One hand or two?

[wingchunIan]

Simultaneous attack and defence is something that sets Wing Chun apart from most other martial arts. Many styles talk about it but still do block and counter type movements. For many the pause between defence and attack (or lack thereof) is a measure of ability with transition between defence and attack becoming smoother and faster with experience and seniority eventually approximating simultaneous action in high level practitioners.
However within Wing Chun there are two ways to achieve this simultaneous attack and defence (if we ignore the third (and imho superior) option of using footwork and angles to perform the defence entirely negating the need for defence with the arms at all); 1) using two arms simultaneously e.g. tan da, pak da, wu da etc where one hand intercepts and "defends" (although normally also doing something to disrupt the opponent's posture, structure etc.) whilst the other strikes. 2) using the same arm to both intercept and attack e.g. intercepting with the punch, retaking the centre with a side palm, biu sao etc

There would appear to be a perception among some practitioners that method 2 i.e. intercepting and defending with the same hand is superior and demonstrates a higher level of skill. I wondered how the majority see this?
From a personal perspective I believe both have a place but use the single hand approach far more in emergencies and less as first choice due to the effect that the interception has of adding resistance to the strike thereby reducing its power, I would always rather hit with a free unobstructed hand than one that is slowed by friction through contact with an arm but its very much a personal view. What does everyone else think?

[k gledhill]

Lin sil di da is a basic level ability enabling each arm to strike and defend as it takes over the leading position. Da sao Jik siu sao is the hand in the leading attack is also defending. Angling and using the same lsdd idea IS basic level too.

Having to use two hands to fight one of the opponents is what vt is trying to overcome by this technical striking ability. It uses the centerline in motion to cut into opponents inability to match the same idea along with movement and angling.

A common error of vt students who don't know this idea from day one will rely on over trapping hand contact to compensate for the lack of knowing. Iow two hands will be used to attack creating x'ed arms. Xing arms in vt is a major error because it means ONE arm of the opponent can stop us if they block and cut off the attacking arm. So the recycling action of our punching allows them to assist in continuous new attacking actions if the opponent defends. Angling and facing is not a hierarchical issue it is allowing us to attack and face while striking and recycling.

Wing chun Ian, your idea of striking with the same arm and " friction " losing force is implying you're over contacting with the leading arm and not recycling it on interception. There is a simple reason for chain striking. If the leading arm uses the angle of the elbow developed by slt, it can both deflect the arm it contacts , turn the position of the opponent so they lose facing and strike them. 3 actions in one attacking arm. There is a tactical directive guiding the rational of this thinking too.

[chaotic2k]

Simultaneous attack and defence is something that sets Wing Chun apart from most other martial arts. Many styles talk about it but still do block and counter type movements. For many the pause between defence and attack (or lack thereof) is a measure of ability with transition between defence and attack becoming smoother and faster with experience and seniority eventually approximating simultaneous action in high level practitioners.
However within Wing Chun there are two ways to achieve this simultaneous attack and defence (if we ignore the third (and imho superior) option of using footwork and angles to perform the defence entirely negating the need for defence with the arms at all); 1) using two arms simultaneously e.g. tan da, pak da, wu da etc where one hand intercepts and "defends" (although normally also doing something to disrupt the opponent's posture, structure etc.) whilst the other strikes. 2) using the same arm to both intercept and attack e.g. intercepting with the punch, retaking the centre with a side palm, biu sao etc

There would appear to be a perception among some practitioners that method 2 i.e. intercepting and defending with the same hand is superior and demonstrates a higher level of skill. I wondered how the majority see this?
From a personal perspective I believe both have a place but use the single hand approach far
more in emergencies and less as first choice due to the effect that the interception has of adding resistance to the strike thereby reducing its power, I would always rather hit with a free unobstructed hand than one that is slowed by friction through contact with an arm but its very much a personal view. What does everyone else think?



In my wing chun we dont use taan da, bong da etc. We aim to hit and cover the angle as we proceed. I have never been able to apply taan da or bong sau etc while underpressure. The elbow must always be bent in order to cover and feel whats going on if there is a bridge....

[k gledhill]

In my wing chun we dont use taan da, bong da etc. We aim to hit and cover the angle as we proceed. I have never been able to apply taan da or bong sau etc while underpressure. The elbow must always be bent in order to cover and feel whats going on if there is a bridge....

Bong sao is part of an attacking action not a defensive retreat, just saying. Attacking with a punch that is bridged we recover the attack ASAP by wu sao striking as bong drops to recycle , etc....

[chaotic2k]

Bong sao is part of an attacking action not a defensive retreat, just saying. Attacking with a punch that is bridged we recover the attack ASAP by wu sao striking as bong drops to recycle , etc....

I get what your saying. Seen in laap sau drill. You reload punch by dropping elbow into bong. We do use sumilar but the bong is more used like lan sau to gaun, on opponents actual torso in order to cinnect with central mass then hit with stikes while controlling balance.

[k gledhill]

I get what your saying. Seen in laap sau drill. You reload punch by dropping elbow into bong. We do use sumilar but the bong is more used like lan sau to gaun, on opponents actual torso in order to cinnect with central mass then hit with stikes while controlling balance.

We use bong like a PAC sao. Wu sao has to be in the elbow of bong to strike as bong drops. Very fast actions.
We can use bong like a LAN but only if we want to push a little. Using bong to push is open to easy counter attacks so not a good idea as habit.
Our bong displaces arms laterally left or right not pushing forwards. Many use bong forwards to counter pressure fook , but this is arm chasing and will also happen in sparring.

[k gledhill]

@2:24 you see "displacing while facing " force of bong , knocks arms out of the way. Has to be fast up and down elbow and not pushing forwards.
http://youtu.be/FQBhp-2nQ-E

[Hendrik]

Imho. Start 10.50 is the difficult part.

Start 14.38 is the difficult part of inch power, that is where the snt development willow, rattan body, snake engine, yik kam transform.. Jin flow snake slide worm move...etc lots of boring long videos of mine trying to present. Without that type of development one cannot handle it. Without the coherence of body mind, that is very difficult to develop. It is a force line type of power generation. Certainly not the boxing or body type.

With that type of power generation , lat sau jek choong is not difficult. But most people has no patient to listen and learn what is those type of power generation . They will think boxing way or southern fist way is everything. Instead of knowing there are different type of power type.



http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=siUvRN94ULA&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DsiUvRN94ULA


Simultaneous attack and defence is something that sets Wing Chun apart from most other martial arts. Many styles talk about it but still do block and counter type movements. For many the pause between defence and attack (or lack thereof) is a measure of ability with transition between defence and attack becoming smoother and faster with experience and seniority eventually approximating simultaneous action in high level practitioners.
However within Wing Chun there are two ways to achieve this simultaneous attack and defence (if we ignore the third (and imho superior) option of using footwork and angles to perform the defence entirely negating the need for defence with the arms at all); 1) using two arms simultaneously e.g. tan da, pak da, wu da etc where one hand intercepts and "defends" (although normally also doing something to disrupt the opponent's posture, structure etc.) whilst the other strikes. 2) using the same arm to both intercept and attack e.g. intercepting with the punch, retaking the centre with a side palm, biu sao etc

There would appear to be a perception among some practitioners that method 2 i.e. intercepting and defending with the same hand is superior and demonstrates a higher level of skill. I wondered how the majority see this?
From a personal perspective I believe both have a place but use the single hand approach far more in emergencies and less as first choice due to the effect that the interception has of adding resistance to the strike thereby reducing its power, I would always rather hit with a free unobstructed hand than one that is slowed by friction through contact with an arm but its very much a personal view. What does everyone else think?

[k gledhill]

Tan da doesn't work in real life :)

: / you can say that again, tan doesn't leave the centerline. Yip Man mentioned this in the nmh article.

[chaotic2k]

We use bong like a PAC sao. Wu sao has to be in the elbow of bong to strike as bong drops. Very fast actions.
We can use bong like a LAN but only if we want to push a little. Using bong to push is open to easy counter attacks so not a good idea as habit.
Our bong displaces arms laterally left or right not pushing forwards. Many use bong forwards to counter pressure fook , but this is arm chasing and will also happen in sparring.


I have seen a clip of PB using his bong to tap away a punch then sending his own punch to take the position. Its all good. Faster than most wsl guys. I agree with what your saying about using bong like a laan. My bong is a *******ized laan. I only attack with it when im through the oppenets limbs on on the blind side (safe zone) on his actual torso or body. I wont block his punches etc with my bong . Thats just how i roll. As for using taan as a technique, i use it to train my punch and elbow. I have never pulled a taan of under pressure. Boy have i tried.

[wingchunIan]

Tan da doesn't work in real life :)

Maybe not for you, I can't comment on what or how you were taught but it has worked just fine for me in real situations on two occasions and works in sparring all the time.

[wingchunIan]

Lin sil di da is a basic level ability enabling each arm to strike and defend as it takes over the leading position. Da sao Jik siu sao is the hand in the leading attack is also defending. Angling and using the same lsdd idea IS basic level too.

Having to use two hands to fight one of the opponents is what vt is trying to overcome by this technical striking ability. It uses the centerline in motion to cut into opponents inability to match the same idea along with movement and angling.

A common error of vt students who don't know this idea from day one will rely on over trapping hand contact to compensate for the lack of knowing. Iow two hands will be used to attack creating x'ed arms. Xing arms in vt is a major error because it means ONE arm of the opponent can stop us if they block and cut off the attacking arm. So the recycling action of our punching allows them to assist in continuous new attacking actions if the opponent defends. Angling and facing is not a hierarchical issue it is allowing us to attack and face while striking and recycling.

Wing chun Ian, your idea of striking with the same arm and " friction " losing force is implying you're over contacting with the leading arm and not recycling it on interception. There is a simple reason for chain striking. If the leading arm uses the angle of the elbow developed by slt, it can both deflect the arm it contacts , turn the position of the opponent so they lose facing and strike them. 3 actions in one attacking arm. There is a tactical directive guiding the rational of this thinking too.
Kevin, if you are recycling upon contact then you are not intercepting and hitting with the same arm and if you do intercept and hit with the same limb then any level of contact is going to add friction or negative momentum to the strike slowing it down.

[k gledhill]

Kevin, if you are recycling upon contact then you are not intercepting and hitting with the same arm and if you do intercept and hit with the same limb then any level of contact is going to add friction or negative momentum to the strike slowing it down.

Not going to write a right or wrong, easier hands on. I know ( not being mean ) you don't know the method I am referring to. Maybe one day meet up with GH when he is back from Turkey. ?

[chaotic2k]

Kevin, if you are recycling upon contact then you are not intercepting and hitting with the same arm and if you do intercept and hit with the same limb then any level of contact is going to add friction or negative momentum to the strike slowing it down.


Ian i dont think you get what kevster is saying. He means you have to change elbow position i.e bong sau into punch (bong to taan), which lowers the elbow and helps connect to the stance in order to generate alot of power EVEN if its the same hand you block with. All this is found in laap sau drill which should be bread and butter. This is why wsl guys keep the elbow lower than other branches. This maintains cinnection to the stance and allows for ballstic power as well as solid structure.

[YouKnowWho]

1) using two arms simultaneously e.g. tan da, pak da, wu da etc where one hand intercepts and "defends" (although normally also doing something to disrupt the opponent's posture, structure etc.) whilst the other strikes. 2) using the same arm to both intercept and attack e.g. intercepting with the punch, retaking the centre with a side palm, biu sao etc ..

The

- 1st method "block and attack at the same time" is 1 step process. You have to commit right way. It's faster but you have to take more risk.

- 2nd method "switch hands" is 2 or even 3 steps process. You don't have to commit until the 2nd step. It's slower but take less risk.

- 3rd method, "dodge (without blocking) and attack" is the highest level. You just move your body outside of your opponent's striking path and attack back.

[Hendrik]

John,




- 1st method "block and attack at the same time" is 1 step process. You have to commit right way. It's faster but you have to take more risk.

------- this has to taking consideration on the momentum collision , it is not a matter of risk but what happen at that collision right at the contact





- 2nd method "switch hands" is 2 or even 3 steps process. You don't have to commit until the 2nd step. It's slower but take less risk


----------This never work . Too late, always one step late.





- 3rd method, "dodge (without blocking) and attack" is the highest level. You just move your body outside of your opponent's striking path and attack back.



--------------- doesn't work , always one step late to move out and move back.

[YouKnowWho]

- 3rd method, "dodge (without blocking) and attack" is the highest level. You just move your body outside of your opponent's striking path and attack back.

--------------- doesn't work , always one step late to move out and move back.

To move out doesn't mean that you move away.

When your opponent uses "haymaker" to hit your head. You dodge your head under his punch (you are still in your punching range), you then hit back.

[JPinAZ]

To move out doesn't mean that you move away.

When your opponent uses "haymaker" to hit your head. You dodge your head under his attack (you are still in your punching range), you then hit back.

True, but then this method really has little to due with WCK at this point, as it violates the first and most important WC principle of centerline.

[YouKnowWho]

- 2nd method "switch hands" is 2 or even 3 steps process. You don't have to commit until the 2nd step. It's slower but take less risk

----------This never work . Too late, always one step late.

That "late" can be a plus. It gives you time to think whether after your block, you want to reteat or to attack. You don't have to kill your opponent on your 1st counter strike.

[Hendrik]

His second strike will come in, and it is too late for your next momentum pick up if you back off. Forget about thinking , no time or that . No to mention his second strike might Change direction .

As the white crane and Wck one must 中門不讓，


So, if one doesn't dealing with momentum but technics only, that is chasing hands .



That "late" can be a plus. It gives you time to think whether after your block, you want to reteat or to attack. You don't have to kill your opponent on your 1st counter strike.

[YouKnowWho]

True, but then this method really has little to due with WCK at this point, as it violates the first and most important WC principle of centerline.

The haymaker is just an example. It can be a straight punch to your face. You rotate your body to let that punch to pass infront of your face and hit back at the same time. Most people will use Tan Da. But you can use Tan Da without the Tan.

[Hendrik]

That then hit back.

The then is one step late .



To move out doesn't mean that you move away.

When your opponent uses "haymaker" to hit your head. You dodge your head under his punch (you are still in your punching range), you then hit back.

[YouKnowWho]

His second strike will come in, and it is too late for your next momentum pick up if you back off. Forget about thinking , no time or that . No to mention his second strike might Change direction .

As the white crane and Wck one must 中門不讓，


So, if one doesn't dealing with momentum but technics only, that is chasing hands .
All those 3 methods can be mixed one after another.

If your opponent comes in toward you, you should move in and never back up. When you move in, you have to take care both of your opponent's arms. When you use Tan Da, since your opponent's other arm is still free, you have to respond to that arm as well. If you just change your Da hand to anothet Tan, you have just used 2 Tan to deal with both of your opponent's arms. At that moment, any of your Tan hand can be changed into Da (since both of your arms are inside of your opponent's front door).

[Hendrik]

Tan da can means lots of different things .

How to move in is the issue.

Also, your way of using tan da is southern fist type. Not Wck way. That is an issue of two tan deal with two arms.


This type of tan da missing the 封閉順來法。



All those 3 methods can be mixed one after another.

If your opponent comes in toward you, you should move in and never back up. When you move in, you have to take care both of your opponent's arms. When you use Tan Da, since your opponent's other arm is still free, you have to respond to that arm as well. If you just change your Da hand to anothet Tan, you have just used 2 Tan to deal with both of your opponent's arms.

[YouKnowWho]

Also, your way of using tan da is southern fist type. Not Wck way. That is an issue of two tan deal with two arms.

What make you think that a "left Tang right Da" followed by a "right Tan left Da" is not WC? Both Tan Da are taking the center. If your opponent throws a right punch, you use left Tan right Da. Your opponent dodges your right Da and left punch at your head, you use right Tan left Da. It puts both of your arms inside of your opponent's front door. It's an excellent combo IMO.

[Hendrik]

Ask yourself , what is your left tan is trying to achieve , what is you right da is trying to achieve that will differentiate Wck or south fist.


If I do a right da he will have trouble to left punch at my head, because my right hand is in his center line and my left tan control his right half of the body. He has to cross his own center line to punch me. While I have a right hand at his center line which is closer to him then he has to cross his own center line and the cross my hand to get into my center line to punch me. Imo

I am within the inner gate, but I don't fight him square, i use two hands, one control his center line another one control his hand which is the closest to me, a leave alone his left arm which is away from his own center line. or his army which is a way from his capital which i have already capture the capitol, I seal him off and capture his center.


See, Wck always seal off and capture like a crane before issue that snake bite if needed.

So, no two arms Vesus two arm struggle, as you describe, those are southern fist way. Who fast who strong who win.



What make you think that a "left Tang right Da" followed by a "right Tan left Da" is not WC?

Both Tan Da are taking the center. If your opponent throws a right punch, you use left Tan right Da. Your opponent dodges your right Da and left punch at your head, you use right Tan left Da.

It puts both of your arms inside of your opponent's front door. It's an excellent combo IMO.

[YouKnowWho]

Ask yourself , what is your left tan is trying to achieve , what is you right da is trying to achieve that will differentiate Wck or south fist.

You can use your left Tan to

- block,
- deflect,
- wrap and control,

your opponent's right arm.

You can use your right Da to

- punch on your opponent's face/chest,
- push on his right shoulder,
- push on his left shoulder,

[Hendrik]

Please take a look my new add on in my previous post


You can use your left Tan to

- block,
- deflect,
- wrap and control,

your opponent's right arm.

You can use your right Da to

- punch on your opponent's face/chest,
- push on his right shoulder,
- push on his left shoulder,

[JPinAZ]

The haymaker is just an example. It can be a straight punch to your face. You rotate your body to let that punch to pass infront of your face and hit back at the same time. Most people will use Tan Da. But you can use Tan Da without the Tan.

Regardless of the punch thrown, if one's first instinct is to 'dodge' or move away from a punch as you describe above, then in most cases I would say they aren't following baslic WC centerline principles. While it can work just fine, no centerline = no wing chun imo.

And I try not to get caught up in terms of tan da, biu da, etc as that can lead away from WC principle thinking and gets into chasing hands. IMO of course! :)

[YouKnowWho]

Please take a look my new add on in my previous post

What if your opponent's right punch followed by left punch all come in through your center? Of course you can take his side door. But if you want to take his front door, what will you do?

[Hendrik]

Wck always angle. Let the momentum decide the angle or door. One move away one center , never standing there to park the center.

If I were you, I don't think as you on tan da...etc those .

I just strike his center while he is attacked and let the outcome direct my slip in center capture. No predetermine.

The goal is capture his center, don't care if it is front door or side door.


What if your opponent's right punch followed by left punch all come in through your center? Of course you can take his side door. But if you want to take his front door, what will you do?

[YouKnowWho]

I just strike his center while he is attacked and let the outcome direct my slip in center capture. No predetermine.

But your opponent already come in through your "front door (space between 2 arms)". How can you get into his "front door" without open his "front door" first? By using double Tan is an excellent way to open his "front door". After you have entered your opponent's front door, you can do almost anything you want to.

Are we talking about the samething?

"To enter your opponent's front door" = "to get your opponent's center"?

[YouKnowWho]

The goal is capture his center, don't care if it is front door or side door.

Definition:

front door - space between both arms.
side door - space outside of both arms.

What do you mean "to capture your opponent's center through his side door"? Could you give an example?

The central-line is the line from the center of your body to your opponent. If you attack from your opponent's side door, since his center line will not point to your body, I just do know how can you capture his center from his side door.

[Hendrik]

1. Enter opponent front door and capture opponent center are two different things.

2. One can always shift the front door away. Front door is not fix.

3. Open his front door doesn't mean capture his center. In fact if you are weaker and open his front door there is 50 percent chance you lost because he can crush you by strengthen and speed.

4. It is after one capture the center and jamming the structure one can free to control. Open the front door not necessarily capture the center.



But your opponent already come in through your "front door (space between 2 arms)". How can you get into his "front door" without open his "front door" first? By using double Tan is an excellent way to open his "front door". After you have entered your opponent's front door, you can do almost anything you want to.

Are we talking about the samething?

"To enter your opponent's front door" = "to get your opponent's center"?

[YouKnowWho]

gets into chasing hands.

It's not his arms that you are interest. You are interest in his "front door". Since his arms are like double doors, in order to enter into that double doors, you have to

- knock on the door,
- open that door, and
- enter.

[Hendrik]

Front door here means inner gate. Side door means outer gate.

One can capture center via inner gate or outer gate.

Via outer gate is Such as right tan left da to his right punch.




Definition:

front door - space between both arms.
side door - space outside of both arms.

What do you mean "to capture your opponent's center through his side door"? Could you give an example?

The central-line is the line from the center of your body to your opponent. If you attack from your opponent's side door, since his center line will not point to your body, I just do know how can you capture his center from his side door.

[wingchunIan]

Ian i dont think you get what kevster is saying. He means you have to change elbow position i.e bong sau into punch (bong to taan), which lowers the elbow and helps connect to the stance in order to generate alot of power EVEN if its the same hand you block with. All this is found in laap sau drill which should be bread and butter. This is why wsl guys keep the elbow lower than other branches. This maintains cinnection to the stance and allows for ballstic power as well as solid structure.

Can safely say that having recently spent a day training with David Peterson and John smith their elbows were no lower.
As for turning bong into a strike by dropping the elbow that is common in bong lap but actually unnecessary if you can use the bong to open a line for the rear hand to strike, however both require an extra move than simultaneously intercepting with one hand whilst striking with the other. Of course this is only my opinion, I use all of the methods outlined depending upon the situation.

[JPinAZ]

It's not his arms that you are interest. You are interest in his "front door". Since his arms are like double doors, in order to enter into that double doors, you have to

- knock on the door,
- open that door, and
- enter.

Hey John, I'm not sure what that has to do with what I was talking about? Honestly, I'm not really interested in the whole door discussion you are having with Crazy Bob :eek: so not sure why you are bringing me into that or why that has anything to do with dodging/side-stepping punches as a first reaction (?)

Anyway, if you would like to continue our discussion, please don't cherry pick my words out of context, as this never accurately represents the original meaning. :D

[wingchunIan]

Regardless of the punch thrown, if one's first instinct is to 'dodge' or move away from a punch as you describe above, then in most cases I would say they aren't following baslic WC centerline principles. While it can work just fine, no centerline = no wing chun imo.

And I try not to get caught up in terms of tan da, biu da, etc as that can lead away from WC principle thinking and gets into chasing hands. IMO of course! :)

Interesting POV. From my perspective the centreline is not fixed in space it is relative to my location and that of my opponent. If I can change the location of the centre line such that I can control it / attack along it whilst my opponent cannot then I will do so every time and am adhering strictly to wing chun principles. Also interesting to see your view of tan da etc the easy I apply it is to fill the space in front of me and chase the centre of the opponent rather than arms.

[WC1277]

Definition:

front door - space between both arms.
side door - space outside of both arms.

What do you mean "to capture your opponent's center through his side door"? Could you give an example?

The central-line is the line from the center of your body to your opponent. If you attack from your opponent's side door, since his center line will not point to your body, I just do know how can you capture his center from his side door.

The center line is a direct line from "your" center to his vertical center, doesn't matter which way he's facing. If you "capture the center" you're essentially not allowing him to line up "his" center with your vertical line.

[JPinAZ]

Interesting POV. From my perspective the centreline is not fixed in space it is relative to my location and that of my opponent. If I can change the location of the centre line such that I can control it / attack along it whilst my opponent cannot then I will do so every time and am adhering strictly to wing chun principles.

I partially agree with this. I agree that centerline is not fixed as your opponent can move and is relative to both my location and my opponents. But in HFY, we have A-to-B point Centerline theories for engagement. To draw a line, you obviously need to points: me being 'A' and my opponent being 'B'. In order to have any way to reference time/space, one of these 2 points has to be stationary. If both me and my opponent are moving, attacking, etc, I can never really draw that line or have a point of reference to start from. So, no chance for real structure or reference with which to build proper leverage, facing, et.
Of course, this doesn't mean I 'never move' and my feet are planted to the floor either, but this is the basic idea that supports our bridging & engagement strategies and our Occupying Space with Fwd Energy concept.


Also interesting to see your view of tan da etc the easy I apply it is to fill the space in front of me and chase the centre of the opponent rather than arms.

I totally agree with what you are saying here! I was just trying to say that I tend not to get too caught up in the technique discussions as the main concepts of WC seem to get lost when they become the focus (technique focus vs. principle focus). It matters little what technique one uses if the concepts/principles of WC are behind them yeah? :)

[WC1277]

We use bong like a PAC sao. Wu sao has to be in the elbow of bong to strike as bong drops. Very fast actions.
We can use bong like a LAN but only if we want to push a little. Using bong to push is open to easy counter attacks so not a good idea as habit.
Our bong displaces arms laterally left or right not pushing forwards. Many use bong forwards to counter pressure fook , but this is arm chasing and will also happen in sparring.

"Question: The Stepping Bong Sau in Chum Kiu(Tor Ma Bong Sau, replied Dan M.)?

Ho Kam Ming: This motion uses a side position and goes sideways. But in application you go forward. The purpose for going sideways is to develop and maintain your center of gravity while moving. If you practice going forward in the beginning, you lose your balance; so you step sideways. Remember, in application, you go forward.

Question: Could you talk some more about Bong Sau? I’ve never heard that idea before.

Ho Kam Ming: When you’re attacked, it’s difficult to tell where the attack is coming from. The Bong Sau only protects your body. When the punch comes in, that’s the time to use it. Other then that, you can use Taan Sau or Pak Sau. Bong Sau is applied after touching; when you feel something, then you use Bong Sau. Bong Sau and the “elbow up” is used for close fighting–to save your position. You use Bong Sau after the hand is already in. Don’t use it if the attack is still outside.

Question: Then is Bong Sau considered an “emergency” block?

Ho Kam Ming: In a way, yes; when you’re in danger. Also, Bong Sau controls the force of others.

Question: Could you show how Bong Sau is used moving forward?

Ho Kam Ming: When your opponent attempts to change attacks, you can jam his motion. Use the body to step in; it’s not the hands so much as the body moving forward.

Question: Besides Bong Sau (Wing Block), are there other motions that are important?

Ho Kam Ming: All techniques are important; each can counter one another. But it’s vital to touch and then apply the techniques. This is why we have Sticky Hands; you touch and apply. This is called application after touching."

It makes me wonder if PB/WSL made some stuff up within the context of "sparring" with other WC guys. Your bongPAC appears to only really be useful against an attack with which the elbow is "down", which last time I checked, outside of TCMA, doesn't really happen with the common fighter...

[WC1277]

Link to the entire Ho Kam Ming article

http://chisao.com/archives/64

[PalmStriker]

But your opponent already come in through your "front door (space between 2 arms)". How can you get into his "front door" without open his "front door" first? By using double Tan is an excellent way to open his "front door". After you have entered your opponent's front door, you can do almost anything you want to.

Are we talking about the samething?

"To enter your opponent's front door" = "to get your opponent's center"? Ha! John. I use the double tan sau for the same purpose. Practice (in high horse) double bong sau/ double tan sau. Repetitions with speed/deflecting force. :D Actually, Karate has a similar double like this with closed fists.

[YouKnowWho]

Ha! John. I use the double tan sau for the same purpose.

The 1st time I used jab and cross on my WC friend, he used double Tan Da on me, my feeling was he could guard his front door so tight that I couldn't enter. After that I tried to use hook punch to enter through his side door instead. I told myself that I want to be able to guard my front door that tight too. It opened my eyes and got me interested in the WC system that day.

[Hendrik]

What you describe is exactly why it is not Wck but southern fist



Take a look at how Wck basic here

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=R3keW8Sc9t8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DR3keW8Sc9t8



Ha! John. I use the double tan sau for the same purpose. Practice (in high horse) double bong sau/ double tan sau. Repetitions with speed/deflecting force. :D Actually, Karate has a similar double like this with closed fists.

[wingchunIan]

Give me a headguard and gloves, and I could show you in under two minutes that your tan da doesnt work. You wouldnt get one successful tan da to work and would look stupid trying....
Bold claim considering you have no idea of my ability and also a bit daft as I would only use tan da if the opportunity presented itself. No opportunity - no tan da, using the right response at the right time.


Shame I am a bit far from you, but Graham would be happy to show you this I am sure. I'm picky about my training partners, no disrespect to anyone but I have reasonable level C class MT fighters, semi pro boxers and a couple of mma enthusiasts that I train regularly with, who all have a healthy attitude to training and whom I trust


I thought I could "apply" tan da for over 20 years. I have done your lineage and I think I understand your delusion. I'm glad you said think. What is it with you guys and lineages? Have you trained with the same sifus as me at the same times in their teaching? did you bring the exact same personal experiences of fighting and other martial arts that I did, to your wing chun? As the answer is obviously no to the above why try to bracket people by a lineage? In the same way as Clive Potter is very different, to Philip Bayer who is in turn very different to David Peterson who in turn is very different to Gary Lamb etc etc there is much variety across all lineages.
FWIW tan da is not difficult to apply, choosing when to use it and not trying to make it into a universal tool or posing for photos afterwards is the key to making it work.


Dont know what your idea of sparring is? but I would love to see how you do this. (I am not being funny here BTW, (or in the rest of the post Ian) I really would like to see it). I have been trying to get some sparring footage filmed that i can share for some time as it is unlike most of what is posted on other threads. The sessions with my training partners mentioned above are often filmed but we have a very clear agreement that the footage never leaves the room as it prevents egos from being unleashed. Typically the sparring looks similar to MT or boxing sparring with 2 minute rounds (limited by me due to my hopeless fitness levels compared to the others) and light to not quite so light contact. We wear headguards and either mma gloves in my case or 14oz gloves in theirsand shinguards with the MT

[GlennR]

Bold claim considering you have no idea of my ability and also a bit daft as I would only use tan da if the opportunity presented itself. No opportunity - no tan da, using the right response at the right time.

I'm picky about my training partners, no disrespect to anyone but I have reasonable level C class MT fighters, semi pro boxers and a couple of mma enthusiasts that I train regularly with, who all have a healthy attitude to training and whom I trust

I'm glad you said think. What is it with you guys and lineages? Have you trained with the same sifus as me at the same times in their teaching? did you bring the exact same personal experiences of fighting and other martial arts that I did, to your wing chun? As the answer is obviously no to the above why try to bracket people by a lineage? In the same way as Clive Potter is very different, to Philip Bayer who is in turn very different to David Peterson who in turn is very different to Gary Lamb etc etc there is much variety across all lineages.
FWIW tan da is not difficult to apply, choosing when to use it and not trying to make it into a universal tool or posing for photos afterwards is the key to making it work.

I have been trying to get some sparring footage filmed that i can share for some time as it is unlike most of what is posted on other threads. The sessions with my training partners mentioned above are often filmed but we have a very clear agreement that the footage never leaves the room as it prevents egos from being unleashed. Typically the sparring looks similar to MT or boxing sparring with 2 minute rounds (limited by me due to my hopeless fitness levels compared to the others) and light to not quite so light contact. We wear headguards and either mma gloves in my case or 14oz gloves in theirsand shinguards with the MT

All sounds good Ian.
Actually sparring against other styles and using your WC on them.
Good for you.
Ignore T Ray, another VT wannabe killing machine

[anerlich]

I have done your lineage and I think I understand your delusion.

JMFC, what an arrogant pr*ck.

[guy b.]

So you really have the ability to "choose when to use" tan da? Reallly?

This does sound unlikely, although I would also like to see it done if you can do it.

[BPWT]

So you really have the ability to "choose when to use" tan da? Really??!

I wouldn't say choose. When someone uses Pak Sao against your punch, you don't choose what to do either. What's the angle of the Pak - does it raise your arm a little or lower it (and how much)? Is the Pak shocking in its force, or weaker but effective due to the opponent's body positioning having changed more to open a line of attack?

Chi Sao (and Lat Sao) helps teach you how you deal with force and angling, how you position while always maintaining forward force. So just as with dealing with a hypothetical Pak, it is the same with creating Tan.

I don't think you choose to use Tan (unless you are working a specific drill for the purpose of developing an attribute of Tan). You opponent chooses it for you.

If you're striking/pressing forward with an arm and it meets resistance (resistance that you can't beat due to better positioning), than maybe it presses you to tan. Maybe to Bong. Maybe to... whatever else. It all depends. But always you maintain the forward force, so the arm can still strike forward once the pressure is off/way is clear/opponent retracts their attack.

This is what Yip Man was talking about in the NMH interview when he spoke about rattan cane force. (how do you, in your lineage, interpret Yip Man's words? Do you take it to mean something else?)

You're always trying to strike - but it's those moments that you can't that your striking arm is forced to give way and become something else (until, of course, it can strike).

Well, that's how our lineage trains it ;)

In short: forward force, that adjusts to resistance but keeps structure (Wing Tsun shapes and methods for dissipating force - i.e. tan or bong, etc) but keeps its forward force so you can hit when the way is free, or when you've done something to make it free.

[BPWT]

You seem to be talking about post-contact shape making in conjunction with lat sao jik chung?

Yes. :) Because generally speaking (there are always exceptions) everything should be post-contact in Wing Tsun. :D

There are only two stand up ranges, IMO. Striking with Bridging, and Striking with no bridging. There are times when maybe I can hit the attacker without needing to bridge, and that's good - but it has dangers (he can be firing off an attack as I am doing the same). Maybe I get lucky and hit with enough force to stop this attack. But maybe he takes the hit and keeps coming with either of his free arms (or legs too, I guess).

So I want to hit whilst bridging and positioning - the bridge protecting my center. To limit his options. Of course, my bridging is a strike too, the tan or bong, etc, is just a thwarted strike that was still trying to keep center. In other words, my bridge is not chasing hands, and it only sticks because it wants to go to the other guy's center but can't because we are on the same line of attack.


(Of course coming from PBWSL the concept of LSJC is understood, although sticky shape changing is unthinkable for us).

Yes, our two lineages have a slightly different approach.


I (and Ian?) was talking more about the idea of being able to choose to apply a tan da simultaeneous attack and defence (with two hands) against an attacker as and when the opportunity presents itself.

Do you mean the following. You think Ian is saying that you throw a straight punch at him and he uses Tan Sao (with punch), without his own attack first being thwarted and turned/pressed to Tan. Do you mean Ian is saying he just creates the shape of Tan with one hand, while he punches with the other?

[BPWT]

A question for T_Ray, if you're online still. :)

Earlier I wrote:


...But always you maintain the forward force, so the arm can still strike forward once the pressure is off/way is clear/opponent retracts their attack.
This is what Yip Man was talking about in the NMH interview when he spoke about rattan cane force. (how do you, in your lineage, interpret Yip Man's words? Do you take it to mean something else?)

From the interview with Yip Man: "But in the Wing Tsun style, the similarity with the rattan cane is in when the opponent closes the distance we use tan, fook or bong for example. Therefore when the opponent comes, it’s like hitting on a rattan cane and so my defense is like when rattan gets pressure and bends. But when the opponent’s attack has a hole or gap, we use extremely fast speed to rush in with our move. Just like a compressed rattan when it’s released, the speed is fast , the move very powerful."

In the PB lineage, if "sticky shape changing is unthinkable for us", how do you interpret Yip Man's comments about the compressed rattan cane?

This is a shape changed by stick. An arm compressed into bong with remaining forward force, or compressed into tan with remaining forward force.

Do you guys learn something different in relation to this (Yip Man's analogy)?

[BPWT]

My interpretation from that interview is that Ip Man appears to be simply explaining our LSJC :)

:) Okay, but... his words are:

"Therefore when the opponent comes, it’s like hitting on a rattan cane and so my defense is like when rattan gets pressure and bends... Just like a compressed rattan when it’s released..."

I think he is clearly saying that the bridge changes shape (bends) upon contact/stick (gets pressure). The pressure can only come on contact, and the receiving pressure and bending is maintaining stick - with forward force remaining as he also talks about it shooting back out (the force released).

You don't think this is the same as "sticky shape changing"?

That is to say, sticky shape changing with forward pressure.

[k gledhill]

:) Okay, but... his words are:

"Therefore when the opponent comes, it’s like hitting on a rattan cane and so my defense is like when rattan gets pressure and bends... Just like a compressed rattan when it’s released..."

I think he is clearly saying that the bridge changes shape (bends) upon contact/stick (gets pressure). The pressure can only come on contact, and the receiving pressure and bending is maintaining stick - with forward force remaining as he also talks about it shooting back out (the force released).

You don't think this is the same as "sticky shape changing"?

That is to say, sticky shape changing with forward pressure.

Yip Man is describing Loi Lau Hoi sung - lat sao Jik chun.

[BPWT]

Yip Man is describing Loi Lau Hoi sung - lat sao Jik chun.

Yes, of course. But I am talking about the way it manifests. T_Ray is saying that in your lineage there is no 'sticky shape changing.'

I don't understand this, because:

1.“Loi Lau” refers to engaging the enemy, forming a bridge. Receiving what comes.

2."Hoi Sung” is about following the center. Following what goes.

3.“Lat Sau Jik Cheung” is about when the hands are released, attacking that center. When the way has become free.

So...

1. How are the hands released if you have no stick - released from what?
2. How do you follow what goes/stay with what goes if you have stick that is rigid because it hasn't compressed (that is to say, is stick that hasn't changed shape)?
3.How can released hands go forward to attack if they haven't compressed somewhat to have forward force. Like the rattan cane, or a spring, the shape can only shoot forward on its own accord if it has been compressed. This implies it's shape has changed.

Yip Man is using the analogy of a cane. Something that is flexible when pressed, but shoots back out when released.

Coincidence?

[BPWT]

Maybe I can explain it better like this:

If you stand in YJKYM in front of me, and I stand the same way. You stretch your arm, as you would as if punching, but fully extend your arm to it's maximum length, keeping your shoulders square to me.

If I stand in front of you and press my chin to your fist, and you continue to keep full extension...and then I let off that pressure from my face, what happens? Does your fist hit me? No - it cannot because your arm was fully extended and you didn't add in any shoulder movement. You were at maximum extension.

Now if we do the same thing but this time as I press my chin to your fist you allow your arm to bend and retract slightly (the shape changing), compressing, and you keep your forward force against my pressure (which had to follow you)... when I suddenly stop pressing forward and, say, move my head backward, your fist will shoot forward into my chin.

It could do so only because you now had space to extend it further. The shape had changed, still had stick, but now had room for that forward force to move your fist forward.


I'm trying to understand how you can have Loi Lau Hoi Sung - Lat Sao Jik Cheung without "sticky shape changing".

[BPWT]

Or here's an example on camera.

I posted this when asking Graham a question regarding Poon Sao (which he didn't answer :))

I asked:

"What do you see happening at 0:52 - 0:54 seconds."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=U373UdDfAxA

The student, anticipating the next movement of the drill for a moment is focussed on his attack and makes a mistake - he loses stick. Maday Norbert's Fook Sao automatically moves forward to strike his face.

Why? Because the Fook has forward force and is a compressed shape. The motion of Fook in Poon Sao is a punching motion (C'mon, PB would surely agree with me here :)).

But the hand can't punch because the line is blocked (by the student's bong sao arm), so it remains in Fook, controlling with forward pressure. When the student's pressure was released, in error, at 52 seconds, the Fook became the strike it always wanted to be :D

So this is an example of sticky shape changing: LLHS - LSJC.

[BPWT]

In this instance the problem is your intepretation of "sticky shape changing", There are plenty of PB clips showing similar to what you are describing :)

:D Okay, so I would also apply what I said above to Tan, Bong, Fook, Wu, etc. They are all shapes which met resistance to their forward pressure and, through stick, changed shape (in order to protect whilst maintaining forward pressure).

So how would you define sticky shape changing?

[WC1277]

If you're thinking in a one dimensional plane than the PB boys can justify their explanation, although, it appears as if there's very little compression going on in any of their videos outside of their "roll" which IMO is wrong anyway with all the rocking back and forth. Their over emphasis on angling neutralizes the idea Ip Man was explaining.

WC is a two arm system, even when only one arm is "touching". Anyone you says otherwise is confused. The whole body works together, even the arms. That saying by Ip Man refers to the point of compression on an arm/s in connection with the body maintaining forward intent. When compression happens on two arms and it's not truly directed towards the center good WC will dissipate that force by spiraling the force out with the arm more heavily compressed while simultaneously shooting the opposite arm forward because of the rotation of the opposing forces. The compression limit is based on your ability to maintain the position without anything more than natural tension. This concept is the basis of the chi sao roll and the roll is ideally neutral. Hypothetically, two practitioners with perfect structure will never do anything other than roll because there's no unequal pressure or movement.

This being said, how does that apply to one arm compression? The same way. If your structure is following the same principle than your arms are rotating at the same balance you develop in Chi Sao. If this sounds crazy to you try this little test. Put your wu sao on your center guarding while holding tension in your index finger. This tension is related to the same tension you make naturally in your index finger when you're rolling from bong to tan. Have someone push inward on your hand. Pretty weak, eh? Now place your other hand in a wu sao behind your forward with the same tension and do the same. A lot stronger, right? Try this with Bong sau but keep your wu sao closer to center. Try it with any position. The hands working together strengthen the structure and allow you to "feel", yes I said it, the compression on both arms even when only one arm is compressed.

What's all of this have to do with a rattan cane? The compression is the result of the thing compressing it being on center of the cane. When the thing pressing on it loses that center the cane flings forward. The only way for the thing compressing it to lose center is either by pulling back or by "rolling" off. The Chi Sao neutral roll creates both these dynamics.

Two arms, not one.

[k gledhill]

Yes, of course. But I am talking about the way it manifests. T_Ray is saying that in your lineage there is no 'sticky shape changing.'

I don't understand this, because:

1.“Loi Lau” refers to engaging the enemy, forming a bridge. Receiving what comes.

2."Hoi Sung” is about following the center. Following what goes.

3.“Lat Sau Jik Cheung” is about when the hands are released, attacking that center. When the way has become free.

So...

1. How are the hands released if you have no stick - released from what?
2. How do you follow what goes/stay with what goes if you have stick that is rigid because it hasn't compressed (that is to say, is stick that hasn't changed shape)?
3.How can released hands go forward to attack if they haven't compressed somewhat to have forward force. Like the rattan cane, or a spring, the shape can only shoot forward on its own accord if it has been compressed. This implies it's shape has changed.

Yip Man is using the analogy of a cane. Something that is flexible when pressed, but shoots back out when released.

Coincidence?

1- how are the hands released if there is no stick ?
We call this " striking " aka punching normally. ; )
2- Drills create intuitive " shadowing " not relying on arm pressure aka arm chasing. We attack the person.
3- Here is where your poon sao differs. We engage the whole anatomical kinetic chain as the counter force in our punches. Our leading arm in fighting is the attack and defense. Under sudden contact our training makes sure we don't lose angles , this is loading our arms but not changing their shape. If you retract from this loading moment youre getting a following hand with it.
Our " frame " in arms in chi sao is from the fixed elbow angles of tan bong fook/Jum. Iow there are constant angles of 135.3 deg. ; ) from chi sao / poon sao drills we create a constant exchange from tan >< Jum lin sil di sa attack/ defense force to neutral fook )( bong contact. Each arm is independently issuing force through structure , like patting the head while rubbing the stomach. It is common ( human ) for wrong coordination AND BOTH ARMS try to put forward pressure , leading to a chronic habit of seeking arm pressure under contact. That's another thread altogether.
The role of poon sao is to be aware of an imbalance in issuing synchronized drill force and correct it. This leads students to lose balance if the offending arms counter drill arm is removed a little to show the error. Lack of STRIKING position/counter force leads to unthinking striking into gaps, lsjc, while the shoulders and other arm maintain " pat the head mode ". Stances become independent of the opponent to issue force and maintain balance without reliance on support from opponents moving arms or seeking them for control. As the stability of strong stances and strong striking become evident , more drills involving stepping with the same poon sao start.
Always testing stability , facing , coordination of defense during attack.

[BPWT]

Thanks for the reply! :)


1- how are the hands released if there is no stick ?
We call this " striking " aka punching normally. ; )

I think I understand - and I agree that when there is no stick, you strike. But I was meaning that if you meet an attack, you need to have contact/stick (receive what comes) before you can follow or strike (depending).

So I was trying to say that once you've made contact your shape must change before anything else, even if that is just a slight compression of the shape.

I don't think I am explaining it very well :D



2- Drills create intuitive " shadowing " not relying on arm pressure aka arm chasing. We attack the person.

Why do you say "arm pressure aka arm chasing"? If I have forward force and there is stick, but that forward force is to the opponent's center, I don't think this is "arm chasing". If the opponent moves his arms/bridge off my line of attack, my arms don't follow his arms, they go forward to his center. I am happy his bridge moved out of the way, it gives me a free way forward to strike.



3- Here is where your poon sao differs.

For sure, our two lineages seem to have a different approach to poon sao.

The kinetic chain, I agree with - but I think this is common in pretty much all WC/VT and in most martial arts generally. It is the way force in generated via a serious of joints working in unison.

I am not sure how you can keep a constant angle of 135.3 deg. in shapes, and actually sometimes the shape needs to adjust. Perhaps this is just one of the different ways we do things.

Regarding "each arm is independently issuing force through structure , like patting the head while rubbing the stomach," I think this is also common across lineages, no?

In terms of "seeking arm pressure", again I am not seeking to pressure the arms of the opponent for the sake of pressuring their arms. Their arms are in the way of where I actually want to be - striking the other guy's center.


The role of poon sao is to be aware of an imbalance in issuing synchronized drill force and correct it. This leads students to lose balance if the offending arms counter drill arm is removed a little to show the error.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Could you explain it another way?

[k gledhill]

Thanks for the reply! :)



I think I understand - and I agree that when there is no stick, you strike. But I was meaning that if you meet an attack, you need to have contact/stick (receive what comes) before you can follow or strike (depending).

So I was trying to say that once you've made contact your shape must change before anything else, even if that is just a slight compression of the shape.

I don't think I am explaining it very well :D




Why do you say "arm pressure aka arm chasing"? If I have forward force and there is stick, but that forward force is to the opponent's center, I don't think this is "arm chasing". If the opponent moves his arms/bridge off my line of attack, my arms don't follow his arms, they go forward to his center. I am happy his bridge moved out of the way, it gives me a free way forward to strike.




For sure, our two lineages seem to have a different approach to poon sao.

The kinetic chain, I agree with - but I think this is common in pretty much all WC/VT and in most martial arts generally. It is the way force in generated via a serious of joints working in unison.

I am not sure how you can keep a constant angle of 135.3 deg. in shapes, and actually sometimes the shape needs to adjust. Perhaps this is just one of the different ways we do things.

Regarding "each arm is independently issuing force through structure , like patting the head while rubbing the stomach," I think this is also common across lineages, no?

In terms of "seeking arm pressure", again I am not seeking to pressure the arms of the opponent for the sake of pressuring their arms. Their arms are in the way of where I actually want to be - striking the other guy's center.



I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Could you explain it another way?

The poon sao is a way to develop force , facing , coordination of arms as each cycles through attack/strike using lsdd into neutral elbow ( fook ) - bong rotation.
If fok/jum punch apply pressure to bong after striking the bongs angle and deflecting will open the line up in fighting later. So the fok Jum exchange of the rotation has to stop pushing or pressing for force exchange, while the now opposite opposing , striking arms exchange lsjc / lsdd .
The whole time the heel -knee-hip-core-facing shoulders-acute elbows- exchange constant force in one arm or the other to create elbow force for punching. The balance of each person is paramount in fighting and using the strong lines of force. So if one student is " resting " their arms on the others or using incorrect lines of interception, arms and counter structural support is quickly removed to allow the student to lose balance and correct the errors. Losing balance in poon sao rolling is easy to do with newbees who ( as humans) use wrists and hands as a support chain to balance themselves or seek control by using us , we don't allow this ; ).


This is why one can never learn vt without someone who is skilled in this way. Anyone can mimic chi sao and rely on human force exchanges at the distal portion of their arms because its " only human " ; ) iow why so many feel they are doing it their way until they get get turned, twisted, lose balance and see they have been pursuing a completely redundant ( human ; )) method, some for many years.

[Wayfaring]

Anyone can mimic chi sao and rely on human force exchanges at the distal portion of their arms because its " only human " ; ) iow why so many feel they are doing it their way until they get get turned, twisted, lose balance and see they have been pursuing a completely redundant ( human ; )) method, some for many years.

This is why I advocate getting turned, twisted, and losing balance from day 1. i.e. sparring. Because then people learn it's normal to happen that way.

[k gledhill]

This is why I advocate getting turned, twisted, and losing balance from day 1. i.e. sparring. Because then people learn it's normal to happen that way.

Day one no , or week one ... A certain level of pre drilling to " triggers " and moving relative to them is required or its just an error fest of turning. Over turning is a big mistake in vt , ergo angle instead while facing.

[Wayfaring]

Day one no , or week one ... A certain level of pre drilling to " triggers " and moving relative to them is required or its just an error fest of turning. Over turning is a big mistake in vt , ergo angle instead while facing.

Of course it's an error fest. Which is why I'd rather have someone over turning on day 1 as opposed to first experiencing it on day 1501.

Keep them from killing each other and let them play.

[k gledhill]

Of course it's an error fest. Which is why I'd rather have someone over turning on day 1 as opposed to first experiencing it on day 1501.

Keep them from killing each other and let them play.

But you DONT have to teach students to make this error, they make it as humans. Vt stops shoulders and upperbody rotating offline to the attack/defense. The purpose of facing and attacking with refacing is so you can cut into or use two arm recycling in lsdd mode against people who TURN THEMSELVES. basic chi-sao teaches two arms to be able to work independently of the other and NOT retract one side of facing as the other strikes or recovers. The redundant factor of "FIGHTING " with vt is that we use a lead (man sao ) and a rear hand (wu sao) for fighting ....not drill mode two hands in parallel facing each other for mutual time.