WSL directly

[Paddington]

Hi guys!

The following link will take you to a great video (60mins or so long) of WSL explaining the forms and applications. Some of you may, like me, already have these clips but for those that don't, the following link may be of use. I was surprised by how much I could understand even though I don't speak the language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1DQvDmZ6BU

Personally, I enjoyed WSL's discussion of section eight of SLT (@28min -ish). I have had many disagreements with my fellow kung fu brothers at the class I attend, regarding this very issue; they did not like me pointing out that you can just hit them :P .

Enjoy!

[sihing]

Hi guys!

The following link will take you to a great video (60mins or so long) of WSL explaining the forms and applications. Some of you may, like me, already have these clips but for those that don't, the following link may be of use. I was surprised by how much I could understand even though I don't speak the language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1DQvDmZ6BU

Personally, I enjoyed WSL's discussion of section eight of SLT (@28min -ish). I have had many disagreements with my fellow kung fu brothers at the class I attend, regarding this very issue; they did not like me pointing out that you can just hit them :P .

Enjoy!

It's a nice video, I posted it on my FB page wall too, nice to see WSL in action and his mechanics, even though it is in slow motion. But it is mostly all about techniques, what to do if someone does this or that to me. Not about structure/mechanic development and things of this nature, development in the sense of how well does my body perform within its own actions, and not in relationship to what someone else is doing to us.

You can learn all the techniques you want against the 1000's of attacks that can happen to you, but if your body/mind is not set in certain fundamental ways (you have no structure, no balance, no recovery method, no sensitivity, no aim in your strikes, etc...) you can't use those techniques as effectively, IMO:)

J

[poulperadieux]

You should have taught WSL, you seem to know a lot how to share his Style.

[Paddington]

You should have taught WSL, you seem to know a lot how to share his Style.

Was that a reply to me?

[k gledhill]

Hi guys!

The following link will take you to a great video (60mins or so long) of WSL explaining the forms and applications. Some of you may, like me, already have these clips but for those that don't, the following link may be of use. I was surprised by how much I could understand even though I don't speak the language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1DQvDmZ6BU

Personally, I enjoyed WSL's discussion of section eight of SLT (@28min -ish). I have had many disagreements with my fellow kung fu brothers at the class I attend, regarding this very issue; they did not like me pointing out that you can just hit them :P .

Enjoy!


What do you think that idea is @28 ?

[Paddington]

What do you think that idea is @28 ?

Why don't you have a go, eh? I am not going to take the worm you are offering. Go fish elsewhere!

[k gledhill]

Why don't you have a go, eh? I am not going to take the worm you are offering. Go fish elsewhere!

Okay, just trying to have a discussion. Not an ambush.
Never mind.

[Jansingsang]

Okay, just trying to have a discussion. Not an ambush.
Never mind.

Guess its a case of crying wolf In this case the wolf wants to discuss matters :eek: :D

[EternalSpring]

well, since what happened @28 mins has been mentioned, and since nearly everyone here is senior to me in Ving Tsun, I might as well ask the questions from the perspective of noob lol.

So what exactly is WSL showing? I dont understand Cantonese or Mandarin but if I had to guess, I would assume he was showing a concept like "replacing hands" for better positioning. I think he took the concept from "chop sao (thats what I know those movements as)" and applied them at heights besides just that which is seen at the end of Siu Nim Tao. Also, i dont know if he was showing this, but perhaps he may have also been showing how that same movement can also cut distance without taking any steps if the person holds onto your wrist/arm/etc.

Anyone have any insight on the matter?

[T_Ray]

http://youtu.be/guBKfDox5qs
@7:25

[Paddington]

Okay, just trying to have a discussion. Not an ambush.
Never mind.

Sorry, mate it is hard to tell with you!

With regards to section 8, and there is a bit covered, the specific part I was alluding to was using those movements in section 8 to defend against wrist and arm grabs i.e. to break them. WSL, from what I can interpret, advises against this and shows us movements from other sections (including the opening that some think is just to check center), that are perhaps better solutions.


well, since what happened @28 mins has been mentioned, and since nearly everyone here is senior to me in Ving Tsun, I might as well ask the questions from the perspective of noob lol.
[...]
Anyone have any insight on the matter?

Hopefully my brief explanation above may help you EternalSpring.

[Paddington]

http://youtu.be/guBKfDox5qs
@7:25

Thanks for the link! I did not, until now, have that one in my extensive archive!

[poulperadieux]

for me, as I was told, and as I think, is not for escaping a wrist hold, if so, that would mean 2 hands on one hand, and that's not possible, as WSL says in the video, he's so right.

[LFJ]

Yup. He was saying some people think of it as a way to escape wrist grabs, but it's not that at all. He says because you have two hands committed to their one, while they have a free hand to punch. When you go to chop their hand off and they punch you in the face, who's faster and which is more dangerous?

So a better way to get out of a wrist grab is to simply turn over to taan-sau and attack their center. Or depending on which hand is grabbing which wrist, you may have to turn to bong-sau to release it, while still keeping your other hand free so you're more even with the opponent. Taan-sau works when it's right to right, or left to left. Bong-sau works when the grab is on the same side, like left grabbing your right. Simply changing shape will release the grab. There is no need to use two hands against their one.

[LFJ]

It's a nice video, I posted it on my FB page wall too, nice to see WSL in action and his mechanics, even though it is in slow motion. But it is mostly all about techniques, what to do if someone does this or that to me. Not about structure/mechanic development and things of this nature, development in the sense of how well does my body perform within its own actions, and not in relationship to what someone else is doing to us.

I get the feeling someone doesn't speak Mandarin. :p

[sihing]

I get the feeling someone doesn't speak Mandarin. :p

:) No Mandarin for me. But I have the sub titled copies..

I guess for me, the movements in the forms are more than just techniques against attacks, even though they could be used that way. SNT is development, elbow, aim, yjkyma, pelvic tilt, recovery and such, CK/Mok jong the same, but yeah someone can see techniques out of it too, that's all my comment was saying:)

J

[LFJ]

What I got from the video was an explanation of concepts and an illustration of them being applied. It's not really possible to discuss application of concept without showing a little something, so what you may see are situational techniques, but more important is the concept he's discussing which aren't bound by those situations. One should be able to see beyond that if they understand the concept.

[sihing]

What I got from the video was an explanation of concepts and an illustration of them being applied. It's not really possible to discuss application of concept without showing a little something, so what you may see are situational techniques, but more important is the concept he's discussing which aren't bound by those situations. One should be able to see beyond that if they understand the concept.

True! I think us in the WSL line understand this, others outside may not or some with little to no VT experience..

J

[poulperadieux]

Yup. He was saying some people think of it as a way to escape wrist grabs, but it's not that at all. He says because you have two hands committed to their one, while they have a free hand to punch. When you go to chop their hand off and they punch you in the face, who's faster and which is more dangerous?

So a better way to get out of a wrist grab is to simply turn over to taan-sau and attack their center. Or depending on which hand is grabbing which wrist, you may have to turn to bong-sau to release it, while still keeping your other hand free so you're more even with the opponent. Taan-sau works when it's right to right, or left to left. Bong-sau works when the grab is on the same side, like left grabbing your right. Simply changing shape will release the grab. There is no need to use two hands against their one.

And so, what's the use of this move for WSL?

[T_Ray]

Once you look beyond the idea of a specific "application", we can see is to develop certain VT skills and attributes....the elbow, striking, crossing, taking center, replacing the hand/line/contact, wu sao, synchronicity/timing....etc....

[LFJ]

And so, what's the use of this move for WSL?

Skip to 7:10 here and he will tell you himself at 8:50; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guBKfDox5qs

[poulperadieux]

Skip to 7:10 here and he will tell you himself at 8:50; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guBKfDox5qs

yep, that's half I was taught

[k gledhill]

And at fighting speed.

http://youtu.be/sviizp-Bmgw

[k gledhill]

Once you look beyond the idea of a specific "application", we can see is to develop certain VT skills and attributes....the elbow, striking, crossing, taking center, replacing the hand/line/contact, wu sao, synchronicity/timing....etc....

It allows very fast exchanges with little thought. ; )

[LFJ]

And at fighting speed.

http://youtu.be/sviizp-Bmgw

"Hahaha, ganz einfach!" :p

[Phil Redmond]

Hi guys!

The following link will take you to a great video (60mins or so long) of WSL explaining the forms and applications. Some of you may, like me, already have these clips but for those that don't, the following link may be of use. I was surprised by how much I could understand even though I don't speak the language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1DQvDmZ6BU

Personally, I enjoyed WSL's discussion of section eight of SLT (@28min -ish). I have had many disagreements with my fellow kung fu brothers at the class I attend, regarding this very issue; they did not like me pointing out that you can just hit them :P .

Enjoy!

I never knew that WSL spoke Mandarin. :)

[k gledhill]

"Hahaha, ganz einfach!" :p

He makes it look easy ; )

[YouKnowWho]

I]Taan-sau[/I] works when it's right to right, or left to left. Bong-sau works when the grab is on the same side, like left grabbing your right.

I believe you should do the opposite. The reason is simple, you should always turn your arm to against your opponent's thumb (1 finger) and not to against his other 4 fingers. If you use your own left hand to grab your right wrist, you will find out that your right "Tan Shou" will work better than your right "Bon Shou".

If your opponent's

- "right" hand grabs your "right" wrist, you can use "Bong Shou" to break it. The proble is you will expose your right elbow to your opponent's free left hand.
- "left" hand grabs your "right" wrist, you can use "Tan Shou" to break it. The problem is your will expose your center to your opponent's free right punch.

The solution is not whether you should use Tan Shou or Bon Shou to break a grip but which direction that you should turn your wrist to break that grip.


And so, what's the use of this move for WSL?
He said when you pull back your punch, if your opponent follows your pulling back, he can punch at you through that "leak". You need to sent your back arm out to "seal that leak". This way, you pull one hand back and sent one hand out, your center is still protected.

[T_Ray]

It allows very fast exchanges with little thought. ; )
Yes! I see it :)

[poulperadieux]

He said when you pull back your punch, if your opponent follows your pulling back, he can punch at you through that "leak". You need to sent your back arm out to "seal that leak". This way, you pull one hand back and sent one hand out, your center is still protected.


That make sense,

So, why doing it downwards in the form and everyone seems fine that the application is upward ?

In that case, why bother with this move in siu lim tao if biu jee is full of fack sao or biu sao that can be interpreted like Philip Bayer does in his video?


No one knows why this move is done downward in siu lim tao?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e4_PUXRKyY

They have a different explication in this family.

[YouKnowWho]

why doing it downwards in the form and everyone seems fine that the application is upward ?
That was his explanation which may not be the "only" explanation.

It can be used to break a wrist grip. many TCMA system all have this technique. If you move your body back and use your body weight, it will work much better.

The following short clip shows how the longfist system uses the same technique.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSbc5y6ybsY

Onething that I don't agree with what he said, "When you use the other hand to break your opponent's wrist grip, his free hand can punch you". If you pull your arm back in such a way that you can use his grapping arm to jam his own punching arm, you won't have this problem.

[trubblman]

Looks interesting but does anyone know of this video with subtitles?

[poulperadieux]

Onething that I don't agree with what he said, "When you use the other hand to break your opponent's wrist grip, his free hand can punch you". If you pull your arm back in such a way that you can use his grapping arm to jam his own punching arm, you won't have this problem.

The question is : "If someone hold you, why bother getting out?"

the most dangerous hand is not the one that grabs you, but the other one, witch location is not controlled by your superior bonanza chi sao enhanced cyborg touch.
And his legs.

There's plenty of ways to get rid of a single hold, without force, and with one hand, so, I do agree with WSL, why bother using two hands?

But like I said earlier in this topic, I think WSL knew half about this move, especially when you compare how it is done in the Leung Sheun Lineage.

I precise I don't belong to Leung Sheun Lineage, I'm just a freeloader, a Schnorrer in OC.
:D

[k gledhill]

The question is : "If someone hold you, why bother getting out?"

the most dangerous hand is not the one that grabs you, but the other one, witch location is not controlled by your superior bonanza chi sao enhanced cyborg touch.
And his legs.

There's plenty of ways to get rid of a single hold, without force, and with one hand, so, I do agree with WSL, why bother using two hands?

But like I said earlier in this topic, I think WSL knew half about this move, especially when you compare how it is done in the Leung Sheun Lineage.

I precise I don't belong to Leung Sheun Lineage, I'm just a freeloader, a Schnorrer in OC.
:D

What do you think is missing ?

[poulperadieux]

What do you think is missing ?

Can't tell yet, want to know before if someone knows why we do this move downward, because upward, it looks like a fak sao or a biu sao combo in the biu jee.

Why did the ancients bothered to do this downward if everyone applies it upward?


I don't mock anyone, just want to know if someone has heard of it before giving the answer I had, don't want to spoil the discussion on that, if discussion there will be.;)

[k gledhill]

Can't tell yet, want to know before if someone knows why we do this move downward, because upward, it looks like a fak sao or a biu sao combo in the biu jee.

Why did the ancients bothered to do this downward if everyone applies it upward?


I don't mock anyone, just want to know if someone has heard of it before giving the answer I had, don't want to spoil the discussion on that, if discussion there will be.;)

I know why it's low and why high.

[poulperadieux]

I know why it's low and why high.

The tide?
Cool for you.:D

So, why do we do this move low in Siu lim tao?

[Phil Redmond]

And at fighting speed.

http://youtu.be/sviizp-Bmgw
Your signature reads: WSL: "Combat experience is more important than any other thing." Sifu Anthony Arnett is holding a Wing Chun tournament.
Open to all Wing Chun Families


May 4th 2013
Baltimore, MD
5315 Harford Rd. 21214


Special Gold/ Silver/ Bronze metals


$50 for 1st event $10 each additional event

Starting @ 9 AM Sharp!


Divisions

Forms/Chi Sao/P.O.C Point of contact Sparring/Light contact sparring


Spectators only $10

at the front door

Cash Only


Contact Master John Clayton @

410 278-2969 or 443 769-0636

Judges and referees needed!

[k gledhill]

Your signature reads: WSL: "Combat experience is more important than any other thing." Sifu Anthony Arnett is holding a Wing Chun tournament.
Open to all Wing Chun Families


May 4th 2013
Baltimore, MD
5315 Harford Rd. 21214


Special Gold/ Silver/ Bronze metals


$50 for 1st event $10 each additional event

Starting @ 9 AM Sharp!


Divisions

Forms/Chi Sao/P.O.C Point of contact Sparring/Light contact sparring


Spectators only $10

at the front door

Cash Only


Contact Master John Clayton @

410 278-2969 or 443 769-0636

Judges and referees needed!


Thanks I will check it out.

[YouKnowWho]

The question is : "If someone hold you, why bother getting out?"
You may not think about this from a grappler point of view. Since I train both WC and grappling, here is my 2 cents.

When one of your opponent hands control one of your wrists, he can guide your arm to jam your other arm, and use his other hand to control your other arm. Now both of your arms are controlled by his hands. Since you have to break his grip before you can punch him, when you are thinking about "break his grip", he is thinking about how to "shoot in" at your leg. He is one step ahead of you in the game.

If you don't want to be forced to play a grappling game, you should break your opponent 1st hand grip ASAP.


the most dangerous hand is not the one that grabs you, but the other one, witch location is not controlled by your superior bonanza chi sao enhanced cyborg touch. And his legs.
I have to disagree with you on this. When your opponent grabs your arm, he has a purpose. His purpose is not just to control one of your arms but to control your entire body.

When you try to punch with your free hand, all your opponent needs to do is to drag your leading arm to "jam" your back striking arm. If you try to kick, your opponent can pull your leading arm downward to force your body weight to shift to your front leg. Your front leg won't even be able to raise up.

Will all these thing happen according to your opponent's plan? It depends on your opponent's skill level and your skill level. It's much easier to prevent it from happening (break your opponent's hold ASAP) than to allow it to happen and fix it afterward.

[Paddington]

What I got from the video was an explanation of concepts and an illustration of them being applied. It's not really possible to discuss application of concept without showing a little something, so what you may see are situational techniques, but more important is the concept he's discussing which aren't bound by those situations. One should be able to see beyond that if they understand the concept.


Yep. I just posted it because it combined several clips together. It is a good one to download and save.

[LFJ]

I believe you should do the opposite. The reason is simple, you should always turn your arm to against your opponent's thumb (1 finger) and not to against his other 4 fingers. If you use your own left hand to grab your right wrist, you will find out that your right "Tan Shou" will work better than your right "Bon Shou".

I don't find that to be the case, actually. Neither on myself nor against an opponent.


If your opponent's

- "right" hand grabs your "right" wrist, you can use "Bong Shou" to break it. The proble is you will expose your right elbow to your opponent's free left hand.
- "left" hand grabs your "right" wrist, you can use "Tan Shou" to break it. The problem is your will expose your center to your opponent's free right punch.

In both cases the opponent's hand will move with you. Inward in the first case, and turning over comfortably in the second. You'd then have to rip your hand back to free it. We like things to move forward, and it is possible the grip won't be broken in either case if the grip is strong.

Instead, if your opponent's

- "right" hand grabs your "right" wrist, taan-sau turn will turn their wrist over painfully, twisting their entire arm and turning their body away if they don't let go.
- "left" hand grabs your "right" wrist, bong-sau will pressure the ulna into their first fingers giving leverage to the radius to break out through their thumb, meanwhile moving forward and keeping protected.

So why do the opposite where there is the possibility that it won't work, and leaving yourself exposed...


The solution is not whether you should use Tan Shou or Bon Shou to break a grip but which direction that you should turn your wrist to break that grip.

That's what taan and bong do in this case.

[LFJ]

So, why doing it downwards in the form and everyone seems fine that the application is upward ?

It may not always be upward. Wherever the contact point may be, high or low.

Three concepts from most to least important:

1. replacing energy; to protect and control space
2. changing shape; to effect an outcome when one shape won't work
3. emergency gaang-sau; to protect the lower gate by shooting for the center when the hands aren't "ready" for a proper gaang-sau.

[EternalSpring]

That make sense,

So, why doing it downwards in the form and everyone seems fine that the application is upward ?

In that case, why bother with this move in siu lim tao if biu jee is full of fack sao or biu sao that can be interpreted like Philip Bayer does in his video?



Some would say that the downwards motion is expressed in a medium and then high range in the Chum Kiu and Biu Jee.

IMO, it *may* not matter what height you start at, but since Siu Nim Tao starts with doing the movement relatively low, that is just the starting point in those styles of Ving Tsun. Otherwise it would be like saying "the straight puch in Siu Nim Tao is to face level, thus, it cannot be used to strike the chest unless later developed in a form." But we know that's not true. The forms give us a starting point for techniques from which we build upon.

[EternalSpring]

Onething that I don't agree with what he said, "When you use the other hand to break your opponent's wrist grip, his free hand can punch you". If you pull your arm back in such a way that you can use his grapping arm to jam his own punching arm, you won't have this problem.


The question is : "If someone hold you, why bother getting out?"

the most dangerous hand is not the one that grabs you, but the other one, witch location is not controlled by your superior bonanza chi sao enhanced cyborg touch.
And his legs.

There's plenty of ways to get rid of a single hold, without force, and with one hand, so, I do agree with WSL, why bother using two hands?

But like I said earlier in this topic, I think WSL knew half about this move, especially when you compare how it is done in the Leung Sheun Lineage.

I precise I don't belong to Leung Sheun Lineage, I'm just a freeloader, a Schnorrer in OC.
:D

I can see what YKW is talking about, it's actually similar to one of the things that I thought WSL was talking about regarding conservation of space w/o taking a step or moving as much. The idea is, is that when you look at that "downward motion" in Siu Nim Tao (Chop Sao?), it is not just one hand doing work, both hands are active and moving (both twisting and moving in diff direction). Some would call it "replacing hands," though that's not the only way to look at it. If my hand that is being grabbed is moving, then the opponents hand, which is grabbing my hand, is also moving (unless he lets me go). This can be applied in a few ways, but the main point is that it's not necessarily two hands needing to team up against one hand. The motion of both arms will also be attacking and effecting the rest of the opponents body as well.

just my 2c

[poulperadieux]

You may not think about this from a grappler point of view. Since I train both WC and grappling, here is my 2 cents.

When one of your opponent hands control one of your wrists, he can guide your arm to jam your other arm, and use his other hand to control your other arm. Now both of your arms are controlled by his hands. Since you have to break his grip before you can punch him, when you are thinking about "break his grip", he is thinking about how to "shoot in" at your leg. He is one step ahead of you in the game.

If you don't want to be forced to play a grappling game, you should break your opponent 1st hand grip ASAP.


I have to disagree with you on this. When your opponent grabs your arm, he has a purpose. His purpose is not just to control one of your arms but to control your entire body.

When you try to punch with your free hand, all your opponent needs to do is to drag your leading arm to "jam" your back striking arm. If you try to kick, your opponent can pull your leading arm downward to force your body weight to shift to your front leg. Your front leg won't even be able to raise up.

Will all these thing happen according to your opponent's plan? It depends on your opponent's skill level and your skill level. It's much easier to prevent it from happening (break your opponent's hold ASAP) than to allow it to happen and fix it afterward.

I understand what you mean, depends each other sensibility.
I prefer Hitting and Kicking, so the hand that grabs me release the pressure while preventing the joint lock and the jam on my grabbed hand using chi sao.

I don't like my hands being on the same side of my body, makes me feel I've got 6 limbs and not 8 like a standard OC practicionner.

[Paddington]

That make sense,

So, why doing it downwards in the form and everyone seems fine that the application is upward ?
.

OK, so with regards to section 8, from that WSL video, he shows us that it is used to change which hand you have in contact with the opponent. Of, course you need to shift your body too!

But why begin with such a low position? That is a good question and I'll try to give you some of my thoughts as to why. Unfortunately this requires a little digression.

At the class I train at, usually we go under rather than over one's own arm when changing which arm is in contact with the opponents, much like when you train a biu sau. If my initial arm, the one in contact with the opponents, is in a relatively high position, the wrist is above the guard hand and it is easy to come underneath.

Say instead my initial contact arm is a bong sau (not a high one but sitting between dai bong sau and bong sau), and the other hand is in a wu sau or tan sau shape (a la kwoon sau). The wrist is lower than that of the guard hand and it is easier to come over the arm to change which arm is in contact.

So to my mind it is low in section 8 to over emphasize when you should change over the top; change over the top when the contact arm is lower than the guard or 'free' arm. In terms of that principle of how to change which arm is contact, I see some of the 'biu saus' in biu jee as complimenting section 8 of SLT; it gives you the alternative where you change under and here the contact arm is in a high position.

Look, this is mainly my own thoughts on the matter and I have to admit that WSL videos and what I have learnt by my own research on the web (and chatting to you lot) is what informs my thoughts here. Yes, I do ask myself why the hell such conversations are absent at my class or why my Sifu shuts down my speech, when I try to talk to him privately about such things. But you know the same thing would happen with any Sifu I may train under, just the points of disagreement will differ.

Anyway, really interested to hear what you think about why I think it is low. Likewise I would really like to know Kev's thoughts on my ideas here.

[Graham H]

Anyway, really interested to hear what you think about why I think it is low. Likewise I would really like to know Kev's thoughts on my ideas here.

I don't like your idea. The reason for the downward actions in forms and drills is to develop and place emphasis on keeping the elbow low. There is a very good reason for it but most like to surround these actions with applications which is up to them.

[Paddington]

I don't like your idea. The reason for the downward actions in forms and drills is to develop and place emphasis on keeping the elbow low. There is a very good reason for it but most like to surround these actions with applications which is up to them.

I am talking about a specific movement and section (8) and not the general point as you suggest. I see the elbow down principle as emphasized more strongly elsewhere. Care to state your explanation of section 8?

[Graham H]

I am talking about a specific movement and section (8) and not the general point as you suggest. I see the elbow down principle as emphasized more strongly elsewhere. Care to state your explanation of section 8?

Ok, its punching concept.

[Graham H]

I don't have sections BTW

[Paddington]

Ok, its punching concept.

I don't want to seem rude but I and others put out explanations or, for want of a better phrase, walk the walk. Looking at your posts I see that very rarely are you able to explain anything. It seems one liners, hyperbole and nothing but hinting is what you do?

How is it a punching concept? Can you actually explain it? And I am talking about all of section 8......

[Graham H]

I don't want to seem rude but I and others put out explanations or, for want of a better phrase, walk the walk. Looking at your posts I see that very rarely are you able to explain anything. It seems one liners, hyperbole and nothing but hinting is what you do?

How is it a punching concept? Can you actually explain it? And I am talking about all of section 8......

Yes, come to my yard and I will show you.

I can explain every aspect and action in the system. It seems you cannot. Until you understand my thinking don't knock it. I used to have the same ideas of Wing Chun as you.

When you understand Ving Tsun it doesn't need long drawn out posts filled with applications and uncertainties. It's easy to work out once you have the right stimulus.

[Paddington]

Yes, come to my yard and I will show you.

I can explain every aspect and action in the system. It seems you cannot. Until you understand my thinking don't knock it. I used to have the same ideas of Wing Chun as you.

When you understand Ving Tsun it doesn't need long drawn out posts filled with applications and uncertainties. It's easy to work out once you have the right stimulus.

That is the thing, every time I or someone else on these boards extends their hand to offer you a platform to tell us your ideas, you refuse to do so. At no point have I knocked your ideas as you have yet to expand upon them! Indeed, that charge is one you are guilty of, not me!

Anyway, I clearly talked about a principle being taught with regards to specific movements in section 8 and not en rote applications. I am sorry your English comprehension is lacking, perhaps I could have explained in more simple terms?

On a final note, I am sure your verbal explanations will have the same if not a greater word count than my post. We are, after all, on a forum and where writing explanations, is what this forum exists for.

EDIT: You know fully well I am in the UK. I am a poor man and I doubt I will ever have the money to travel to ask you in person. If you don't want to say what you think publicly, drop me a PM. I am happy to discuss privately too.

EDIT2: I don't claim to be a Sifu or have all the answers, it puts me in a good position to share ideas and discuss as I don't really have that ego thing. I am always open to changing and revising my thoughts and that is why I ask you and others to explain.

[BPWT]

Paddington, who do you train with?

Sometimes helps to know the lineage.

[Paddington]

I train with one of Ip Chun's students, though my thoughts do differ from what is commonly taught regarding certain aspects. I am just an open minded guy who is willing to listen, discuss and revise opinions.

EDIT: I should say I enjoy deep explanations. For my part I am a maths teacher and I have been working on a wing chun book, all the mathematics and mechanics of it, for some time. Will I ever finish it? Well, I still have a lot to learn but don't we all!

[Graham H]

That is the thing, every time I or someone else on these boards extends their hand to offer you a platform to tell us your ideas, you refuse to do so. At no point have I knocked your ideas as you have yet to expand upon them! Indeed, that charge is one you are guilty of, not me!

Oh calm down petal! :p


Anyway, I clearly talked about a principle being taught with regards to specific movements in section 8 and not en rote applications. I am sorry your English comprehension is lacking, perhaps I could have explained in more simple terms?

English? What's that? :confused:


On a final note, I am sure your verbal explanations will have the same if not a greater word count than my post. We are, after all, on a forum and where writing explanations, is what this forum exists for.

EDIT: You know fully well I am in the UK. I am a poor man and I doubt I will ever have the money to travel to ask you in person. If you don't want to say what you think publicly, drop me a PM. I am happy to discuss privately too.

EDIT2: I don't claim to be a Sifu or have all the answers, it puts me in a good position to share ideas and discuss as I don't really have that ego thing. I am always open to changing and revising my thoughts and that is why I ask you and others to explain.

I fear you may be half ways through a box of kleenex already so I will endevour to explain. As I don't have sections you are referring to the last three actions prior to the 3 punches at the end of SLT are you not?

[Graham H]

I train with one of Ip Chun's students,

That may make things difficult for me.

[Paddington]

Oh calm down petal! :p
[...]
I fear you may be half ways through a box of kleenex already so I will endevour to explain. As I don't have sections you are referring to the last three actions prior to the 3 punches at the end of SLT are you not?

Yes, I am referring to those actions and also responding to octopus boy's Q. You know saying section 8 is just a way to identify where in the form we are looking at in this discussion. Calling it section 8 obviously worked because you know what I am talking about. A rose by any other name smells just as sweet eh?

Anyway, please explain I am, genuinely, interested in your more thorough explanations (that is a compliment btw)!


That may make things difficult for me.

As I said, I am the type of guy who has an open mind and is not entrenched!

[BPWT]

Well, Graham trained Yip Chun lineage before moving to the WSL method, so in theory it can be explained as he came from someone similar to you. ;)

I trained at Kamon Wing Chun, way back in 2001 I think it was. In that lineage, the movement was seen as a direct application.

My training now sees it a little differently. Mostly what has already been mentioned - a combination of teaching elbow positioning, ideas of replacing hands, and some direct applications (usually shown to illustrate a point, more than anything else) for freeing the hands when things get a bit jammed up/squashed up - which can sometimes happen if you've screwed up your distancing.

Beginners also use this movement/are taught this movement as a counter to both hands being pinned and crossed (say, left hand pinned and pressed over right hand). It isn't the most realistic attack :D but the reason they learn this drill/exercise is to focus on the twisting motion of the hands/arms, combined with some upper-body rotation... which appears elsewhere in other possible applications and Chi Sau, etc.

In that case, the application isn't really meant to be taken 'as is', but its for students to get familiar with certain body methods and movements.

But this pretty much true with most things in the forms. You can find applications if you want, and it can be fun to do so, but the forms (IMO) aren't teaching you 1,2,3 style applications. They are teaching you body methods, concepts, etc.

(And yes, Graham, sometimes they are not simple and easy concepts and body methods :D;))

[Paddington]

Thank for sharing BPWT!

[poulperadieux]

Thanks for your thoughts, I'm not really interested in kevin's thoughts so I'll answer you.

There's a saying in wing chun, I think it was written by TST from Yip man teachings : "Wing Chun wins by going under".

That's why you switch by going under since Biu Jee.

So what's the point of the move in siu lim tao?


You'll have to look on people who train a lot the internal work of SLT, like these ones :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e4_PUXRKyY

For them, some of the main purposes of SLT is to relax down the shoulders, sink the legs so they train a lot all the muscles and tendons (it's really painful the first seconds, you have to train at least 2 years to manage to do it 30 minutes without cheating), and to acquire a Heavy Elbow .

The Heavy Elbow is an obsession in Leung sheun's lineage.

In the end of the form, you are exhausted if you 've done it right, so your legs hurt like hell, you breathing is deep to give your legs the energy they need, and your upper body is relaxed due to the relaxation and also the contrast with the huge effort you've done in the lower body.

So this move, I think, is the ultimate check for the elbow's weight of the formas the one one top is heavy and relaxed, the other one tries to rise, et vice et versa.

For me, this move has no application, it's a Qi Gong move, what else?

[poulperadieux]

Yes, come to my yard and I will show you.

I can explain every aspect and action in the system. It seems you cannot. Until you understand my thinking don't knock it. I used to have the same ideas of Wing Chun as you.

When you understand Ving Tsun it doesn't need long drawn out posts filled with applications and uncertainties. It's easy to work out once you have the right stimulus.

Yeasssah !

In PB VT, all you need to expose your ideas is a Goat, and a Knife !

[Sean66]

It's a punching concept.
A method of practicing the correct path of the elbow and hand in punching, as well as the coordination between the two hands. One punching and one pulling back as fast as possible, replacing the other. This ensures that you always have a hand back to protect yourself (in the right distance) and also ensures that you don't leave your hand out there when the way for punching is obstructed, but change immediately thus avoiding force on force.

Note that after entering when striking we try not to pull back the hand to the elbow each time but to work "point to point".

Why do it low? Because it's easier to control the action. Easier to make sure you're really taking that outside line and going elbow over elbow, before you start concentrating on the actual punches at the end of the form.

[T_Ray]

It's a punching concept.
A method of practicing the correct path of the elbow and hand in punching, as well as the coordination between the two hands. One punching and one pulling back as fast as possible, replacing the other. This ensures that you always have a hand back to protect yourself (in the right distance) and also ensures that you don't leave your hand out there when the way for punching is obstructed, but change immediately thus avoiding force on force.

Note that after entering when striking we try not to pull back the hand to the elbow each time but to work "point to point".

Why do it low? Because it's easier to control the action. Easier to make sure you're really taking that outside line and going elbow over elbow, before you start concentrating on the actual punches at the end of the form.
Excellent answer! :)

[k gledhill]

It's a punching concept.
A method of practicing the correct path of the elbow and hand in punching, as well as the coordination between the two hands. One punching and one pulling back as fast as possible, replacing the other. This ensures that you always have a hand back to protect yourself (in the right distance) and also ensures that you don't leave your hand out there when the way for punching is obstructed, but change immediately thus avoiding force on force.

Note that after entering when striking we try not to pull back the hand to the elbow each time but to work "point to point".

Why do it low? Because it's easier to control the action. Easier to make sure you're really taking that outside line and going elbow over elbow, before you start concentrating on the actual punches at the end of the form.


Well put......

[YouKnowWho]

You send one hand out to "replace" the other hand, so you can pull the other hand back (for any reason). The back of your hands are almost touching to each other (not required). This way you only need a small space to do so (you can't do this well with boxing gloves on). The general TCMA term for this move is called "hand washing". Here is an application for this move used in grappling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXs8dbRjZ2Y

[k gledhill]

You send one hand out to replace the other hand, so you can pull the other hand back (for any reason). The back of your hands are almost touching to each other (not required). This way you only need a small space to do so (you can't do this well with boxing gloves on). The general TCMA term for this move is called "hand washing". Here is an application for this move used in grappling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXs8dbRjZ2Y

Why do keep trying to make vt into grappling ?

[Graham H]

It's a punching concept.
A method of practicing the correct path of the elbow and hand in punching, as well as the coordination between the two hands. One punching and one pulling back as fast as possible, replacing the other. This ensures that you always have a hand back to protect yourself (in the right distance) and also ensures that you don't leave your hand out there when the way for punching is obstructed, but change immediately thus avoiding force on force.

Note that after entering when striking we try not to pull back the hand to the elbow each time but to work "point to point".

Why do it low? Because it's easier to control the action. Easier to make sure you're really taking that outside line and going elbow over elbow, before you start concentrating on the actual punches at the end of the form.

Perfect Sean. Thanks :D

Attn Paddington. You asked "how can it be a punching concept?" Now you have the information. The problem with a lot of Wing Chun lineages is that they have surrounded these actions with fighting applications. I have seen many. Why have they done this? Well your question sums it up perfectly. When somebody hasn't been exposed to such ideas the whole thing goes out the window. You can invent many things through lack of knowledge. (see below)

This punching concept is everywhere in the forms not just at the end of SLT. Without this idea Ving Tsun cannot function properly. These punching concepts don't turn people into instant world class fighters but what they do is make it easier to fight using Ving Tsun and makes the system very clear to understand.

One of the attributes improved through chi sau is the ability to cycle and recycle this punching concept. Without it what you are left is is what you see in most Wing Chun schools. Two people trying to occupy what they both beleive to be the centerline and they use the arm contact to try and open each other up like can openers.

This is what can happen when somebody has the wrong idea. The system gets f***ed...........To quote Poul


For them, some of the main purposes of SLT is to relax down the shoulders, sink the legs so they train a lot all the muscles and tendons (it's really painful the first seconds, you have to train at least 2 years to manage to do it 30 minutes without cheating), and to acquire a Heavy Elbow .

The Heavy Elbow is an obsession in Leung sheun's lineage.

In the end of the form, you are exhausted if you 've done it right, so your legs hurt like hell, you breathing is deep to give your legs the energy they need, and your upper body is relaxed due to the relaxation and also the contrast with the huge effort you've done in the lower body.

So this move, I think, is the ultimate check for the elbow's weight of the formas the one one top is heavy and relaxed, the other one tries to rise, et vice et versa.

For me, this move has no application, it's a Qi Gong move, what else?

[Graham H]

Yeasssah !

In PB VT, all you need to expose your ideas is a Goat, and a Knife !

Oh ok. Well done Poul. :rolleyes:

[BPWT]

I'm not saying what you do is wrong, Graham... indeed, some of sounds quite right :D (Sean's post was good, and well expressed) but you're making some pretty bold statements about what this art is, and who is doing it right and who has f*cked it all up.

Can you point me to a quote from Yip Man where he said that this punching concept is everywhere in the forms? :)

If not, then it makes more sense to say that this is WSL's interpretation. Of course, if you can point me to a quote from WSL saying that only he got it right from Yip Man and that everyone else got it wrong, that would go some way to clearing things up too. ;)

For me there are many ideas in the forms, and punching concepts is absolutely one of them. Poon Sau is a punching concept, at heart, too.

But man, you are getting as bad as Kevin :p; there is more out there than just the WSL method, and again you need to look at how Yip Man might have developed his system (if you want to claim which Yip Man WC/VT is right, and which is wrong).

So there! :D

[Graham H]

I'm not saying what you do is wrong, Graham... indeed, some of sounds quite right :D (Sean's post was good, and well expressed) but you're making some pretty bold statements about what this art is, and who is doing it right and who has f*cked it all up.

Its my opinion based on my experience that covers quite a few lineages. Is that bad? :rolleyes:


Can you point me to a quote from Yip Man where he said that this punching concept is everywhere in the forms? :)

Why are you questioning what Yip Man said? :confused::eek:


If not, then it makes more sense to say that this is WSL's interpretation. Of course, if you can point me to a quote from WSL saying that only he got it right from Yip Man and that everyone else got it wrong, that would go some way to clearing things up too. ;)

Yeah a lot of people think that. I have met many LT students that think the same as you.


For me there are many ideas in the forms, and punching concepts is absolutely one of them. Poon Sau is a punching concept, at heart, too.

Horaaa!


But man, you are getting as bad as Kevin :p;

LOL. Not a bad thing in my book. He has been around Wing Chun a long time and has seen a lot of nonsense.


there is more out there than just the WSL method, and again you need to look at how Yip Man might have developed his system (if you want to claim which Yip Man WC/VT is right, and which is wrong).

I'm not in a position to say what Yip Man did or didn't do. Are you?

So there yourself! :D

[Graham H]

Its funny that you are using Yip Man himself in our little love triangle :D:D:D:D

[BPWT]

Its my opinion based on my experience that covers quite a few lineages. Is that bad? :rolleyes:

Not bad, but... you know, maybe wrong.



Why are you questioning what Yip Man said? :confused::eek:

Eh? I'm not, I'm asking you to show me where, let's say in a published interview, he said what you are saying is true of his art.



Yeah a lot of people think that. I have met many LT students that think the same as you.

C'mon. But I'll bite... name a few who studied the LT method from Leung Ting.



Horaaa!

Whoop!




LOL. Not a bad thing in my book. He has been around Wing Chun a long time and has seen a lot of nonsense.

He might have. But when he was studying under Victor Kan, did he not think VK was the best thing since slice bread? Now he's found bagels from PB. :) Which is all good... bread is nice.




I'm not in a position to say what Yip Man did or didn't do. Are you?

Nope - but I'm not telling people what they learn is f*cked up. I figured you must have some secret sauce directly from Yip Man... you know, whereby you could actually show us the sauce. :)


So there yourself! :D

Hand replacing hands is one thing, replacing my line with... my line is just Bad :cool:Form, LOL

[Graham H]

Not bad, but... you know, maybe wrong.

Yes they were wrong.


Eh? I'm not, I'm asking you to show me where, let's say in a published interview, he said what you are saying is true of his art.

Its not possible to discuss Yip Man. Give it up.


C'mon. But I'll bite... name a few who studied the LT method from Leung Ting.

Batman


He might have. But when he was studying under Victor Kan, did he not think VK was the best thing since slice bread? Now he's found bagels from PB. :) Which is all good... bread is nice.

Did he?


Nope - but I'm not telling people what they learn is f*cked up. I figured you must have some secret sauce directly from Yip Man... you know, whereby you could actually show us the sauce. :)

If you think that what Poul Pot wrote about SLT is not f***ed then your are as strange as he is :)



Hand replacing hands is one thing, replacing my line with... my line is just Bad :cool:Form, LOL

Eh? How are your heavy elbows? lmao

[BPWT]

Yes they were wrong.

Sigh




Its not possible to discuss Yip Man. Give it up.

You mean you have no evidence that supports what you're saying, other than PB telling you that his bread is the only real bread.



Batman

You mean you cannot provide a real name :rolleyes: (Graham, this will hurt.... Batman is not real)



Did he? Philipp Bayer thought LTWT was ok as well until he met WSL.

Yes, I believe he did. :) PB studied WT for a fairly short while, I think - he made the 6th student grade (out of 12 student grades), if I am not mistaken. So he probably trained, I don't know... a year maybe? Not sure how long things take in the EWTO. I think his accident resulted in him moving over to WSL's method, but I really don't know and I think the relationships turned kinda sour. But regardless (he made his choice and for sure it worked out well for him)... but he was never an expert on Leung Ting and the LTWT system. I am sure he would admit that himself.



If you think that what Poul Pot wrote about SLT is not f***ed then your are as strange as he is :)

Most lines/linages from Yip Man follow the same general sayings about the body requirements of SNT - do you not see the link between what poulperadieux wrote and those maxims?

Did you hear the stories of Yip Man spending long periods training the Tan/Fook/Wu section of SNT - do you not see how this is about more than just elbow 'positioning'?

Many lines of Wing Chun outside of YM's have the aspects that poulperadieux mentions - do you not think that is strange? Especially considering what some students of YM's (LS, LT, TST, etc, etc) were learning.

All of that said, I could quite easily be as strange as poulperadieux :) I also liked his flip flops in that other video he posted. Cool indeed.

[Graham H]

You mean you have no evidence that supports what you're saying, other than PB telling you that his bread is the only real bread.

He hasn't said that to me. Has he said it to you? :confused:



You mean you cannot provide a real name :rolleyes: (Graham, this will hurt.... Batman is not real)

I'm not listing all the names of the people I have met from LT lineage. Why would I do that? This convo is childish enough as it is.


Yes, I believe he did. :) PB studied WT for a fairly short while, I think - he made the 6th student grade (out of 12 student grades), if I am not mistaken. So he probably trained, I don't know... a year maybe? Not sure how long things take in the EWTO. I think his accident resulted in him moving over to WSL's method, but I really don't know and I think the relationships turned kinda sour. But regardless (he made his choice and for sure it worked out well for him)... but he was never an expert on Leung Ting and the LTWT system. I am sure he would admit that himself.

Nice defence. PB has many people from LT and KK lineage. Some of them were very high up. I beleive what they say.


Most lines/linages from Yip Man follow the same general sayings about the body requirements of SNT - do you not see the link between what poulperadieux wrote and those maxims?

Nope he is a weirdo


Did you hear the stories of Yip Man spending long periods training the Tan/Fook/Wu section of SNT - do you not see how this is about more than just elbow 'positioning'?

I don't beleive in ghosts. Have you been on the ouija board?


Many lines of Wing Chun outside of YM's have the aspects that poulperadieux mentions - do you not think that is strange? Especially considering what some students of YM's (LS, LT, TST, etc, etc) were learning.

Yep all the funny ones. I'm not surprised to like what he says.


All of that said, I could quite easily be as strange as poulperadieux :) I also liked his flip flops in that other video he posted. Cool indeed.

His flip flops were great and showed more substance than some of his posts. You watch something stupid is bound to show up in a minute. :):rolleyes:

[poulperadieux]

Sigh

All of that said, I could quite easily be as strange as poulperadieux :) I also liked his flip flops in that other video he posted. Cool indeed.


Nooooooo!

Don't quote my dearest flip flops... Htey diiiied this summer, I just shifted my weight this famous morning, an they were goooooone.

RIP, cute flip flops.

Snif.

[BPWT]

He hasn't said that to me. Has he said it to you? :confused:

So PB acknowledges that other people from the Yip Man lineage might not be wrong in training something different to what he, PB, teaches? Great. He sounds more reasonable than his students.



I'm not listing all the names of the people I have met from LT lineage. Why would I do that? This convo is childish enough as it is.

You don't need to list all of them! Just name a few who have studied directly under Leung Ting and who learned his system. Not people who visited him once but trained mainly in Europe under KK. Just name a few who learned the LTWT system without the KK influence. That's all I'm asking for.




Nice defence. PB has many people from LT and KK lineage. Some of them were very high up. I beleive what they say.

Well, it is a genuine defense... PB never studied that long in the KK interpretation of WT. I think he would admit that he did not reach a high level. Or am I wrong?

Again, I am not calling you a liar... just let me know a few names of these high-ranking people from, say, Hong Kong or Hungary (so people who have studied the LT system), who gave it up to train PB's method. At the moment, I don't know who to talk to - so give me a hand, fella. :)


I don't beleive in ghosts. Have you been on the ouija board?

Is doesn't interest you to think about what YM trained and why? How he developed his skills? When WSL met YM, he was extremely impressed. Something tells me that WSL wasn't just thinking... "Wow, check out his elbow positioning." :D

But maybe that was it. In its whole, undiluted form. :D:rolleyes:

[Graham H]

Is doesn't interest you to think about what YM trained and why? How he developed his skills? When WSL met YM, he was extremely impressed. Something tells me that WSL wasn't just thinking... "Wow, check out his elbow positioning." :D

But maybe that was it. In its whole, undiluted form. :D:rolleyes

Nope because most of what is reported and discussed about Yip Man is fabricated. WSL was a student of Yip Man and I'm sure there were many first hand things discussed about him with his student. I was not present. I wasn't even present when WSL was around so I am even reluctant to talk about him. Fortunately I talked to WSL's wife and WSL's friends so I have a good idea what is wrong and what is right. I also talked to a friend of Yip Man that had no part in his Wing Chun. They were social friends. I have an idea what sort of man he was and thats where it ends.

[WC1277]

Forms and pretty much all of WC are not applications but 'developmental' exercises that help someone to "develop" certain attributes for fighting. Ultimately the goal is to fight 'natural' with those attributes and to use strategy based on WC 'concepts'. Now that's not to say that, in a perfect situation, you can't use certain things as applications as WSL showed. But like the WSL boys have said, he first explained the "developmental" concept of that part of the form and 'then' showed an alternative "application" that's more realistic and mechanically sound. That's ok because at least he made the distinction. I do agree with those here who find it dangerous to 'monkey see, monkey do' with the forms. Much will be missed and the layers of the onion will eventually become rotten.

For what it's worth, I agree with the PB boys the premise of that part of the form being the arm occupying the space of the other quickly and accurately. However, from my understanding and experience, it's done low in the forms because it 'is' meant to develop that concept 'but' for the lower gate. The elbow rolls from in to out when sliding over the other arm. If you throw the body behind it with turning, you essentially have a gaan sau motion. There's entirely different elbow mechanics when doing that motion in the upper gate. It's hard to explain but I've both seen and used that exact motion in chi sau as an emergency technique to loop the arms around from the lower to upper gate when one becomes collapsed. Not saying anyones wrong here, just saying that, while the WSL concept is accurate 'in general', this particular part of the forms motion of the elbow doesn't line up to support it.

Just my 2 cents...

[Vajramusti]

Forms and pretty much all of WC are not applications but 'developmental' exercises that help someone to "develop" certain attributes for fighting. Ultimately the goal is to fight 'natural' with those attributes and to use strategy based on WC 'concepts'. Now that's not to say that, in a perfect situation, you can't use certain things as applications as WSL showed. But like the WSL boys have said, he first explained the "developmental" concept of that part of the form and 'then' showed an alternative "application" that's more realistic and mechanically sound. That's ok because at least he made the distinction. I do agree with those here who find it dangerous to 'monkey see, monkey do' with the forms. Much will be missed and the layers of the onion will eventually become rotten.

For what it's worth, I agree with the PB boys the premise of that part of the form being the arm occupying the space of the other quickly and accurately. However, from my understanding and experience, it's done low in the forms because it 'is' meant to develop that concept 'but' for the lower gate. The elbow rolls from in to out when sliding over the other arm. If you throw the body behind it with turning, you essentially have a gaan sau motion. There's entirely different elbow mechanics when doing that motion in the upper gate. It's hard to explain but I've both seen and used that exact motion in chi sau as an emergency technique to loop the arms around from the lower to upper gate when one becomes collapsed. Not saying anyones wrong here, just saying that, while the WSL concept is accurate 'in general', this particular part of the forms motion of the elbow doesn't line up to support it.

Just my 2 cents...

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

A good statement.

[Vajramusti]

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

A good statement.

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

When a sifu is not completely conceptually clear or when people don't listen carefully--in no time the next or more generation
jump yo their own conclusions.

[k gledhill]

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

A good statement.

Equally as confused you two. Nothing to do with a chi sao emergency.... :rolleyes:

[WC1277]

Equally as confused you two. Nothing to do with a chi sao emergency.... :rolleyes:

Let me make it easier to understand for you kev. Since the forms are developmental and chi sao is developmental and I expressed the developmental application in the context of chi sao..........it "develops" a safe escape from a "trap" and/or "collapse", not a "grab".

[Vajramusti]

Equally as confused you two. Nothing to do with a chi sao emergency.... :rolleyes:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Too bad WSL annointed no pope, hence much wannabe bulls.

True that he had many capable students.

[Paddington]

It's a punching concept.
A method of practicing the correct path of the elbow and hand in punching, as well as the coordination between the two hands. One punching and one pulling back as fast as possible, replacing the other. This ensures that you always have a hand back to protect yourself (in the right distance) and also ensures that you don't leave your hand out there when the way for punching is obstructed, but change immediately thus avoiding force on force.

Note that after entering when striking we try not to pull back the hand to the elbow each time but to work "point to point".

Why do it low? Because it's easier to control the action. Easier to make sure you're really taking that outside line and going elbow over elbow, before you start concentrating on the actual punches at the end of the form.

Cheers. I like the emphasis on training to get a hand back ASAP.

[Paddington]

Perfect Sean. Thanks :D
[...] Well your question sums it up perfectly. When somebody hasn't been exposed to such ideas the whole thing goes out the window. You can invent many things through lack of knowledge. (see below) [...]"


:rolleyes:

This guy, eh?

It is ironic, I actually talked about themes similar to sean. You just agreed with what sean said right?

[Paddington]

For what it's worth, I agree with the PB boys the premise of that part of the form being the arm occupying the space of the other quickly and accurately. [...] There's entirely different elbow mechanics when doing that motion in the upper gate.

Just my 2 cents...

Thanks for your explanation. The bits I highlight from your post were the themes I was also raising.

[k gledhill]

Let me make it easier to understand for you kev. Since the forms are developmental and chi sao is developmental and I expressed the developmental application in the context of chi sao..........it "develops" a safe escape from a "trap" and/or "collapse", not a "grab".

Thanks you made even clearer your problem.

[Paddington]

Thanks you made even clearer your problem.

I hate to press you but you have yet to really say, in your own words, what you think. No one is shutting you down. People are just sharing. And yes I mean an explanation, a paragraph or two.

EDIT: I for one agree not to aggressively quote you, should you choose to share.

EDIT2 It is interesting to note that, for my part, I have just been talking about that WSL vid. You know, given all I had were the pictures I offered up what I thought were themes under discussion or raised. Turns out some of them were.

[WC1277]

Thanks you made even clearer your problem.

Whatever man. Do you have any idea how easy it is to both jam and take over your 'punching concept' there? It's as one dimensional as it comes....but hey, I'm sure it works against your fellow classmates, so whatever floats your boat... :D

[Graham H]

:rolleyes:

This guy, eh?

It is ironic, I actually talked about themes similar to sean. You just agreed with what sean said right?

Themes? Oh the irony :rolleyes:

[poulperadieux]

Forms and pretty much all of WC are not applications but 'developmental' exercises that help someone to "develop" certain attributes for fighting. Ultimately the goal is to fight 'natural' with those attributes and to use strategy based on WC 'concepts'.


Precisely.

But that seems to be lost equally in Leung Ting and Philip Bayer's stuff, based on what I read here.

[Graham H]

Precisely.

But that seems to be lost equally in Leung Ting and Philip Bayer's stuff, based on what I read here.

Eh? You are obviously not understanding what we write. That is exactly how I see Ving Tsun. Concepts not applications.

[poulperadieux]

Eh? You are obviously not understanding what we write. That is exactly how I see Ving Tsun. Concepts not applications.


yeah yeah, we always see crap in other's toilets and never clean our properly.

[Graham H]

yeah yeah, we always see crap in other's toilets and never clean our properly.

Well f**k me Buddha has shown up! :rolleyes:

[poulperadieux]

Well f**k me Buddha has shown up! :rolleyes:

Sorry, I forgot, in your toilets, we can also see blood and goat remains.


"Ô thou Bayersohnofleung, thou thrut shalt Prevail"

[Graham H]

Sorry, I forgot, in your toilets, we can also see blood and goat remains.


"Ô thou Bayersohnofleung, thou thrut shalt Prevail"

We have a place for you over here!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadmoor_Hospital

[poulperadieux]

We have a place for you over here!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadmoor_Hospital

I assure you, we agreeed that we are not mad.
We just don't belive in your GOD Graham, that's all.

[k gledhill]

I hate to press you but you have yet to really say, in your own words, what you think. No one is shutting you down. People are just sharing. And yes I mean an explanation, a paragraph or two.

EDIT: I for one agree not to aggressively quote you, should you choose to share.

EDIT2 It is interesting to note that, for my part, I have just been talking about that WSL vid. You know, given all I had were the pictures I offered up what I thought were themes under discussion or raised. Turns out some of them were.

Sean said it very clearly. No need to repeat it. A striking concept that simultaneously intercepts. Lin sil di da

[Graham H]

I assure you, we agreeed that we are not mad.
We just don't belive in your GOD Graham, that's all.

You haven't been exposed to my GOD so how can you know? :p

[poulperadieux]

You haven't been exposed to my GOD so how can you know? :p

I've seen what his religion do to his people, so fon't interested thanks, don't like mass hysteria teachings.

[BPWT]

I've seen what his religion do to his people, so fon't interested thanks, don't like mass hysteria teachings.

Yes, but you must also realize, poulperadieux, that in the PB lineage, hysteria is a punching concept. :D:D

[Graham H]

Yes, but you must also realize, poulperadieux, that in the PB lineage, hysteria is a punching concept. :D:D

B

What is your thinking behind these three actions at the end of SLT?

Why do we cross the arms up and down at the beginning of the forms?

Why do we push forward Tan Sau and Fook Sau slowly in SLT?

Why do we step up with the feet together with the double palm action in Chum Kiu?

What are the three gum sau actions towards the end of Chum Kiu for?

After each section in CK and BJ why do we use this one arm in one arm out action?

Why in BJ do some of the action go underneath the arm instead of over it?

I'll await your response.

[BPWT]

B
I'll await your response.

****! That's a lot of questions, and thus a big answer as none of the Qs have a one-line answer, in my book. :)

I'm on deadline, so checking in here during fleeting moments of panic and banging my head against my desk. So maybe later I can answer when I don't have a print house breathing down my neck.

But in the meantime, how about you give me a few names of those people you said studied directly LT's system with LT, who have now left to go learn from PB.

(and don't say "Batman" this time)

Ps. regarding your Qs, you know we are surely going to have different opinions/understanding/ideas about them, yes? I know that for you, you will say I am wrong and that each of the things you talk about are "punching concepts" :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

Just answer the questions! I've got all day.

[GlennR]

Ill have a crack!


What is your thinking behind these three actions at the end of SLT?


Where's the 4th?


Why do we cross the arms up and down at the beginning of the forms?

To ward of evil spirits


Why do we push forward Tan Sau and Fook Sau slowly in SLT?


Youre lazy?


Why do we step up with the feet together with the double palm action in Chum Kiu?

Youre working on your disco moves?


What are the three gum sau actions towards the end of Chum Kiu for?

World peace


After each section in CK and BJ why do we use this one arm in one arm out action?

You are about to start the "hokey poky"


Why in BJ do some of the action go underneath the arm instead of over it?

Secret tickling manoeuvre


I'll await your response.

Your wait is over

[Graham H]

Glenn I already know you don't know the answers but I can always rely on a happy Ozzy to brighten the place up!

Toodleroo :)

[Graham H]

You could always have a proper crack. It would be interesting to hear your ideas behind these actions.

[BPWT]

Just answer the questions! I've got all day.

Well, unfortunaely I don't have all day!! :mad: I'm working. But seriously, you ask questions but won't answer just one of mine.

How about you give me a few names of those people you said studied directly LT's system with LT, who have now left to go learn from PB?

But seeing as I am willing to play nice, and as I am taking a coffee break and having a couple of smokes while I wait for my work day to turn into a living Hell... :) I will try and answer a few for you.

What is your thinking behind these three actions at the end of SLT?

Like I said earlier in this thread, it is teaching things about:
1. Elbow positioning (though not just for punching)
2. The concept of replacing (not necessarily for a ‘punch’ though often for a strike – and more about forward motion than backward motion, IMO)
3. Rotation of the arm – which is about the wrist and elbow relationship, and is a kinda primer for things you need later on
4. And more, but…

a) You won’t agree, so why spend the timing writing it
b) If you want details about things you admit don’t exist in PB’s VT, you should spend time with a real LTWT teacher (I am not a teacher )

Why do we cross the arms up and down at the beginning of the forms?

In our line, this motion is Double Tan Sau to Double Garn Sau, and then Kwan Sau that effectively takes you back to Double Tan, for SNT. But in CK and BT, the Tan to Garn happens much quicker and often looks as though you have gone straight to the Double Garn – that is to say, as the arms cross they immediately cut down to Garn, as opposed to SNT where the linkage is slower and is point by point. For CK and BT there’s a reason for this, but…. well, back to SNT.

It is tough to answer your Q because I don’t see it as an ‘up and down’ movement. Rather it is a ‘forward movement’, followed by a ‘downward and forward movement’, followed by a rotational movement (Kwan ‘rotating in and then forward’).

But for us, these movements are teaching things about:

1. Elbow position (and no, not just for a punch)
2. Forward energy (during the whole sequence)
3. Freeing the hands (Kwan), etc, while maintaining forward force.

There is more, of course… but again, see a) and b) above


Why do we push forward Tan Sau and Fook Sau slowly in SLT?

In our line we push Tan and Fook forward slowly, but also retract the Wu slowly too. You retract Wu Sau faster than the two forward motions?

But again, for us this particular sequence is teaching:
1. Elbow positioning (and yes, you’ve guessed it, not just for a punch – at least not in the obvious sense. E.g. Wu is often an attack that met resistance), and the elbow positioning for Tan and Fook is the same, though for Wu is not (different ideas)
2. For Tan and Fook: Forward and sinking force/energy from the elbow – the two have to be combined – connected to this idea of a ‘heavy elbow’
3. For Wu: Forward intent and sinking force/energy from the elbow

These need to trained slow so you can really focus on combining the elbow positioning with the various uses of force/energy and intent.

And yes, there is more to these three movements, and no I don’t have time to write a book for you.

Suffice to say that some of the above is also connected to what we are also training in the stance, particularly Kim Sut and the fact that you could argue SNT operates on one line, as opposed to CK using two within the context of YGKYM.

[Graham H]

Ok I'll wait until you have answered the rest. Thanks for writing it down.

[Graham H]

Joy or that other Fong guy could answer the questions as well, if he's not too busy looking into mirrors, and we will end up with the thinking that crosses 4 different lineages.

If Ian could answer (or T.Ray as he was part of it for so long) we would have 5

Wong Shun Leung
Leung Ting
Tsu Shong Tin
Ho Kam Ming
Ip Chun

....maybe an Ip Ching lineage from somebody.

[BPWT]

Ok I'll wait until you have answered the rest. Thanks for writing it down.

Sorry, but I won't spend more time just to have you say it is wrong/made up/etc, etc.

How about you address the above, as it is largely SNT level stuff and in a sense 'basic'.

And please answer my question about all these LTWT guys trained by LT who now learn from PB.

[Graham H]

I'm not going to say your are wrong or berate. Answer the questions. Stop being paranoid!

[BPWT]

So you won't answer my question? :rolleyes: I wonder why...

Sorry, Graham. I think I've answered enough in the time I have.

I'm beginning to think you're a troll, just looking for a rise. :confused:

You're just 'more, more, more'.

[Paddington]

Themes? Oh the irony :rolleyes:

What you are indicating as irony is not. Your comrades and yourself talked about a preference for the principle i.e. a general over the particulars i.e. an applications. Theme or principle is pretty much the same in terms of indicating a generality.

I would say another irony is born out when kev said he was not here to 'stir' but rather just discuss. It has been shown in this thread that he lied to this fact.

If I had it my way I would remove you guys from this forum so that we can get the population up and increase constructive discussions. I might present that argument in terms of increasing sales of the product this site promotes to the management some day.

[Graham H]

So you won't answer my question? :rolleyes: I wonder why...

Sorry, Graham. I think I've answered enough in the time I have.

I'm beginning to think you're a troll, just looking for a rise. :confused:

You're just 'more, more, more'.

I'm not a troll. You want to back out then that is up to you. It tells me a lot. What I wanted is clear and decisive ideas behind these very basic actions in the Ving Tsun system that spanned several of Ip Man's senior students. This is a forum after all and for the people that do not post maybe they are interested to find out how and why all our thinking is different. Yip Man did not teach all these people different things. Why would he? Regardless of what he taught it is clear that there are many many many different ideas out there. Some sound and some absurd. What this forum should do for the viewer is make their own mind up and the chances that they will all choose the same lineage are small.

Let people make their own decisions and they can go for what they think is good for them.

Why stop at the questions I asked? Why not give people the chance to see on how our ideas differ from any different aspects instead of arguing with each other all the time?

The only thing that can stop that happening are that you (gen) just don't know which will lead people to ask questions in other areas. Isn't that what the web should be for?

If you refuse to answer B then there maybe somebody looking in that will learn from what you may have wrote. He/she can then compare it to other ideas and potentially choose which lineage to become part of.

Why keep making this personal?

Two things can happen. Either I will continue to get ridiculed below or the people I have asked will put their thoughts down in writing.

I think I know which one.

[Paddington]

Just a general note on people's argumentation styles. You are never able to address the points people make and even when they make a point similar to yours, you can't see it nor note the similarities. You end up making yourselves look foolish.

It is obvious to me that whilst you have good knowledge and perhaps skill in Wing Chun, you don't know it all and ultimately you will realize this and need to seek out the more experienced to help you. Unfortunately it is likely you will run up against brick walls; people just won't want to work with you if your posts on these boards are indicative of you personalities more generally.

Yeah, the above is my prediction.

[Graham H]

BTW this is not some sort of recruitment drive as Joy would probably think.

WSLVT is not for everybody, nor is LTWT or IPWC or TSTWC etc etc etc.

We are all different.

[Graham H]

Just a general note on people's argumentation styles. You are never able to address the points people make and even when they make a point similar to yours, you can't see it nor note the similarities. You end up making yourselves look foolish.

It is obvious to me that whilst you have good knowledge and perhaps skill in Wing Chun, you don't know it all and ultimately you will realize this and need to seek out the more experienced to help you. Unfortunately it is likely you will run up against brick walls; people just won't want to work with you if your posts on these boards are indicative of you personalities more generally.

Yeah, the above is my prediction.

Refer to my post above

[Graham H]

And please answer my question about all these LTWT guys trained by LT who now learn from PB.

As far as I'm aware they came from both KK and LT or at least that what they said. I have been in PB's school when people from LTWT have arrived. After and exchange and discussion then no more LTWT.

It's up to you whether you believe that.

If you insist on names I will PM you. Maybe you can mail them to ask why they left.

LTWT is very popular in Germany. There are many that used to practice in that lineage but have left due to KK & LT actions. FACT!

[Paddington]

*removed as wrong thread*

[wingchunIan]

Joy or that other Fong guy could answer the questions as well, if he's not too busy looking into mirrors, and we will end up with the thinking that crosses 4 different lineages.

If Ian could answer (or T.Ray as he was part of it for so long) we would have 5

Wong Shun Leung
Leung Ting
Tsu Shong Tin
Ho Kam Ming
Ip Chun

....maybe an Ip Ching lineage from somebody.

I'd be happy to comment on each point (although I can only speak for my lineage and not the whole Ip Chun lineage), but it would be good to hear the answers from a PB lineage perspective.

[Graham H]

I'd be happy to comment on each point (although I can only speak for my lineage and not the whole Ip Chun lineage), but it would be good to hear the answers from a PB lineage perspective.

It will be good to hear answers from all lineages.

[BPWT]

I'm not a troll.

In that case, why don't you:

a) Provide feedback to your own questions - showing that you are indeed willing to debate and engage. Rather than just ask from others but not actually giving

b) Answer my previous question about direct LT guys now with PB. You made the claim that high ranking guys from Leung Ting are now learning from PB. That sounds interesting... but you refuse to give any names at all (even though it is surely public, as they were supposedly high ranking). Instead, you say: "Batman."


You want to back out then that is up to you. It tells me a lot.

That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have read from you. I took the time to address some of your questions - but didn't, and still don't, have time to address all of them.

Backing out? That would be true if I had said "no" to answering any. I gave you some answers, and frankly why talk about CK level material when I don't even know if we are on the same page regarding SNT level materials.

All my posts told you were that I am willing to share. Yours tell me that you are not so willing, and that you refuse to give me an answer regarding something you previously claimed. Regarding that, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and asked for more info (a name). As you can't provide it you either a troll and/or a bullish*tter. Sorry.


What this forum should do for the viewer is make their own mind up and the chances that they will all choose the same lineage are small.

When you post but answer no questions, how I am supposed to make up my mind about anything.


Why keep making this personal?

It is personal only in the sense that you make claims you won't elaborate on, ask Qs you yourself don't want to give your own feedback on, and you pan/ridicule/ others even though it becomes clearer day-by-day that your own knowledge may be restricted to seeing everything in Wing Chun (generic spelling, meaning all from Yip Man), as being just a 'punching concept'.

So you find it funny (it sets off your warning bells) that someone like myself hasn't done a great deal of work with the pole, while I find it funny that someone who has (yourself) seemed to get there before learning some of the details in the empty hand forms. :rolleyes: Or like I said earlier, maybe it isn't you personally, maybe this just what the PB system is - a very stripped down Wing Chun, focussing almost exclusively on the basics.

Who knows. :confused: No one, if you only give short little answers to questions and just say 'Go visit Phillip." Which for many of us is not practical or of prime importance.

So again, can you or can you not answer my question? Can you tell me who learned directly from Leung Ting (not from KK with a few LT seminars, etc, thrown in) the LTWT system who has, now, left it in order to learn from PB?

I've asked this 3 or 4 times, and you keep ignoring it. I ask only as I would like to know and would love to talk to them. If you can't answer the question, please stop with the bullish*t.

[BPWT]

As far as I'm aware they came from both KK and LT or at least that what they said. I have been in PB's school when people from LTWT have arrived. After and exchange and discussion then no more LTWT.

It's up to you whether you believe that.

If you insist on names I will PM you. Maybe you can mail them to ask why they left.

LTWT is very popular in Germany. There are many that used to practice in that lineage but have left due to KK & LT actions. FACT!

Great! Please PM me. No names needed of people who have left the EWTO (KK's organization), as I know many such names and know (usually) the reasons they left.

But I know no one from LT (so, not from KK) who have done this. I would like to know.

I certainly do believe that people from the EWTO have left it and gone to PB. No arguments from me there. I am talking about a different set of people, and I think you know that full well.

[Graham H]

a) Provide feedback to your own questions - showing that you are indeed willing to debate and engage. Rather than just ask from others but not actually giving

I have no problem with that when your arrive.


b) Answer my previous question about direct LT guys now with PB. You made the claim that high ranking guys from Leung Ting are now learning from PB. That sounds interesting... but you refuse to give any names at all (even though it is surely public, as they were supposedly high ranking). Instead, you say: "Batman."

As far as I knew LT and KK were the same. If they are now not joined together then maybe these guys specifically from KK. I did not know that to be the case. I will be seeing a lot of them in a few weeks. I'll ask. You sound like you are trying to disprove me. You can't.


That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have read from you. I took the time to address some of your questions - but didn't, and still don't, have time to address all of them.

If it is as stupid as what you are writing I'm sorry.


Backing out? That would be true if I had said "no" to answering any. I gave you some answers, and frankly why talk about CK level material when I don't even know if we are on the same page regarding SNT level materials.

....and the rest???????


All my posts told you were that I am willing to share. Yours tell me that you are not so willing, and that you refuse to give me an answer regarding something you previously claimed. Regarding that, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and asked for more info (a name). As you can't provide it you either a troll and/or a bullish*tter. Sorry.

Stop being a c**t and get on with it. I'm not angry. You seem to be.


When you post but answer no questions, how I am supposed to make up my mind about anything.

So I'm willing to. I've got nothing to hide. Never had. Stop crying.


It is personal only in the sense that you make claims you won't elaborate on, ask Qs you yourself don't want to give your own feedback on, and you pan/ridicule/ others even though it becomes clearer day-by-day that your own knowledge may be restricted to seeing everything in Wing Chun (generic spelling, meaning all from Yip Man), as being just a 'punching concept'.

That is correct.


So you find it funny (it sets off your warning bells) that someone like myself hasn't done a great deal of work with the pole, while I find it funny that someone who has (yourself) seemed to get there before learning some of the details in the empty hand forms. :rolleyes: Or like I said earlier, maybe it isn't you personally, maybe this just what the PB system is - a very stripped down Wing Chun, focussing almost exclusively on the basics.

It's not but carry on.


Who knows. :confused: No one, if you only give short little answers to questions and just say 'Go visit Phillip." Which for many of us is not practical or of prime importance.

that's what people used to say to me and I did it. Have you?


So again, can you or can you not answer my question? Can you tell me who learned directly from Leung Ting (not from KK with a few LT seminars, etc, thrown in) the LTWT system who has, now, left it in order to learn from PB?
Diverting attention away from yourself isn't going to well is it?


I've asked this 3 or 4 times, and you keep ignoring it. I ask only as I would like to know and would love to talk to them. If you can't answer the question, please stop with the bullish*t.

I'm not ignoring it. I'll ask them.

[Graham H]

I wouldn't bother wasting your time writing another long post like that. Just answer the questions and stop playing tennis with me!

[BPWT]

Graham, you really are writing nonsense. You want me to write pages and pages about how I do this that and the other, and why? Sorry, I think I'd rather wait to hear what you have to say about the SNT level stuff, first.

So I will wait to hear your ideas on those, as I have already given mine. But there are a few things I do have to say.

I am not angry. :)
But I don't like being taken for a ride - and I think you are trolling and being obtuse.


I have no problem with that when your arrive.

Seriously? :D What was it you said to the guy who laughed at your YouTube video: "I'll finish you." Something like that, wasn't it. LOL. You have a mouth on you, I'll give you that. :rolleyes: Well, there is a chance I will in the UK this September. PM me your details.

But much more importantly...


As far as I knew LT and KK were the same. If they are now not joined together then maybe these guys specifically from KK. I did not know that to be the case. I will be seeing a lot of them in a few weeks. I'll ask. You sound like you are trying to disprove me. You can't.

What LT teaches in Hong Kong (concepts, general training methods, chi sao methods, lat sao methods, etc) is not the same as what KK is teaching in Europe.

What you pay in Hong Kong, and how long you wait to learn things in Hong Kong, is not the same as what you pay and how long you wait in Europe.

KK learned from LT, and is indeed really very skilled... but what the EWTO does these days is really a far cry from what you get from Leung Ting. This knowledge, and for some, revelation, resulted in many people in Europe (and not just in Germany) leaving the EWTO. Those people, having left, had no option to learn from LT (if you are in Western Europe and you want to learn from the 'official' WT organization, you need to be with KK. This is a deal long established between LT and KK.

Is that good for Leung Ting's art? Who am I to say - but Leung Ting has no need to be worried about his art being passed on the way he teaches it. There are people who can do this.

So yes - EWTO people have left and gone elsewhere (usually because of 1: the odd things they are being taught, 2: the system being so far from what LT teaches, 3: the outrageous costs, 4: the crazy politics).

So... I am still waiting for your PM that gives me a name of someone who learned Wing Tsun directly from Leung Ting and then gave it up to learn what PB is teaching.

If you provide an actual name of an actual person who has done this... super... I will write back to apologize for calling you a bullsh*tter, and I will try and contact that person you name to ask them about their impressions of LTWT in reference to WSLPBVT.

If you can't provide a name then I don't need to try and disprove you - you would have done it yourself.

[T_Ray]

I have been working hard to forget some of the strange thinking I learned in other lineages of WC/VT! :)
In the past, I have been given numerous explanations for those movements in the forms. Explanations ranging from the seemingly reasonable, to the downright absurd!
Mostly the explanations were to say each movement was some specific technique to be used against a specific kind of attack.
Some of the crazier explanations of the cross arms movement I have come across, including:
To "Define the Centreline".... One very well known WC instructor saying that in China in the old days, people didn't have big mirrors, so they would line themselves up with a tree or bamboo and cross down and up to line up their centreline.
The lifting cross arms "lines up acupuncture "chi points" in the hands with points in the upper body".
Perhaps less strange:
Its gaun sao.
Its to place the elbows forward.
The slow tan, fook, wu sao,...:
Its to develop "Elbow Energy" or "Ging Lik" (whatever that is?).
Applications including escaping from some kinds of wrist grabs, plus the common idea that a tan sao is some kind of blocking application that is used against a punch.

Then I went to see Philipp Bayer, and have a much simpler, clearer and functional understanding of the forms and the system. :)

[Graham H]

Listen man I asked for your thinking on a few simple Wing Chun actions. I wasn't going to berate you or rubbish what you write. Rather than answer them you have turned this into pages of BS. You said you didn't have any time to answer yet you have found time for all that trash you have wrote above.

Forget it.

People get angry when they are pushed into corners. :rolleyes:

Ian responded and was willing to offer his thinking. Maybe Glenn and Joy would have who knows? Why have you not just done that and avoided this rubbish?

What have you done? Tried to fire questions, even my own questions, back at me. :rolleyes:

Maybe you need your nappy changed.

BTW if you had any clue about Wing Chun you would been able to explain those actions in a few simple sentences but you can't. That is normal for WT. I was hoping you would prove me wrong.

Convo over. Toodle pip.

[Graham H]

I have been working hard to forget some of the strange thinking I learned in other lineages of WC/VT! :)
In the past, I have been given numerous explanations for those movements in the forms. Explanations ranging from the seemingly reasonable, to the downright absurd!
Mostly the explanations were to say each movement was some specific technique to be used against a specific kind of attack.
Some of the crazier explanations of the cross arms movement I have come across, including:
To "Define the Centreline".... One very well known WC instructor saying that in China in the old days, people didn't have big mirrors, so they would line themselves up with a tree or bamboo and cross down and up to line up their centreline.
The lifting cross arms "lines up acupuncture "chi points" in the hands with points in the upper body".
Perhaps less strange:
Its gaun sao.
Its to place the elbows forward.
The slow tan, fook, wu sao,...:
Its to develop "Elbow Energy" or "Ging Lik" (whatever that is?).
Applications including escaping from some kinds of wrist grabs, plus the common idea that a tan sao is some kind of blocking application that is used against a punch.

Then I went to see Philipp Bayer, and have a much simpler, clearer and functional understanding of the forms and the system. :)


Thanks for your response T. It's a shame that nut job BPWT couldn't do the same.

[BPWT]

I answered in more detail than T-Ray, who also answered only a selection.

Did that pass you by?

Back to your rabbit-jumping around in a stance wide open for a kick in the nuts. :rolleyes: Or go play with your pole (don't say it... The Pole Is A Punching Concept).

[BPWT]

Ps. Still no PM from you with a name. A single name.

[poulperadieux]

I answered in more detail than T-Ray, who also answered only a selection.

Did that pass you by?

Back to your rabbit-jumping around in a stance wide open for a kick in the nuts. :rolleyes: Or go play with your pole (don't say it... The Pole Is A Punching Concept).


:D:D:D:D:D

Stop it, I'm crying.

[poulperadieux]

Yes, but you must also realize, poulperadieux, that in the PB lineage, hysteria is a punching concept. :D:D


Noooo, it's playing every day with their pole !!

Don't you follow any of the goat blood covered Rabbit have to say to our pleasure?:D:D

[Graham H]

Back to your rabbit-jumping around in a stance wide open for a kick in the nuts. :rolleyes: Or go play with your pole (don't say it... The Pole Is A Punching Concept).

Nappy changed now then is it? :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

:D:D:D:D:D

Stop it, I'm crying.

That makes two of you today. Two ladies blouses at best. :)

[BPWT]

Two ladies blouses at best. :)

:D Dude, you are saying this to people who have seen your video. Glass houses and all that...:D

Oh, and I won't keep asking you for a name via PM.... I am guessing you really can't provide one. :rolleyes:

I found this great quote from PB the other day (in an interview):

CJ: What are your thoughts on the future of Sifu Wong Shun Leung's wing chun?
PB: I hope that we can keep the stupid and foolish people away from the system.

I think PB needs to have a think, judging by some of his student's comments on this forum.

[Graham H]

:D Dude, you are saying this to people who have seen your video. Glass houses and all that...:D

Oh, and I won't keep asking you for a name via PM.... I am guessing you really can't provide one. :rolleyes:

I found this great quote from PB the other day (in an interview):

CJ: What are your thoughts on the future of Sifu Wong Shun Leung's wing chun?
PB: I hope that we can keep the stupid and foolish people away from the system.

I think PB needs to have a think, judging by some of his student's comments on this forum.

You mean my training video? Can you list the problems with it below please? Your wisdom will be appreciated.

PB is my Instructor. He likes my thinking and movement. Coming from him I am happy. What you say means nothing. The foolish people he is describing would be the likes of you and that French guy. He would only have to read your posts to know.

When he saw my video he liked the work. Your opinion doesn't count. I'm not surprised you don't like. You practice Wing Tsun :D

I like your video BTW................oh hang on a minute :rolleyes:

[Graham H]

I told you I will ask them which WT they belonged to and let you know.

[wingchunIan]

Well, there is a chance I will in the UK this September. PM me your details.


if you're going to be in the UK and fancy getting together to talk Wing Chun over a coffee and do some training together for a couple of hours drop me a PM and we can sort something out.

[Graham H]

if you're going to be in the UK and fancy getting together to talk Wing Chun over a coffee and do some training together for a couple of hours drop me a PM and we can sort something out.

I'll come as well to train

[David Jamieson]

closed temporarily for clean up.
mgmt