just a wing chun concept, exactly the same principle exists in most other Chinese Martial Arts. Tai chi and Northern Praying Mantis for example.

You don't stick for the whole exchange, its a brief moment in time where you stick rather than letting your opponent dis-engage.
Agree 100% there.

- Stick, and build a bridge,
- "tuck" your opponent's arm in a temporary place that will not give you any problem when you move in,
- destroy that bridge, and
- enter.

The sticking concept can even used in sword fight.

- Your sword touch your opponent's sword.
- You press his sword to the other side.
- You slide your sword along his sword,
- move in, and
- cut his head off.

[lance]

By now, most of you, if you've read any of my recent posts, should have a somewhat clear understanding of the way in which I understand "To Stick". So I would like to know how others may have their understanding since this forum seems to be largely void of talk about the foundational skill that WC is based off of.

So what is sticking to you? WC1277 . YouKnowWho is right about sticking , to me when you stick to your opponent ' s body , you know where he is because you can feel him . But the minute you don ' t feel his body what do think really happens ? Think about it .

[Yoshiyahu]

Video check it out!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orG1d0d7gq8

see how he sticks close?


Okay my wording is off you are correct. When I type alot i place a word like Hand/Sau and use in the connontation that is entire hand from finger tip to elbow...kinda of like cubit. Yes i agree with bridging from wrist, hands, and even elbow so to speak. But my definition of sticking is not merely grasping arm. Its not really touching your arm or holding your arm. My definition of sticking is as you put it briefly...


if I hit him, he's falling back and off balance, I just fill space and hit until either he's down, or the space gets refilled by him. Wash, rinse, repeat.


Imagine if you were at studio laying down some tracks. There was a sound missing...or space that needed to be filled. You need to stick something there to close the gap. That is what I mean by sticking.

Sticking can be with or with out the bridge. The bridge is for control. Sticking is more than a bridge. It is done with a bridge and it also done with striking. But you don't always have to have your hand out waiting for contact to stick. Thats all I am saying. When you fill the empty space with attacks an finish off your opponent so he cant react you are sticking. Sticking to his centerline, sticking to his structure, sticking to his center of gravity. You are sticking to him like glue.

Have you ever heard a person say the other guy he was fighting was on him like glue?

That is what I ultimately mean by sticking. Just because there is no bridge doesn't mean there is no contact. Remember rush in on loss of contact right?

well if your plummering his face there is no loss of contact?

No i think we disagreeing for not...because what you are saying that you do is also apart of sticking...even when you break the bridge!! Because you still have contact? Your on him like white on rice!


Did you read a dang thing I said?? when did I ever say my view of sticking is merely touching his arms for sake of touching his arms?? Quite the opposite, and I even went as far to say that sticking for the sake of sticking is chasing hands and IMO very wrong. Seriously, I'm trying to give you a chance here, but you still can't even read what I write!

Again, please read this carefully (and also reread my previous posts), my idea of chi is, I chi if I have to - if no chi, hit! (something you seemed to have agreed with me saying in the past...)

And Again, I only stick when I am forced to deal with something that is impeeding my fwd progress. My opponent does something that I have to react to by controlling/sticking to the bridge. Whether I use gate theory to clear the obstruction, or box theroy, or something else. And, if I still need to controll my opponent's COG/facing while I strike, then by all means I still might stick to a bridge while I hit to keep control.
BUT, if I hit him, he's falling back and off balance, I just fill space and hit until either he's down, or the space gets refilled by him. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Sticking is only a way to cause a distortion in my opponent's bridge so I can get back to the task at hand - punching him :D

And actually, no, you are not sticking to him if you are hitting him if you're arms are unimpeeded. You're just hitting him. Sticking to him would mean my elbow has no recoil in the punch. And, after I cycle one time thru left and right, both of my fists would be sticking to his face. that's just dumb ;)



Sometimes this is very necessary, but not always. If you are ALWAYS looking for this, you are chasing the bridge/hand. What if you knock him back and he's wide open? Do you really need to grab him to continue hitting him?
But, I say this from experience and understanding of the systme, not belief ;)



Actually, bridges do not have to do with only the hands. The rest of what you are talking about actually IS about bridging IMO. we can bridge with our wrists, forearms, elbows, body, knees, legs, etc. Not all are equal depending on the situation, but all can be consided a 'bridge'. Very simply put, a bridge is something that connecst 2 things right? Where is it said that only means the hands?

The rest of your idea about sticking when no bridge is really about occupying space and fwd energy concepts from my POV of HFY. while I agree your tactic is sound, I think your usages of the terms is skewed.



Sure, that is A definition of stick. But that doesn't mean that we look to do that constantly! Only when needed. You are forgetting application in that definition, as well as length and necessity to stick.
FWIW, I never realy look to 'cling' to my opponent. In my experience, when someone grabs'clings it is usally because they are afraid/scared of being hit.



Agree for the most part. But you said bridges only refers to hands.. This sounds to be in conflict with that statement.

[JPinAZ]

Ok, so you're talking sticking as in a very broad/basic sense of the term, pretty much the same as smothering your opponent, or chase/persue? While I get what you're dricing at, IMO this isn't really 'sticking' per se in a chi sau sense.
In HFY, what you are describing is covered by our Occupy Space with fwd energy concept, as well as Jeui Yeng concept from our Ng Jan Chiu Min Jeui Ying/5 battle arrays. I view 'sticking' more specifically as it referes to kiu sau engagement & chi sau bridging.

To narrow it down a bit, how do you define sticking as in reference to the term 'chi sau' within your all encompassing definition?

[Yoshiyahu]

Ok, so you're talking sticking in a very broad/basic sense of the term, pretty much the same as smothering your opponent? In HFY, this is covered by Occupy Space with fwd energy concept, as well as Jeui Yeng concept from our Ng Jan Chiu Min Jeui Ying/5 battle arrays. I'm talking sticking more specifically as it referes to kiu sau engagement & chi sau bridging.
To narrow it down a bit, how do you define sticking as in reference to the term 'chi sau' then?

chi sau is a passive drill. Even freestyle is still passive. Because both parties agree to stick. Its where you both stay inclose contact. you both contiune to bridge. In chi sau you have two people are bridging, two people seeking the centerline, two people seeking to control it, two people sticking close...

in fighting a non-wc guy...that is not going to happen. A street fighter dont care about no bridge, no centerline, no chi sau. He is going to knock your head off. Alls he care about is hitting that face. A boxer will move in and out your punching range. You have to learn to stick to a dancing fighter or he will eat you up. Seeking the bridge to stick will get you set up for a attack. So seek to attack by sticking with relenteles attacks. Bridges are created from your attack or defense as your opponent launches a counter attack.

Yes I agree with sticking to bridge. But if there is no bridge why stick to it. If your opponent covers his hands over his head why not simply manipulate his body so you can strike him anyway. Why not simply control the neck while kicking the knees. Im not asking you per say...Just an in general question.


When you doing chi sau. Your bridges are always sticking because both of you are in agreement and both of you practice an art that bridges. But in fighting you dont have that luxury. I see the occupying space and forward energy concept as sticking...not merely with the hands. Why call one thing sticking and one thing bridging? You can stick to my bridge, you can also stick to my COG. its all dependant on your skill level. But following a persons hands just to see what they gonna do next like poon sau waiting for opening will get you set up. I separate sparring from chi sau. In sparring there is no waiting or feeding. Its just attack and feel as you are attacking your opponent.

But chi sau engagnement teaches you sensitivity so when the you bridge the gap meaning join arms either because your punch is intercepted or their attack is intercepted you can react. I don't go in with hands out looking to join. I just start hitting if you throw up elbow to block or try to cover and bob and weave I make use of what you give me. If you have no guards out there to impede my attack i just start hitting whats open. If you move back or to the side I stick to you! If I bridge your jab i stick (while attacking) to you as you draw it back. If you come in attack and retreat i attack by sticking. I dont stick for the sake of joining hands or bridging unless its to stop you from hitting me by deflecting your energy away from my centerline! But while I do so its to attack!!!

[JPinAZ]

chi sau is a passive drill. Even freestyle is still passive. Because both parties agree to stick. Its where you both stay inclose contact. you both contiune to bridge. In chi sau you have two people are bridging, two people seeking the centerline, two people seeking to control it, two people sticking close...

I didn't ask you what you thought 'chi sau' was, I asked you how you define 'sticking' as it pertains to the term 'chi sau', but whatever.. :rolleyes:


Yes I agree with sticking to bridge. But if there is no bridge why stick to it. If your opponent covers his hands over his head why not simply manipulate his body so you can strike him anyway. Why not simply control the neck while kicking the knees. Im not asking you per say...Just an in general question.

I never said anything close to saying you should stick to a bridge. I have no idea what this has to do with anything I said in what you quoted?


I see the occupying space and forward energy concept as sticking...not merely with the hands.

So I know you're not just talking our your faat sau, please explain your understanding of the HFY occupy space with fwd energy concept for me, because that's what I mentioned. I also ask because it really doesn't have much to do with sticking at all.. oh, what's the point..


Why call one thing sticking and one thing bridging?

:confused: Because they are 2 different things, so they have 2 different names with 2 different definitions.
Bridging is about engagement. Sticking is something you might have to do once you are already engaged depending on the space and energy you encounter if and when you have bridged. This really shouldn't be this difficult...


You can stick to my bridge, you can also stick to my COG. its all dependant on your skill level. But following a persons hands just to see what they gonna do next like poon sau waiting for opening will get you set up. I separate sparring from chi sau. In sparring there is no waiting or feeding. Its just attack and feel as you are attacking your opponent.

ok....


But chi sau engagnement teaches you sensitivity so when the you bridge the gap meaning join arms either because your punch is intercepted or their attack is intercepted you can react. I don't go in with hands out looking to join. I just start hitting if you throw up elbow to block or try to cover and bob and weave I make use of what you give me. If you have no guards out there to impede my attack i just start hitting whats open. If you move back or to the side I stick to you! If I bridge your jab i stick (while attacking) to you as you draw it back. If you come in attack and retreat i attack by sticking. I dont stick for the sake of joining hands or bridging unless its to stop you from hitting me by deflecting your energy away from my centerline! But while I do so its to attack!!!

this is 180 degrees from what you were saying earlier in this thread, but it's good to see you are starting to think a little more.
I do find what you are saying really hard to swallow that YOU are actually doing these things in training since it's a polar opposite from what you've been saying up until now. Where and when do you do these things and with whom? Stan?

Since you like posting links of all sorts of things from youtube here, do you have any clips of yourself actually doing these things? Or any of your sparring/training partners doing this type of stuff?

[lance]

Video check it out!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orG1d0d7gq8

see how he sticks close?


Okay my wording is off you are correct. When I type alot i place a word like Hand/Sau and use in the connontation that is entire hand from finger tip to elbow...kinda of like cubit. Yes i agree with bridging from wrist, hands, and even elbow so to speak. But my definition of sticking is not merely grasping arm. Its not really touching your arm or holding your arm. My definition of sticking is as you put it briefly...



Imagine if you were at studio laying down some tracks. There was a sound missing...or space that needed to be filled. You need to stick something there to close the gap. That is what I mean by sticking.

Sticking can be with or with out the bridge. The bridge is for control. Sticking is more than a bridge. It is done with a bridge and it also done with striking. But you don't always have to have your hand out waiting for contact to stick. Thats all I am saying. When you fill the empty space with attacks an finish off your opponent so he cant react you are sticking. Sticking to his centerline, sticking to his structure, sticking to his center of gravity. You are sticking to him like glue.

Have you ever heard a person say the other guy he was fighting was on him like glue?

That is what I ultimately mean by sticking. Just because there is no bridge doesn't mean there is no contact. Remember rush in on loss of contact right?

well if your plummering his face there is no loss of contact?

No i think we disagreeing for not...because what you are saying that you do is also apart of sticking...even when you break the bridge!! Because you still have contact? Your on him like white on rice!Yoshiyahu , the WC sifu in the video is good but he uses alot of wasted motion . Well to you , it may look like he was sticking to his opponents' hands , but to me it look more like trapping when he was covering both of his opponents' hands in his way .

Other than that the sifu was just using regular WC techniques , if I was facing a boxer like the WC sifu was , the boxer for example threw a right hook towards my face area , I can move in like the way the WC sifu did or I would just step back , and let the attack pass me and just use WC techniques .

If I was facing the boxer face to face and he threw a right jab at me I can either use a right taun sao to block his attack or can just use left hand downward palm block , and guide it to the center and the boxer is naturally going to hit me with the other hand anyway , so I ' ll just set the boxer in a trapping hands technique , and blast him with WC hand techniques . I would just make it in a way that the boxer would have a hard time of fighting me .

My definition of sticking hands is this , it does ' nt matter if the opponent throws an attack with his right and or left hand , I can remain block it , because as I block his attack I ' ve already made contact with the opponents' attacking hand already , and the opponent is going to have to pull his attacking hand back in order to attack with the other hand , during the opponents' second attack I would just move in on the opponent , using trapping hands to immobolize the opponents' attack . In other words if I can feel the opponent then I ' m safe , but
if I don ' t feel the opponent , I ' m probably opened up to an attack by the opponent , so I need to be caution in the sticking area of the opponent . Eventhough , you stick to the opponent , but don ' t trap your opponents' you ' re opening yourself to the opponents' attack .

[Yoshiyahu]

Good Post...so in other words your saying you want to control the opponennt I wholeheartily agree!



Yoshiyahu , the WC sifu in the video is good but he uses alot of wasted motion . Well to you , it may look like he was sticking to his opponents' hands , but to me it look more like trapping when he was covering both of his opponents' hands in his way .

Other than that the sifu was just using regular WC techniques , if I was facing a boxer like the WC sifu was , the boxer for example threw a right hook towards my face area , I can move in like the way the WC sifu did or I would just step back , and let the attack pass me and just use WC techniques .

If I was facing the boxer face to face and he threw a right jab at me I can either use a right taun sao to block his attack or can just use left hand downward palm block , and guide it to the center and the boxer is naturally going to hit me with the other hand anyway , so I ' ll just set the boxer in a trapping hands technique , and blast him with WC hand techniques . I would just make it in a way that the boxer would have a hard time of fighting me .

My definition of sticking hands is this , it does ' nt matter if the opponent throws an attack with his right and or left hand , I can remain block it , because as I block his attack I ' ve already made contact with the opponents' attacking hand already , and the opponent is going to have to pull his attacking hand back in order to attack with the other hand , during the opponents' second attack I would just move in on the opponent , using trapping hands to immobolize the opponents' attack . In other words if I can feel the opponent then I ' m safe , but
if I don ' t feel the opponent , I ' m probably opened up to an attack by the opponent , so I need to be caution in the sticking area of the opponent . Eventhough , you stick to the opponent , but don ' t trap your opponents' you ' re opening yourself to the opponents' attack .

[Yoshiyahu]

Why do you need to stick when you engage? If its something you do because you engaged..are u doing just because ur engaged?


I didn't ask you what you thought 'chi sau' was, I asked you how you define 'sticking' as it pertains to the term 'chi sau', but whatever.. :rolleyes:



Bridging is about engagement. Sticking is something you might have to do once you are already engaged depending on the space and energy you encounter if and when you have bridged. This really shouldn't be this difficult...

[JPinAZ]

Why do you need to stick when you engage? If its something you do because you engaged..are u doing just because ur engaged?

WTF! Are you serious? I never said anything even close to saying 'you need to stick when you engage' - where the he11 did you get that garbage from, or do you just make this crap up because you have nothing more to add to the discussion on your end?
Either you really are on drugs or you really can't read/comprehend simple english.

Look, I've been trying to talk with you against my better judgement after that whole 'stan is great' thread :rolleyes:, but it's getting pretty much impossible to have a discussion with you when your reading comprehention skills are close to non-existant..

[Yoshiyahu]

WTF! Are you serious? I never said anything even close to saying 'you need to stick when you engage' - where the he11 did you get that garbage from, or do you just make this crap up because you have nothing more to add to the discussion on your end?
Either you really are on drugs or you really can't read/comprehend simple english.

Look, I've been trying to talk with you against my better judgement after that whole 'stan is great' thread :rolleyes:, but it's getting pretty much impossible to have a discussion with you when your reading comprehention skills are close to non-existant..

Okay Well i was asking a question to get a convo out of you. i enjoy talking about WC even with people who have different view points. NE way please share with your view more concisely then maybe I misread things...no need to insult me!

You said the following:
Bridging is about engagement. Sticking is something you might have to do once you are already engaged depending on the space and energy you encounter if and when you have bridged. This really shouldn't be this difficult...


I asked the question:
Why do you need to stick when you engage? Are u doing just because ur engaged?

Maybe my question is stupid...Just trying to keep the conversation going buddy!

[wingchunIan]

Everyone has heard the maxim, hand comes detain it, hands leaves follow it, hand lost thrust forward (or words to that effect) and therein is the definition of sticking. You are seeking information, disrupting the opponent's rythmn / freedom of movement and feeling for gaps to the centre.

[JPinAZ]

Okay Well i was asking a question to get a convo out of you. i enjoy talking about WC even with people who have different view points. NE way please share with your view more concisely then maybe I misread things...no need to insult me!

Maybe my question is stupid...Just trying to keep the conversation going buddy!

Your question is stupic because it's already been answered several times here. I've explained myself regarding sticking and bridging in this thread as well as other threads where you asked. He11, it's even answered in the second half of the **** sentence you quoted: "Sticking is something you might have to do once you are already engaged depending on the space and energy you encounter if and when you have bridged"
I really am starting to believe you just don't have a clue what you are reading, or have substance abuse problem. No insult, just a theory that's being proven a fact time and again.

You really should be asking your sifu these questions if you can't comprehend simple english on a forum. Don't you have a Sifu? If your sifu can't answer them, then you should probably start looking for a new teacher. Or maybe you could ask stan (LOL). You can't learn WC online, and I'm tired of having to answer the same **** question over and over and over.

But if you want to have a 'convo', then maybe you should start answering some questions of mine, 'buddy'. :rolleyes:
you can start here, there's plenty you just plain out ignored: http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1155471&postcount=172

[Yoshiyahu]

Everyone has heard the maxim, hand comes detain it, hands leaves follow it, hand lost thrust forward (or words to that effect) and therein is the definition of sticking. You are seeking information, disrupting the opponent's rythmn / freedom of movement and feeling for gaps to the centre.

good answer...i love how you elaborated on the maxim!



Your question is stupic because it's already been answered several times here. I've explained myself regarding sticking and bridging in this thread as well as other threads where you asked. He11, it's even answered in the second half of the **** sentence you quoted: "Sticking is something you might have to do once you are already engaged depending on the space and energy you encounter if and when you have bridged"
I really am starting to believe you just don't have a clue what you are reading, or have substance abuse problem. No insult, just a theory that's being proven a fact time and again.

You really should be asking your sifu these questions if you can't comprehend simple english on a forum. Don't you have a Sifu? If your sifu can't answer them, then you should probably start looking for a new teacher. Or maybe you could ask stan (LOL). You can't learn WC online, and I'm tired of having to answer the same **** question over and over and over.

But if you want to have a 'convo', then maybe you should start answering some questions of mine, 'buddy'. :rolleyes:
you can start here, there's plenty you just plain out ignored: http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1155471&postcount=172

okay buddy what ever you say...lol...thanks for the convo!