WSL Ving Tsun - Sifu Cliff Au Yeung - Blindfold Gor Sau Training [Archive]

Graham H

07-24-2013, 03:56 AM

Too be fair Sigung Wsl did do this drill what we must ask our self is whats the real significance of its use ? Is it about Sensitivity of the arms to redirect the force of energy? Or If you get poked in the eyes you can still F@#k them up just like in Warriors two :D Or is it just a Show off Drill :(

Yes Sigung did do this drill. There could have been many reasons why. It may all be smoke and mirrors. That's normal in Wing Chun.

Fundamentally you have to ask what it will develop. For people that think that Ving Tsun is about gluing themselves on each others arms this drill will have its place. In real fighting there is no prolonged contact. There is no time to chase the the arms like is taught in most schools. IMO this is another drill that only works between two cooperating training partners and does little to increase ones prowess in a real fight. We were given eyes for a reason and they are the most important thing you will need when somebody is trying to bash your head in. Why waste time with blind folds.

One could argue that maybe it was used to tease the CLF guys. Who know's?

Blindfolded chi sau training is nonsense IMO and only adds to the arrogance that Wing Chun guys think they can fight that way and/or it develops any real skill.

I was taught in the past that if you could develop the ability to "bridge" get control of the arms and use the opponents force against them with your sight restricted that it should make it easier when sight is restored. I have since recognized the error in that way of thinking and firmly believe that that whole idea is absolute BS!

duende

07-24-2013, 04:03 AM

Blindfold or not.... There were many bad habits present in his footwork that would get him into trouble against a competent fighter.

Graham H

07-24-2013, 04:27 AM

Where I have seen WSL demo blindfolded, it seems it is to show how in VT we use Lat Sao Jik Chung, rather than as a parlour trick.

ie here @ 2:45 ish.

http://youtu.be/KkbJnQbkxHk

Rather than speculate I'll drop Philipp a message. :)

guy b.

07-24-2013, 04:55 AM

Cliff is good but I think this is just silly martial arts stuff, PR. Hard to see the benefit. I'm sure he would say that himself if you asked.

Graham H

07-24-2013, 05:01 AM

Cliff is good but I think this is just silly martial arts stuff, PR. Hard to see the benefit. I'm sure he would say that himself if you asked.

PR stuff would be my guess but then why sell an idea that doesn't make much sense or has any benefit in developing Kung fu skills? Any logical thinking person would think it's absurd.

Ving Tsun evolves. Maybe this is one of those things that should remain in the past. ;)

Paul T England

07-24-2013, 05:03 AM

Its a useful tool, nothing more. Don't take it as a way of fighting but a simple drill to lep you.

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

guy b.

07-24-2013, 05:05 AM

PR stuff would be my guess but then why sell an idea that doesn't make much sense or has any benefit in developing Kung fu skills? Any logical thinking person would think it's absurd.

Ving Tsun evolves. Maybe this is one of those things that should remain in the past. ;)

Yes, probably a miss reading of current martial arts climate. Maybe a cultural aspect to it? Who knows?

WSL certainly did a few PR type things in his time which look a bit dodgy looking back now.

Graham H

07-24-2013, 05:13 AM

Its a useful tool, nothing more. Don't take it as a way of fighting but a simple drill to lep you.

Please explain what it helps

Graham H

07-24-2013, 05:32 AM

So here is the reason....

The blindfold is given to students that have problems "chasing the arms" visually and with their own arms. The thinking is that if the students vision is taken away that they will not be effected by obstacles and therefore will develop the correct idea of LSJC using the whole body. Some students that have more courage and are less prone to being scared of incoming limbs may not require it. If the student needs the blindfold he should keep wearing it until the problem is trained away.

Unfortunately people have interpreted blindfold training into trying become sensitive to each others movements through prolonged contact with the arms. The correct idea is not to stick to the arms but attack the center without cowering away from attacks.

Graham H

07-24-2013, 05:32 AM

.........................and also for PR :D

guy b.

07-24-2013, 05:45 AM

.........................and also for PR :D

I'm guessing Cliff doesn't think he himself has problems with arm chasing so in this case more likely 100% PR

Graham H

07-24-2013, 05:50 AM

I'm guessing Cliff doesn't think he himself has problems with arm chasing so in this case more likely 100% PR

Without asking him I don't know and I would be embarrassed to ask but there is a lot of arm chasing in that clip.

In the WSL clips he just drills forward which makes more sense if any development is to come from it IMO.

I have never needed the blindfold which is why I wasn't really sure about it. I'm glad I asked. Everyday is a school day :)

guy b.

07-24-2013, 06:10 AM

Without asking him I don't know and I would be embarrassed to ask but there is a lot of arm chasing in that clip.

In the WSL clips he just drills forward which makes more sense if any development is to come from it IMO.

I have never needed the blindfold which is why I wasn't really sure about it. I'm glad I asked. Everyday is a school day :)

I'm sure he doesn't think he needs it, lol.

I just can't imagine well known sifu x putting out a clip of themselves going back to basics and trying to fix their own arm chasing problem. Wouldn't happen, must be PR purposes (although the explanation you provided does make some kind of sense)!

Graham H

07-24-2013, 06:12 AM

I'm sure he doesn't think he needs it, lol.

I just can't imagine well known sifu x putting out a clip of themselves going back to basics and trying to fix their own arm chasing problem. Wouldn't happen, must be PR purposes (although the explanation you provided does make some kind of sense)!

...some kind of sense??? :confused: :)

guy b.

07-24-2013, 09:15 AM

...some kind of sense??? :confused: :)

Blindfold = fixing arm chasing sounds plausible. I always just thought it was ****ing around and showing off.

Wayfaring

07-24-2013, 09:20 AM

Fundamentally you have to ask what it will develop.

You just need to expand your thinking a little.

For instance, what if I was caught on an elevator, completely packed full, and it got stuck between floors and all the lights went out and one guy went postal starting to attack everyone?

Or what if I p1ssed off a mob boss and me and 4 other guys were blindfolded, trussed and tossed in the trunk of a car. Then, whoever fought their way out first got to live.

It could be relevant. ;)

guy b.

07-24-2013, 09:27 AM

You just need to expand your thinking a little.

For instance, what if I was caught on an elevator, completely packed full, and it got stuck between floors and all the lights went out and one guy went postal starting to attack everyone?

Or what if I p1ssed off a mob boss and me and 4 other guys were blindfolded, trussed and tossed in the trunk of a car. Then, whoever fought their way out first got to live.

It could be relevant. ;)

You should add these plausible sounding scenarios to the experience thread

Jansingsang

07-24-2013, 12:01 PM

Without asking him I don't know and I would be embarrassed to ask but there is a lot of arm chasing in that clip.

In the WSL clips he just drills forward which makes more sense if any development is to come from it IMO.

I have never needed the blindfold which is why I wasn't really sure about it. I'm glad I asked. Everyday is a school day :)

Ah ha Theres always a reason to a drill within Wsl lineage Sigung wouldn't have taken part in something which had no developmental gain imo He was always cracking jokes about pulor trick individuals per se . So now were all a lot cleaer of the overall meaning Which being LSJC development tool

As the old saying goes If you dont ask quetions you'll never know:)

Wayfaring

07-24-2013, 01:54 PM

You should add these plausible sounding scenarios to the experience thread

I can only go so far in supporting your troll threads....

YouKnowWho

07-24-2013, 02:05 PM

When develop Tinjing with blindford?

Information going through your

- eyes will be processed by your brain.
- skin will be processed by your spine.

Since it's faster to respond from your spine than from your brain, the Tinjin can give you faster reaction. When you open your eyes and your arm touches your opponent's arms, you may cheat yourself by using your vision and not 100% use your skin sensativity. When you are in blindford, you have no choice but to "only" depend on your sesitivity.

If you do want to develop your sensativity, blindford is the way to go.

guy b.

07-24-2013, 02:07 PM

I can only go so far in supporting your troll threads....

Are you saying you lied on my reality thread?:eek:

k gledhill

07-24-2013, 02:15 PM

Wayfaring

07-24-2013, 02:21 PM

Are you saying you lied on my reality thread?:eek:

Are you sure it isn't a "reality TV" thread?

wingchunIan

07-24-2013, 02:53 PM

Not my sensitivity. Lsjc is lost when too much sticky hands is done.

Why whenever anyone mentions sensitivity do some people assume this equates to arm chasing. All high level fighters in all systems develop tactile responses its just that many systems rely on experience to teach it rather than having specific drills. Using the tactile responses is far faster than having rely on visual processing. When you are doing your lap sao drills do you rely on your eyes to tell you that the partner has made contact with your arm? or can you tell without looking when they over commit and cross the centre line or alternatively come up short? This is sensitivity, using the information that your arms receive upon contact to find angles and gaps, nothing to do with sticking or chasing arms, and what Ip Man was referring to when he said " the opponent will show you how to hit them"

Grumblegeezer

07-24-2013, 02:55 PM

I'm not prepared to critique the chi-sau in this clip as it is quite different to what our group practices. I do however feel that blindfolded chi sau (or simply shutting your eyes for a bit) can train useful attributes ...if not overdone.

As others noted this practice may help with "lat sau jik chung", but sometimes students will just try to defend themselves by reverting to chasing hands. I think a better use of shutting your eyes when training is to work on maintaining forward pressure from your stance through your fingers, because the one thing you can't do with your eyes shut is to let a gap develop between yourself and your opponent.

As far as applications go, I think realizing that you are not totally dependent upon visual cues (as is a long range fighter) helps build confidence. Also, over the years, I have run into a couple of visually impaired WC students. Once they made contact, their disadvantage was greatly reduced. Not reduced enough to fight a wary and evasive long-range fighter in a sparring session, but perhaps enough to defend themselves against some foolish punk who tries to take advantage of their "disability" and grab them.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 12:20 AM

This is sensitivity, using the information that your arms receive upon contact to find angles and gaps

Absolute rubbish! Have you ever had a real fight mate? :rolleyes:

Graham H

07-25-2013, 12:21 AM

As others noted this practice may help with "lat sau jik chung",

"may" help? What do you mean?

Paddington

07-25-2013, 01:09 AM

Absolute rubbish! Have you ever had a real fight mate? :rolleyes:

I think developing Lsjc in chi sau is, as wingchunIan notes, to use "[...] the information that your arms receive upon contact to find angles and gaps".

However, I feel the idea of Lsjc and the rattan cane are perhaps more relevant to developing fighting skills through chi sau.

Yes, you can feel for a gap but you don't process that information through your mind; that forward intent is already there so that when the linchpin is removed, your strike is already on its way.

I must add that lsjc, for me at least, has been hard to develop; particularly the subtleties and balance so that your opponent cannot use that intent against you. I will also add that, at least through the Ip Chun lineage I initially trained through, lsjc is not something trained very often nor is it, much to my frustration, a concept made explicit to students.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 01:32 AM

I think developing Lsjc in chi sau is, as wingchunIan notes, to use "[...] the information that your arms receive upon contact to find angles and gaps".

Eh? So you are saying that LSJC is about receiving information are you? :eek:

However, I feel the idea of Lsjc and the rattan cane are perhaps more relevant to developing fighting skills through chi sau.

Jesus! LSJC has nothing to do with rattan circles!

Yes, you can feel for a gap but you don't process that information through your mind; that forward intent is already there so that when the linchpin is removed, your strike is already on its way.

Poppy****!

I must add that lsjc, for me at least, has been hard to develop; particularly the subtleties and balance so that your opponent cannot use that intent against you. I will also add that, at least through the Ip Chun lineage I initially trained through, lsjc is not something trained very often nor is it, much to my frustration, a concept made explicit to students.

LSJC is an important part of Ving Tsun. It's not hard to develop if the training methods are correct unless the student is a bit useless. maintaining it in sparring is another story. I never even heard of LSJC in the Ip Chun lineage.

LSJC has been roughly translated to "loss of contact, thrust forward without hesitation". People wrongly assume that the "loss of contact" bit means that we already have arm contact and when it is released we should thrust forward using some kind of springy energy. That is a common misconception in Wing Chun.

wingchunIan

07-25-2013, 02:03 AM

Absolute rubbish! Have you ever had a real fight mate? :rolleyes:

unfortunately I've had plenty of them. It's you that is in denial over something that is so real and present in every single fighting system ever practiced. You are almost certainly employing it in your own training / fighting even if you don't realise it or wish to acknowledge it.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 02:11 AM

unfortunately I've had plenty of them. It's you that is in denial over something that is so real and present in every single fighting system ever practiced. You are almost certainly employing it in your own training / fighting even if you don't realise it or wish to acknowledge it.

So you are saying that when I spar in Ving Tsun and/or when I have been in a street ruck that I am sensing energy in my opponents arms and using this to find gaps and lines of attack??? You are actually telling me that I am and that I don't realize it and that I am in denial??? Really??

Typical Ip Chun Benny Hill you are mate. Put me back on your ignore list FFS! :mad:

wingchunIan

07-25-2013, 02:16 AM

LSJC is an important part of Ving Tsun. It's not hard to develop if the training methods are correct unless the student is a bit useless. maintaining it in sparring is another story. I never even heard of LSJC in the Ip Chun lineage.
My own lineage is Ip Chun and we teach LSJC as part of SNT and it is a source of emphasis as soon as a student starts poon sao or any other interactive training. It is one of the core concepts we teach and it receives a great deal of emphasis.

LSJC has been roughly translated to "loss of contact, thrust forward without hesitation". People wrongly assume that the "loss of contact" bit means that we already have arm contact and when it is released we should thrust forward using some kind of springy energy. That is a common misconception in Wing Chun.
Our definition of LSJC is applies any time that there is nothing between the the striking limb and the target whether there was contact in the first place or not, but it is interesting to note that the concept you describe is part of the majority of wing chun teachings including most of Ip Man's direct students. Also interesting how often the first two thirds of the maxim get omitted

Paddington

07-25-2013, 02:17 AM

Graham, you have misunderstood some of what I have said.

I do say in my post that by information I am being very broad and I am quick to move away from Ian's position; I even say I am not referring to using the mind to think. If I feel pressure or an absence of pressure, that is still information for my body. To my mind lsjc is still conditioning a response to stimuli or information so I see that as bound up with it.

Further I am talking about a rattan cane not a circle; it is flexible like bamboo and springy. Yes, that is to think of lsjc in that way; it is very subtle though and more a trigger for movement for the strike once the gap is there; that forward light springy intent as a c o c k e d hammer of a gun that can trigger a more explosive and powerful burst, here the movements for a strike with hips and elbows connected.

Incidentally, a lot of what I outline above is just my thoughts and most of those thoughts have come from others not associated with or training through an Ip Chun lineage.

Please feel free to post up your further analogies to help me better understand this concept.

p.s.

[...] It's not hard to develop if the training methods are correct unless the student is a bit useless.
[...]

A bit ad hominem, no?

LFJ

07-25-2013, 02:58 AM

LSJC has been roughly translated to "loss of contact, thrust forward without hesitation". People wrongly assume that the "loss of contact" bit means that we already have arm contact and when it is released we should thrust forward using some kind of springy energy. That is a common misconception in Wing Chun.

I know what you mean when others only focus on this "springy energy" effect once contact is made, and even seek to make contact so they can use it as some sort of sensitivity trick but neglect constant forward energy as a general principle. They are misguided, but from my viewpoint you're confusing LSJC with LLHS. What I mean:

The way I understand the LLHS-LSJC phrase is interaction between the opponent and yourself, how to act in relation to the opponent;

-When the opponent "advances" (loi) you "remain" (lau), i.e. make use of angling and such to keep the pressure forward but don't retreat taking pressure away.
-When the opponent "retreats" (heui) you "see them off" (sung), i.e. you advance keeping the pressure on them.
-When the opponent's "arm is removed" (lat-sau) you "rush straight" (jik-chung), i.e. you strike forward to their center.

LLHS is all about that constant forward energy.
LSJC is an effect of that energy when met with and once breaking obstruction.

I see you interpreting LSJC as LLHS, i.e. constant forward energy moving the whole structure as one unit. As a result, you replace LSJC with LLHS and deny the "springy energy" effect.

Well, what happens when contact is made with that sort of forward energy and is then suddenly lost, either by means of you removing the obstacle or the opponent taking their arm away? Do you not automatically "thrust forward without hesitation"? That is the LSJC part. If you aren't getting that effect, then something is wrong with your LLHS/forward energy. That's why it appears first in the phrase.

BPWT

07-25-2013, 03:15 AM

Jesus! LSJC has nothing to do with rattan circles!

Yes, not circles - rattan canes. As Yip Man spoke about in the interview he gave to NMH magazine.

LSJC is an important part of Ving Tsun. It's not hard to develop if the training methods are correct unless the student is a bit useless. maintaining it in sparring is another story. I never even heard of LSJC in the Ip Chun lineage.

Yes, maintaining it in sparring is not easy. I was told about LSJC in my Ip Chun lineage, but that was as far as it went. An instructor talked about it. There was never any process of showing how to develop it, sadly.

People wrongly assume that the "loss of contact" bit means that we already have arm contact and when it is released we should thrust forward using some kind of springy energy. That is a common misconception in Wing Chun.

Again, Yip Man mentioned this specifically. I am sure he didn't have a misconception of Wing Chun ;)

Graham H

07-25-2013, 03:15 AM

Graham, you have misunderstood some of what I have said.

I do say in my post that by information I am being very broad and I am quick to move away from Ian's position; I even say I am not referring to using the mind to think. If I feel pressure or an absence of pressure, that is still information for my body. To my mind lsjc is still conditioning a response to stimuli or information so I see that as bound up with it.

Further I am talking about a rattan cane not a circle; it is flexible like bamboo and springy. Yes, that is to think of lsjc in that way; it is very subtle though and more a trigger for movement for the strike once the gap is there; that forward light springy intent as a c o c k e d hammer of a gun that can trigger a more explosive and powerful burst, here the movements for a strike with hips and elbows connected.

Incidentally, a lot of what I outline above is just my thoughts and most of those thoughts have come from others not associated with or training through an Ip Chun lineage.

Please feel free to post up your further analogies to help me better understand this concept.

p.s.

Why don't you just explain your understanding of what LSJC is.

A bit ad hominem, no?

No

BPWT

07-25-2013, 03:17 AM

The way I understand the LLHS-LSJC phrase is interaction between the opponent and yourself, how to act in relation to the opponent;

-When the opponent "advances" (loi) you "remain" (lau), i.e. make use of angling and such to keep the pressure forward but don't retreat taking pressure away.
-When the opponent "retreats" (heui) you "see them off" (sung), i.e. you advance keeping the pressure on them.
-When the opponent's "arm is removed" (lat-sau) you "rush straight" (jik-chung), i.e. you strike forward to their center.

LLHS is all about that constant forward energy.
LSJC is an effect of that energy when met with and once breaking obstruction.

Nice description :)

+1.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 03:28 AM

I know what you mean when others only focus on this "springy energy" effect once contact is made, and even seek to make contact so they can use it as some sort of sensitivity trick but neglect constant forward energy as a general principle. They are misguided, but from my viewpoint you're confusing LSJC with LLHS. What I mean:

The way I understand the LLHS-LSJC phrase is interaction between the opponent and yourself, how to act in relation to the opponent;

-When the opponent "advances" (loi) you "remain" (lau), i.e. make use of angling and such to keep the pressure forward but don't retreat taking pressure away.
-When the opponent "retreats" (heui) you "see them off" (sung), i.e. you advance keeping the pressure on them.
-When the opponent's "arm is removed" (lat-sau) you "rush straight" (jik-chung), i.e. you strike forward to their center.

LLHS is all about that constant forward energy.
LSJC is an effect of that energy when met with and once breaking obstruction.

I see you interpreting LSJC as LLHS, i.e. constant forward energy moving the whole structure as one unit. As a result, you replace LSJC with LLHS and deny the "springy energy" effect.

Well, what happens when contact is made with that sort of forward energy and is then suddenly lost, either by means of you removing the obstacle or the opponent taking their arm away? Do you not automatically "thrust forward without hesitation"? That is the LSJC part. If you aren't getting that effect, then something is wrong with your LLHS/forward energy. That's why it appears first in the phrase.

If contact is made during your forward assault it is minimal. Most of the time only milliseconds. Chi Sau teaches us to continue not stick. We do not block or look to physically move limbs aside but rather use one arm for two purposes so two arms become 4 attacking and protecting entitiies. The correct punching strategy and the use of your bongs, paks, jut etc (should you need them) continue towards the opponent unless of course you are stopped in you tracks when evasive measures need to be taken.

In training we always attack forward (LSJC) so it becomes part of us. In a real fight things may not be so easy and we have to be aware of danger either presented by the attacker or from our own mistakes. LSJC is a concept of developing power using the whole body. Chi Sau builds the structure and Gor Sau uses the structure. There is no time for arm fighting.

In sparring I don't want my attacker to impede me so I will never make contact with his arms unless they hit mine during the punch in which case my elbow should deal with the problem. No elbow and you are left with what you usually see in Wing Chun schools. They use one arm to block and the other to punch. Tan Da is a prime example of this nonsense.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 03:38 AM

BPWT

07-25-2013, 03:45 AM

Yip Man is not alive. Words can be minced as I have seen time and time again in Wing Chun. My own Sigung is long gone as well so I have trust my head coach to relay the message. What Yip Man did and said is in a lot of cases pure speculation and it annoys me when people try and hang of his legacy.

We all know there was a lot of cloak and dagger stuff going on. Yip Man said things to lead people up the garden path so why take an interview written by somebody else as gospel?

1000's of schools around the world claim to be teaching Yip Man Wing Chun and yet most differ from one to the next.

Better to take things with a pinch of salt.

Sure, Yip Man is no longer alive. And you can read the interview and choose not to accept what he was saying. Totally up to you.

But just because something he said in an interview doesn't tally with what you learn, it is a mistake (in my opinion) for you to dismiss it as wrong (or to simply say it might be YM leading someone up the garden path).

In this very thread you said how blind-folded CS was useless, but then you sought clarification and PB told you it had a purpose (in particular circumstances) in training.

I would also argue that what YM said in an interview is not really speculation. He said it.

If I told you a story of my teacher interpreting something he was told YM had allegedly said to someone, that would be speculation.

YM said many interesting things in that interview - there's not really much to speculate on.

LFJ

07-25-2013, 03:49 AM

@Graham

I agree, but you are interpreting LSJC as constant forward energy in moving your whole structure as one. But that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opponent's arms.

"Lat-sau" literally refers to the opponent's arm being removed. That sau is the opponent's arm. So LSJC is dependent upon the opponent's arm being there as an obstruction and what should happen once it's removed.

Why would simply attacking forward with the whole body, which has nothing to do with an opponent's arm, be named something like LSJC which starts off talking about the opponent's arm?

What I understand you to be talking about is actually LLHS.

Do you have another interpretation for LLHS then?

wingchunIan

07-25-2013, 04:16 AM

Graham H

07-25-2013, 04:17 AM

YM said many interesting things in that interview - there's not really much to speculate on.

..........that could be interpreted differently from person to person just like all the other stuff in Wing Chun.

I read your ideas on LLHSLSJC. I disagree. I have different ideas but the title is still LLHSLSJC isn't it?

It's easy to misinterpret things. Wing Chun is a big nasty pot of misinterpretation, miscommunication, politics, infighting and mud slinging.

If you believe what you read are told about Yip Man then you must also have a Unicorn tied up outside. You know why? Because you weren't in the same room and cannot possible judge the context of anything that was said or possibly know anything about the mans personality and humour.

Leave it there eh?

Paddington

07-25-2013, 04:20 AM

Why don't you just explain your understanding of what LSJC is [...]

Hmm, perhaps others could me advise me as to the status of my sanity, for I believe I already gave Graham and example of my thoughts?

Paddington

07-25-2013, 04:21 AM

[...] from my viewpoint you're confusing LSJC with LLHS. What I mean:

The way I understand the LLHS-LSJC phrase is interaction between the opponent and yourself, how to act in relation to the opponent;

-When the opponent "advances" (loi) you "remain" (lau), i.e. make use of angling and such to keep the pressure forward but don't retreat taking pressure away.
-When the opponent "retreats" (heui) you "see them off" (sung), i.e. you advance keeping the pressure on them.
-When the opponent's "arm is removed" (lat-sau) you "rush straight" (jik-chung), i.e. you strike forward to their center.

LLHS is all about that constant forward energy.
LSJC is an effect of that energy when met with and once breaking obstruction.

Thanks for these thoughts and distinctions, I found them really helpful.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 04:41 AM

Hmm, perhaps others could me advise me as to the status of my sanity, for I believe I already gave Graham and example of my thoughts?

Yes and I don't agree with you.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 04:43 AM

So LSJC is dependent upon the opponent's arm being there as an obstruction and what should happen once it's removed.

Really? ok

game over

Toodle pip

BPWT

07-25-2013, 04:50 AM

If you believe what you read are told about Yip Man then you must also have a Unicorn tied up outside. You know why? Because you weren't in the same room and cannot possible judge the context of anything that was said or possibly know anything about the mans personality and humour. Leave it there eh?

Yes, this would be true if we were talking about second or third-hand stories about Yip Man. But we're not. He gave an interview - the talk about rattan cane-like force is what he said.

"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."

I don't think anyone could interpret this as not being about LLHS-LSJC. Given that, it is strange he would 1) use an analogy he didn't think was true, 2) use the idea of pressure, bending, compressing and releasing, if that too was not what he meant.

So I think it is a weak argument to say to suggest that maybe this was humor, that he gave an interview and laced it with false information as, what, some kind of joke? :rolleyes: Considering he rarely gave interviews, it would be strange for him to give one and then fill it with unicorns.

Like I said before, if someone denies this concept of compression and releasing, then it is a bitter pill to swallow when YM specifically refers to it.

That's not to say that the normal pill you usually take is ineffective (PB looks, to me, to be extremely good, very fast, possessing great - really great - timing, and he looks as strong as an ox).

But it does show there's more than one way to skin a cat, so it is silly to talk about "common misconceptions" from other lineages outside of your own. In LLHS-LSJC discussions you are arguing against the words of Yip Man.

Paddington

07-25-2013, 04:54 AM

Yes and I don't agree with you.

That's fine, man. I am just here to learn and I am not asking anyone to take on what I am saying. I am not a Sifu and don't claim to be. TBH I would rather come out and say how I view things and then be corrected by someone should I be in error, than to not have said anything at all.

So, Graham, I am happy to read, in your own words, how you view these themes. How would you teach them? I always find that question helps me get the concepts.

LFJ

07-25-2013, 04:58 AM

So LSJC is dependent upon the opponent's arm being there as an obstruction and what should happen once it's removed.Really? ok

game over

Toodle pip

Literally, yes. That's what LSJC means. Of course not the concept you're describing, because that is not "LSJC", even though you call it that.

I get the feeling PB doesn't speak Chinese? Maybe there was some misinterpretation on his part. You're calling something by a name that doesn't fit it at all... If it has nothing to do with the opponent's arm, why is the opponent's arm in its name? :confused:

What you describe is LLHS, but you never mention that half of the phrase. I wonder if you have a different interpretation of what it means too?

Graham H

07-25-2013, 05:09 AM

I get the feeling PB doesn't speak Chinese? Maybe there was some misinterpretation on his part.

OMFG! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

BPWT

07-25-2013, 05:13 AM

OMFG! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

LOL Graham. Yes, someone has just questioned if, perhaps, PB might have misinterpreted something.

Take a deep breath. In your mind go to a happy place. :)

Graham H

07-25-2013, 05:21 AM

If it has nothing to do with the opponent's arm, why is the opponent's arm in its name? :confused:

Why do some people refer to Bong Sau as wing arm block and other refer to the bone between the shoulder and the elbow?

Why do some people translate Fook Sau as controlling or subduing hand and other say its a punch?

Why do some people say tan sau means spreading palm block?

Why do some people translate Chum Kiu as searching for the arm bridge and others relate the bridge to be the line to your opponent?

Why do some people say Loi lau means make arm contact and other say its about intercepting an attack with your own?

Why do some people say that Bij Jee is about developing finger jabs?

Why do some people think the weapons are only in the system for traditional purposes?

Some people say "sau" means hand. Others say arm. Some say both.

Why o why o why?

You see anything in Wing Chun can mean anything depending on who is saying it so your literal translations are BS.

Being able to speak Chinese means nothing.

David Peterson is fluent in Mandarin and can speak Cantonese yet he and my Sifu have different understandings of WSLVT. Why do you think that is LFJ? You think PB has misinterpreted it because he cannot speak the lingo? :rolleyes:

WSL and PB understood each other perfectly mate. In fact the understanding between PB and WSL was one of the best. Not my words either.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 05:24 AM

LOL Graham. Yes, someone has just questioned if, perhaps, PB might have misinterpreted something.

Take a deep breath. In your mind go to a happy place. :)

Nope nothing. In fact unlike some people PB didn't study under WSL by himself. There were many other groups of people present over a very long time that all say the same thing. In fact I was only talking to somebody about it recently who said nothing has changed from day 1. Its all the same stuff WSL taught them and PB stands by that. When you have whole groups of people that trained for a long time under WSL's guidance I tend to believe what they say rather than you numptys

Your go.

LFJ

07-25-2013, 05:45 AM

David Peterson is fluent in Mandarin and can speak Cantonese yet he and my Sifu have different understandings of WSLVT. Why do you think that is LFJ? You think PB has misinterpreted it because he cannot speak the lingo? :rolleyes:

Well, let's see. Both had personal training with WSL, but one could also communicate directly with him and understand the words of explanation and detail as they came out his mouth. That same guy's explanation of a concept matches the meaning of its name. The other guy, as I gather from you, has mislabeled a different concept with this same name, a name that doesn't fit it at all... So... yeah.

I know which one you think is better, obviously, but PB is still incorrect in labeling the concept you describe as "LSJC". What you describe is LLHS, and you apparently lack the actual concept that the phrase "LSJC" refers to. But you seem firm and content with it, so...

BPWT

07-25-2013, 05:54 AM

Your go.

Not my go, or turn, at all.

You are arguing with the words of Yip Man. If PB (and the group of those he trained with) think Yip Man was wrong in what he said, well... I think that is crazy.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 06:10 AM

What you describe is LLHS, and you apparently lack the actual concept that the phrase "LSJC" refers to. But you seem firm and content with it, so...

Ok here is MY interpretation............

Do you have another interpretation for LLHS then?

Loi Lau is about intercepting an attack. During this attack we must try to cut the opponent off theoretically with something more superior. Ideally it will be a strike or flurries of strikes. How this pans out depends on the situation. LSJC is present in Loi Lau. It has to be or we will be stood still and not be able to take advantage of chances that may be present. The incoming attack could be any attack from any limb. It cannot possibly be chrystalized to just an arm or arms. Loi Lau is part of everything you do. We are always intercepting and trying to attack the opponent in the half beat. Using Sun Tzu's analogy when the army is half way across the bridge.....................

As well as Loi Lau we must use Hoi Sung. This keeps us in permanent contact with the opponents structure (not their arms). If he tries to evade or retreat we must follow and maintain striking distance. Loi Lau and LSJC are always inside Hoi Sung.

Lat Sau Jik Chung is every action. It comes from training the whole structure correctly through the forms and chi sau. The idea to always drill forward at any given opportunity. This idea allows us to always press the opponent and take advantage of chances to attack. Obstacles are sometimes never there but the ideas and movement always remain the same. If obstacles are put in the way be it from an attack or just an opponent trying to protect themselves the skill built up in Chi Sau -Gor sau - Sparring teach us to continue the attack and find opportunities to strike using angles, paks, juts, bongs etc and by trying to turn the opponent to a point where they are at their weakest. All these things are designed to opent the way for the punch should there be any problem.
If we engage the opponents arms and fight them square on we restrict ourselves from being able to hitting with both fists equally so we have a unique way to use the elbow to deflect and protect whist the hands are punching or travelling/recycling to punch. Chum Kiu teaches this idea where as Siu Lim Tau prepares for it.
The dummy further develops these ideas whilst giving one striking power, precision in punching and timing.

LLHSLSJC is a continuous cycle prevalent in every single action of the Ving Tsun fighter. They are not separated. They are one. To apply them all correctly takes time and constant effort.

The idea of LLHSLLSJC being primarily for contacting the arm, sticking to the arm and if the arm isn't there or is removed at any given point we punch is a massive failiure in today's Wing Chun.

k gledhill

07-25-2013, 06:26 AM

Philipp speaks and understands Chinese. BUT when he joined WSL he did not so WSL had to physically or by diagram etc... explain what he meant when teaching pb.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 06:49 AM

Philipp speaks and understands Chinese. BUT when he joined WSL he did not so WSL had to physically or by diagram etc... explain what he meant when teaching pb.

Also Cliff Au Yeung was responsible for a lot of translating in the early days until WSL and PB could speak directly to each other.

k gledhill

07-25-2013, 06:50 AM

Also Cliff Au Yeung was responsible for a lot of translating in the early days until WSL and PB could speak directly to each other.

Yes, he saw the cay clip of blindfold with us ; )

guy b.

07-25-2013, 06:53 AM

Literally, yes. That's what LSJC means. Of course not the concept you're describing, because that is not "LSJC", even though you call it that.

I get the feeling PB doesn't speak Chinese? Maybe there was some misinterpretation on his part. You're calling something by a name that doesn't fit it at all... If it has nothing to do with the opponent's arm, why is the opponent's arm in its name? :confused:

What you describe is LLHS, but you never mention that half of the phrase. I wonder if you have a different interpretation of what it means too?

I think you are misinterpreting LSJC. You talk of meeting an obstruction and breaking that obstruction. I don't think LSJC is to do with contact. It is to do with coming in and exerting pressure either as a strike or as stance movement when there is a chance, any chance. Opponent leaves a gap: LSJC, eat up the space, fill the gap

Graham H

07-25-2013, 06:56 AM

I think you are misinterpreting LSJC. You talk of meeting an obstruction and breaking that obstruction. I don't think LSJC is to do with contact. It is to do with hitting when there is a chance to hit. Opponent leaves a gap: LSJC

LSJC is just the intent to drive forward and develop the skill to continue, continue, continue via the correct structure and use of it. We don't know what will be in front of us until it happens so there are no applications.

LFJ

07-25-2013, 06:56 AM

Graham H

07-25-2013, 06:57 AM

Well, let's see. Both had personal training with WSL, but one could also communicate directly with him and understand the words of explanation and detail as they came out his mouth. That same guy's explanation of a concept matches the meaning of its name. The other guy, as I gather from you, has mislabeled a different concept with this same name, a name that doesn't fit it at all... So... yeah.

You are very wrong!

LFJ

07-25-2013, 06:58 AM

I think you are misinterpreting LSJC. You talk of meeting an obstruction and breaking that obstruction. I don't think LSJC is to do with contact. It is to do with coming in and exerting pressure either as a strike or as stance movement when there is a chance, any chance. Opponent leaves a gap: LSJC, eat up the space, fill the gap

That would have been covered already in the first half of the phrase LLHS-LSJC... Check back a few posts.

guy b.

07-25-2013, 06:58 AM

So I think it is a weak argument to say to suggest that maybe this was humor, that he gave an interview and laced it with false information as, what, some kind of joke? :rolleyes: Considering he rarely gave interviews, it would be strange for him to give one and then fill it with unicorns.

Look what Yip Man left behind. Obviously he was a complete pi$$taker and found it hilarious to seed wrong information left right and centre. He even taught his own sons some questionable stuff

Graham H

07-25-2013, 07:00 AM

@Graham

I agree with the method you describe in general, but I don't think you are using the terms properly.

Yes, people misinterpret terms like Biu-ji and Cham-kiu, but their interpretations still have to do with "fingers" and "bridges", they just misunderstand what they refer to.

On the other hand, Lat-sau describes an action of someone flinging their arms in anger. Picture their arms come apart and their center is wide open. The opponent's arms are removed from the center. The phrase LSJC says when this happens you strike forward.

This term gives the mental picture of an opponent's arms leaving center, but this is the term you use to refer to just moving your structure forward and it has nothing to do with the opponent's arms? Not strange?

It doesn't seem you're missing some meaning somewhere?

No I don't agree! What if he kicks, head butts, grabs or dives?? What if you can't strike forward at that moment? Its not LSJC?

I wouldn't read too much into mental pictures derived from the Cantonese translations. I used to make that mistake. In fact I started learning the language up until a point I realized it was pointless. About the time I met PB :)

Graham H

07-25-2013, 07:01 AM

Look what Yip Man left behind. Obviously he was a complete pi$$taker and found it hilarious to seed wrong information left right and centre. He even taught his own sons some questionable stuff

Agreed.........

Graham H

07-25-2013, 07:02 AM

In fact they probably made a lot of stuff up so I wouldn't hold Yip Man responsible. Yip Chun especially.

k gledhill

07-25-2013, 07:32 AM

Why whenever anyone mentions sensitivity do some people assume this equates to arm chasing. All high level fighters in all systems develop tactile responses its just that many systems rely on experience to teach it rather than having specific drills. Using the tactile responses is far faster than having rely on visual processing. When you are doing your lap sao drills do you rely on your eyes to tell you that the partner has made contact with your arm? or can you tell without looking when they over commit and cross the centre line or alternatively come up short? This is sensitivity, using the information that your arms receive upon contact to find angles and gaps, nothing to do with sticking or chasing arms, and what Ip Man was referring to when he said " the opponent will show you how to hit them"

This is wrong thinking.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 07:49 AM

This is wrong thinking.

Don't tell him that kev! He will say you are in denial! :D

LFJ

07-25-2013, 07:55 AM

No I don't agree! What if he kicks, head butts, grabs or dives?? What if you can't strike forward at that moment? Its not LSJC?

The principle simply states if your centerline attack is met with obstruction, when the obstruction is removed by whatever means (center opened), your attack should continue rather than be retracted or hung in the air. The force that makes this a non-thinking action is constant forward intent. Do you disagree with this as a basic principle?

Here is my interpretation of the whole phrase from literal to more interpretive or succinct:

LLHS; LSJC:

-When the opponent comes you remain (don't retreat). When the opponent goes you escort (chase center); When the opponent's arm is removed, charge straight.
-Intercept what comes. Escort what goes.; When the line is cleared, attack instinctively.
-Cut the line. Stick on 'em.; When a gap is made, fill it.

The first half is what I call constant forward pressure. The second half is what I call automatic response to a line cleared of obstruction.

The second half is an effect of having developed the first.

k gledhill

07-25-2013, 07:59 AM

Don't tell him that kev! He will say you are in denial! :D

Lightning is hard to touch ; ) but fun to watch people try !
Or try to make pressure on lightning.

Graham H

07-25-2013, 08:06 AM

The principle simply states if your centerline attack is met with obstruction, when the obstruction is removed by whatever means (center opened), your attack should continue rather than be retracted or hung in the air. The force that makes this a non-thinking action is constant forward intent. Do you disagree with this as a basic principle?

Kind of but for it to be LSJC it doesn't need obstacles. LSJC is your whole movement. The forward intent is always there regardless. Even if you have to retreat and/or evade there is still LSJC

Here is my interpretation of the whole phrase from literal to more interpretive or succinct:

LLHS; LSJC:

-When the opponent comes you remain (don't retreat).

Don't agree. Sometimes you need to.

When the opponent goes you escort (chase center); When the opponent's arm is removed, charge straight.

Don't agree. What if he hasn't tried to strike you but is retreating? You may have pre empted

-Intercept what comes. Escort what goes.; When the line is cleared, attack instinctively.
-Cut the line. Stick on 'em.; When a gap is made, fill it.

Intercept an attack, stick to him if he tries to evade or retreat, thrust forward without hesitation at every opportunity.

So we are slightly different. My way works for me and I can show it, teach it and use it. I don't explain things like you anymore although I did prior to meeting Bayer.

Must go training now. Laters x

LFJ

07-25-2013, 08:22 AM

Kind of but for it to be LSJC it doesn't need obstacles. LSJC is your whole movement. The forward intent is always there regardless. Even if you have to retreat and/or evade there is still LSJC

Well, fine. That is what I think LLHS refers to in general. It doesn't make sense to mention the opponent's arm in the name of your own movement that doesn't have anything to do with their arm, but if you insist...

Don't agree. Sometimes you need to.

Retreat straight back? The "pushed step" is the closest thing to that perhaps, but it is angling and "remaining" (lau) in range to keep forward pressure on the opponent.

Don't agree. What if he hasn't tried to strike you but is retreating? You may have pre empted

Then I would ask you why this:

stick to him if he tries to evade or retreat, thrust forward without hesitation at every opportunity.

When you cut open their center, or they make a mistake, I call that an opportunity.

Must go to sleep now. Peace. x

Paul T England

07-26-2013, 12:59 AM

Logic and understnading wil answer for you.

Why do some people refer to Bong Sau as wing arm block and other refer to the bone between the shoulder and the elbow? (They are the same thing, the upper arm is all birds have and its their wing!!!)

Why do some people translate Fook Sau as controlling or subduing hand and other say its a punch? (It is a fook sau but for application it can turn into a punch)

Why do some people say tan sau means spreading palm block? (It means spreading hand (like spreading butter from my understanding)

Why do some people translate Chum Kiu as searching for the arm bridge and others relate the bridge to be the line to your opponent? (without chasing hands they are the same!)

Why do some people say Loi lau means make arm contact and other say its about intercepting an attack with your own? (Now we are getting silly)

Why do some people say that Bij Jee is about developing finger jabs? (SNT, CK and BJ have more depth than I understand but also more than most other chunners coudl dream of)

Why do some people think the weapons are only in the system for traditional purposes? (They are these days but you can still keep the techniques and skills alive, plus they add uch for power and application. Generally training with weapons enhances empty hand skills, try a live blade!!!)

Some people say "sau" means hand. Others say arm. Some say both. It can mean both depending on context surely?

Why o why o why?

You see anything in Wing Chun can mean anything depending on who is saying it so your literal translations are BS.

Being able to speak Chinese means nothing. (understanding the language and culture can help you but not without real instruction)

David Peterson is fluent in Mandarin and can speak Cantonese yet he and my Sifu have different understandings of WSLVT. Why do you think that is LFJ? You think PB has misinterpreted it because he cannot speak the lingo?

WSL and PB understood each other perfectly mate. In fact the understanding between PB and WSL was one of the best. Not my words either.

Graham H

07-26-2013, 01:48 AM

Logic and understnading wil answer for you.

(They are the same thing, the upper arm is all birds have and its their wing!!!)

Rubbish

(It is a fook sau but for application it can turn into a punch)

:confused:

(like spreading butter from my understanding)

Rubbish

(without chasing hands they are the same!)

:confused:

(Now we are getting silly)

:confused: jesus, what are you on about?

(SNT, CK and BJ have more depth than I understand but also more than most other chunners coudl dream of)

lmfao

(They are these days but you can still keep the techniques and skills alive, plus they add uch for power and application. Generally training with weapons enhances empty hand skills, try a live blade!!!)

Oh dear I actually agree with you.

(understanding the language and culture can help you but not without real instruction)

Rubbish

Graham H

07-26-2013, 02:59 AM

Well, fine. That is what I think LLHS refers to in general. It doesn't make sense to mention the opponent's arm in the name of your own movement that doesn't have anything to do with their arm, but if you insist...

Yes I insist :)

Retreat straight back? The "pushed step" is the closest thing to that perhaps, but it is angling and "remaining" (lau) in range to keep forward pressure on the opponent.

Yep. You think if you are being attacked by a 19 stone drunk idiot you can "keep forward pressure" on him do you. Brave guy.

When you cut open their center, or they make a mistake, I call that an opportunity.

With your can opener arms? :D

I hope you slept well mon frere! lol

LFJ

07-26-2013, 03:07 AM

LFJ

07-26-2013, 03:14 AM

Yep. You think if you are being attacked by a 19 stone drunk idiot you can "keep forward pressure" on him do you. Brave guy.

Depends on the size and composition of the stones...

But seriously, they will be strongest in one direction- the front. Change angle and suddenly they can be manipulated much more easily, especially if they're drunk.

Graham H

07-26-2013, 03:24 AM

On the 'language barrier', I've seen foreigners come to China for training and their lack of language ability really is a barrier at times. You can monkey-see, monkey-do and get by. But even with an interpreter, if their translation is rubbish you'll be missing important details, or in the worst case the point entirely because you are led to believe the master was saying something which they weren't quite.

I would say it is obvious the one who can directly understand the detailed explanation as it is coming out of the master's mouth in their native tongue will have a greater likelihood of understanding their complete message, as opposed to one relying solely on monkey-see, monkey-do, or getting the wrong information from a poor translator, or even when the master's English is not good enough for them to express everything they would like. Something is likely to be missing, such as the more abstract concepts.

I will have to disagree. Speaking the language means nothing. Look at Gary Lam. He is Chinese and taught in WSL's own school and look what a mess he has been teaching and using. PB and WSL could talk directly after time and he spent many more vital hours in the company of WSL than most. He lived in HK for the first 18 months of his time with WSL and was living with a Chinese family.

Many of WSL's students visited for holidays. They were not full time students and assistants. Added to that is that PB is a fighter and an intelligent dude. He was one of the only Westerners ever to go to the sparring classes in HK and he also went on holidays with WSL and his wife. This would have gave him many many hours of talking time with WSL as well as practicing.

Just because you can speak Chinese does not mean you will a great VT practitioner, fighter and Teacher.

When I told Simo and Chen Kin Man I was studying under Bayer they both told me he was the best. There weren't many other names flying around the table when we were talking about people that had WSL's thinking mate. I would have noted it.

Graham H

07-26-2013, 03:25 AM

Depends on the size and composition of the stones...

But seriously, they will be strongest in one direction- the front. Change angle and suddenly they can be manipulated much more easily, especially if they're drunk.

Easy to talk about when the threat of serious injury and fear are taken away isn't it?

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 05:17 AM

A little known fact was how much time WSL and PB trained in Germany. At the period of WSL death, PB was building an apt over his own home for WSL and his wife to move to Germany.

wingchunIan

07-26-2013, 07:45 AM

This is wrong thinking.

Of course it is. Because PB didn't tell you this is so in those exact words it doesn't fit with your mantra and therefore is incorrect. The rest of the fighting world is clearly wrong. A BJJ practitioner doesn't look for submissions they react to what they feel, a wrestler doesn't look for opportunities to throw they react to what they feel, a boxer or MT fighter at clinch range doesn't rely on seeing the next punch coming in they react to what they feel in terms of impact on either their body or their gloves. At distance you have to use your eyes to determine what is happening but at close range you can't possibly see everything, process the information and respond quickly enough.
When you throw a punch at someone and it gets stopped do you
a) stand there dumbfounded wondering what to do next
b) look carefully at your arm to determine what just happened before making a decision as to what to do next
c) ignore everything and follow a set sequence of moves X follows Y follows Z like a robot whatever the situation
d) react instinctively without thinking, such as switching hands, changing angles, removing the obstruction etc etc

If the answer is (d) then you are using sensitivity (basing your reaction on the tactile information received). In the split second of contact the first thing that tells you your punch has been stopped is the sensation from your arm. Understanding the correct / highest percentage response to such stimuli and reduction in the time taken to respond is either gained through years of experience of fighting and sparring or through sensitivity training or both.

Graham H

07-26-2013, 08:43 AM

Of course it is. Because PB didn't tell you this is so in those exact words it doesn't fit with your mantra and therefore is incorrect. The rest of the fighting world is clearly wrong. A BJJ practitioner doesn't look for submissions they react to what they feel, a wrestler doesn't look for opportunities to throw they react to what they feel, a boxer or MT fighter at clinch range doesn't rely on seeing the next punch coming in they react to what they feel in terms of impact on either their body or their gloves. At distance you have to use your eyes to determine what is happening but at close range you can't possibly see everything, process the information and respond quickly enough.
When you throw a punch at someone and it gets stopped do you
a) stand there dumbfounded wondering what to do next
b) look carefully at your arm to determine what just happened before making a decision as to what to do next
c) ignore everything and follow a set sequence of moves X follows Y follows Z like a robot whatever the situation
d) react instinctively without thinking, such as switching hands, changing angles, removing the obstruction etc etc

If the answer is (d) then you are using sensitivity (basing your reaction on the tactile information received). In the split second of contact the first thing that tells you your punch has been stopped is the sensation from your arm. Understanding the correct / highest percentage response to such stimuli and reduction in the time taken to respond is either gained through years of experience of fighting and sparring or through sensitivity training or both.

Absolute nonsense. I think you live in the clouds Ian.

Wayfaring

07-26-2013, 08:49 AM

Yep. You think if you are being attacked by a 19 stone drunk idiot you can "keep forward pressure" on him do you. Brave guy.

I think he was talking about stepping back with an angle step rather than straight back. With a large guy like that you better work angles and either get some continuous offense going or stay outside of range. I do agree that with a large size differential it's not going to be possible to keep in a stance and never take a backwards step.

BPWT

07-26-2013, 09:25 AM

You can also step back at an angle and still keep forward pressure through the point of contact (and there should be a point of contact as this is where you met the force that was too strong for you to simply shift or step otherwise and so you had to angle back).

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 09:43 AM

LFJ

07-26-2013, 09:47 AM

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 10:05 AM

Specifically, the teui-ma or 'pushed step' collapses backward on an angle which still allows forward pressure to be returned to the opponent via a new line on which they are weaker. It's therefore not truly a 'retreating' step.

This is one method of applying the 'loi lau' (when the opponent advances, you remain) principle in order to keep constant forward pressure as I've been discussing. When the opponent is caught on this bad line they'll often try to evade or retreat in order to recover. That's when 'heui sung' (when the opponent retreats, you chase center) comes in. LLHS = constant forward pressure.

If our centerline attack is met with obstruction, when that obstruction is removed this forward energy causes our attack to automatically continue to the target. That's LSJC. If this effect is not happening, the problem is with LLHS. You're stopping, hesitating, retracting, or retreating, but not applying constant forward pressure. LSJC is the result of LLHS. That's my interpretation in a nutshell.

Sometimes the abstract methods we use to develop are confused with 1:1 use. We ( vt ) USE EACH OTHER in abstract ways to strengthen ourselves for combat. You can't expect our pushing to be replicated so its " when you get pushed " what if the guy kicks you ? Are you going to let the kick push you ? I won't push you into toi ma either. ; )
Too much contact based drilling in abstractions causes a 1:1 idea.
In seung ma toi ma there are TWO roles being taken. Not all about being pushed back, who is stepping forwards ? How does the seung ma deal with an angle ? Why do I push you ? What leg do I push with , step back , forwards , how far to step ? Why ?

PB made us laugh when he mentioned the abstract nature of the dummy too. If it is a human we should put hair under the arm pits ; ) lmao ! But it isn't.

Wayfaring

07-26-2013, 10:16 AM

PB made us laugh when he mentioned the abstract nature of the dummy too. If it is a human we should put hair under the arm pits ; ) lmao ! But it isn't.

VT anatomically correct dummies. The next craze. :D

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 10:23 AM

VT anatomically correct dummies. The next craze. :D

Hah ! Why are the arms of the dummy not aimed at our heads ? Surely a direct arm down the center seems logical ? Why a low centered arm , happy to see us ? !

BPWT

07-26-2013, 10:33 AM

Why a low centered arm , happy to see us ? !

:D Okay, that made me laugh :D

LFJ

07-26-2013, 10:36 AM

I wasn't talking about a drill, k.

Teui-ma doesn't have to be from contact done as a result of an actual push by the opponent as in drill. It can be a means of evading a forward attack without 'retreating'. When advancing on an angle or moving laterally is not the best option, teui-ma can be used.

Employed against a kick it involves no contact at all. Timed just right it moves one off line causing the opponent to over-commit and lose balance, at which point an interception of their leg as it lowers to the floor can take them off their feet or critically disrupt their balance. It can be applied in a similar fashion as the dummy footwork. It just requires a bit of skill in range and timing.

LFJ

07-26-2013, 10:40 AM

In that sense, Kev, the 'pushed' step is what is abstract. :) Describes the feeling of the step.

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 10:47 AM

LFJ

07-26-2013, 11:01 AM

What?

You're the one talking about contact and drilling. I never even mentioned seung-ma.

I don't know what you're on about now.

WC1277

07-26-2013, 11:03 AM

Hah ! Why are the arms of the dummy not aimed at our heads ? Surely a direct arm down the center seems logical ? Why a low centered arm , happy to see us ? !

While your post is amusing and I must admit it made me smirk, an arm down the middle aimed at our heads is not logical.

The dummy arm placement is an abstract of a reversed triangle with the body core being the "point" of the triangle, i.e. your target, centerline. Even when you're making contact with just a lower and an upper or just an upper even while moving around it, if your footwork is correct, your upper structure still should be in a triangle "shape" position due to this arm positioning. One of the reasons I laugh when you argue with me about my point of balanced footwork with the upper body, in all the forms including the dummy, is because I don't think you see this abstract... ;)

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 11:07 AM

While your post is amusing and I must admit it made me smirk, an arm down the middle aimed at our heads is not logical.

The dummy arm placement is an abstract of a reversed triangle with the body being your target, i.e. centerline. Even when you're making contact with just a lower and an upper or just an upper even while moving around it, if your footwork is correct, your upper structure still should be in a triangle "shape" position due to this arm positioning. One of the reasons I laugh when you argue with me about my point of balanced footwork with the upper body, in all the forms including the dummy, is because I don't think you see this abstract... ;)

Not the reason. I know you don't do this thinking in your lineage.

WC1277

07-26-2013, 11:09 AM

Not the reason. I know you don't do this thinking in your lineage.

Ok, then, what's the reason for the arm placement?

k gledhill

07-26-2013, 11:10 AM

What?

You're the one talking about contact and drilling. I never even mentioned seung-ma.

I don't know what you're on about now.

Ok we can leave it then.

Graham H

07-26-2013, 11:31 PM

Graham H

07-26-2013, 11:35 PM

That's my interpretation in a nutshell.

Everybody is entitled to their own interpretation. Whether it is correct or not is another matter. Your interpretation would be incorrect in my lineage but then that's because PB missed the boat when it came to learning Ving Tsun because he couldn't speak Chinese :):rolleyes:

Graham H

07-26-2013, 11:38 PM

While your post is amusing and I must admit it made me smirk, an arm down the middle aimed at our heads is not logical.

The dummy arm placement is an abstract of a reversed triangle with the body core being the "point" of the triangle, i.e. your target, centerline. Even when you're making contact with just a lower and an upper or just an upper even while moving around it, if your footwork is correct, your upper structure still should be in a triangle "shape" position due to this arm positioning. One of the reasons I laugh when you argue with me about my point of balanced footwork with the upper body, in all the forms including the dummy, is because I don't think you see this abstract... ;)

That thinking would be incorrect in my lineage

GlennR

07-26-2013, 11:43 PM

That thinking would be incorrect in my lineage

Theres thinking in your lineage? Bwahahahahahahhaahaha!

Graham H

07-26-2013, 11:44 PM

Theres thinking in your lineage? Bwahahahahahahhaahaha!

Yes but it's all wrong lol

guy b.

07-27-2013, 01:47 AM

So seung ma depends on making contact to push like the drill ?

?

This doesn't follow from what LFJ said

lance

07-27-2013, 03:56 AM

Thought ill just throw this in the mix enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j5bSRb-3TQ Just how many students did Sifu WSL have anyway ? So was Sifu Gary Lam , David Peterson Sifu WSL ' s disciples ? And after Sifu David Peterson , Sifu WSL decided to take in students under him ? Just wanted to get my facts straight concerning ,
Sifu WSL , that ' s all .

Jansingsang

07-27-2013, 04:35 AM

Just how many students did Sifu WSL have anyway ? So was Sifu Gary Lam , David Peterson Sifu WSL ' s disciples ? And after Sifu David Peterson , Sifu WSL decided to take in students under him ? Just wanted to get my facts straight concerning ,
Sifu WSL , that ' s all .

Sigung WSL had quite a noteable amount of Students to speak of all the above I cant speak for whom he took on as students
for your fact finding this might help

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

k gledhill

07-27-2013, 05:35 AM

Sigung WSL had quite a noteable amount of Students to speak of all the above I cant speak for whom he took on as students
for your fact finding this might help

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

Correction. WSL had many visitors and few students.

Jansingsang

07-27-2013, 05:44 AM

Correction. WSL had many visitors and few students.

That too I stand corrected Sir :D

wkmark

07-28-2013, 07:49 PM

Correction. WSL had many visitors and few students.

Are you talking about foreigners or local students??

wingchunIan

07-28-2013, 11:45 PM

Again wrong approach.

Only according to you, I'll stick with the approach that works for the rest of the fighting world.

Graham H

07-29-2013, 02:02 AM

Only according to you, I'll stick with the approach that works for the rest of the fighting world.

I hope you're not referring to the Ip Chun lineage when you say "rest of the fighting world" lol

Frost

07-29-2013, 02:11 AM

I hope you're not referring to the Ip Chun lineage when you say "rest of the fighting world" lol

what's that phrase about people in glass houses.....:)

Graham H

07-29-2013, 02:11 AM

what's that phrase about people in glass houses.....:)

Ok you decide.......

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=560688887304990

wingchunIan

07-29-2013, 05:55 AM

what's that phrase about people in glass houses.....:)

saw Graham's post because you quoted it, think I was fairly clear in my previous post as to what I mean by the entire fighting world

Graham H

07-29-2013, 06:12 AM

saw Graham's post because you quoted it, think I was fairly clear in my previous post as to what I mean by the entire fighting world

Yes and I was referring to Ip Chun's version of Wing Chun being more akin to knitting rather than fighting. :D

Somebody quote that for Ian please lol

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 06:17 AM

wingchunIan

07-29-2013, 07:39 AM

So Ian, you use chi sao to develop arm pressure control and sensing arm intentions ? When you fight and a guy is punching and kickng you, your response is guided by feeling his punch or kick first , like the rest of the fighting world ? I think the fighting world has shown this approach to vt ,what it is , **** .
Mobility and tactical striking doesn't rely of feeling first, we have to use reflex like movements developed through high reps to become fast enough and powerful enough to use at fighting speeds. Sadly many mistake chi sao as a way to feel things. They forget power of a punch for feeling each others arms. They use each other for balance pressure rather than independent mobile structures capable of fast balanced striking attacks.
The fighting world is just fine with my approach. ; )

VT is abstract. It requires that each student is using one another as a group approach for combating enemies, not each other in ridiculous arm rolling wars. Synchronization of arms along with power is not easy so many will follow a less intense method.
And this is why you need to actually read the posts rather than just shooting off some rhetoric. If you don't believe that high level fighters in other combat arts (bjj, mma, boxing, MT) use the information presented to them by their tactile senses to drive their reactions then you must believe in some magical power because they manage to pull things off without being in a position to see their opponent, oh or maybe they just get lucky every time.

the "reflex like movements developed through high reps" are using what for their trigger exactly? ESP? your amazing ability to see in slow motion? or just maybe its the sensation received through the arm itself.......

I'm done arguing in circles

Graham H

07-29-2013, 07:58 AM

I'm done arguing in circles

Good because your posts are nonsense.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 08:01 AM

And this is why you need to actually read the posts rather than just shooting off some rhetoric. If you don't believe that high level fighters in other combat arts (bjj, mma, boxing, MT) use the information presented to them by their tactile senses to drive their reactions then you must believe in some magical power because they manage to pull things off without being in a position to see their opponent, oh or maybe they just get lucky every time.

the "reflex like movements developed through high reps" are using what for their trigger exactly? ESP? your amazing ability to see in slow motion? or just maybe its the sensation received through the arm itself.......

I'm done arguing in circles

I am done too, you can lead a horse to water.....

WC1277

07-29-2013, 12:02 PM

So Ian, you use chi sao to develop arm pressure control and sensing arm intentions ? When you fight and a guy is punching and kickng you, your response is guided by feeling his punch or kick first , like the rest of the fighting world ? I think the fighting world has shown this approach to vt ,what it is , **** .
Mobility and tactical striking doesn't rely of feeling first, we have to use reflex like movements developed through high reps to become fast enough and powerful enough to use at fighting speeds. Sadly many mistake chi sao as a way to feel things. They forget power of a punch for feeling each others arms. They use each other for balance pressure rather than independent mobile structures capable of fast balanced striking attacks.
The fighting world is just fine with my approach. ; )

VT is abstract. It requires that each student is using one another as a group approach for combating enemies, not each other in ridiculous arm rolling wars. Synchronization of arms along with power is not easy so many will follow a less intense method.

Amusing. A soapbox aspiring to be the man above holding it down...:rolleyes:

A soapbox who can't understand 'timing', the role it plays, with a teacher who doesn't seem to know how to teach it...

A soapbox who thinks the correct 'clak' of the dummy is the result of holding the arms/body in that position for an extra second to not allow any reverberation. A soapbox who most likely can't make that 'clak' otherwise...

A soapbox who regularly trains with an open fist and a bent wrist when "attacking" somehow thinking that will 'translate'. A soapbox who regularly says others are 'flailing arms' yet is blind to his own...

A soapbox whose lineage has almost no training on taking the "inside line" and instead chooses to focus on methods against 'elbow down' opponents despite the obvious that no one they will face will ever have 'elbows down'. A soapbox who thinks he can still "turn" them or "angle" despite this.

A soapbox who correctly doesn't treat the dummy as a 'human' but in turn treats it's training partners as if it did...

....I could go on but since this soapbox is beginning to collapse under the weight of it's preacher, I mean teacher, I feel sorry for the choice of materials it was made out of...

Jansingsang

07-29-2013, 12:23 PM

amusing. A soapbox aspiring to be the man above holding it down...:rolleyes:

A soapbox who can't understand 'timing', the role it plays, with a teacher who doesn't seem to know how to teach it...

A soapbox who thinks the correct 'clak' of the dummy is the result of holding the arms/body in that position for an extra second to not allow any reverberation. A soapbox who most likely can't make that 'clak' otherwise...

A soapbox who regularly trains with an open fist and a bent wrist when "attacking" somehow thinking that will 'translate'. A soapbox who regularly says others are 'flailing arms' yet is blind to his own...

A soapbox whose lineage has almost no training on taking the "inside line" and instead chooses to focus on methods against 'elbow down' opponents despite the obvious that no one they will face will ever have 'elbows down'. A soapbox who thinks he can still "turn" them or "angle" despite this.

A soapbox who correctly doesn't treat the dummy as a 'human' but in turn treats it's training partners as if it did...

....i could go on but since this soapbox is beginning to collapse under the weight of it's preacher, i mean teacher, i feel sorry for choice of materials it was made out of...

A soapbox sounds like a good theme to a song .. Its all about the Soapbox Mammy Mammy brilliant

WC1277

07-29-2013, 01:23 PM

A soapbox sounds like a good theme to a song .. Its all about the Soapbox Mammy Mammy brilliant

I don't know if that was supposed to be some kind of clever comeback or you didn't realize that post was about Kevin and all the PB fanboys. That includes you, right? ;)

YouKnowWho

07-29-2013, 01:53 PM

At distance you have to use your eyes to determine what is happening but at close range you can't possibly see everything, process the information and respond quickly enough.
I think most people just didn't read this part of your post. To me, you have made this very clear.

BPWT

07-29-2013, 02:06 PM

And to think........We're stuck with this cr@p.
http://youtu.be/ZcWcy2NA1pk

To be sure, I agree that this clip is not crap - and obviously PB is not crap :)

But I have to agree with Ian to some extent.

In the clip you posted, the drills (whether bong/lap or starting from poon sau) have lots of movement (angling, pivoting) when attacking that work off of a bridge, and that has to be partially connected to 'feel'.

Clearing the line of attack and feeling that the line of attack has been cleared, for example. I can't believe this attacking is done purely via visuals and through having drilled the attacks for repetitive/automatic response.

I think your lineage certainly has a bigger focus on striking without maintaining bridges - but you do still have bridging and you use what you get from that contact, it seems to me.

In these clips PB makes heavy use of the lap to help clear the way (usually followed by a very fast attack as he fills the open gap). But if the opponent was very, very strong and could resist the lap - would PB still attack the same way, by rote (attacking along a line that was not clear - and thus a redundant attack), or would he work off of the tension/strength he met and change to another attack?

It must be the latter, no?

If not, why have so many of the Ving Tsun hands? Why not simply use punching with elbow down, supported with footwork and angling, pivoting, etc, for everything?

Why have Kau Sau, for example?

Jansingsang

07-29-2013, 02:24 PM

I don't know if that was supposed to be some kind of clever comeback or you didn't realize that post was about Kevin and all the PB fanboys. That includes you, right? ;)

Calm down calm down now:D I was not defending anyone here Why should it be just about Kevin ? It's a forum were we all can express ourselfs isnt it so :confused: I only wanted a Sing song as nothing new was happening :rolleyes: You dont need to jump out your pram and have a go at me Just because i liked the Soapbox theme

Listen iam not in Nobodys Fanboy, Bum boy what ever club you on about right Kevin is a Big boy now and handles his own affiars were not affiliated Only the same Sigung Wsl So lets not argue and just hold hands and Sing the Soapbox Song again it will relieve your Stressssssss:D

BPWT

07-29-2013, 04:15 PM

@BPWT
What is Kau Sau?

We don't have. :)

Maybe it is a terminology difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPdl-mGKL-Y

WSL's left hand/arm at 0:56-0:57.

I can't see from the camera angle how much contact (or not) he keeps with the dummy's arm. It appears again in the form, for most lineages too, I think. You can see it also at around 1:40-1:41 (again with WSL's left hand).

We (in LTWT) train it specifically in a particular chi sau section. There are a few ideas to the motion, but one is to move something inside your bridge to the outside, or to put it another way, to redirect from one line to another in order to open up a new line of attack.

I mention Kau Sau as its idea can't (IMO) be used unless you are reacting to a line of force/direction of force once bridged. Rote muscle-memory from drilling wouldn't allow to predict the use, and visual aids would be too slow.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 04:20 PM

To be sure, I agree that this clip is not crap - and obviously PB is not crap :)

But I have to agree with Ian to some extent.

In the clip you posted, the drills (whether bong/lap or starting from poon sau) have lots of movement (angling, pivoting) when attacking that work off of a bridge, and that has to be partially connected to 'feel'.

Clearing the line of attack and feeling that the line of attack has been cleared, for example. I can't believe this attacking is done purely via visuals and through having drilled the attacks for repetitive/automatic response.

I think your lineage certainly has a bigger focus on striking without maintaining bridges - but you do still have bridging and you use what you get from that contact, it seems to me.

In these clips PB makes heavy use of the lap to help clear the way (usually followed by a very fast attack as he fills the open gap). But if the opponent was very, very strong and could resist the lap - would PB still attack the same way, by rote (attacking along a line that was not clear - and thus a redundant attack), or would he work off of the tension/strength he met and change to another attack?

It must be the latter, no?

If not, why have so many of the Ving Tsun hands? Why not simply use punching with elbow down, supported with footwork and angling, pivoting, etc, for everything?

Why have Kau Sau, for example?

I am not surprised you share Ian's approach. In fact it's to be expected due to the same approach. Contact for sensing feeling stuff, and then chain punch eggbeater attack with twelve elbows when fighting. ; )
Kau sao ?

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 04:22 PM

@BPWT
What is Kau Sau?

We don't have. :)
--------------------------------------------------------Kau sao is an important wing chun movement.
The foundations are there in slt and the (first section)mok jong forms. It can be used in drills, chi sao and gor sao.
Many mistake it for a pak sao. It can help redirect close quarters attacks -like short hooks- coming close to the body- where pak may not be as effective.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 04:23 PM

Maybe it is a terminology difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPdl-mGKL-Y

WSL's left hand/arm at 0:56-0:57.

I can't see from the camera angle how much contact (or not) he keeps with the dummy's arm. It appears again in the form, for most lineages too, I think. You can see it also at around 1:40-1:41 (again with WSL's left hand).

We (in LTWT) train it specifically in a particular chi sau section. There are a few ideas to the motion, but one is to move something inside your bridge to the outside, or to put it another way, to redirect from one line to another in order to open up a new line of attack.

I mention Kau Sau as its idea can't (IMO) be used unless you are reacting to a line of force/direction of force once bridged. Rote muscle-memory from drilling wouldn't allow to predict the use, and visual aids would be too slow.

That's huen sao. It is a mid section cutting hand aka sickle hand, not what you're thinking like a hooking hand ?
Btw huen doesn't require pre contact to work either.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 04:27 PM

--------------------------------------------------------Kau sao is an important wing chun movement.
The foundations are there in slt and the (first section)mok jong forms. It can be used in drills, chi sao and gor sao.
Many mistake it for a pak sao. It can help redirect close quarters attacks -like short hooks- coming close to the body- where pak may not be as effective.

In your eclectic method maybe a kau sao and a foot hook combo : /

BPWT

07-29-2013, 04:30 PM

That's huen sao. It is a mid section cutting hand aka sickle hand, not what you're thinking like a hooking hand ?
Btw huen doesn't require pre contact to work either.

That's cool - I never think of it as Huen Sau because of the elbow position, but it fits with what I am asking too, as it also changes the line.

My point is, do you use these ideas based on rote drilling - essentially so that you use this based on an automatic response to either a) a visual cue, or b) your own previous action (I mean, if you were to employ the idea found in the movement, into one of your drills)?

BPWT

07-29-2013, 04:38 PM

I dont see it....I see huen sao training....I can see how huen sao as trained on dummy can be misconstrued as some kind of circling arm/re directing "move".....especially for those who only see the form as a series of "applications"........not sure how that can be mistaken for a pak sao?

I don't think our lineage sees the forms as "a series of applications", rather a series of ideas - like everything in the art. But it's a physical art - you can always find a physical manifestation. You should always be able to take ideas/concepts from the art and find a way to drill aspects of it... otherwise WC/VT/WT would just be people on forums talking about the art. :)

In the PB clips, he looks to be physically interacting with the students ;) Would you not say he is showing you how to "apply" the arts ideas?

But my point was... why not simply use stepping, turning/pivoting for repositioning and only punch in VT, if you don't want to utilize contact via a bridge and instead only rely on visual cues and preconditioned responses?

Kevin said Huen doesn't need pre-contact to work. Not needing pre-contact makes no sense, unless i am really not understanding Kevin's words. So I'm asking why use huen at all then if there is no contact - huen is not a strike, so without a bridge... why not simply strike?

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 04:39 PM

In your eclectic method maybe a kau sao and a foot hook combo : /
------------------------------------------------

Never fails- obstreperous as usual. Too bad that you don't understand kau sau.Your loss.

BPWT

07-29-2013, 04:52 PM

. ...[...]
Yes. The elbow has to lift of course, because the dummy arm doesn't move......which means you can properly train and develop your huen.....provided you dont give up your elbow too easily........

Okay, but in the video (throughout the form), during this movement (and others) WSL keeps stick on the dummy's arms.

Why? He could easily perform the movements by always striking and disengaging.

or you see it as some kind of raised-elbow-circle-arm-clingy-re-direction nonsense :)

Yes, the elbow raises because of the rigidity of the dummy's arm - but also because of what you are doing with your arm - because it maintained stick to the dummy. If you disengaged your arm you could attain the same position that follows (and perhaps without raising the elbow, no?)

So I am asking, why do you stick during the dummy form - especially on movements that are not taking a direct line forward?

Edit: At 3:10, WSL is showing application of an idea from a movement (showing that you can illustrate with applications). But here he is showing an application that takes advantage of the stick - at 3:10, why perform this movement with his right arm? He could just as easily have shifted and used his left hand to cut the new angle.

IMO, he is taking advantage of the stick/contact his right hand has, to aid the attack he issues with his left hand. To be sure, if the student had interrupted his demo at that point and come forward with another strike, WSL would have known it was coming because he had maintained contact with his right hand.

BPWT

07-29-2013, 05:11 PM

Tell that to my right forearm after Philipp showed me huen sao :D

Seriously...what you are alluding to.....its right un front of you in PB clips. We want to strike or clear (strike) a path for another strike.....not redirection or sensing feeling and manipulating limbs etc.

Yes, i can relate - what sometimes look like a defensive movement can leave you bruised to Hell.

Clearing a path, let's say with lap sau, is redirecting! A tan motion is redirecting. When you, in PB lineage, say your Bong Sau is shunting, that is a way of redirecting.

My point is that PB is constantly bridging and redirecting in this clips.

What I can't understand is how you (generic you) say that this is not based on feel. What happens if PB attacks and you attack too, at pretty much the same time?

Are you both just automations, running through a prearrange motion that comes from hours of drilling? No, of course not ;) You would have your attack thwarted/interrupted and you would change (angle, direction, position). That would have to be done via feel.

Why? Because the movement would happen faster than you eyes could relay the unexpected to your brain and you could insert a new prearranged motion.

Or put it this way - to go back to lap sau.

If you lap my arm and I am hideously strong and tense, and you can't move my arm, what do you do (in PB lineage)?

WC1277

07-29-2013, 05:23 PM

Tell that to my right forearm after Philipp showed me huen sao :D

Seriously...what you are alluding to.....its right un front of you in PB clips. We want to strike or clear (strike) a path for another strike.....not redirection or sensing feeling and manipulating limbs etc.

So you chase arms then? I keep hearing over and over again from you fellas that "everything" is a strike. Even when you're "clearing" a path, it's a strike. That jum sau is a strike. That kau sau, I'm sorry huen sau;), is a strike. Etc. etc. etc.

Who put this play on words into you all? I used to kind of leave PB, the man, out of the arrogance of his students. But, ffs, someone had to of put these choice of words into every single one of you that posts on these forums. Coincidence?

You do realize, if in fact you do as your poor choice of words entails, that you ARE chasing arms then!!!? ....makes sense though, if you can ALWAYS predict your training partner is going to switch between 'one arm attacks'...just saying...:rolleyes:

BPWT

07-29-2013, 05:37 PM

Run! :D

Seriously?..first....lap as you know it, is really jut. It is important to know it is describing the energy (dynamic)rather than the motion.
So you are pitting my whole body trained jut (lap) against your one arm and I am unable to move it a few inches to clear for my next strike???:D

Yes, we can call it jut! :) Our Bong Lap drill in LTWT is really Bong Jut Da to all intents and purpose.

But for the sake of argument/discussion, yes... say that I strike in the drill, and you bong and your next movement (lap or jut) struggles to clear the line... or, say it does clear the line but I have already repositioned my facing and so that 'old line' no longer exists, what do you do (in PB lineage)?

My point, is that whatever you do it will be based on contact from your jut/lap hand. As soon as you make contact (whether in jut or bong or whatever) you will be aware of your position in relation to my own. And then you act accordingly.

So... when I watch these clips of PB, I see him constantly bridging, redirecting, working position off of contact (brief stick).

Yet you and Kevin and Graham, etc, keep saying that in VT you don't look to bridge and redirect, that Chi Sau is not about sticking, etc. Yet I see clips of PB and WSL that seem to illustrate exactly these things.

WC1277

07-29-2013, 06:12 PM

How the hell do you get arm chasing from me saying we strike and strike?:confused:
No we dont chase or stick to arms? Its simple enough to grasp surely?

...but you do... Probably the source of the horrible timing you all seem to have as well.

Let me ask you something. When you use jut sau as a "strike", what are you striking? The body or the arms? If you are "striking" the arms(which you are), then you are not only, defeating the purpose, but you're actively adding a committed "active" motion to the opponents arm and not the body, hence "chasing". I don't care how fast you think you are or the "self-fulling prophecy" you guys do with each other, you are voluntarily creating an action against the "arms" and in turn will get knocked out... once again, just saying....:rolleyes:

There are only two motions that address this "active" function. Lap sau and pak sau. And even then, you have to have good timing. ALL other motions you learn are just for simultaneous redirect and attack(with two arms) when the "straight" attack gets interfered with...

Stop being dense please and realize that arms aren't going to be sitting there for you to "strike"!

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 07:06 PM

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

Never fails- obstreperous as usual. Too bad that you don't understand kau sau.Your loss.

Your delusions blind you.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 07:09 PM

. ...[...]
Yes. The elbow has to lift of course, because the dummy arm doesn't move......which means you can properly train and develop your huen.....provided you dont give up your elbow too easily........or you see it as some kind of raised-elbow-circle-arm-clingy-re-direction nonsense :)
Aka joys Kau sau ( only he understands ); )

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 08:37 PM

Aka joys Kau sau ( only he understands ); )
----------------------------------------

Too bad- you don't. Not interested in any conversion.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 08:51 PM

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

Too bad- you don't. Not interested in any conversion.

I used to think Kau sao was a way to manipulate arms in chi sao too. Wrong thinking based on chi sao combat exchange. A misinterpreted huen sao done on a rigid dummy arm. Come on, froggy ! Stop eating the crickets and listen to one.

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 08:59 PM

I used to think Kau sao was a way to manipulate arms in chi sao too. Wrong thinking based on chi sao combat exchange. A misinterpreted huen sao done on a rigid dummy arm. Come on, froggy ! Stop eating the crickets and listen to one.
------------------------------------------------------

I have seen you move in VK days..witha different sifu you try to quack differently-but your moves in the recent seminar are still stiff. Your attempts at humor are usual poor.

LFJ

07-29-2013, 09:01 PM

BPWT and Vajramusti both use the term 'kau-sau', but refer to two completely different actions;

BPWT's kau-sau is like a hyun-sau with high elbow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouYQ9NhH0lo

Vajramusti's kau-sau looks like a paak-sau from the front but flicks the wrist and pulls in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf17b2VBcZo

Two completely different actions with the same name.

Don't exist in WSLVT.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 09:12 PM

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

I have seen you move in VK days..witha different sifu you try to quack differently-but your moves in the recent seminar are still stiff. Your attempts at humor are usual poor.

Allegiance is not a guarantee of anything joy.

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 09:15 PM

Vajramusti

07-29-2013, 09:17 PM

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

True Lots of stuff not in what you call WSLVT.

The tyranny of words.

k gledhill

07-29-2013, 09:49 PM

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

True Lots of stuff not in what you call WSLVT.

Lots of Fong inventions by your own admission.

WC1277

07-30-2013, 01:42 AM

Kau sau is essentially a huen sau motion that rotates 'outside-in', not 'in-outside' like the huen. The wrist does NOT twist to the inside but retains a 'lap sau grip' type shape in application either horizontally or vertically depending.

An easy example where it can be found used is in the chi sao roll 'switch'. People sometimes will try to punch in as you roll your tan sau out to the fok sau during the switch. That roll out, you could say, is the first part of the motion of kau sau. That space in between your completion to fok, since your hand is essentially parallel to their forearm, the normal reaction people do is try to pak or try to slip their jum sau past the forearm to intercept the attack. What the kau sau does instead is lightly grip the arm, no thumb, in almost a reversed lap sau like position(which it essentially is already in) and slightly guides the incoming arm off the line. In this particular situation, Kau sau can allow a faster return attack because it doesn't require any "active" motion on your part since the opponent is essentially turning himself off the line with your kau sau just being there. However, kau sau 'potentially' could be used in an 'active' state. Like I said above, think reversed lap sau.

So in short, huen sau twists from when on top of the opponents arm and rotates from "inside to outside" to gain the inside line and kau sau twists from below the opponents arm and rotates from "outside to inside" to gain the outside 'inside-facing' line. Two completely different motions.

Graham H

07-30-2013, 02:11 AM

BPWT

07-30-2013, 03:44 AM

More over indulged chi sau nonsense that wouldn't work for sh1t in a real fight!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPdl-mGKL-Y

At 2:50 - 2:54, WSL is showing application of an idea from a movement of the dummy form (showing that you can indeed illustrate with applications from the forms). Here he is showing an application that takes advantage of the stick.

At 2:50, why perform this movement with his right arm? He could just as easily have shifted and used his left hand only to cut the new angle.

IMO, he is taking advantage of the stick/contact his right hand has, to aid the attack he issues with his left hand.

Why do you think he does this?

tc101

07-30-2013, 03:44 AM

More over indulged chi sau nonsense that wouldn't work for sh1t in a real fight!!!

I think many people look through chi sau prisms and form their perspective of wing chun in that way.

wingchunIan

07-30-2013, 03:54 AM

BPWT

07-30-2013, 04:04 AM

From my perspective kau sao performs a similar function to huen sao and each is a tool for the job in hand. Huen sao is the default choice if the direction of force is nice and horizontal as it allows the elbow to remain low giving cover and lining up the follow up strike however if the line of incoming force is angled upwards huen sao then becomes a battle and will not work as illustrated in the dummy form by the immovable arm of the dummy. In such circumstances kau sao still allows you to pass the force and re-angle. From experience it works exceptionally well against hooks to the body when you've moved slightly out of range / angled and the shot connects with the inside of your arm forearm to forearm. It prevents your arm from being dragged off of centre and allows you to turn the opponent using their own momentum.

Indeed. :)

But please understand that there are those who feel "that sh1t won't work", it is "nonsense", it is "BS", it is a "common misconception" it is "a mistake they used to make", etc. :rolleyes:

Never mind that these ideas of clearing the line and altering the line are actually shown by WSL in seminars, that the man maintains stick when he needs to, etc. Or the fact that even PB himself (gulp) uses bridges and redirects. :rolleyes:

LFJ

07-30-2013, 04:33 AM

From experience it works exceptionally well against hooks to the body when you've moved slightly out of range / angled and the shot connects with the inside of your arm forearm to forearm. It prevents your arm from being dragged off of centre and allows you to turn the opponent using their own momentum.

Is this purposeful? You move out of range so that you can cross yourself only to then need to undo it with a neat move?

Graham H

07-30-2013, 04:50 AM

From my perspective kau sao performs a similar function to huen sao and each is a tool for the job in hand. Huen sao is the default choice if the direction of force is nice and horizontal as it allows the elbow to remain low giving cover and lining up the follow up strike however if the line of incoming force is angled upwards huen sao then becomes a battle and will not work as illustrated in the dummy form by the immovable arm of the dummy. In such circumstances kau sao still allows you to pass the force and re-angle. From experience it works exceptionally well against hooks to the body when you've moved slightly out of range / angled and the shot connects with the inside of your arm forearm to forearm. It prevents your arm from being dragged off of centre and allows you to turn the opponent using their own momentum.

Jesus effing christ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The direction of force is "nice and horizontal"????????????????:eek::eek::eek::eek:
It allows you to pass the force and re-angle????
Maybe you should spar against somebody who can punch mate! Honestly this is really really embarrassing for all Wing Chun!!!:(

LFJ

07-30-2013, 04:52 AM

Never mind that these ideas of clearing the line and altering the line are actually shown by WSL in seminars, that the man maintains stick when he needs to, etc. Or the fact that even PB himself (gulp) uses bridges and redirects. :rolleyes:

Maintaining stick is not the aim and only lasts a millisecond to redirect. One does not just remove a hand lest the opponent is trained to spring off that pressure and give it back.

But rather than looking to maintain stick in order to feel what energy is there and try to do something with it, the limb is just dealt with quickly in a safe manner. That in some cases means not removing the hand, as demonstrated by WSL, but the intention is not really to feel anything, just to stay safe while recovering position, clearing the way and capturing a superior line of attack on the opponent.

Using the correct form of shifting energy from the hip and elbow will deal with the opponent whether they are relaxed or tense. It's just worse for them if they are tense.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 05:47 AM

Maintaining stick is not the aim and only lasts a millisecond to redirect. One does not just remove a hand lest the opponent is trained to spring off that pressure and give it back.

I would say it is not the aim (to maintain stick), if the way is free to strike. But if it is not..

But rather than looking to maintain stick in order to feel what energy is there and try to do something with it, the limb is just dealt with quickly in a safe manner. That in some cases means not removing the hand, as demonstrated by WSL, but the intention is not really to feel anything, just to stay safe while recovering position, clearing the way and capturing a superior line of attack on the opponent.

The process of contact and feeling is not reflective in that sense... you don't wait and 'try to do something with it'. Everything happens too fast. That speed is why the system has bridging tools. You make contact and then as the opponent moves/strikes/applies force or strength, the options you have are made for you - LLHS - LSJC.

Using the correct form of shifting energy from the hip and elbow will deal with the opponent whether they are relaxed or tense. It's just worse for them if they are tense.

Agreed. :) But if they are relaxed, what you do (based on what they gave you) will be different to what you do if they are tense (based on what they gave you). How do you know if they are relaxed or tense? Well, if you have bridged, all becomes clear - not via sight (necessarily), but via contact.

Lap Sao is a good indicator of this. If your elbow positioning is good, when you lap and they are relaxed, it clears their limb slightly to give you the line to attack; if you lap and they are tense, you move to create a new line of attack.

Basic stuff, based on bridging, elbow positioning and the responses you work on in chi sau.

LoneTiger108

07-30-2013, 05:52 AM

From my perspective kau sao performs a similar function to huen sao and each is a tool for the job in hand.

The tyranny of words.

Honestly this is really really embarrassing for all Wing Chun!!!

:eek:

I find this whole thread, and many others on here lately, totally embarrasing to be honest. Kinda makes me wonder why anyone in their right mind would even consider training in Wing Chun, let alone actually visiting a Sifu and giving it a go!

FWIW Huensau and Kausau, for me, have different objectives because the language itself tells us so, they are also different in nature. Huensau is a principle led method of movement, if not THE most important method to understand in your Wing Chun! Whereas Kausau is the term for an actual technique that is applied. You do not apply Huensau, you apply a technique within the Huensau rotation and that technique will have another term... make sense?

Now here is where it should sink in.

Kausau is to be viewed as being a part of Huensau, it is a technique within the Huensau method... as is Biusau, Jumsau, Jutsau etc the 'action' that distinguishes kausau is the 'latching'. In other words, when you apply Kausau the opponents arm will get trapped and unable to move in all but one direction, again a strategy to force a mistake. See? Nothing magical.

I dare say that ALL our techniques like this are designed to force the mistake, they have reactions that have been tested over time and we prepare for the follow-up of said reactions... hence the popularity of such training as Chisau and sayings as Loi Lo Hoi Sung, Lut Sau Jik Chong!!

BPWT

07-30-2013, 05:52 AM

Jesus effing christ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The direction of force is "nice and horizontal"????????????????:eek::eek::eek::eek:
It allows you to pass the force and re-angle????
Maybe you should spar against somebody who can punch mate! Honestly this is really really embarrassing for all Wing Chun!!!:(

Graham, this is really simple stuff. :confused: Force comes in all shapes and sizes, and comes at you in all types of directions. This is the purpose of Chi Sau - to teach you how on contact, via the forward pressure you keep, you automatically handle the force and directions of force... from that initial point of contact.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:06 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuRwgQ5f6og&feature=youtu.be

Look at what happens around the 0:20 mark when Kevin tenses up.

PB has contact (has bridged), what do you see happen? Why?

Or at the beginning around the 0:04 mark. Kevin briefly gets tied up and does not recycle the hands. Why? What does PB do in response? Based on sight, or via understanding what's just happened via the bridging?

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:10 AM

I admit that PB lineage (indeed most WSL lineage) disengages more than most other Wing Chun lineages (and I am not saying that is wrong).

Duncan Leung made this point years ago when he reflected on Chi Sau'ing with WSL students in the days he (Duncan Leung) was having private lessons with Yip Man.

But watching clips of PB, he is often doing things his students say their lineage doesn't do. :rolleyes:

LFJ

07-30-2013, 06:11 AM

Lap Sao is a good indicator of this. If your elbow positioning is good, when you lap and they are relaxed, it clears their limb slightly to give you the line to attack; if you lap and they are tense, you move to create a new line of attack.

I guess if your energy is all in your wrists. Otherwise you will move their entire tense structure as a whole, quite like what PB was doing to Kevin at their seminar. His power was manipulating Kevin whether he was tense or not.

The more tense they are the easier they are to manipulate because they give you control of their center-of-mass through their tense limbs. Hip and elbow power and correct angles will allow you to rotate them out and move them in whatever which way. Energy up in the wrists won't give you that and you'll have to move around them like they are a wooden dummy. Unfortunately they won't just stand there for you.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:21 AM

I guess if your energy is all in your wrists.

The energy is from the elbow. But you bridge with the Kiu (duh :)) which is from the wrist to the elbow.

Otherwise you will move their entire tense structure as a whole, quite like what PB was doing to Kevin at their seminar. His power was manipulating Kevin whether he was tense or not.

Kinda. When Kevin was tense, his whole structure was moved, hence the need to keep stepping back. But when he was more relaxed, you can clearly see the only structural element that was manipulated was the arms.

In the first instance, PB moves with steps to create a new line of attack, in the second instance, PB needs to move less because his hand work was enough to create a new line.

The more tense they are the easier they are to manipulate because they give you control of their center-of-mass through their tense limbs.

How do you know their limbs are tense? Via contact, right? How can you tell via contact (contact is not visual in this sense)? Because at the moment you make contact with your forward pressure, you immediately feel and react.

Which is what PB is doing. Even though the PB students keep saying you don't want, in WSLPB lineage, to bridge and feel. :rolleyes:

Graham H

07-30-2013, 06:33 AM

This is the purpose of Chi Sau

No correction! It's your idea of Chi Sau wrongly shared by the likes of Ian and WC12047257289525925925205092 :)

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 06:33 AM

Graham H

07-30-2013, 06:35 AM

...answer me this B.....how can you possibly know what PB is doing and what his ideas are without being in front of him??? I find this really bizarre.

See I know and I also know you have no clue about what you are talking about. I think for those of us that have been in the same room as PB will agree with that 100%

I would have quit by now if I was you so fair play.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:46 AM

No correction! It's your idea of Chi Sau wrongly shared by the likes of Ian and WC12047257289525925925205092 :)

And yet... watching PB in these clips, and WSL in video footage from his seminars, supports this idea.

Frost

07-30-2013, 06:48 AM

You know I used to think wing chun was one of the simpler chinese systems, no curved striking, only one fist shape, limited direct kicking, only 3 forms and only two of those really taught the system the third was what to do when things went pear shaped, Chi sao reinforced the principles of the first two forms, how to occupy the centreline and where my centreline should be in relation to my opponent, proper elbow position, how to use the lats and shoulder girdle to create a firm base and how to use coordinated body weight moving forward to create power, it taught you how to use forward pressure and what to do when said forward pressure was applied to you, to hit where there was a gap and to create a gap where there is non….simple direct and fairly easy to learn…whether it works or is any good is for another flame war but for gods sake 13 pages of this rubbish, why not simply show what you mean in a real fight so everyone can see it, not chi sao, not drills but in a real sparring of fighting match, with as much or as little protection as your version of wing chun feels is allowed otherwise this circular argument will go on for ever

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:48 AM

So you think we are fighting ?

Of course not. Where did I say that? You are running through a response drill. And in that drill PB is dominating because he is taking control of the lines of attack - which he can do via the initial bridge each time.

How else do you think he is able to take advantage of your tension? How do you think he knows you are tense or over committed or over-turned etc? How can he use the speed he uses?

The answers are staring you in the face.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 06:54 AM

...answer me this B.....how can you possibly know what PB is doing and what his ideas are without being in front of him??? I find this really bizarre.

Okay, I will answer :)

Without being in front of him, I can't 'feel' it. And I am not inhabiting Kevin's body either. :)

How can I possibly know, then? Because I am watching what happens to Kevin. I can see him losing position, losing balance, etc, and I can watch and see how it came about.... By watching what PB is doing.

When Kevin is tense, you can see how PB responds to it.

But again I ask... how does PB know Kevin is tense?

I would have quit by now if I was you so fair play.

No need to quit when I can see what PB is doing in the clips, and see that he is:

1. Bridging
2. Redirecting
3. Working off of both the bridging and the redirecting

Easy as 1-2-3, for PB.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 06:59 AM

Graham, this is really simple stuff. :confused: Force comes in all shapes and sizes, and comes at you in all types of directions. This is the purpose of Chi Sau - to teach you how on contact, via the forward pressure you keep, you automatically handle the force and directions of force... from that initial point of contact.

Classic wrong focus of chi sao. : /

I don't want your arms to contact mine, grab mine, stop me with a block. I develop a striking base with ko power WITH a partner who is NOT trying to fight me in the drill.
Mobility of this ko power base needs to be worked with a partner meaning there is no contact of arms but we use each other for coordination of striking recycling along with the facing and maintaining attacking pressure. Imagine if you are pressure based contacting arms in chi sao and your partner steps in any direction away from you and then stands still for you to attack them again .... Will you try to engage the arms with a grabbing lop sao ? Over step and allow easy striking counters with NO arm contact intentions ? Lose balance when you do make any random contact with a striking resistance to you ? How much of that can you think about when fighting ?
Chi sao is an abstract bridge to fighting with both arms equally. Not one weak one strong. We have to have ko power and coordination of arms ( chi sao) we also add a lesser known aspect of chi sao , deliberate movement to create angling attacks and counters. ( chum kil ) our drills seen in the clip of me and pb are to create fighting conditioning mutually, he is coaching me under mental pressure of speed to react in certain spatial interception lines, not by contact. A fac sao or a punch is so fast with power our defense needs to be solid and not leaving the centerline to chase . We aren't seeking contact for feelings sake. We are adopting lines that naturally intercept SPEED AND POWER strikes. We also use each other to create opportunities to strike that means hitting OPEN GAPS not striking arms closing zones of attack. Learning NOT to make redundant over trapping grabbing arm pressure. The opposite of most people's ideas of chi sao.
To develop the speed and power of angles that maintain their integrity at fighting speed we use each other.
Chi sao isn't sensing it building strong elbow angles with Lin sil di da ideas NOBODY here is even addressing because their focus is on wrist contact feeling and control.

It's ironic that a drill translated as sticking hands is to rid US of the tendency to do just that when attacked ; ). When you grasp this subtle idea you will grow. Stay centered and hold natural intercepting lines of attack and defense,( elbow angle striking ) if contact is made simply follow it back to strike, when there is an opportunity to strike open defenses do so directly.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 07:05 AM

What Graham said, until you are in front of Philipp , who's speeds and use of force has to be experienced first hand ! ; ) you will never feel solid structure in ballistic shots. He is never there for you to feel or sense his arms. : ) tense , me ? Lmao !

LFJ

07-30-2013, 07:10 AM

How do you know their limbs are tense? Via contact, right? How can you tell via contact (contact is not visual in this sense)? Because at the moment you make contact with your forward pressure, you immediately feel and react.

You kind of missed my point, which is that it doesn't matter. For example, the hyun-sau WSL demonstrated was done to recover from a bad position. That position is what is reacted to and why the action is done- not whatever kind of energy is felt.

The same action is applied. The extent of the effect it has on the opponent will change if they are tense or relaxed. It is only worse for themselves if they are tense. But we don't care. Our objective is to recover position and attack instantly, not feel and react.

Sensitivity doesn't matter if forward energy is maintained. Actions will come out regardless of what you feel or think so long as you understand facing, lines, angles, etc. as PB does so well. It is far more efficient and effective to fight the lines than to interpret the opponent's energies. Fighting happens too fast for that.

From an outside perspective it all looks the same. You are assuming what is happening within PB's being based on the way you've learned.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 07:16 AM

Classic wrong focus of chi sao. : /

Again, that 'wrong focus' you talk about is actually present in what PB is doing.

I don't want your arms to contact mine.. etc etc etc... deliberate movement to create angling attacks and counters.

Kevin, you are just recycling the same old lines. I have read before what you say Chi Sao is in your lineage - what I am saying is that what you say and what you do in those clips, is not the same.

Our drills seen in the clip of me and pb are to create fighting conditioning mutually, he is coaching me under mental pressure of speed to react in certain spatial interception lines, not by contact.

Yet all of his coaching in that clip comes from him having read you via contact.

So I ask you too: How does PB know you are tense?

When you are tense he does not do the same thing to you that he does when you are more relaxed. He is not following the same rote attacks. One is supported by much more expansive stepping, the other by more condensed hand work. Can you really not see why?

We are adopting lines that naturally intercept SPEED AND POWER strikes. We also use each other to create opportunities to strike that means hitting OPEN GAPS not striking arms closing zones of attack.

Okay, so tell my why, in the clip you posted of you and PB, you never gain those lines? If you use each other to create opportunities (a mutually beneficial drill/exercise), how come you never have such an opportunity?

Why do you think PB always has the line? Why do you think that always comes after a bridge was created? :rolleyes:

Why, at 0:04, did you not recycle the hands? What prevented it? What did PB do that allowed him to at that moment strike the open gap?

BPWT

07-30-2013, 07:33 AM

You kind of missed my point, which is that it doesn't matter. For example, the hyun-sau WSL demonstrated was done to recover from a bad position. That position is what is reacted to and why the action is done- not whatever kind of energy is felt.

In that case, why did WSL demo this by still engaging his right hand? He could could have simply done what he did with his left hand. Why did he maintain contact with his right?

The same action is applied. The extent of the effect it has on the opponent will change if they are tense or relaxed. It is only worse for themselves if they are tense. But we don't care. Our objective is to recover position and attack instantly, not feel and react.

Whether the opponent is tense or relaxed directly relates to how they will be able to deal, or not deal, with your next movement. So you ought to care! :)

Like I said earlier - when Kevin was tense, PB needed to move his body and step. When Kevin was a little more relaxed, the need for this was negated - PB's hands could do the work and he could still keep position.

Sensitivity doesn't matter if forward energy is maintained. Actions will come out regardless of what you feel or think so long as you understand facing, lines, angles, etc.

This is not logical at all, I'm sorry. Tension or relaxation in the opponent, or strong force or weak force, or a slightly rising attack or a slightly sinking attack, etc, etc, are different things. You can't have a cookie-cutter response to whatever comes, as it means you are blindly following attacking lines which may not be viable lines of attack.

It is far more efficient and effective to fight the lines than to interpret the opponent's energies. Fighting happens too fast for that.

You don't interpret the opponent's energy in a thinking, pondering sense because, as you say, a fight happens too fast. The opponent's energy, once you have bridge, automatically determines the correct line you will use. This is why we stress the importance of elbow position - it supports what the arm is doing, whether striking or redirecting. The point is that the attacking lines are determined by position. Position, once a bridge is formed, is determined by that bridge.

Again, just watch the clip with PB and Kevin. It is apparent.

From an outside perspective it all looks the same. You are assuming what is happening within PB's being based on the way you've learned.

I am basing what I say here on two things:

1. What PB's students are saying/writing.
2. What I can see PB doing.

The two don't correlate.

Graham H

07-30-2013, 07:37 AM

And yet... watching PB in these clips, and WSL in video footage from his seminars, supports this idea.

No it doesn't because you can't see the whole picture or have the opportunity to have it explained properly. PB also puts it into action which counts for a lot.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 07:39 AM

Again, that 'wrong focus' you talk about is actually present in what PB is doing.

Kevin, you are just recycling the same old lines. I have read before what you say Chi Sao is in your lineage - what I am saying is that what you say and what you do in those clips, is not the same.

Yet all of his coaching in that clip comes from him having read you via contact.

So I ask you too: How does PB know you are tense?

Okay, so tell my why, in the clip you posted of you and PB, you never gain those lines? If you use each other to create opportunities (a mutually beneficial drill/exercise), how come you never have such an opportunity?

Why do you think PB always has the line? Why do you think that always comes after a bridge was created? :rolleyes:

Why, at 0:04, did you not recycle the hands? What prevented it? What did PB do that allowed him to at that moment strike the open gap?

You are doing what I also did until I understood. You are using the only logic process you have to make sense of the abstract nature of the drills.
Why am I still standing on my feet during the drill ? Did you see how many times he hit me ? With speed and power ? No ? You probably saw me after he did, trying to respond without any contact based intel ; ).
Which hand hits you with full force and speed in an exchange of interception or not. usually ? Wu sao, or rear hand, last time I checked is out of contact range ; ) how would you stop a guy hitting you if be grabbed you to hit with this rear hand out of contact ? Stand still and wait to use his grab on your wrist, block it while standing and turning to face the arm ? Move and adopt angles based on lead/ strong hand ? How would you train to react intuitively to this. Use a sensing arm method of trying to feel intentions ? Or move your arse based on natural awareness of spatial awareness through abstract combat methods ?

It takes literally a few seconds of exchanging to show the methods are like oil and water. One is contact based wrist force the other abstract use of slt acute elbow angles aimed at creating force faster and more often than the opponent can recycle and crete their force and defense.

Graham H

07-30-2013, 07:40 AM

Okay, I will answer :)

Without being in front of him, I can't 'feel' it. And I am not inhabiting Kevin's body either. :)

How can I possibly know, then? Because I am watching what happens to Kevin. I can see him losing position, losing balance, etc, and I can watch and see how it came about.... By watching what PB is doing.

.

He would do the same to you BUT you would get an explanation and how it all fits into the system and how incorrect chi sau practice (mainly arm sticking) is so wrong. That is something you cannot see from video

Graham H

07-30-2013, 07:41 AM

The two don't correlate.

No they don't because even for me and kev watching the videos is not the same and we are the ones stood in the room.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 07:44 AM

Kevin, you are simply not answering the questions.

Why, in the clip you posted of you and PB, do you never gain those lines, if the drill is mutually beneficial - a cooperative practice to coach? All I see is you losing position, but never recovering it or taking it.

Why do you think that his attacking line always comes after a bridge was created?

Why, at 0:04, did you not recycle the hands? What prevented it? What did PB do that allowed him to at that moment strike the open gap?

BPWT

07-30-2013, 07:53 AM

No they don't because even for me and kev watching the videos is not the same and we are the ones stood in the room.

Nonsense.

PB students say they don't want to bridge and redirect.
PB, in his clips, constantly redirects having first bridged.

PB students say they don't want to feel from a bridge.
PB, in the clip with Kevin, uses different responses dependent on whether Kevin was tense or relaxed (PB knew this by ESP?... no, it happened after contact was made)

LFJ

07-30-2013, 08:06 AM

In that case, why did WSL demo this by still engaging his right hand? He could could have simply done what he did with his left hand. Why did he maintain contact with his right?

The hyun-sau rotates the opponent to give yourself a dominant position. If you just retract your right hand and punch with the left, you've done nothing to recover your position safely and will likely be hit by one hand or the other.

Still has nothing to do with feeling and is not looking to maintain contact for any reason other than recovering position safely. It lasts a millisecond. I would hardly call it maintaing contact. As soon as the mistake touches it must hyun quickly to recover. There's no time to feel and react to force left, right, up or down. Regardless of their energy, if you don't recover you'll be hit.

The point is that the attacking lines are determined by position. Position, once a bridge is formed, is determined by that bridge.

So, attacking lines are determined by position, not by feeling.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 08:08 AM

tense , me ? Lmao !

You're saying you weren't tense during that drill? :confused:

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 08:08 AM

Nonsense.

PB students say they don't want to bridge and redirect.
PB, in his clips, constantly redirects having first bridged.

PB students say they don't want to feel from a bridge.
PB, in the clip with Kevin, uses different responses dependent on whether Kevin was tense or relaxed (PB knew this by ESP?... no, it happened after contact was made)

We use equal lines of INTERCEPTION that meet from the same ideas not for contact to feel but interception. If contact is made there is a tactic guiding us to make actions based on the opponents counter reactions. But we / I don't need to feel your arms to take advantage of our combat idea. If we both make contact during chi sao its because we both made same interseption striking then we use each other on different reference levels, attacking weak plane and recovering to a strong plane of force. Iow how to recover a counter attack angle with both force in fists and balanced alignment like we would moving and fighting.
The EXCHANGE of arm position force means we aren't touching for sensitivity but for equal facing lines of two arms ( ambidextrous ability ). The redundant aspect of chi sao arms and our fighting is no equal arm contact. One lead one rear hand for fighting.
If your alignment in chi sao was bad or based in contact to feel an arm, it will also manifest itself on my lead man sao or asking hand , my rear hand is not within your contact to sense. Our tactics are simple and I will be revealing more than I care to with " enemies " ; ).

BPWT

07-30-2013, 08:17 AM

If you just retract your right hand and punch with the left, you've done nothing to recover your position safely and will likely be hit by one hand or the other.

Yes, so in that instance WSL kept contact with his right hand. He maintained a bridge. Of course it was not for long - it didn't take him long to issue the next strike. The time the bridge remained is not important. What is important is that he maintained it for the time he needed it. During that time he was covered (with his shift and attack) against another strike.

So, attacking lines are determined by position, not by feeling.

Please read again. What I said was: "The point is that the attacking lines are determined by position. Position, once a bridge is formed, is determined by that bridge."

Feeling and the bridge - two sides of the same coin!

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 08:18 AM

You're saying you weren't tense during that drill? :confused:

Of course I was !! Lmao , it's what speed and power suddenly shot at you does. He deliberately does this for demonstration and teaching. Humans ( me included ) overreact to sudden lines of attack. Feint a kick to the nuts , reaction. Feint a strike to a face and you get reaction of ? Does the guy turn and cover ? Use a windshield wiper block to his face ? What line becomes open to attack during these moments. Do you use feeling ? When you do punch the guy are you too far away , off balance ? Can you defend and attack with only one leading arm so his simple blocks don't stop both your arms from attacking ?
People don't chi sao you fighting. We develop spatial interception lines you can't see in a clip. Facing and x lines allows for a different approach to centerline fighting. Why a centerline besides a-b boxers also use ? Why do guys with fast hands give sticking hand fighters trouble ?

BPWT

07-30-2013, 08:19 AM

Our tactics are simple and I will be revealing more than I care to with " enemies " ; ).

:D Okay, don't reveal all your secrets. But I am not your enemy... tension is your enemy. :)

But I notice that you typed a response, but didn't answer my questions.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 08:23 AM

:D Okay, don't reveal all your secrets. But I am not your enemy... tension is your enemy. :)

But I notice that you typed a response, but didn't answer my questions.

Because you did get an answer but can't process the logic based on your approach
Tension is " everyone's " enemy.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 08:37 AM

Because you did get an answer but can't process the logic based on your approach

That's a cop-out, and I think you know it.

People don't chi sao you fighting. We develop spatial interception lines you can't see in a clip.

Well, I agree with this, but would say that you want to use the attributes from Chi Sao. And yes, the 'spatial interception lines', as you call them, are important.

That's why in LTWT we train Chi Sau and Lat Sau. (LT's Hong Kong-based Lat Sau, not the weird crap coming out of German WT).

The Lat Sau training is all about starting from non-contact, moving into bridging, moving back out and back in again as a situation unfolds and things happen.

Back in the 1970s LT wrote that learning Lat Sau from his system was higher level than Chi Sau (as it encompassed what you learned in Chi Sau, but put it into action in a more realistic setting - one where distances and the means to bridge varied more).

Anyways, I stand by what I've been saying.

I think the PB crowd has developed a series of Mantras to describe their system, but when I see clips of PB, he is often doing things that his students critique from other YM lineages.

LFJ

07-30-2013, 08:47 AM

Yes, so in that instance WSL kept contact with his right hand. He maintained a bridge. Of course it was not for long - it didn't take him long to issue the next strike. The time the bridge remained is not important. What is important is that he maintained it for the time he needed it. During that time he was covered (with his shift and attack) against another strike.

What's your point? Were you not trying to say it has something to do with sensing the opponent's energy? I think I explained sufficiently how it doesn't.

Please read again. What I said was: "The point is that the attacking lines are determined by position. Position, once a bridge is formed, is determined by that bridge."

Feeling and the bridge - two sides of the same coin!

In the WSL example, the bridge was formed by the arms being crossed, inside to inside. That was the position. The attack line was determined by that position. Had nothing to do with feeling, as explained.

So what are you trying to say?

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 08:54 AM

That's a cop-out, and I think you know it.

Well, I agree with this, but would say that you want to use the attributes from Chi Sao. And yes, the 'spatial interception lines', as you call them, are important.

That's why in LTWT we train Chi Sau and Lat Sau. (LT's Hong Kong-based Lat Sau, not the weird crap coming out of German WT).

The Lat Sau training is all about starting from non-contact, moving into bridging, moving back out and back in again as a situation unfolds and things happen.

Back in the 1970s LT wrote that learning Lat Sau from his system was higher level than Chi Sau (as it encompassed what you learned in Chi Sau, but put it into action in a more realistic setting - one where distances and the means to bridge varied more).

Anyways, I stand by what I've been saying.

I think the PB crowd has developed a series of Mantras to describe their system, but when I see clips of PB, he is often doing things that his students critique from other YM lineages.

It has to be face to face sadly. It is a fighting system not a typing method. ; )

BPWT

07-30-2013, 10:25 AM

What's your point? Were you not trying to say it has something to do with sensing the opponent's energy? I think I explained sufficiently how it doesn't.

Simply put, you can't react to force if you are not in contact with it. (unless you want to rely purely on your eyes - which at close quarters and real speed, is not advisable).

I was talking earlier about how the WSL lineage tends to disengage more than other lineages once bridging is made... but you have to have engaged before you can disengage, right? It doesn't mean the WSL lineage doesn't look to bridge (as some keep saying).

My point is that WSL demonstrated maintaining a bridge, and I said why.

In the WSL example, the bridge was formed by the arms being crossed, inside to inside.

Yes.

That was the position.

Yes.

The attack line was determined by that position. Had nothing to do with feeling, as explained. So what are you trying to say?

But that's exactly it, **** it! :) You've just said it.

'The bridge was formed', that 'was the position', the 'line of attack was determined by that position.' As I said, the bridging is the feeling. The bridging (read: contact/feeling) determined the position and thus the options for attacking.

This clip was a seminar - there was no intent from the student to attack. There was no force from the student once the bridge was made. No reason for WSL to worry :) He was there to teach and explain.

But he still kept the bridge/contact/feeling for the time he needed to show an attack/counter.

Why? Because WING CHUN IS A BRIDGING ART

(and the reasons why can be seen not just in this clip, but also in PB's, and pretty much everyone else's).

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 10:29 AM

Simply put, you can't react to force if you are not in contact with it. (unless you want to rely purely on your eyes - which at close quarters and real speed, is not advisable).

I was talking earlier about how the WSL lineage tends to disengage more than other lineages once bridging is made... but you have to have engaged before you can disengage, right? It doesn't mean the WSL lineage doesn't look to bridge (as some keep saying).

My point is that WSL demonstrated maintaining a bridge, and I said why.

Yes.

Yes.

But that's exactly it, **** it! :) You've just said it.

'The bridge was formed', that 'was the position', the 'line of attack was determined by that position.' As I said, the bridging is the feeling. The bridging (read: contact/feeling) determined the position and thus the options for attacking.

This clip was a seminar - there was no intent from the student to attack. There was no force from the student once the bridge was made. No reason for WSL to worry :) He was there to teach and explain.

But he still kept the bridge/contact/feeling for the time he needed to show an attack/counter.

Why? Because WING CHUN IS A BRIDGING ART

(and the reasons why can be seen not just in this clip, but also in PB's, and pretty much everyone else's).

Confusion is apparent ; )

LFJ

07-30-2013, 11:18 AM

Simply put, you can't react to force if you are not in contact with it.

But it's not about reacting to force. Reacting to contact doesn't necessarily mean you're reacting to force, just position. You can't seem to wrap your head around this.

'The bridge was formed', that 'was the position', the 'line of attack was determined by that position.' As I said, the bridging is the feeling. The bridging (read: contact/feeling) determined the position and thus the options for attacking.

Are you equating 'feeling' a point of contact and reacting to the position you and the opponent are in with 'sensing' the opponent's energy and reacting to their force?

I understand how from the outside it may look the same and you can only understand it based on how you've learned, but it couldn't be more different.

BPWT

07-30-2013, 11:40 AM

But it's not about reacting to force. Reacting to contact doesn't necessarily mean you're reacting to force, just position. You can't seem to wrap your head around this.

You are right, I can't get my head around it :D

If there is contact, there is always force (either yours or his). Whether a fight, sparring, a response drill like bong lap (or bong jut da, if you will).

I can't imagine a scenario where the opponent and I make contact, and neither is exhibiting any force, any momentum at all.

[Note: if any WT'ers are reading, I know you're thinking, 'But one of the first rules of LTWT is to give up your own force'. This would be a subject better suited to the 'Tension' thread Grumblegeezer started] :)

Thanks, LFJ, for taking the time to come back and respond. I might not agree with what you guys are saying, but it's always good to hear more.

But I think we've reached the circle-of-death with this subject. ;)

(until Graham posts something to get my goat) :D

Graham H

07-30-2013, 12:33 PM

Yes you are a douche bag! :D

WC1277

07-30-2013, 01:56 PM

But it's not about reacting to force. Reacting to contact doesn't necessarily mean you're reacting to force, just position. You can't seem to wrap your head around this.

Are you equating 'feeling' a point of contact and reacting to the position you and the opponent are in with 'sensing' the opponent's energy and reacting to their force?

I understand how from the outside it may look the same and you can only understand it based on how you've learned, but it couldn't be more different.

In summary:

You guys arm chase. You try to manipulate the arms blocking your path in front of you by "striking" them. You arm chase and whether your dense mind can wrap around this concept or not. You arm chase!

My Opinion:

I've always tried to be open minded to other lineages and look at the big picture of what they're doing. I.e. positioning, distance, balance, etc within the WC context. You know, attributes. Every lineage has at least a few decent ones.

In contrary, however, despite my loathing of the PB crowds annoying robotic insistency, I still have not found the WSL/VT lineage impressive, really, in any way. To me, regardless of WC, they epitomize the training regimen of a desperate young zit faced kid trying desperately to be seen by the professionals in the gym. Being 'aggressive' in ALL of your drills does not mean anything to developing skill!

You guys don't understand timing for the life of you even though PB has decent timing, at least against you guys!

PB, in and of himself, is not impressive to me

WSL in action, in forms, and technique is not that impressive to me, although I do have respect for him.

Your rocking back and forth in poon sau is a joke and even further shows the ineptitude of timing with structure.

-------

While you guys go on pronouncing your arm chasing to the world, people "talk" about redirecting force because they're talking about chi sao. The development tool of WC. What you hard harded fellas don't seem to grasp is that what approaching it this way does, if correctly, is far more useful in developing attributes without contact, then you guys attacking arms!:rolleyes:

Think about it numbskulls. If I always train to TRY to "redirect" as I attack, I will be in a much more balanced POSITION in a real fight even without contact. All legitimate fighting systems develop balancing to the opponent. Whether it's "side foward", "mirror facing", "footwork", etc. If you hit left, I hit right, you hit right, I hit left. You cross, I hit forward, I cross, you hit forward. Chi Sao is a DRILL!!!! If you want to develop your "one-armed" cr@p where you attack the opponents arms. By all means, but you're alone on that one, and don't be surprised when someone with actual skill knocks you out!

my two cents...

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 02:43 PM

In summary:

You guys arm chase. You try to manipulate the arms blocking your path in front of you by "striking" them. You arm chase and whether your dense mind can wrap around this concept or not. You arm chase!

My Opinion:

I've always tried to be open minded to other lineages and look at the big picture of what they're doing. I.e. positioning, distance, balance, etc within the WC context. You know, attributes. Every lineage has at least a few decent ones.

In contrary, however, despite my loathing of the PB crowds annoying robotic insistency, I still have not found the WSL/VT lineage impressive, really, in any way. To me, regardless of WC, they epitomize the training regimen of a desperate young zit faced kid trying desperately to be seen by the professionals in the gym. Being 'aggressive' in ALL of your drills does not mean anything to developing skill!

You guys don't understand timing for the life of you even though PB has decent timing, at least against you guys!

PB, in and of himself, is not impressive to me

WSL in action, in forms, and technique is not that impressive to me, although I do have respect for him.

Your rocking back and forth in poon sau is a joke and even further shows the ineptitude of timing with structure.

-------

While you guys go on pronouncing your arm chasing to the world, people "talk" about redirecting force because they're talking about chi sao. The development tool of WC. What you hard harded fellas don't seem to grasp is that what approaching it this way does, if correctly, is far more useful in developing attributes without contact, then you guys attacking arms!:rolleyes:

Think about it numbskulls. If I always train to TRY to "redirect" as I attack, I will be in a much more balanced POSITION in a real fight even without contact. All legitimate fighting systems develop balancing to the opponent. Whether it's "side foward", "mirror facing", "footwork", etc. If you hit left, I hit right, you hit right, I hit left. You cross, I hit forward, I cross, you hit forward. Chi Sao is a DRILL!!!! If you want to develop your "one-armed" cr@p where you attack the opponents arms. By all means, but you're alone on that one, and don't be surprised when someone with actual skill knocks you out!

my two cents...

Ummm I met a nine year student of your lineage who after exchanging and discussing agreed his previous nine Fong years were wasted. It took a few seconds to show him the wrong ideas he had been shown. His only concern was unlearning the previous nine years of muscle memory. ; ) he said this to me.

So nameless one, YOU are no different.

WC1277

07-30-2013, 02:56 PM

Ummm I met a nine year student of your lineage who after exchanging and discussing agreed his previous nine Fong years were wasted. It took a few seconds to show him the wrong ideas he had been shown. His only concern was unlearning the previous nine years of muscle memory. ; ) he said this to me.

So nameless one, YOU are no different.

Oh Yes, that's right, the infamous now "9 year" student whom no one is aware of, at least not in Tucson, the hub of who actually trains legitimately with Fong Sifu. Why can't you place him Kevin? What's his story? His name? Please tell?

Ozzy Dave

07-30-2013, 03:11 PM

You guys arm chase. You try to manipulate the arms blocking your path in front of you by "striking" them. You arm chase and whether your dense mind can wrap around this concept or not. You arm chase!

Each to their own, however, I think you’re labouring under a misconception.

What this is really all about is the application of force and whether it is continuous and controlling (sticky) or ballistic and shocking.

You seem to have a preference for the former, which I would hazard a guess colours your opinions in general and your appreciation of timing in particular.

All arguments of whether there is bridging or tactile sensitivity involved is moot imo.

The basic thing to understand is that it is a continuum not a mutually exclusive scenario i.e. power moves from continuous to ballistic and both forms can be used in training and fighting, though sticky lends itself more to grappling technique.

It’s just a question of what you want to achieve - controlling the opponent’s cog or shocking it in order to produce involuntary responses as the WSL/PB lads advocate.

I’m with the WSL/PB crowd on this one.

2 cents back at ya...

Dave

WC1277

07-30-2013, 04:03 PM

Each to their own, however, I think you’re labouring under a misconception.

What this is really all about is the application of force and whether it is continuous and controlling (sticky) or ballistic and shocking.

You seem to have a preference for the former, which I would hazard a guess colours your opinions in general and your appreciation of timing in particular.

All arguments of whether there is bridging or tactile sensitivity involved is moot imo.

The basic thing to understand is that it is a continuum not a mutually exclusive scenario i.e. power moves from continuous to ballistic and both forms can be used in training and fighting, though sticky lends itself more to grappling technique.

It’s just a question of what you want to achieve - controlling the opponent’s cog or shocking it in order to produce involuntary responses as the WSL/PB lads advocate.

I’m with the WSL/PB crowd on this one.

2 cents back at ya...

Dave

Involuntary responses from whom Dave? I can't think of one legitimate example of someone falling for this "arm striking" other than other WC guys or my nephew i.e. inexperienced people. It just seems dumb to be honest with you. Distance feinting would even be far more effective and more useful for good timing. I don't know. I never once was told or thought that you fight with chi sao or even that you'll actually be able to redirect attacks. That wasn't the point. However, positioning, adjustment, and timing can be developed with contact redirection development with simultaneous striking. If one legitimately develops the body to respond to incoming force on a line of attack, it doesn't matter if contact is there in actual application because you've conditioned yourself to yes, "turn" and adjust and balance yourself to the opponent. I mean come on! That's fighting 101 and WC has an excellent drill to develop that.

Also, how in the h€ll can one develop contact free timing from striking arms!? You are literally giving away an entire beat to arms that aren't going to be there! :confused:

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 05:16 PM

Oh Yes, that's right, the infamous now "9 year" student whom no one is aware of, at least not in Tucson, the hub of who actually trains legitimately with Fong Sifu. Why can't you place him Kevin? What's his story? His name? Please tell?

No names , I did that before innocently with a Robert Chu student and the poor guy was suddenly a " low level " guy who trained once ; )

The point here is that HE said it to me ; ) he knew like I did , graham did and others who are introduced to the subtle shift in thinking. I didn't recruit him or try to change his mind , I just explained our thinking face to face.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 05:20 PM

Involuntary responses from whom Dave? I can't think of one legitimate example of someone falling for this "arm striking" other than other WC guys or my nephew i.e. inexperienced people. It just seems dumb to be honest with you. Distance feinting would even be far more effective and more useful for good timing. I don't know. I never once was told or thought that you fight with chi sao or even that you'll actually be able to redirect attacks. That wasn't the point. However, positioning, adjustment, and timing can be developed with contact redirection development with simultaneous striking. If one legitimately develops the body to respond to incoming force on a line of attack, it doesn't matter if contact is there in actual application because you've conditioned yourself to yes, "turn" and adjust and balance yourself to the opponent. I mean come on! That's fighting 101 and WC has an excellent drill to develop that.

Also, how in the h€ll can one develop contact free timing from striking arms!? You are literally giving away an entire beat to arms that aren't going to be there! :confused:

Have you met a wsl pb student ?

Jansingsang

07-30-2013, 05:50 PM

Each to their own, however, I think you’re labouring under a misconception.

What this is really all about is the application of force and whether it is continuous and controlling (sticky) or ballistic and shocking.

You seem to have a preference for the former, which I would hazard a guess colours your opinions in general and your appreciation of timing in particular.

All arguments of whether there is bridging or tactile sensitivity involved is moot imo.

The basic thing to understand is that it is a continuum not a mutually exclusive scenario i.e. power moves from continuous to ballistic and both forms can be used in training and fighting, though sticky lends itself more to grappling technique.

It’s just a question of what you want to achieve - controlling the opponent’s cog or shocking it in order to produce involuntary responses as the WSL/PB lads advocate.

I’m with the WSL/PB crowd on this one.

2 cents back at ya...

Dave

Good post youv'e hit the nail on the head its a question of preference wither you like to control the opponent or ballisticate there arse The choice is yours:D Its great it can all be discussed .But i feel its becoming a bit nasty in some of the posts in regard to Sigung WSL Ok Yes too be fair Yip chun, Leung ting Ho Kam Ming Yep iam gulity of saying one or two things :rolleyes: But we must stick to the facts and not speculate and slander those that can't respond for themselfs So Gentleman please some decorum is need for fair respectable debate :cool:

WC1277

07-30-2013, 05:53 PM

No names , I did that before innocently with a Robert Chu student and the poor guy was suddenly a " low level " guy who trained once ; )

The point here is that HE said it to me ; ) he knew like I did , graham did and others who are introduced to the subtle shift in thinking. I didn't recruit him or try to change his mind , I just explained our thinking face to face.

Fine, whatever Kevin. It doesn't really matter anyways. It doesn't really change the fact that you train to "strike" arms. It's confirmed, your "subtle" shift in thinking is a self confirming prophecy!

Why doesn't anyone understand that Chi Sao isn't fighting! Yes, there are very "rare" instances where possibly you'll do something to a real opponent straight out of chi sao. But all in all, it's not reality. We argue in these forums 99% of the time about chi sao and proper DEVELOPMENT! But I just recently realized the contraindication of your "thinking" has nothing to do with development at all. You say Joy or others are living in a well, yet it's you PB boys that have actually changed sh!t to win at chi sao! And it's insane and detached from reality!

1: "Striking" arms is chasing. It is an active motion against a target that's not the body. It commits a point in time and quite frankly is ridiculous to train considering arms will not be sitting there for you in reality to "strike". Like I've said before, you treat the dummy as if it wasn't a human(correctly) but in turn you've essentially made a wooden dummy out of your training partner.

2. Chi Sao is NOT fighting. It's for DEVELOPING adjustment, position, and timing to incoming force on lines of attacks. It is developed with contact just as a father might hold the hand of his baby as it learns to walk. The baby can lean on it, push off of it, adjust his feet, etc. until it develops it's balance and overall upright walking structure in relation to it's environment. After that, the child doesn't need contact to do it. Chi Sao is no different. With touch, the force comes in and you learn to readjust to gain the line. That's it. Just a tool that teaches you the interaction of two people fighting and how to optimize your position, timing, distance, etc. in relation. If trained correctly, no contact is required after that to know how to adjust when someone tries to hit you. I swear, if more people looked at chi sao this way, the right way, WC might have a chance at surviving this butchering of ideas that so many do.

Vajramusti

07-30-2013, 06:31 PM

But i feel its becoming a bit nasty in some of the posts in regard to Sigung WSL Ok Yes too be fair Yip chun, Leung ting Ho Kam Ming Yep iam gulity of saying one or two things :rolleyes: But we must stick to the facts and not speculate and slander those that can't respond for themselfs So Gentleman please some decorum is need for fair respectable debate :cool:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the best of my knowledge I have never criticized WSL. I respect all those who spent quality time with Ip Man. I just deflect KG and Graham's attacks on my line. or claiming sole inheritance of WSL's POV..We should and can male our tones more civil.

k gledhill

07-30-2013, 07:01 PM

Fine, whatever Kevin. It doesn't really matter anyways. It doesn't really change the fact that you train to "strike" arms. It's confirmed, your "subtle" shift in thinking is a self confirming prophecy!

Why doesn't anyone understand that Chi Sao isn't fighting! Yes, there are very "rare" instances where possibly you'll do something to a real opponent straight out of chi sao. But all in all, it's not reality. We argue in these forums 99% of the time about chi sao and proper DEVELOPMENT! But I just recently realized the contraindication of your "thinking" has nothing to do with development at all. You say Joy or others are living in a well, yet it's you PB boys that have actually changed sh!t to win at chi sao! And it's insane and detached from reality!

1: "Striking" arms is chasing. It is an active motion against a target that's not the body. It commits a point in time and quite frankly is ridiculous to train considering arms will not be sitting there for you in reality to "strike". Like I've said before, you treat the dummy as if it wasn't a human(correctly) but in turn you've essentially made a wooden dummy out of your training partner.

2. Chi Sao is NOT fighting. It's for DEVELOPING adjustment, position, and timing to incoming force on lines of attacks. It is developed with contact just as a father might hold the hand of his baby as it learns to walk. The baby can lean on it, push off of it, adjust his feet, etc. until it develops it's balance and overall upright walking structure in relation to it's environment. After that, the child doesn't need contact to do it. Chi Sao is no different. With touch, the force comes in and you learn to readjust to gain the line. That's it. Just a tool that teaches you the interaction of two people fighting and how to optimize your position, timing, distance, etc. in relation. If trained correctly, no contact is required after that to know how to adjust when someone tries to hit you. I swear, if more people looked at chi sao this way, the right way, WC might have a chance at surviving this butchering of ideas that so many do.

You're clueless.

WC1277

07-30-2013, 07:04 PM

Good post youv'e hit the nail on the head its a question of preference wither you like to control the opponent or ballisticate there arse The choice is yours:D Its great it can all be discussed .But i feel its becoming a bit nasty in some of the posts in regard to Sigung WSL Ok Yes too be fair Yip chun, Leung ting Ho Kam Ming Yep iam gulity of saying one or two things :rolleyes: But we must stick to the facts and not speculate and slander those that can't respond for themselfs So Gentleman please some decorum is need for fair respectable debate :cool:

A fair respectable debate? Kevin, Graham, and PB crowd destroy every respectable debate!! As far as WSL goes, I do respect him and I said that. Doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. PB, I could care less, the type of student attitudes he develops is embarrassing as evidenced by this forum and I have no qualms about responding in turn to them.

Others made some reasoned well thought out responses in this "respectable debate" and, well, you know, it ends how it always does...

Ozzy Dave

07-30-2013, 09:43 PM

Involuntary responses from whom Dave?

Well the opponent of course. If the cog is moved abruptly it has a correlating effect on the cns, much like when you slip and catch yourself before falling over there is a pause, a break in movement as you clamp down and reassess your proprioception – it’s a natural response and it’s involuntary.

In essence the theory is that if you can repeatedly do that to someone they have a limited ability to respond as their timing will always be late and this is the reason otherwise skilful people look like muppets when drilling with the likes of PB.

No one is intentionally striking the arms, hitting the centre directly has a better effect obviously but if the arms are in the way you strike at the centre through them to create the gap both physically and temporally to get in a potential ko. For instance a well applied pak sao should unbalance the person you apply it on.

We all know ballistic force (faat geng) in general is developed on the dummy and exercised via chi sao in WC/WT/VT (hope I have all the acronyms) it’s a required attribute to applying the art and yes good structure can mitigate the effects but that’s the whole issue really, what do you want to concentrate on? For me developing my faat geng to be stronger than your structure is where it’s at and one of the reasons for the whole chi sao drill.

As for contact free timing, when someone hits you in earnest contact is provided whether you like it or not all you need to do is engage on an appropriate line, just like WSL said - easy to learn hard to master.

Dave

LFJ

07-30-2013, 09:55 PM

If there is contact, there is always force (either yours or his). Whether a fight, sparring, a response drill like bong lap (or bong jut da, if you will).

I can't imagine a scenario where the opponent and I make contact, and neither is exhibiting any force, any momentum at all.

Okay, I'll give it one last shot. See if you understand the difference;

Responding to force would be like maintaining 'stick' in order to sense, conform, and change shape based on the opponent's energy left, right, up, down, forward, or backward, then find a weakness in there to strike. That to me is follow the leader, the definition of arm chasing.

Responding to position, on the other hand, would be knowing angles, attacking lines, etc. through bodily awareness and acting to cut into the most advantageous lines by way of interception, or application of force to disrupt the opponent's balance, structure, and facing while simultaneously striking them.

Just looking at the example of position recovery shown by WSL it may look the same from an outside perspective. But you would be erroneously assuming he is doing the former. If in that situation he doesn't immediately respond to recover the position, but tries to sense and conform to the opponent's energy, he'll be hit.

LFJ

07-30-2013, 09:59 PM

In summary:

You guys arm chase. You try to manipulate the arms blocking your path in front of you by "striking" them. You arm chase and whether your dense mind can wrap around this concept or not. You arm chase!

I don't strike arms. I strike people. The elbow position and attacking angle allows for simultaneous dissipation (siu) of the opponent's attack while I hit them. That's the definition of 'lin siu daai da', "joining dissipation with striking".

I've analogized it before with a rimshot in percussion. That is the sound produced by simultaneously striking the rim and head of the drum with the stick, where the shaft is the arm and the bead is the fist.

My target is to hit the opponent with my fist. If there is no obstruction in the way, they just get hit. If a limb or attack is in the way, it gets intercepted and cut through as I hit.

I never just strike at an arm left, right, up or down, with exception of at times bong-sau to recover position, but it is joined also with an attack on the opponent.

Maybe you don't have LSDD in your system, but I don't see how you get arm chasing out of that when the target is always the head of the drum. Interception of the opponent's arm is an advantage of structure...

Jansingsang

07-30-2013, 11:58 PM

A fair respectable debate? Kevin, Graham, and PB crowd destroy every respectable debate!! As far as WSL goes, I do respect him and I said that. Doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. PB, I could care less, the type of student attitudes he develops is embarrassing as evidenced by this forum and I have no qualms about responding in turn to them.

Others made some reasoned well thought out responses in this "respectable debate" and, well, you know, it ends how it always does...

Yes A fair respectable debate ... There you goe popping off at the mouth again Too be fair leave PB out of this ok it's only two individuals from his Stable. This should not reflect on the man Ive met him and he seems a humble individual and not arrogant in anyway So like i said it isnt fair when people slagg off people because of others short comings and youv'e never met him .. You seem too think theres this mob behind these guys you even includied myself :rolleyes: Off course ill have agreements with the content of whats said at times iam of the lineage . But that dosn't mean i agree with the attitudes that are displayed :( We all need too listen and check people out, before we Speculate Which in my opinion is a dangerous thing Just my two pence in there:)

GlennR

07-31-2013, 12:20 AM

Each to their own, however, I think you’re labouring under a misconception.

What this is really all about is the application of force and whether it is continuous and controlling (sticky) or ballistic and shocking.

You seem to have a preference for the former, which I would hazard a guess colours your opinions in general and your appreciation of timing in particular.

All arguments of whether there is bridging or tactile sensitivity involved is moot imo.

The basic thing to understand is that it is a continuum not a mutually exclusive scenario i.e. power moves from continuous to ballistic and both forms can be used in training and fighting, though sticky lends itself more to grappling technique.

It’s just a question of what you want to achieve - controlling the opponent’s cog or shocking it in order to produce involuntary responses as the WSL/PB lads advocate.

I’m with the WSL/PB crowd on this one.

2 cents back at ya...

Dave

G'day Dave............... nice post as usual

And maybe its just us practical no-nonsense Australians that pick up on what youve said in the above highlighted section..... its HOW you want to achieve the outcome (ie knocking the guy out) that differentiates the various lineages.

All of them adhere to WC principles, they just have a different take on them.

Ive said it before, Ali-Frazier were stylistically as opposed as you could get two boxers, but no one ever said that either of them didnt box.

Shame the WC-VT people cant think the same

Graham H

07-31-2013, 12:30 AM

Too be fair leave PB out of this ok it's only two individuals from his Stable.

It's not actually. It may be only predominantly myself and Kev on this forum but there are others on other forums and indeed 100's in our lineage that have come from other lineages. If you look on the some European forums even PB himself.

It even rages on Facebook. Only recently there have been "arguments" between long term students (and his many students) that have now joined our lineage from William Cheung. The list goes on and on and on.............

This forum is only the tip of the ice berg.

The thing you (gen) don't notice is that behind the scenes from all these arguments and petty bickerings many people are making the change. IMO that's a good thing because no matter how much abuse is thrown at me and other PB students the more people that end up correcting their Ving Tsun the better that will be in the long run.

I myself used to be on your (gen) side of the fence arguing with PB students on this very forum until I went to see first hand. Haven't looked back.

So keep the arguing raging that's what I say........:)

Jansingsang

07-31-2013, 01:23 AM

It's not actually. It may be only predominantly myself and Kev on this forum but there are others on other forums and indeed 100's in our lineage that have come from other lineages. If you look on the some European forums even PB himself.

It even rages on Facebook. Only recently there have been "arguments" between long term students (and his many students) that have now joined our lineage from William Cheung. The list goes on and on and on.............

Yes agreed your both on this forum And others are indeed voiceing there take on things also been like that since day dot all the bickering but we got be mindful Not to disrespect
others along the way that's all iam saying at the end of the day Let the mud feist
resume.... Com 'on who wants some :D

BPWT

07-31-2013, 02:47 AM

Okay, I'll give it one last shot. See if you understand the difference;

Stop sucking me back into this thread by being polite and reasonable :)

Responding to force would be like maintaining 'stick' in order to sense, conform, and change shape based on the opponent's energy left, right, up, down, forward, or backward, then find a weakness in there to strike. That to me is follow the leader, the definition of arm chasing.

If you think of it as someone changing shape based on these criteria of movement and force, and following the limb issuing the movement and force, wherever it goes... then yes, this would be chasing hands. :)

But what I am saying is that contact is made when you are directing your force towards the opponent to strike them. If your force is greater than theirs and your position is better, you go in (go forward, etc) and strike. But if you make contact and you can't do this, then you respond to the force in a different way - you need to redirect, angle, etc, while keeping contact (stick, if you will) that still retains the hallmarks of forward force/pressure.

Why do I say "while keeping contact"?

I'm not chasing hands because the retained contact is just a consequence of the opponent having a good line, while I am adjusting to find a better one/tighter one.

If they move their arm completely off this line (they just move it away from my center with no purpose behind the action) I don't then keep contact with it (keep stick/feeling) as 'the way is free' for me to go forward. So I hit. Contact would have been lost (they disengaged their striking arm), but that's good in this case, as they opened a line of attack.

This sounds way more complicated that it actually is. When I write it down it is easy to think: how do you feel the force, how do you react to it, how do you know how to change angle if needed, how do you do this, that and the other, at speed?

But it's really not so complicated in practice (though it is not necessarily easy :)). Chi Sau, and the various other drills that aid us in getting LLHS - LSJC into what we do, teach us to respond to fast actions without thinking - in my lineage, LT put together a series of drills (Chi Sau sections, he calls them) to help you start this process.

This is the purpose of Chi Sau (IMO) - to teach you how, on contact and via the forward pressure you keep, you can automatically handle the force and directions of force... from that initial point of contact.

That's why earlier I wrote: "The process of contact and feeling is not reflective in that sense... you don't wait and 'try to do something with it'. Everything happens too fast. That speed is why the system has bridging tools. You make contact and then as the opponent moves/strikes/applies force or strength, the options you have are made for you - LLHS - LSJC."

So for me, WT/WC/VT is a bridging art - it has to be because LLHS - LSJC teaches us what to do once there's contact, and it implies that in reality contact will happen.

Responding to position, on the other hand, would be knowing angles, attacking lines, etc. through bodily awareness and acting to cut into the most advantageous lines by way of interception, or application of force to disrupt the opponent's balance, structure, and facing while simultaneously striking them.

You know, I am not disagreeing with this. Really, I agree :).

But my point is regarding all the things you mention (angles, lines, interception, application of force, etc) is in relation to "bodily awareness".

When things happen at speed, I am saying this awareness - this understanding of your position - is better found in relation to your opponent via contact once an initial bridge was made (provided of course, that you didn't get lucky and simply hit the guy with a clean strike and KO'd him with a single attack - something that would be nice, but not realistic).

I always assume contact will happen - a bridge formed - in an encounter. LLHS - LSJC is about receiving, following (center - not arm chasing), issuing, etc.

Or to look at it from a different angle, what does the second form teach us - why is it called Chum Kiu?

What I have been disagreeing with is the assertion that WSLPBVT doesn't do this - people have been saying this lineage doesn't look to bridge, doesn't look to keep contact (stick) and redirect, etc. Truly, you disengage more than most WC/WT lineages, but when I see PB in his clips, I see him working pretty much everything from contact that leads to redirecting.

A bridge is contact (brief stick).

Earlier I wrote: "Clearing a path, let's say with lap sau, is redirecting! A tan motion is redirecting. When you, in PB lineage, say your Bong Sau is shunting, that is a way of redirecting. My point is that PB is constantly bridging and redirecting in those clips."

And that is why I also earlier wrote: "So... when I watch these clips of PB, I see him constantly bridging, redirecting, working position off of contact (brief stick)."

Ozzy Dave

07-31-2013, 03:04 AM

Ive said it before, Ali-Frazier were stylistically as opposed as you could get two boxers, but no one ever said that either of them didnt box.

Shame the WC-VT people cant think the same

G’day Glenn,

Yeah, funny you should mention boxing, its great for giving perspective and learning to respect individual style. You also learn to appreciate sabre rattling for what it is – a sugar pedestal that will dissolve at the first defeat and we’ll all be defeated some time. However, while keeping this in mind nothing wrong with debating the finer points I say ;)

Dave

Sean66

07-31-2013, 03:26 AM

Good post T_Ray.
Just like wing chun should be. Short, precise and to the point.

Graham H

07-31-2013, 03:28 AM

Good post T_Ray.
Just like wing chun should be. Short, precise and to the point.

...unless you practice LTWT, ICWC or HKMVT! lol :D

LFJ

07-31-2013, 03:52 AM

But what I am saying is that contact is made when you are directing your force towards the opponent to strike them. If your force is greater than theirs and your position is better, you go in (go forward, etc) and strike. But if you make contact and you can't do this, then you respond to the force in a different way - you need to redirect, angle, etc, while keeping contact (stick, if you will) that still retains the hallmarks of forward force/pressure.

Doesn't sound familiar...

What I have been disagreeing with is the assertion that WSLPBVT doesn't do this - people have been saying this lineage doesn't look to bridge, doesn't look to keep contact (stick) and redirect, etc. Truly, you disengage more than most WC/WT lineages, but when I see PB in his clips, I see him working pretty much everything from contact that leads to redirecting.

No PBVT reps in my country, so I can't say exactly what's going on. But I don't see him sticking in his clips. I see a heck of a lot of ballistic force, and listening to his students, that's what they feel. So that tells me what is actually happening. You're seeing something else and not listening to his students who actual feel it.

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:04 AM

G’day Glenn,

Yeah, funny you should mention boxing, its great for giving perspective and learning to respect individual style. You also learn to appreciate sabre rattling for what it is – a sugar pedestal that will dissolve at the first defeat and we’ll all be defeated some time. However, while keeping this in mind nothing wrong with debating the finer points I say ;)

Dave

Evening Dave

Thing about boxing is that it has perspective as they fight, one stylist can say "your hook is wrong technically" but the response will be "ive knocked 8 men out with that technically flawed hook"

Its ALL about perspective.

Having said that, its understanding the finer details that gets you to that elite level im sure we'd all like to be at ;)

BPWT

07-31-2013, 04:06 AM

@ LFJ

Fair enough - to each his own.

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:07 AM

Doesn't sound familiar...

Yep, pretty common them amongst most WC lineages

No PBVT reps in my country, so I can't say exactly what's going on. But I don't see him sticking in his clips. I see a heck of a lot of ballistic force, and listening to his students, that's what they feel. So that tells me what is actually happening. You're seeing something else and not listening to his students who actual feel it.

Yeh, but he does use the bridge, he bases his line of attack on what he has done with the bridge...... wether its shunting, sticking etc

tc101

07-31-2013, 04:28 AM

Thing about boxing is that it has perspective as they fight, one stylist can say "your hook is wrong technically" but the response will be "ive knocked 8 men out with that technically flawed hook"

The thing is technical correctness is seen as a starting point to learn from and from there you learn how to do things best for yourself. To put it a different way it is just a model to help you and give you an idea of how start doing things.

Its ALL about perspective.

That is the truth.

Having said that, its understanding the finer details that gets you to that elite level im sure we'd all like to be at ;)

I think you are right but here is the thing people hearing this often believe that the understanding comes first and that you get it from someone who shares their let me repeat their understanding with you. I have learned that is not true. As your skill level increases from training your understanding grows not the other way round and while someone can share their understanding you cannot adopt it since then it is not your understanding but just a knock off limited version of theirs. You can only ever have your understanding which comes from your training and experience.

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:32 AM

The thing is technical correctness is seen as a starting point to learn from and from there you learn how to do things best for yourself. To put it a different way it is just a model to help you and give you an idea of how start doing things.

It goes in steps, you practice... you go back to fundamentals... you learn fundamentals... you practice

I think you are right but here is the thing people hearing this often believe that the understanding comes first and that you get it from someone who shares their let me repeat their understanding with you. I have learned that is not true. As your skill level increases from training your understanding grows not the other way round and while someone can share their understanding you cannot adopt it since then it is not your understanding but just a knock off limited version of theirs. You can only ever have your understanding which comes from your training and experience.

Its a combination..... understanding with practise and vice versa

Graham H

07-31-2013, 04:34 AM

Yep, pretty common them amongst most WC lineages

Yeh, but he does use the bridge, he bases his line of attack on what he has done with the bridge...... wether its shunting, sticking etc

No he doesn't. His line of attack is based on mistakes and openings presented by the other guy. This is what chi sau teaches, not arm sticking. This way he can maintain striking without the risk of meeting obstacles square on. He doesn't try to deflect things out of the way. He takes the opponents ability to strike away completely. If a quick pak, jut or bong are required its not because he has made any bridge detections. He intercepts incoming attacks with one swift action that is combined with an attack. No time to stick.

There is a whole strategy for this. It's GOT NOTHING TO WITH EFFING BRIDGES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:40 AM

No he doesn't. His line of attack is based on mistakes and openings presented by the other guy.

Mistakes id assume he has helped create...... yes? no?

This is what chi sau teaches, not arm sticking.

Did i say that?

This way he can maintain striking without the risk of meeting obstacles square on.

Because he works a line after having dealt with the obstacle (bridge), or did it just magically disappear?

He doesn't try to deflect things out of the way. He takes the opponents ability to strike away completely. If a quick pak, jut or bong are required its not because he has made any bridge detections. He intercepts incoming attacks with one swift action that is combined with an attack. No time to stick.

Oh come on G, he paks to clear the line all the time in his clips.

There is a whole strategy for this. It's GOT NOTHING TO WITH EFFING BRIDGES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)

Calm down G.... youre getting too old to get excited!

Ozzy Dave

07-31-2013, 04:47 AM

Evening Dave

Thing about boxing is that it has perspective as they fight, one stylist can say "your hook is wrong technically" but the response will be "ive knocked 8 men out with that technically flawed hook"

Its ALL about perspective.

Having said that, its understanding the finer details that gets you to that elite level im sure we'd all like to be at ;)

Agreed Glenn

Dave

tc101

07-31-2013, 04:48 AM

It goes in steps, you practice... you go back to fundamentals... you learn fundamentals... you practice

Yes yes I agree I am only saying that the model is not how we will often end up doing things that we will often modify that model way to suit our individuality and that is why you cannot use some objective standard or model to compare with how someone is doing it and say it is good or bad. For that you need to look at how it is working for them. It is through the practice that you learn how to modify things for yourself. Of course there are guidelines but they are only that.

Its a combination..... understanding with practise and vice versa

Yes.

Ozzy Dave

07-31-2013, 04:51 AM

No he doesn't. His line of attack is based on mistakes and openings presented by the other guy.

Mistakes id assume he has helped create...... yes? no?

Good question Graham, what do you say?

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:54 AM

Good question Graham, what do you say?

Thanks Dave..... looking forward to G's answer

Graham H

07-31-2013, 04:55 AM

Mistakes id assume he has helped create...... yes? no?

In some instances

Did i say that?

No I did

Because he works a line after having dealt with the obstacle (bridge), or did it just magically disappear?

So a punch, kick, a head butt, a grab, a weapon are all bridges are they?? If so then yes a bridge. :rolleyes:

Oh come on G, he paks to clear the line all the time in his clips.

Yes he does but it's not based on BPWT's or wingchunian's etc idea on contacting the bridge, sensing energy etc etc

Calm down G.... youre getting too old to get excited!

Not excited just frustrated at you clowns that have no idea about what your on about is all pet! :)

BTW Glenn you will be interested to know that I have been back boxing recently. Apart from PB and PB guys nobody can really fight Wing Chun so I had no choice. The sparring has been an eye opener as I originally thought I could use Ving Tsun. No way albeit footwork and attacking lines. Without the gloves I can use my Ving Tsun and in fact have more success than with gloves against a person that is throwing hooks. uppercuts etc. If the gloves are on I have to box.

I can't be bothered to go into the details why but it is safe to say that the arm contact wing chun brigade would not stand much chance if any at all.

GlennR

07-31-2013, 04:58 AM

Yes yes I agree I am only saying that the model is not how we will often end up doing things that we will often modify that model way to suit our individuality and that is why you cannot use some objective standard or model to compare with how someone is doing it and say it is good or bad. For that you need to look at how it is working for them. It is through the practice that you learn how to modify things for yourself. Of course there are guidelines but they are only that.

No they aren't JUST guidelines.... ultimately these guidelines describe the optimum techniques which is ultimately where you want to be.

But, ill give you one thing..... these guidelines/principles/theories were "discovered" after generations of trial and error

The folks previous have done the work for us

Graham H

07-31-2013, 05:03 AM

Mistakes id assume he has helped create...... yes? no?

You mean this question???

GlennR

07-31-2013, 05:12 AM

In some instances

Who would have thought eh

No I did

Thought so

So a punch, kick, a head butt, a grab, a weapon are all bridges are they?? If so then yes a bridge. :rolleyes:

Ofcourse they are.... call it a point of reference if you dont like the word bridge.
ALL strikers use it.... MT, boxing, silat etc

Yes he does but it's not based on BPWT's or wingchunian's etc idea on contacting the bridge, sensing energy etc etc

Did i say that?

Not excited just frustrated at you clowns that have no idea about what your on about is all pet! :)

On the contrary G.... i think i do

Fightings fighting after all

BTW Glenn you will be interested to know that I have been back boxing recently.

Good move

Apart from PB and PB guys nobody can really fight Wing Chun so I had no choice.

Thats part of the reason ive wandered away form WC..... for now at least

The sparring has been an eye opener as I originally thought I could use Ving Tsun. No way albeit footwork and attacking lines.

Yep, its a different animal isnt it

Without the gloves I can use my Ving Tsun and in fact have more success than with gloves against a person that is throwing hooks. uppercuts etc. If the gloves are on I have to box.

Its an eye opener isnt it, the WC principles etc really fall away once you get the gloves on.
You enjoying it?

I can't be bothered to go into the details why but it is safe to say that the arm contact wing chun brigade would not stand much chance if any at all.

Yes and no.
At boxing range they wont/dont know what to do, bit like a rabbit in the headlights, but at clinch range it has its uses

Its funny, this whole "ballistic" thing in regards to PB has me looking at the two styles ive done (WC that is) a bit differently.

Been a very good thread to be honest

GlennR

07-31-2013, 05:13 AM

You mean this question???

Yep, thats the one

BPWT

07-31-2013, 05:15 AM

No he doesn't.

:rolleyes:

His line of attack is based on mistakes and openings presented by the other guy. This is what chi sau teaches, not arm sticking.

As Glenn pointed out - often PB has forced these mistakes and openings. Partly from positioning, partly from clearing the line. Any form of contact is a bridge.

Regarding arm sticking, like I said... you are the only one who keeps labeling others as arm sticking, even when it is explained to you what this actually is, and what it isn't (arm chasing).

He doesn't try to deflect things out of the way.

For Pete's Sake! His clips are full of lap, bong and pak. All of which deflect things. Do you really not see him using pak, bong and lap? :confused:

To deflect something you have to make contact with it... to make contact with something is to create a bridge. PB does this time and time again. Bridge and deflect, bridge and reposition, etc.

There is a whole strategy for this. It's GOT NOTHING TO WITH EFFING BRIDGES!

In WSLPBVT, do you learn the second form? :) I know you do, as you once said that SNT alone was useless for fighting - that you need CK.

Do you call the second form Chum Kiu? If you do, what do think the name of this form means. How does PB translate it? Or have you guys renamed it?

Ozzy Dave

07-31-2013, 05:17 AM

You mean this question???

Yep, I and I'm sure Glenn appreciate PB is good, without benefit of contact (it's on my bucket list) your opinion is sought.

I'd say there is quite a bit of control going on - not a bad thing just appears the centre is being manipulated effectively.

Again your opinion is sought...

Dave

Graham H

07-31-2013, 05:22 AM

:rolleyes:

As Glenn pointed out - often PB has forced these mistakes and openings. Partly from positioning, partly from clearing the line. Any form of contact is a bridge.

Regarding arm sticking, like I said... you are the only one who keeps labeling others as arm sticking, even when it is explained to you what this actually is, and what it isn't (arm chasing).

For Pete's Sake! His clips are full of lap, bong and pak. All of which deflect things. Do you really not see him using pak, bong and lap? :confused:

To deflect something you have to make contact with it... to make contact with something is to create a bridge. PB does this time and time again. Bridge and deflect, bridge and reposition, etc.

In WSLPBVT, do you learn the second form? :) I know you do, as you once said that SNT alone was useless for fighting - that you need CK.

Do you call the second form Chum Kiu? If you do, what do think the name of this form means. How does PB translate it? Or have you guys renamed it?

Blah blah blah blah :rolleyes: