Nice version of vinh xuan [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

YouKnowWho

10-14-2013, 11:44 PM

controlling the center line without being a restricted or bound by the centerline.
When we talk about "centerline", we have to talk about the Chinese spear technique. The spear is used to stab at your opponent's heart (his center) more than any other weapon does.

The Chinese spear technique only has 3 major moves. the

- stab,
- clockwise circle,
- counter clockwise circle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY4azsuTzhM&feature=youtu.be

All WC systems have the stab. Does all WC system also have the clockwise circle and counter clockwise circle? Apparently some WC system have it.

If you can move both of your arms in circle with your

- left arm moving in a clockwise circle, and
- right arm moving in a counter clockwise circle,

you can seal your center line (the intersection of both circles) tightly that no incoming attack can go through.

http://imageshack.us/a/img51/6126/tfep.jpg

KPM

10-15-2013, 04:04 AM

LoneTiger108

10-15-2013, 05:02 AM

Looks a whole lot like the Chi Sao done in Pin Sun WCK!

Wah! All these labels ;)

Pin Sun Wing Chun as we all have seen through the years has a flavour of mainland interactive training, as does the Vietnamese clip here. Call it Chisau or whatever you like, it is a far stretch from the common Ip Man chisau we commonly see, and fwiw very few even do that justice.

2 arms against 2 arms has a set of variations which people here with basic experience should be able to share, and I would suggest if you don't know what I am talking about then you need to revisit your Sifu and ask some hard and fast questions... Ip Man revised this type of mainland interaction to get to where we were at in the 1960s and then after the boom of the 70s everything changed.

There is value to everything if you understand the objectives.

kung fu fighter

10-15-2013, 07:13 AM

All WC systems have the stab. Does all WC system also have the clockwise circle and counter clockwise circle? Apparently some WC system have it.

Yes, Biu and Huen

To work off of what John is saying......there are two strategies when it comes to defending the center line. You can occupy the centerline and defend it from the inside outward, or you can leave the centerline open and defend it from the outside inward. Southern Mantis uses the second strategy. Most Wing Chun uses the first strategy. Some Wing Chun also makes more use of the second strategy.

most Mainland wck uses both strategies, where as yip man wck place more emphasis on the first strategy.

In my humble opinion, the first strategy is great for beginner to intermediate level students as it drills in the idea of the center line, but I find too man yip man WCK practioners get stuck at that level thinking that is the be all and end all in chi sao development. There ragid way of thinking does not allow there skill level to advance beyond the first level to the second strategy which develops flow. just my 2 cents based on my observation during my research into a few different mainland wck linages. Both strategies are equally as important.

YouKnowWho

10-15-2013, 12:01 PM

To work off of what John is saying......there are two strategies when it comes to defending the centerline. You can occupy the centerline and defend it from the inside outward, or you can leave the centerline open and defend it from the outside inward. Southern Mantis uses the second strategy. Most Wing Chun uses the first strategy. Some Wing Chun also makes more use of the second strategy.

Strategy 1 (straight line against circle): occupy the centerline and defend it from the inside outward,
Strategy 2 (circle against straight line): leave the centerline open and defend it from the outside inward.

In clinching, if you want to control the

- "upper" part of your opponent's body, you use strategy 1. A double outward circles will put your arms "above" your opponent's arms.
- "lower" part of your opponent's body, you use strategy 2. A double inward circles will put your arms "under" your opponent's arms.

the first strategy is great for beginner to intermediate level students as it drills in the idea of the center line, but I find too man yip man WCK practioners get stuck at that level thinking that is the be all and end all in chi sao development. There ragid way of thinking does not allow there skill level to advance beyond the first level to the second strategy which develops flow. just my 2 cents based on my observation during my research into a few different mainland wck linages. Both strategies are equally as important.

If you over emphasize "straight line", you will totally ignore the circular punches such as

- hook (haymaker),
- uppercut,
- hammer fist,
- back fist,
- side punch (XingYi Heng Chuan),
- Ha Chuan (start circular but end with straight),
- ...

It's OK to start your striking skill development from jab and cross. But there are more after that. The moment that you start to train strategy 2, you have just open a new door right in front of you.

This is just my opinion about "general TCMA training path". It has nothing to do with any particular style.

KPM

10-15-2013, 12:34 PM

Wah! All these labels ;)

---But labels are important! How would we know what someone else is talking about without being able to categorize or label it?

Pin Sun Wing Chun as we all have seen through the years has a flavour of mainland interactive training,

---Yes. Because it IS "mainland"!

Call it Chisau or whatever you like, it is a far stretch from the common Ip Man chisau we commonly see, and fwiw very few even do that justice.

---I invite anyone to go back and look at that clip again. The Chi Sao they are doing is not simply "Huen Chi Sao" circling wrists. It is more like the Pin Sun Chi Sao that uses a coiling action. In Pin Sun it is often described as "two snakes seeking an opening." If you watch closely you will see some Bong Sao's naturally resulting in the action. If you've done both this kind of Chi Sao and the Yip Man Luk Sao Chi Sao it is easy to see how the Yip Man/Yuen Kay San version evolved from this older rolling platform. This also supports the idea that the Luk Sao roll was developed by either Yuen Kay San or Yip Man and shared. Vietnamese Wing Chun comes from Yuen Kay San's brother. The brother learned from the same source as YKS, but likely didn't learn the Luk Sao roll because it doesn't show up in the lineage he established in Viet Nam. Yip Man WCK and Yuen Kay San WCK seem to be the only lineages with the Luk Sao rolling platform. When we see it in other lineages, its likely because they have picked it up fairly recently.

Ip Man revised this type of mainland interaction to get to where we were at in the 1960s and then after the boom of the 70s everything changed.

---The story told by Sum Nung was that Yuen Kay San was the one that came up with the Luk Sao rolling in association with Sum Nung himself and Yip Man. Hard to know one way or the other. But given that YKS was older and more senior than Yip Man.......

Eric_H

10-15-2013, 12:59 PM

if you know what to look for there is a center line awareness in what they are doing, but not in the obvious way that most are used to.

I know what I'm looking for, it's not present. Body structure doesn't lie.

kung fu fighter

10-15-2013, 01:14 PM

I know what I'm looking for, it's not present. Body structure doesn't lie.

Body structure is one level, there are other higher levels

Grumblegeezer

10-15-2013, 01:38 PM

Body structure is one level, there are other higher levels

A few random complaints...

I get so tired of these kinds of snooty-sounding remarks. Translation: "I know more secret, higher level stuff, therefore what you say is poo".

Another thing... all this stuff about mainland WC. What's up with that? I mean after all GM Yip Man learned and taught his art on the mainland too. Sure he became famous during his exile to Hong Kong. The stuff on the mainland was isolated behind what used to be called the "Bamboo Curtain" for about forty years, but that doesn't make it older, better, or more authentic. It just makes it different.

Finally everybody is so quick to generalize and judge. I don't see how you can judge anything very well from just a short videoclip. Really, to know anything for certain it's best to cross bridges.

Oh and about that hand-circling chi-sau. We do something very similar in the Yip Man branch I train with. That's in addition to the standard Luk-Sau rolling. Perhaps my old Sifu picked it up on his early trips back to the mainland way back in the 80s. Or perhaps Yip Man showed it to him. I don't know. But I believe it's useful training.

BTW, Eric, when we do that kind of drill, we do maintain an awareness of classic WC structure and centerline.

JPinAZ

10-15-2013, 04:33 PM

Ignoring the snarky 'I have higher level WC than you do' BS comments, I agree with those that say you can engage from the inside or outside. It really depends on where your hands are during Bai Jong. There are times when you won't even have time to bring up your guard before a punch is thrown and there are WC mechanics, body methods and tools that allow us to protect the centerline from out to in (as well as the obvious inside methods)

In HFY, one example that comes to mind is part of our Cheurn Kiu Sau long bridge methods. Loi Lap Sau application can be used for engaging on center and going from in to out (in a simple sense), and Noi Gwa Sau to bridge out to in and bringing an attack from outside the box to inside the box while establishing WC centerline.

BTW, Eric, when we do that kind of drill, we do maintain an awareness of classic WC structure and centerline.

Not trying to answer for Eric, but I see the same thing he does in this clip. And I don't doubt you or someone else can do something similar and still have an awareness of WC structure - it's simply not being demonstrated in the clip that was linked

And as a general comment, I don't see centerline either in this clip - 'higher level' or otherwise :rolleyes:

Eric_H

10-15-2013, 05:09 PM

Body structure is one level, there are other higher levels

Not in that clip! :)

KPM

10-15-2013, 05:26 PM

Here's the Pin Sun version. And Jim does have good body structure. I've felt it. Because I have "crossed bridges" with him as Grumblegeezer suggests. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KpRjsFlL1Q

LaRoux

10-15-2013, 05:30 PM

Looks a whole lot like the Chi Sao done in Pin Sun WCK!

And just like all chi sao, completely unrelated to anything having to do with full on application against a fully resisting opponent.

YouKnowWho

10-15-2013, 07:54 PM

Here is a "double inward circles" used in grappling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bZYaYylnD8&feature=youtu.be

Whether it may work in the striking game or not, it has not been tested fully. It just proves that the strategy "leave the centerline open and defend it from the outside inward" is a general TCMA concept. It doesn't belong to any particular TCMA system.

Grumblegeezer

10-15-2013, 08:11 PM

Here is a "double inward circles" used in grappling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bZYaYylnD8&feature=youtu.be

Thanks for that interesting clip, John. But with those X-men "Cyclops" glasses, why not just blast him with your laser vision?

http://i.annihil.us/u/prod/marvel//universe3zx/images/4/45/Cyclops_Head.jpg

LoneTiger108

10-16-2013, 02:32 AM

---But labels are important! How would we know what someone else is talking about without being able to categorize or label it?

Labels are for those that are buying products.

---I invite anyone to go back and look at that clip again. The Chi Sao they are doing is not simply "Huen Chi Sao" circling wrists. It is more like the Pin Sun Chi Sao that uses a coiling action. In Pin Sun it is often described as "two snakes seeking an opening." If you watch closely you will see some Bong Sao's naturally resulting in the action. If you've done both this kind of Chi Sao and the Yip Man Luk Sao Chi Sao it is easy to see how the Yip Man/Yuen Kay San version evolved from this older rolling platform. This also supports the idea that the Luk Sao roll was developed by either Yuen Kay San or Yip Man and shared. Vietnamese Wing Chun comes from Yuen Kay San's brother. The brother learned from the same source as YKS, but likely didn't learn the Luk Sao roll because it doesn't show up in the lineage he established in Viet Nam. Yip Man WCK and Yuen Kay San WCK seem to be the only lineages with the Luk Sao rolling platform. When we see it in other lineages, its likely because they have picked it up fairly recently.

Nice.

---The story told by Sum Nung was that Yuen Kay San was the one that came up with the Luk Sao rolling in association with Sum Nung himself and Yip Man. Hard to know one way or the other. But given that YKS was older and more senior than Yip Man.......

Seriously... you are still debating who came up with what? Rather than look a little more deeply and see that it was all there in the first place? I have heard these stories too and you know the only constant? Ip Man.

FWIW and FME There is more to Ip Mans interactive platforms than Luksau and Chisau. Like the LT guys, I have a few other terms for interactive training that all trace back to and through Ip Man himself, Ng Jung So and Chan Wah Shun. As most already know we also connect through Wong Wah Sam and Fung Sang too, but people prefer to promote areas and villages rather than the real life people behind all this knowledge. Maybe this is because all we have is lists of names with little evidence of their existence other than the list of names!

From what I have been told, there were very specific and serious reasons why Lee Shing baisi to Ip Man, and why that was rushed too. He had travelled throughout East Asia beforehand searching out the Masters. Nothing to do with teaching publically either, because in the 60's it was one single Wing Chun Pai.

His students however were not bound by any codes of conduct so basically done what they wanted after 1991, and some done what they wanted decades before that! All, however, have a different interactive platform than, say, WSL students, or Victor Kan students. Man, they even have different ways from eachother lol! But I find it very interesting that the platform is most similar to the Chisau of Simon Lau and Wai Po Tang! Both originating from mainland Wing Chun schools, and both very influential in the early UK Wing Chun scene.

So who created what exactly? It's all pure speculation IMHO

Just my five pence...

KPM

10-16-2013, 04:19 AM

Labels are for those that are buying products.

---No. Labels are a way of categorizing things and categorizing things are necessary in a discussion setting. Can you imagine trying to talk about football without "labeling" the various teams, coaches, etc.?

Seriously... you are still debating who came up with what? Rather than look a little more deeply and see that it was all there in the first place? I have heard these stories too and you know the only constant? Ip Man.

---I'm not debating anything. I threw the idea out there on a thread showing a Chi Sao platform. You can take it or leave it. If you've heard the stories too, then you'll know that Yip Man is not the only constant. Yuen Kay San is a constant as well. There was definitely a link between the two and the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform.

but people prefer to promote areas and villages rather than the real life people behind all this knowledge. Maybe this is because all we have is lists of names with little evidence of their existence other than the list of names!

---I have no idea what you are trying to say here Spencer. :confused:

From what I have been told, there were very specific and serious reasons why Lee Shing baisi to Ip Man, and why that was rushed too. He had travelled throughout East Asia beforehand searching out the Masters. Nothing to do with teaching publically either, because in the 60's it was one single Wing Chun Pai.

---And what does that have to do with this discussion? Does everything come down to Lee Shing for you?

So who created what exactly? It's all pure speculation IMHO

---Yeah. It is all speculation. But some things fit with what we know better than other things and therefore seem more likely. The fact is, there is no evidence that anyone was using the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San. It seems to have started with these two gentleman. Exactly which of them was the innovator is hard to say since we weren't there. But more than one source has stated that it was Yuen Kay San. And at least one of those sources (Sum Nun) was actually there.

LoneTiger108

10-16-2013, 08:16 AM

Can you imagine trying to talk about football without "labeling" the various teams, coaches, etc.?

Football is a funny old game, pretty much a product for sale these days. Wing Chun is a Martial Art that was never supposed to be marketed and sold as a product. But I do understand your point.

If you've heard the stories too, then you'll know that Yip Man is not the only constant. Yuen Kay San is a constant as well. There was definitely a link between the two and the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform.

So if you know this and have experienced what you talk of... show it!

Break it down in a clip or two and show the exact development you are talking about. It will become clearer for everyone if somebody can just do that. And the same can be asked of anyone from YKS family too, but as far as I have seen nobody has been able to share anything like I am asking. But please... be the first!

---And what does that have to do with this discussion? Does everything come down to Lee Shing for you?

Er... well... yes it does.

Maybe this is because I am a student of one of his students? Maybe it is because I am loyal to just one Sifu? Maybe it's because I am simply nuts?

And yes, it is related to the thread because I was simply 'throwing it out there' that there was more people than YKS out there developing the best way to interact! 11 others directly related to be fair. And after all my Sigungs research and training, he chose to represent Ip Man because of what he had developed, or like you say, possibly learnt from his elders like YKS.

The fact is, there is no evidence that anyone was using the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San.

Ok I will throw something else into the mix... the programs I learnt included quite a few set currculums (including Ip Mans) written in Chinese. Curriculums I say, not Kuit or poems or such like. Curriculums.

One was of the interactive developments known to Wing Chun students, and two of them were Luksau and Chisau among others. As far as I know this was not made up information or language, it had existed in Ng Jung So's time and possibly been taught by Chan Wah Shun all the way back to Leung Jan. This is what Ip Man had access to and it's likely it came from the Fatshan schools.

So my query is, if the language existed before even Ip Man and YKS had ever met, then maybe all they done was attempt to figure out what these platforms were about? Thus developing what we think is new, but in fact only reinventing what was already there... Chisau and Luksau.

For me, that sounds far more logical because again, like I have said, there were guys like Simon Lau and Wai Po Tang teaching in London in the 70s and 80s and they had a different platform than Ip Mans HK guys that was more familiar to me when I trained. Both learnt from Fatshan and Vietnam too funnily enough, and both had to go through my Sigung and ask permission from Ip Man before they taught in the UK!

So when I see clips like the one posted, it only strengthens the case that the mainland doesn't know or has any interest in what was developed later by YKS, Ip Man or whoever!! They are all too keen to preserve and promote what they do now, and all repsect to them for that!

KPM

10-16-2013, 09:53 AM

So if you know this and have experienced what you talk of... show it!

---Show what? What do you want me to do?

Break it down in a clip or two and show the exact development you are talking about.

---A clip of what? All you have to do is look at the Chi Sao clips here, then compare it to any of Yip Man lineage or Yuen Kay San lineage people doing Chi Sao. There was no intermediate step.

It will become clearer for everyone if somebody can just do that. And the same can be asked of anyone from YKS family too, but as far as I have seen nobody has been able to share anything like I am asking. But please... be the first!

---Maybe because no one has been sure of what you are asking for?

And yes, it is related to the thread because I was simply 'throwing it out there' that there was more people than YKS out there developing the best way to interact! 11 others directly related to be fair. And after all my Sigungs research and training, he chose to represent Ip Man because of what he had developed, or like you say, possibly learnt from his elders like YKS.

---Ok. Again I will say....it is unclear to me what you are getting at. Lee Shing chose to represent Yip Man because of what he had developed or possibly learnt from YKS? How does that change what I said?

One was of the interactive developments known to Wing Chun students, and two of them were Luksau and Chisau among others.

---But who wrote these documents and when?

As far as I know this was not made up information or language, it had existed in Ng Jung So's time and possibly been taught by Chan Wah Shun all the way back to Leung Jan. This is what Ip Man had access to and it's likely it came from the Fatshan schools.

---Look Spencer. I am simply going by logic and available evidence. The various Weng Chun lineages claim descent through Fung Siu Ching. They don't use a Luk Sao Chi Sao platform. When Leung Jan retired to Ku Lo village what he taught did not include a Luk Sao Chi Sao platform. I have studied Pin Sun Wing Chun and it does not have the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform. What footage I have seen from Chan Wah Shun lineage does not show the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform. So based on the evidence I have had available, it seems that the generation prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San did not do this kind of Chi Sao. If you have evidence to the contrary, then I'm open to seeing it!

So my query is, if the language existed before even Ip Man and YKS had ever met,

---What "language" are to talking about? Remember, you are the one that so objects to categorizing or labeling anything. ;) So just what do these documents say?

For me, that sounds far more logical because again, like I have said, there were guys like Simon Lau and Wai Po Tang teaching in London in the 70s and 80s and they had a different platform than Ip Mans HK guys

--- If they were doing a different Chi Sao platform than Yip Man's guys, logic would seem to suggest to me that Lee Shing taught them this from the Wing Chun methods he studied apart from Yip Man. Perhaps they were doing the Chi Sao platform from Pin Sun?

---I'd also like to take this opportunity to post a redaction to something I wrote before. It has been pointed out to me by someone from that lineage, that YKS's brother, Yuen Chai Wan, did indeed teach the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform when he emigrated to Northern Viet Nam. So it is likely he took part in its development. Which makes sense given that he would have been training with his brother and with Yip Man prior to leaving China.

Jansingsang

10-16-2013, 09:57 AM

Football is a funny old game, pretty much a product for sale these days. Wing Chun is a Martial Art that was never supposed to be marketed and sold as a product. But I do understand your point.

So if you know this and have experienced what you talk of... show it!

Break it down in a clip or two and show the exact development you are talking about. It will become clearer for everyone if somebody can just do that. And the same can be asked of anyone from YKS family too, but as far as I have seen nobody has been able to share anything like I am asking. But please... be the first!

Er... well... yes it does.

Maybe this is because I am a student of one of his students? Maybe it is because I am loyal to just one Sifu? Maybe it's because I am simply nuts?

And yes, it is related to the thread because I was simply 'throwing it out there' that there was more people than YKS out there developing the best way to interact! 11 others directly related to be fair. And after all my Sigungs research and training, he chose to represent Ip Man because of what he had developed, or like you say, possibly learnt from his elders like YKS.

Ok I will throw something else into the mix... the programs I learnt included quite a few set currculums (including Ip Mans) written in Chinese. Curriculums I say, not Kuit or poems or such like. Curriculums.

One was of the interactive developments known to Wing Chun students, and two of them were Luksau and Chisau among others. As far as I know this was not made up information or language, it had existed in Ng Jung So's time and possibly been taught by Chan Wah Shun all the way back to Leung Jan. This is what Ip Man had access to and it's likely it came from the Fatshan schools.

So my query is, if the language existed before even Ip Man and YKS had ever met, then maybe all they done was attempt to figure out what these platforms were about? Thus developing what we think is new, but in fact only reinventing what was already there... Chisau and Luksau.

For me, that sounds far more logical because again, like I have said, there were guys like Simon Lau and teaching in London in the 70s and 80s and they had a different platform than Ip Mans HK guys that was more familiar to me when I trained. Both learnt from Fatshan and Vietnam too funnily enough, and both had to go through my Sigung and ask permission from Ip Man before they taught in the UK!

So when I see clips like the one posted, it only strengthens the case that the mainland doesn't know or has any interest in what was developed later by YKS, Ip Man or whoever!! They are all too keen to preserve and promote what they do now, and all repsect to them for that!

Spencer stop talking out your back crevice you do anything say anything to put the lee shing on some Big fat pedal stool you Tool :rolleyes: ..You know fully well Simon lau was taught by lee shing ...Wai Po Tang was taught by Simon lau and to verify that you could see him on the way of the warrior smacking up some girl who got the better of him :D And the only interactive crap you learnt is that flag waving garbage.. Man I hate f%&%ing liars ..The primary reasons why Wcs moving so frigging slow in the 21st century :mad:

JPinAZ

10-16-2013, 10:11 AM

Here's the Pin Sun version. And Jim does have good body structure. I've felt it. Because I have "crossed bridges" with him as Grumblegeezer suggests. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KpRjsFlL1Q

With the hunched over stances, I don't even see proper self centerline in this one... Pretty hard to have any fwd intent that way, let alone 'body structure' as I know it.

As Eric stated early on: no centerline, no wing chun.

hunt1

10-16-2013, 10:17 AM

The fact is, there is no evidence that anyone was using the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San.

Actually Keith this is incorrect. Yui Choi system uses Luk Sao and the rolling is even shown and is part of their Chum Kui Form. Yui Choi learned his Chum Kui from Ng Chung So. NGS's school was a central meeting and training place for all wing chun in Foshan in the 20's and 30's. Yui Kai told stories many times of watching his father along with Yip Man YKS Jui Chiu and Jui Wan training and exchanging at the school. It is much more likely based on the objective evidence that the rolling platform was an outgrown of the training that went on at NGS school. If not then the question to be ansered why is the rolling part of the Yui Choi Chun kui but not in the chum kui of others.

While there are many stories the road to the true history of wing chun is in the forms.

hunt1

10-16-2013, 10:26 AM

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1252644]With the hunched over stances, I don't even see proper self centerline in this one... Pretty hard to have any fwd intent that way, let alone 'body structure' as I know it.

JP makes a good point.

kung fu fighter

10-16-2013, 10:41 AM

I have studied Pin Sun Wing Chun and it does not have the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform.

The fact is, there is no evidence that anyone was using the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San.

Actually Keith this is incorrect. Yui Choi system uses Luk Sao and the rolling is even shown and is part of their Chum Kui Form. Yui Choi learned his Chum Kui from Ng Chung So. NGS's school was a central meeting and training place for all wing chun in Foshan in the 20's and 30's. Yui Kai told stories many times of watching his father along with Yip Man YKS Jui Chiu and Jui Wan training and exchanging at the school. It is much more likely based on the objective evidence that the rolling platform was an outgrown of the training that went on at NGS school. If not then the question to be ansered why is the rolling part of the Yui Choi Chun kui but not in the chum kui of others.

While there are many stories the road to the true history of wing chun is in the forms.

Actually Luk Sao Chi sao Platform is a variation of Pin Sun WCK's Dai Lim Tao two-man set. This leads me to believe it was part of leung jan's curriculam and therefore was not created by yip man and YKS.

[QUOTE=JPinAZ;1252644]With the hunched over stances, I don't even see proper self centerline in this one... Pretty hard to have any fwd intent that way, let alone 'body structure' as I know it.

JP makes a good point.

I agree, In that PSWC chi sao clip, those guys have lousy body structure, so don't take that as an example of good PSWC people. But on the other hand they are doing the correct rolling cycle, which was the point why Keith posted that clip.

LoneTiger108

10-16-2013, 11:37 AM

Actually Luk Sao Chi sao Platform is a variation of Pin Sun WCK's Dai Lim Tao two-man set. This leads me to believe it was part of leung jan's curriculam and therefore was not created by yip man and YKS.

That is a first for me to see online. Good stuff!

Forgive me for being blunt here, but if this is just the interaction of one of 12 maybe you can see what I have been trying to say?

Basically that Luksau (Looksau) has been there all along, with quite a few other platforms too.

YouKnowWho

10-16-2013, 12:14 PM

With the hunched over stances, I don't even see proper self centerline in this one... Pretty hard to have any fwd intent that way, let alone 'body structure' as I know it.

As Eric stated early on: no centerline, no wing chun.

IMO, the "hunched over stances - hollow chest" is the correct posture used in combat. The straight back stance is not good at all.

KPM

10-16-2013, 01:03 PM

Actually Luk Sao Chi sao Platform is a variation of Pin Sun WCK's Dai Lim Tao two-man set. This leads me to believe it was part of leung jan's curriculam and therefore was not created by yip man and YKS.

Uh, no. This is the Dai Lim Tao 2 man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKjiOBtX_k4

So you might be able to say that the single sticking hands in Yip Man WCK came from this, but not the 2-arm rolling platform. This is a two-man set, not a free-form rolling platform.

KPM

10-16-2013, 01:06 PM

Actually Keith this is incorrect. Yui Choi system uses Luk Sao and the rolling is even shown and is part of their Chum Kui Form.

I wasn't aware that Yui Choi used the Luk Sao platform. Thanks for that! But who were the big 3 in Wing Chun in Foshan?.....Yui Choi, Yip Man, and Yuen Kay San. So it would make sense that Yui Choi was in on any innovations in Chi Sao, since these guys all trained together and were peers.

But I don't understand what you mean by the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform being part of the Chum Kiu form? :confused:

KPM

10-16-2013, 01:12 PM

With the hunched over stances, I don't even see proper self centerline in this one... Pretty hard to have any fwd intent that way, let alone 'body structure' as I know it.

As Eric stated early on: no centerline, no wing chun.

First....no forward intent? :rolleyes: The forward lean, if anything, exaggerates forward intent! If he was leaning back on his heels, then I could understand someone saying it is "pretty hard to have any fwd intent."

Second...obviously its hard to know someone's body structure without seeing or feeling it tested. Nothing in this clip really put it to the test. But I have felt Jim's structure, and it is solid!

Third....why do you think there is no centerline here?

LoneTiger108

10-16-2013, 01:32 PM

Spencer stop talking out your back crevice you do anything say anything to put the lee shing on some Big fat pedal stool you Tool :rolleyes:

There is no pedestal dude. Only those that are on one themselves see them!

..You know fully well Simon lau was taught by lee shing ...Wai Po Tang was taught by Simon lau

Wah! I didn't know that :eek: Of course Simon Lau learnt from Lee Shing when he came to the UK, but his Wing Chun was already set from his training in Fatshan, or so I heard?

Wai Po may have started there but he went on to learn from others including Yiu Kil.

And the only interactive crap you learnt is that flag waving garbage.. Man I hate f%&%ing liars ..The primary reasons why Wcs moving so frigging slow in the 21st century :mad:

Easy tiger! If you are looking for liars they aint at this end of the keyboard :o

LoneTiger108

10-16-2013, 01:37 PM

But I don't understand what you mean by the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform being part of the Chum Kiu form? :confused:

I don't know if they have the same idea as I have, but Chum Kiu for me is when a student first starts to learn two handed interactions and within the form are some keys to rotations and body structures required.

JPinAZ

10-16-2013, 02:12 PM

IMO, the "hunched over stances - hollow chest" is the correct posture used in combat. The straight back stance is not good at all.

That's cool, and if I remember correctly, you don't really practice WC in your fighting method, so to you, the hunched over stance might make perfect sense :)

But not all fighting arts are the same.. Wing Chun principles, structures and body methods don't work very well with that type of stance.

JPinAZ

10-16-2013, 02:28 PM

First....no forward intent? :rolleyes: The forward lean, if anything, exaggerates forward intent! If he was leaning back on his heels, then I could understand someone saying it is "pretty hard to have any fwd intent."

Completely dissagree. It's near impossible to have WC's idea of fwd intent thru your whole structure (from the ground up) in this type of stance. Which is why I also said 'body structure' in my last reply.

And I never said anything about leaning back on your heels. But since you brought it up, While I don't advocate that method either for the same reason - you give up neutrality - I've seen and experienced people making the lean-back work better in regards to fwd intent thru the bridge than anyone who was using a fwd, hunched over one.

Second...obviously its hard to know someone's body structure without seeing or feeling it tested. Nothing in this clip really put it to the test. But I have felt Jim's structure, and it is solid!

I am only going by what is presented in the video to form my opinion, as apparetnly some others here have as well. Sorry if my opinion bothers you though, I mean't no harm :)

Third....why do you think there is no centerline here?

I said self centerline in my comments to Jim's clip, and even bolded the word self. But, I say that simply because the spine is not straight and the weight is not evenly balanced. With a hunched over stance, you can not have the things I mentioned.

As far as shared - or A-to-B centerline - the way they cross center once they get into the dance-like 'twisting' portions of this drill, I'd say it's not here either. Once you are crossing center, you can't have fwd intent and are giving up A-to-B centerline, regardless of the stance used - at least from my undertanding of basic WC principles.

YouKnowWho

10-16-2013, 02:51 PM

That's cool, and if I remember correctly, you don't really practice WC in your fighting method, so to you, the hunched over stance might make perfect sense :)

But not all fighting arts are the same.. Wing Chun principles, structures and body methods don't work very well with that type of stance.

You should only use your structure when you attack. Before your attack, your body should be bent so you can straight it when needed. You have to compress before you can release. You have to pull your bow before you can shot your arrow out. This concept has nothing to do with "style".

Can you see anybody has body structure in this picture?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6XdzrqO5aHU/Tz49BxeC3vI/AAAAAAAAAK0/FoXRg3KjKss/s1600/ready-to-run.jpg

Now you can see structure in this picture.

https://www.google.com/search?q=running&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=kwtfUu6fFqy7jAKx84GICQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=955&dpr=1#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=wxQr2BgzjCF93M%3A%3BPzWe4ZIa8j7A8M%3Bhttp%25 3A%252F%252Ffitniche.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F02%252Fproper-running-form.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ffitniche.com%252Frun ning-form-clinics%252F%3B1991%3B772

In that WC clip, both are playing. none of them has committed on anything. It's too early to apply their structure IMO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_Qc2tho5N8&list=PLF871C0B72851D784

kung fu fighter

10-16-2013, 03:49 PM

IMO, the "hunched over stances - hollow chest" is the correct posture used in combat. The straight back stance is not good at all.

WCK avocate relaxing the chest so that it sinks with gravity, not "hunched over stances - hollow chest" or bending forward from the hip joint.

Actually Luk Sao Chi sao Platform is a variation of Pin Sun WCK's Dai Lim Tao two-man set. This leads me to believe it was part of leung jan's curriculam and therefore was not created by yip man and YKS.

Uh, no. This is the Dai Lim Tao 2 man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKjiOBtX_k4

So you might be able to say that the single sticking hands in Yip Man WCK came from this, but not the 2-arm rolling platform. This is a two-man set, not a free-form rolling platform.

That's the standard way of doing PSWC Dai Lim Tao two-man set, however there is another variation which is virtually identical to Luk sao utilizing Bong, Tan, fook like in yip man wck. You probably haven't seen this variation. Evan in the standard Dai lim tao drill that you posted above, you can clearly see the bong tan cycle being done in the drill, as well as the fook and jut cycle being done on the opposite hand. when you put everything together you end up doing the second variation of the dai lim tao drill which is luk sao. The problem is people are trying to sell their brand of wing chun, therfore they only mention the differences and not the similarities among the various WCK linages to deceive people. A cult like mentality if you ask me.

KPM

10-16-2013, 05:36 PM

Completely dissagree. It's near impossible to have WC's idea of fwd intent thru your whole structure (from the ground up) in this type of stance. Which is why I also said 'body structure' in my last reply.

---I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Weight near the balls of the feet with a bit of a forward lean certainly has forward intent to me. How well it can be used in the specific position in the clip may be another factor. I do have to admit that Jim doesn't appear to be applying any forward pressure in this video. That is one of the differences between this rolling platform and the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform. With Luk Sao the arms are going up & down with forward pressure or intent. In this "Huen Sao" platform the arms are essentially going side to side and circling with very little forward pressure. This is even more pronounced in the original video on this thread.

And I never said anything about leaning back on your heels. But since you brought it up, While I don't advocate that method either for the same reason - you give up neutrality

---I agree. But is "neutrality" part of your idea of "forward intent"?

I am only going by what is presented in the video to form my opinion, as apparetnly some others here have as well. Sorry if my opinion bothers you though, I mean't no harm :)

---No problem. Things aren't always very clear in a video.

I said self centerline in my comments to Jim's clip, and even bolded the word self. But, I say that simply because the spine is not straight and the weight is not evenly balanced. With a hunched over stance, you can not have the things I mentioned.

---Ok. I'll give you that! But realize that the Southern Mantis and the Bak Mei guys also use the centerline concept and they have an even more pronounced "hunch."

As far as shared - or A-to-B centerline - the way they cross center once they get into the dance-like 'twisting' portions of this drill, I'd say it's not here either. Once you are crossing center, you can't have fwd intent and are giving up A-to-B centerline, regardless of the stance used - at least from my undertanding of basic WC principles.

---Well, I think I have to give that one as well! I don't like the "cross center" thing either.

KPM

10-16-2013, 05:49 PM

That's the standard way of doing PSWC Dai Lim Tao two-man set, however there is another variation which is virtually identical to Luk sao utilizing Bong, Tan, fook like in yip man wck. You probably haven't seen this variation.

---So this variation uses both arms at once? And how do you know that this variation did not result from someone in more recent times seeing the Luk Sao Chi Sao roll and saying "gee, we can do that from the Dai Lim Tao Drill!"???? In the various versions of the Ku Lo village art I have seen, I have never seen the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform.

Evan in the standard Dai lim tao drill that you posted above, you can clearly see the bong tan cycle being done in the drill, as well as the fook and jut cycle being done on the opposite hand. when you put everything together you end up doing the second variation of the dai lim tao drill which is luk sao.

---Again. The standard drill is a DRILL. It is not being done as a free-flow rolling platform. Both arms are not being used at once. Like I pointed out to Spencer, it wasn't necessarily a big step to go to the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform. It would have been a very natural adaptation or innovation. It just doesn't seem that anyone was doing it in the generation prior to Yip Man and Yuen Kay San. At least I haven't seen any convincing evidence of that yet. And I was told by what I consider to be a very reliable source that Sum Nun himself said that Yuen Kay San developed Luk Sao and shared it with Yip Man. So until I see something convincing that contradicts that, I will go with that information.

The problem is people are trying to sell their brand of wing chun, therfore they only mention the differences and not the similarities among the various WCK linages to deceive people. A cult like mentality if you ask me.

---I'm not trying to sell anything. And I don't have anything even close to a "cult-like mentality" Navin. All I've done is present the evidence I have seen and the logic that connects it. Show me footage of Grandmaster Fung Chun doing the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with a student prior to his death and I'll be ready to consider changing my conclusions! ;)

KPM

10-16-2013, 06:27 PM

Hunt1 was right. Assuming this wasn't added to the lineage in later generations, here is Yiu Choi lineage people doing Luk Sao Chi Sao.

Yiu Choi Chi Sao at 4:44:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHlGGSOyNk0

Unfortunately, Ng Chung So lineages don't seem to have survived. Footage I find of Chan Wah Shun/Chan Yu Min lineages don't show Chi Sao. What they do show looks VERY different from Yip Man Wing Chun. So there has likely been some "mixing" since Chan Wah Shun's day.

Yiu Choi seems to be the only lineage connected with Ng Chung So other than Yip Man that is still around. They do Luk Sao Chi Sao, but since Yiu Choi was one of the "three heroes of Wing Chun" in Foshan along with Yip man and Yuen Kay San and they hung out together regularly, it makes sense that he would have been in on any Chi Sao developments. But we cannot rule out the possibility that Ng Chung So was the innovator and showed it to all of them! I guess we'll just have to take Sum Nun's word for it until something surfaces that tells us otherwise. At least that's how I see it. Your mileage may vary! ;)

Hendrik

10-16-2013, 07:36 PM

We know Luk sau chi sau exist in other Wck lineages before 1890 by evidence. There is witting record on how to play it.

Sifu Wayne Yung and myself have just finished written an article " wing chun kuen true description" for nov 2013 Hong Kong new martial hero magazine.

The core of the article is based on the inner circle kept snake crane wing chun note book and yik kam kuen kuit. It is the first time in the history wcners from other lineages can have a look on the content of the note book. We release these to the public now. So wcner can see from these two sources how they echo each other's and what exist in 1850 to 1890 time frame or what is the content of Wck at that period of time without have to guess.

Let what is written in the past describe what is wing chun kuen as it. Sure we go beyond Yks, Ipman, passing Leung Jan, going to Leung LAN Kwai Wck which is the time WWB, yik kam, lo man Kung practice in the red boat era. With these two ancient writing we today do have 20/20 sight on the big picture of Wck.

Hope after this, Wck has a good reference across all red boat Wck lineages instead of story based imformation on individual lineage as in the past 60 years.

Hunt1 was right. Assuming this wasn't added to the lineage in later generations, here is Yiu Choi lineage people doing Luk Sao Chi Sao.

Yiu Choi Chi Sao at 4:44:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHlGGSOyNk0

Unfortunately, Ng Chung So lineages don't seem to have survived. Footage I find of Chan Wah Shun/Chan Yu Min lineages don't show Chi Sao. What they do show looks VERY different from Yip Man Wing Chun. So there has likely been some "mixing" since Chan Wah Shun's day.

Yiu Choi seems to be the only lineage connected with Ng Chung So other than Yip Man that is still around. They do Luk Sao Chi Sao, but since Yiu Choi was one of the "three heroes of Wing Chun" in Foshan along with Yip man and Yuen Kay San and they hung out together regularly, it makes sense that he would have been in on any Chi Sao developments. But we cannot rule out the possibility that Ng Chung So was the innovator and showed it to all of them! I guess we'll just have to take Sum Nun's word for it until something surfaces that tells us otherwise. At least that's how I see it. Your mileage may vary! ;)

kung fu fighter

10-16-2013, 07:55 PM

[B]---So this variation uses both arms at once? And how do you know that this variation did not result from someone in more recent times seeing the Luk Sao Chi Sao roll and saying "gee, we can do that from the Dai Lim Tao Drill!"???? In the various versions of the Ku Lo village art I have seen, I have never seen the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform.

Yes It is being done as a free-flow rolling platform with both arms being used at once.

Also if Yip Man and YKS created luk sao, please explain why luk Sao is found in the snake and crane wck of lo man Kung which predates YKS.

---I'm not trying to sell anything. And I don't have anything even close to a "cult-like mentality" Navin. All I've done is present the evidence I have seen and the logic that connects it. Show me footage of Grandmaster Fung Chun doing the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with a student prior to his death and I'll be ready to consider changing my conclusions! ;)

Keith this comment was not aimed at you, it was intended towards an individual with a Napoleon Complex, I think you know whom I am referring to. lol

KPM

10-17-2013, 03:50 AM

KPM

10-17-2013, 03:53 AM

Also if Yip Man and YKS created luk sao, please explain why luk Sao is found in the snake and crane wck of lo man Kung which predates YKS.

--Ahh! Now this I am willing to consider! I don't know anything about Lo Man Kung. Is there footage of this lineage doing Luk Sao Chi Sao around? I'll have to look into this! :)

Keith this comment was not aimed at you, it was intended towards an individual with a Napoleon Complex, I think you know whom I am referring to. lol

---Oh! Got it! Thanks Navin. ;)

LoneTiger108

10-17-2013, 04:42 AM

I hope you have plans for an English translation soon? Otherwise this won't have much impact on those of us here in the western world, since not many of us read Chinese. I would certainly like to see an English translation of any description of Luk Sao Chi Sao!

Agreed. An English translation should be made available too.

But I have to chirp in on your constant use of this Luk Sao Chi Sao term Keith! Again, I don't know if Navin has similar ideas, but for me these are two different interactive platforms especially at the begining. As a student progresses to a more free interaction they will constantly be changing from one type to another, sometimes for only a split second and sometimes more.

KPM

10-17-2013, 06:15 AM

Agreed. An English translation should be made available too.

But I have to chirp in on your constant use of this Luk Sao Chi Sao term Keith! .

Again, labels are important in a communication format like this. ;) If I just said "Chi Sao" people wouldn't know if I was referring to the Yip Man version or the circling hand version highlighted on this thread. So we have to distinguish it somehow. The terms I've seen used most often are Luk Sao and Poon Sao. Since I've also seen Poon Sao used to refer to the "circling hand" version, it seemed the most clear to use the term "Luk Sao Chi Sao" when talking about the platform used by Yip Man and Yuen Kay San lineages. I use this to refer to he rolling platform itself, not to any difference between free-flow and just rolling. I haven't seen the term used that way. Do you have a better way to distinguish between the two rolling platforms?

JPinAZ

10-17-2013, 08:46 AM

You should only use your structure when you attack. Before your attack, your body should be bent so you can straight it when needed. You have to compress before you can release. You have to pull your bow before you can shot your arrow out. This concept has nothing to do with "style".]

Haha, maybe you should talk about what you do and stop telling me what I should do ;)

Again, I'm talking about Wing Chun principle & body methods. For WC Loi Lao Hoi Sung to work, you need proper WC body structure to both receive and escort energy - and both can be done with an upright posture. In HFY WC, we have compress/release body methods that don't involve hunching over. We train this in-part in our Dip Gwat Gung methods where we train compression & release of our core/ribs in connection with joint power, and no bent-over hunching (as shown in the clips on this thread) is necessary to achieve this.

Can you see anybody has body structure in this picture?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6XdzrqO5aHU/Tz49BxeC3vI/AAAAAAAAAK0/FoXRg3KjKss/s1600/ready-to-run.jpg

Now you can see structure in this picture.

https://www.google.com/search?q=running&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=kwtfUu6fFqy7jAKx84GICQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=955&dpr=1#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=wxQr2BgzjCF93M%3A%3BPzWe4ZIa8j7A8M%3Bhttp%25 3A%252F%252Ffitniche.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F02%252Fproper-running-form.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ffitniche.com%252Frun ning-form-clinics%252F%3B1991%3B772

In that WC clip, both are playing. none of them has committed on anything. It's too early to apply their structure IMO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_Qc2tho5N8&list=PLF871C0B72851D784

Even in your pics, while they have nothign to do with the subject of structure in combat, you show the runners standing more erect in their application of running. Not sure how any of this supports your previous quote of " The straight back stance is not good at all. " Heck, you even conterdicted this in the quote above when you said "so you can straight it when needed". Now I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just arguing to argue now. ;)

How long did you study WC for? As far as I can remember when we met in TX, you practice/teach mainly grappling arts yeah? I'm talking about WC only. So, it seems we are probably just going to talk past each other all day, 'specially once you start flip flopping like I pointed out :o

Normally, I appreciate your logic-based ideas on this forum. But at this point, I don't think we're going to agree, so I'll just let it go for now.

KPM

10-17-2013, 10:20 AM

I'm talking about Wing Chun principle & body methods. For WC Loi Lao Hoi Sung to work, you need proper WC body structure to both receive and escort energy - and both can be done with an upright posture. In HFY WC, we have compress/release body methods that don't involve hunching over.

I agree. Same in Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen.

kung fu fighter

10-17-2013, 10:42 AM

I agree. Same in Chu Sau Lei Wing Chun Kuen.

Keith are you training in Robert Chu's system now?

LoneTiger108

10-18-2013, 02:37 AM

The terms I've seen used most often are Luk Sao and Poon Sao. Since I've also seen Poon Sao used to refer to the "circling hand" version, it seemed the most clear to use the term "Luk Sao Chi Sao" when talking about the platform used by Yip Man and Yuen Kay San lineages.

So you see how you are throwing a third method into the mix? ;)

All are distinctly different and have their own unique practises in the early stages so you can understand exactly what you are doing at all times during interactive practise.

I use this to refer to he rolling platform itself, not to any difference between free-flow and just rolling. I haven't seen the term used that way. Do you have a better way to distinguish between the two rolling platforms?

What is this addiction to 'free-flow' and 'just rolling'?! There is never 'just rolling' as even when the intent is to exercise there are very specific reasons why the roll does this or that or whatever.

'Free flow' is what I would refer to as Gorsau, but only if the applied techniques are originating from bridge arm contact, whereas Sansau is more akin to 'free-sparring' from longer ranges.

So now you have FIVE different interactive platforms designed to develop your fighting ability. If you can even start to imagine what I am talking about you will understand that labelling can be very positive indeed when it is constructive and logical ;)

The label I have for the whole interactive practise is Doi Lien, which basically translates as Interactive Practise! So I use Looksau Doilien, Chisau Doilien, Poonsau Doilien, Gorsau Doilien and Sansau Doilien.

That is a good start for any Wing Chun practitioner IMHO but I understand there will be many that will always and forever refer to everything here as simply 'Chisau'... and some will have even more labels!!

So be it!

Each to their own :)

KPM

10-19-2013, 05:38 AM

All are distinctly different and have their own unique practises in the early stages so you can understand exactly what you are doing at all times during interactive practise.

So, you are saying that there are various "labels" and that all of these are distinct and important? I thought you didn't like labels. ;)

What is this addiction to 'free-flow' and 'just rolling'?! There is never 'just rolling' as even when the intent is to exercise there are very specific reasons why the roll does this or that or whatever.

Of course. That is a given. When you are rolling you are testing structure and position. You should never just absent-mindedly stand there and roll the arms. But still, no specific attacks are being launched at the partner at this time. I don't know what "addiction" you are talking about.

'Free flow' is what I would refer to as Gorsau, but only if the applied techniques are originating from bridge arm contact, whereas Sansau is more akin to 'free-sparring' from longer ranges.

Yes, and in most Yip Man lineages the rolling without going into attacks is called "Luk Sao." Hence my use of the term "Luk Sao Chi Sao" to refer to the Yip Man and Yuen Kay San basic rolling structure. So most people with background in Yip Man WCK would understand what I was talking about and see that it is distinct from the "Huen Sao" rolling platform from the other Mainland China systems. You seem to be the only one that has had a problem with that.

So now you have FIVE different interactive platforms designed to develop your fighting ability. If you can even start to imagine what I am talking about you will understand that labelling can be very positive indeed when it is constructive and logical ;)

And what is illogical about what I have done? You are the one that has jumped in and tried to complicate the whole thing.

The label I have for the whole interactive practise is Doi Lien, which basically translates as Interactive Practise! So I use Looksau Doilien, Chisau Doilien, Poonsau Doilien, Gorsau Doilien and Sansau Doilien.

And "Doi Lien" is a term that won't mean anything to a lot of people here. Most people use "Chi Sao" as a general term for all kinds of "sticking hands" practice, because that is how the term translates in English! You seem to have replaced "Chi Sao" as a general term with "Doi Lien." Most lineages don't do that and so wouldn't talk that way in general discussion. Now, in your categorization, if Luk Sao is rolling without attacks, Gor Sao is rolling with attacks, and San Sao is essentially free-fighting....what are Chi Sao and Poon Sao?

That is a good start for any Wing Chun practitioner IMHO but I understand there will be many that will always and forever refer to everything here as simply 'Chisau'... and some will have even more labels!!

A good start for a Lee Shing Wing Chun practitioner maybe. However not many, but MOST Wing Chun people refer to all "sticking hands" training as "Chi Sao" as I noted. And for what its worth, most would not include San Sao or free-fighting under the label of "Chi Sao." So it seems to me that this whole tangent we've gone off on in this thread is because LSWCK uses different terminology that almost everyone else. That's fine. But rather than saying:
But I have to chirp in on your constant use of this Luk Sao Chi Sao term Keith!
You could have just said: "this is how LSWCK labels the various interactive training" and saved us a lot of trouble! :rolleyes:

KPM

10-19-2013, 05:59 AM

kung fu fighter

10-19-2013, 07:07 AM

For Navin:You said that the Luk Sao platform was part of the snake and crane WCK of Lo Man Kung which predates YKS. I can't find anything on this. Do you have links with info?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=153965044713296

For Hunt1: You said that the Luk Sao platform was part of the Chum Kiu form in some lineages. Can you describe what you mean by this?

At 0:17 into this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEy5Ur93RBc

LFJ

10-19-2013, 07:21 AM

At 0:17 into this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEy5Ur93RBc

Ha, interesting. What's the point of that?

Hendrik

10-19-2013, 08:24 AM

For Navin:
You said that the Luk Sao platform was part of the snake and crane WCK of Lo Man Kung which predates YKS. I can't find anything on this. Do you have links with info?

For Hunt1:
You said that the Luk Sao platform was part of the Chum Kiu form in some lineages. Can you describe what you mean by this?

For Hendrik and Spencer:
You both said you had documents that describe Luk Sao platform. Can you provide us with a English translation of those descriptions along with authorship and dating?

I've looked for footage of Vietnamese Wing Chun doing the Luk Sao rolling Chi Sao platform and have only found footage similar to the post that started this thread. Does anyone have a link to a vid showing them using Luk Sao?

From the evidence at hand, there are no indications of the specific Luk Sao rolling platform being used as a two-man interactive exercise prior to the generation of YM and YKS. The evidence suggests that the interaction of the "three heroes of Foshan"...Yuen Kay San, Yip Man, and Yiu Choi came up with it. Since Yuen Chai Wan was YKS's brother and Yiu Choi's teacher at one point it makes sense he would have been shown this as well. Since they all interacted with Ng Chun So as well, its hard to rule him out as the originator. We do have Sum Nun saying he was there and that Yuen Kay San was the one that developed this and shared with at least Yip Man.

I don't have anything invested in this either way, and in the end it really doesn't matter. But I find it interesting from an historical standpoint. I'm open to solid evidence that shows that Luk Sao existed as a "double arm Chi Sao" training exercise prior to these gentlemen.

KPM,

It is in the following note book written 1890.

It is keep within the snake crane wing chun lineage only , in next issue of new martial hero, the content will be briefly reveal to the world to show how Wck is as it in pre 1890 era.

The note is still for inner circle family member. Only a few seen it including Sifu Robert Chu .

It is a big book in Classical Chinese on Wck key points and curriculum ...etc. No English translation in the mean time. Not intend to open for public . It is reveal partially combine with yik kam kuit in the next issue of new martial hero magazine just to clarify Wck root and content by documented evidence, when todays world is having many version of Wck history.

Combine the yik kam kuit and this note we do know what happen with Wck in 1850 to 1890 era with a 20/20 sight on the big picture. This two ancient document echo each other's even they are from different isolated Wck lineages for past 160 years. and provide clear description of Wck in that era. So, yes, we do have evidence on what is happening and evolution.

With these informations above, we now go beyond yks and Ipman or even Leung jan era, we know what is WWB , yik kam , lo man Kung red boat era Wck, or go straight to Wck of Leung LAN Kwai the god son of Yim wing chun and person who responsible to spread Wck in the red boat opera 1850 . No speculation, what one see is what one get. We have gone that far.

Per sifu Robert Chu and my conversation yesterday, we don't even have 50 % of ancient Wck kungfu as in the document develop. Via the two documents, we can see No one lineage has it all, but every lineage has a great piece of Wck.

Hendrik

10-19-2013, 08:43 AM

A brief intro for the " wing chun kuen true description " in next issue ( nov 2013) of new martial hero magazine. This will be the first time in the past 80 years Wck history and root is presented as it by the ancient documents.

Any volunteer love to helping to translate the following to English is greatly appreciate! Thanks!

詠春拳歷史與拳種探討

傳說，四川廣西地區苗順祖師以他的蛇功夫溶合福建五枚的白鶴永春拳創一種新拳術。苗順把這拳術傳嚴二，嚴二傳女詠春與婿梁博俦。詠春夫妻傳養子梁蘭桂。

1840 年間梁蘭桂傳到紅船戲班。稱之為詠春拳。當時所傳，至少有三人。黃華寶（梁贊之師），易金 , 與羅晚恭。梁蘭桂，易金，羅晚恭屬天地會。參與李文茂起義。涉及太平天國起義，與清廷毀瓊花會館之後之復仇行動。

目前，從易金與羅晩恭二支系所遺留下之1850 -1890 文獻，小練頭歌訣與蛇鶴詠春門祕，中得知，四川峨眉十二庄與福建白鶴永春是這拳術之根源。

另外，從這二支系的拳禮與門訓文中，如「永行忠義堪歌詠言出九鼎志更春」「蛇鶴能制逆宗童」「劍指膀肘呈英雄」「半點子午槍定太平」證實了1850年代詠春拳祖先屬於天地會，參與李文茂起義。涉及太平天國起義，與清廷毀瓊花會館之後之復仇行動。」

註：「蛇鶴能制逆宗童」之「逆宗童」指叛徒。「劍指膀肘呈英雄」之「英雄」者「洪英」之倒寫。「太平」者太平天國

十一月期的新武俠雜誌將有一篇：詠春挙述真。更深入去探討：從易金與羅晩恭二支系所遺留下之1 850 -1890 文獻，小練頭歌訣與蛇鶴詠春門祕的內容。由其內容來描述當時的詠春拳。

HybridWarrior

10-19-2013, 10:05 AM

Per sifu Robert Chu and my conversation yesterday, we don't even have 50 % of ancient Wck kungfu as in the document develop. Via the two documents, we can see No one lineage has it all, but every lineage has a great piece of Wck.

Very interesting
. I wonder which aspects of Wing Chun have been lost over time...? And for what reason(s)?

Hendrik

10-19-2013, 10:16 AM

Lack of Power generation, momentum handling , internal Kung development,...etc.
Causing the handling to be not fully activate... Lost of indepth development ...etc.

After 1950 , Wck evolve to fit general public needs ....etc.

IMHO
From 1850 to 1865 is war time, china continuous to struggle upto 1911, china never settle until 1990,
lost of Wck seniors in uprising , lack of time for proper indepth training as in 1830. Information lost big time.
Thus, one has different type of stories.

Such as Wck is for those who is un educated in red boat.
The matter of fact is both the writing from yik kam and snake crane Wck shows highly educated writing.

Thus, one can't expect to have villages who learn for simple self defense to know those advance stuffs .
The first thing was lost is the yjkym. Clamping goat is an explanation to villagers folk.
You take that as ultimate role model you dead.

Simple as that but no one raise the issue in the past 70 years keep clamping the knees the ankle,
thinking some days some Devine being is going to help one to become super man like Bruce lee.

As in this picture, those nam kuen type of locking clamping joints, one can't do force flow from ground ,
some called it structure, and I call it loading down knees and ankle rack.
It violate law of physics or newton mechanic. So, the whole thing end up to become a body push , who is big in muscle who win arena.
That is not what the Wck type.

Time needs to wake up.

Very interesting
. I wonder which aspects of Wing Chun have been lost over time...? And for what reason(s)?

LoneTiger108

10-19-2013, 12:45 PM

So, you are saying that there are various "labels" and that all of these are distinct and important? I thought you didn't like labels. ;)

Well no not exactly, there are interactive methods that have specific Wing Chun labels ;)

And no. I do not like labels that are used to market my sigung and his teachings, like Kulo/Gulao/Piensan etc and everyone that knows me knows this too, as you do so stop taking the pi$$ lol!

Yes, and in most Yip Man lineages the rolling without going into attacks is called "Luk Sao."

Ah... this is not what I am talking about. Looksau for me is a closer range forearm to forearm rotation, so in fact everything is attacking because you are in range and it is only the fusion of each roll that nullifies the attack from breaking through. What I mostly see in other Ip families is the practise of Poonsau, more wrist to wrist and longer range.

You seem to have replaced "Chi Sao" as a general term with "Doi Lien." Most lineages don't do that and so wouldn't talk that way in general discussion. Now, in your categorization, if Luk Sao is rolling without attacks, Gor Sao is rolling with attacks, and San Sao is essentially free-fighting....what are Chi Sao and Poon Sao?

Yes I have done what you say because that is how it was written for me. Where the original writings originate is the question, because IMHO they come from a time before Ip Mans HK era. The term I know is unique to our Academy.

You could have just said: "this is how LSWCK labels the various interactive training" and saved us a lot of trouble! :rolleyes:

Well if I had said that I would be wrong. One, I do not believe is this LSWC label and two, both uncles that are still teaching (Goh & Lee) do not use these terms at all as far as I know. It's simply Chisau for everything interactive other than sparring. As I have said, I use this term for my own reasons and don't expect anyone else to adopt them lol!!

Each to their own (again!)

KPM

10-19-2013, 01:00 PM

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=153965044713296

Wow! That's got to be some of the worst examples of Chi Sao I've seen in awhile! There may have been 3 or so rolls in there in a "Luk Sao" structure, but it was hard to tell. Mostly just flailing about!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEy5Ur93RBc

It would take some vivid imagination to derive the Luk Sao rolling platform from that! First, its just one side or one arm...just like in the Pin Sun Dai Lim Tao drill. There is a significant step from that to using the two-arm rolling of Luk Sao Chi Sao. Second, most lineages interpret these movements as joint locks or controlling movements, maybe an inward Pak Sao with a palm strike. But I've never seen anyone associate this with Chi Sao.

KPM

10-19-2013, 01:04 PM

I do not believe is this LSWC label and two, both uncles that are still teaching (Goh & Lee) do not use these terms at all as far as I know. It's simply Chisau for everything interactive other than sparring. As I have said, I use this term for my own reasons and don't expect anyone else to adopt them lol!!

Then the next time you take objection to the terminology someone else uses, which happens to be pretty standard terminology, maybe you should explain yourself a little better! ;)

JPinAZ

10-21-2013, 10:03 AM

Per sifu Robert Chu and my conversation yesterday, we don't even have 50 % of ancient Wck kungfu as in the document develop. .

At least you are man enough to admit you don't have complete WC. :p

Via the two documents, we can see No one lineage has it all, but every lineage has a great piece of Wck.

Please don't speak for everyone - I highly doubt you or Robert have the experience in even a 1/10th of the WCK out there, let alone even seen them, to make these ignorant statements.

kung fu fighter

10-23-2013, 09:21 AM

Per sifu Robert Chu and my conversation yesterday, we don't even have 50 % of ancient Wck kungfu as in the document develop. Via the two documents, we can see No one lineage has it all, but every lineage has a great piece of Wck.

I agree 100%! if WCK people would but aside their politics and agendas for the greater good of the WCK Art, and just compare notes with each other constructively regardless of differences in linage, we would have a better picture of what the ancient Wck kungfu was.
Forums like this one are a great medium for that, but unfortunately only few on here are willling to do so.

Hendrik

10-23-2013, 01:43 PM

I agree 100%! if WCK people would but aside their politics and agendas for the greater good of the WCK Art, and just compare notes with each other constructively regardless of differences in linage, we would have a better picture of what the ancient Wck kungfu was.
Forums like this one are a great medium for that, but unfortunately only few on here are willling to do so.

Navin,

With the two ancient documents it is very clear now on what happen. Now we can piece up things to see big pictures and details. How different kuit fit into the big picture. As in this Sung Num YKS kuit as in photo fitting into which part of the snake crane Wck secret note.

As for politics , sure, it is just too many defending their own lineages. Yesterday, I told some one I don't care which history speculation, I only based on the two documents here on. What exist exist. Facts is facts. I sure will give face to those who makes up his - story because they are just human like us. But as for what is closes to the truth, the standard is in next moth new martial hero magazine and reveal to the world. No one can change what is exist. The definition of Wck will come out because more and more people will share and speak up for the truth.

Notice that almost every few years I present a new evidence to support my presentation since decade ago in here. I have never changed my story or history but more and more evidence found, more and more family join in. The view get Clearer and clearer. As I mention before, my agenda is education.

Spiked

10-23-2013, 02:09 PM

I am so confused by all these labels.

JPinAZ

10-23-2013, 03:24 PM

KPM

10-23-2013, 05:53 PM

Maybe it's not unwillingness, maybe it's just that some people here don't agree that WCK is a shell of what it once was and therefore don't feel the need to have to try to piece it back together.

..

I agree. Times change. The needs of a fighting method change. How do we know we even want to do whatever this "ancient" WCK may have been? How do we know that those elders wouldn't look at some of the innovations that have happened in WCK with time and say.."that's pretty good! Show me how you did that!" ;)

And I think this was said before? But ALL Wing chun was "made up" by someone! Lots of martial arts have been mish mashed to create a new system from parts of several older ones. Some have just been made up more recently than others! What counts is good biomechanics and effectiveness. You can have all the ancient double helix power, but if you end up on your back every time a good grappler shoots in, then it might be worthless!

KPM

10-23-2013, 05:57 PM

Hendrik

10-23-2013, 08:22 PM

1. I think it is better to clear define what does it means by

He said there would be------- no Luk Sao Chi Sao in the modern sense ------ without Yuen Kay San!

2.

no Luk Sao Chi Sao in the modern sense without Yuen Kay San
=
based on available evidence, it looks more and more like the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform was developed by one of the "3 heroes of Foshan". ?

OK, I'm kind of hesitant to say this, given the recent kumbaya moment about politics and agendas. But what the heck, this is KFO forums after all! ;)

First. I contacted Robert. He has seen the documents that Hendrik notes. He has even visited the Snake-Crane guys that Navin mentioned. You know what his comment was? He said there would be no Luk Sao Chi Sao in the modern sense without Yuen Kay San!

Second. I'm surprised none of the Hung Fa Yi guys have commented about this point. But if, based on available evidence, it looks more and more like the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform was developed by one of the "3 heroes of Foshan", then it begs the question........where did Garrett Gee learn it???? I have no agenda and no politics, just curious about history! ;)

Hendrik

10-23-2013, 08:33 PM

1.

Do you know what is a double helix embedded in the ck set?

Can you activate the three sets of Wck as it means to be or design for?

Do you practice wing chun kuen?

You sure can created your new system, but like Bruce lee, please call it JKD.

Time can change, but should Wck Upto anyone to define it?

2.

As for

*You can have all the ancient double helix power, but if you end up on your back every time a good grappler shoots in, then it might be worthless!

First know what it is before making comment.

Second, tell me which style or which technic is guarentee to work and make one invincible every time ?

Third, how do your ck set function properly without double helix?

3. Innovation and evolution happen, such as splitting the one long set to three sets system. However, it is not everyone make up everything and call it wing chun kuen.

Some one can say But ALL Wing chun was "made up" by someone!
Sure but too bad he is not wing chun thus what he made up is not what wing chun made up.
That simple.

As I share with you previously, Wck doesn't do southern mantis type of side blocking. Otherwise, it is not Wck.

I agree. Times change. The needs of a fighting method change. How do we know we even want to do whatever this "ancient" WCK may have been? How do we know that those elders wouldn't look at some of the innovations that have happened in WCK with time and say.."that's pretty good! Show me how you di

And I think this was said before? But ALL Wing chun was "made up" by someone! Lots of martial arts have been mish mashed to create a new system from parts of several older ones. Some have just been made up more recently than others! What counts is good biomechanics and effectiveness. You can have all the ancient double helix power, but if you end up on your back every time a good grappler shoots in, then it might be worthless!

Hendrik

10-23-2013, 09:13 PM

1. It is just a simple thing.

Accept what is there by evidence.

But lots of people can not take that. There is where the agenda and politic starts.

2. As for Luk sau, here is the first few line of the kuit in the next new martial hero magazine.

轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground

You see what you get. Yes, they play with force vectors.

So, how can yks invent the Luk Sao chi Sao platform when in 1890 people already record these?

Yks might practice Thier Luk Sao chi sau in Thier own way which is respectable ,valid and legitimate. However, that doesn't mean YKS or the three hero invented the Luk Sao chi sau platform.

Same with some one saying YKS created the three sets. That too is not accord with reality. Yks might practice and evolve his three sets, which is respectable and valid. But he doesn't invent the three sets .

3. Imho, in past 60 years people just keep making lots of his- story and now cannot face reality. These days When the cards are open one by one. I know it is painful to accept reality but it is more suffering trying to fight it because one never be able to change the facts of the past.

Can I define Wck? Sure, but called it Hendrik way of Wck or Hendrik Do but not Wck as practice in the past. And also no guarentee Hendrik knows what the heck he is talking about if you want to learn the real Wck.

I rest my case here and no going to follow this thread , I leave the cards which will open to tell its own story. It is a simple technology case. Is it an apple platform of android platform as simple as that.

Finally is there a invincible ipad from apple? No such thing exist in the world. But one don't call ones invention ipad from apple.

As I have told some Wck sifus yesterday, I am ok whatever history you love to defense your lineage or boost yourself. on Wck , I only trust that two writing which validate each other's from the 1850 to 1890 , the rest doesn't matter. Because it is the true face of technology I would like to see.

Eric_H

10-23-2013, 09:23 PM

OK, I'm kind of hesitant to say this, given the recent kumbaya moment about politics and agendas. But what the heck, this is KFO forums after all! ;)

First. I contacted Robert. He has seen the documents that Hendrik notes. He has even visited the Snake-Crane guys that Navin mentioned. You know what his comment was? He said there would be no Luk Sao Chi Sao in the modern sense without Yuen Kay San!

Second. I'm surprised none of the Hung Fa Yi guys have commented about this point. But if, based on available evidence, it looks more and more like the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform was developed by one of the "3 heroes of Foshan", then it begs the question........where did Garrett Gee learn it???? I have no agenda and no politics, just curious about history! ;)

Oh good lord not this again.

Listen, I wouldn't even want to bring the guy up, but since you seem to be getting your misinformation from Robert Chu, let's take a look at him first shall we? Robert knows less than 0.01% of Hung Fa Yi. He's had multiple opportunities to come and see what we do - I was even in class when he called my Sifu out of the blue a few years ago to say he (Robert) was having a workshop in San Francisco and ask my Sifu about some things. I remember that my Sifu said to Robert that he was welcome to come see us and that he had a few questions to ask Robert when he saw him. Of course we all know there was never a workshop, so I guess we're still waiting to see if Robert ever comes up this way.

Secondly, we've had over what, 12 chi sao workshops documented on this forum, other forums and various blogs and websites around the net. Not one of them mentions luk sao, and here's why: "Luk" is something of a slang term, really all it means is rolling hands. Any time two WC guys do chi sao, regardless of lineage or rule set it could be considered Luk Sao. It's in the differences, such as Hung Fa Yi's time/space/energy chi sao or 3 bong sao focus compared to something like Moy Yat's Teui Ma or Jip Sau Jow Sau style of training that show what our different systems are really about.

Heck, my Sifu has been to China like 10-15 times in the last 5 years, and touched hands with senior people in Sum Nung, Gu Lao and Yip Man lineages - not one of them has ever had the opinion we're doing the same thing. Even our student Liu Wai Gai in hong kong had 30 years under Yun Kay San/Sum Nung wing chun - and from his own mouth he said it's different... that's from the mouth of someone truly doing the "inventor of luk sao's" lineage for a very long time.

The Hung Fa Yi Chi Sao has no problem to interact with other people's platforms, just because the other people call what they're doing "Luk Sao" it doesn't mean we're operating under the same rules or that we would call it "Luk Sao." I can tell you for a fact, having done both, they are not even close.

I'd take anything Robert says with a big grain of salt - I mean, ask William Cheung, Rick Spain or Moy Yat if he were still with us if they'd want to talk about that guy. I can imagine pretty clearly what the answer is.

KPM

10-24-2013, 04:15 AM

1. It is just a simple thing.

Accept what is there by evidence.

But lots of people can not take that. There is where the agenda and politic starts.

That's what I'm doing Hendrik! No agenda, no politics. When I look, I do not see anyone doing the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform from the generation prior to YKS and YM.

2. As for Luk sau, here is the first few line of the kuit in the next new martial hero magazine.

轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground

Those are rather broad and vague guidelines. They do not describe physical actions. How can you say that this is talking about the specific two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by the YKS and YM lineages? I think that's what Robert meant when he said there would be no Luk Sao "in the modern sense" without YKS. And, as Eric pointed out, "Luk Sao" just means "rolling hands." I have NOT been talking about rolling hands in a generic sense. I think I have been very clear to show I am talking specifically about the two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages. What you have translated above could apply equally to the "Poon Sao" type rolling platform used in Pin Sun Wing Chun and other methods that don't roll like YKS & YM lineages.

So, how can yks invent the Luk Sao chi Sao platform when in 1890 people already record these?

How can you say that what you translated for us was a record of the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform used by YKS and YM lineages???? :confused: It may have described some of the energy exchange involved in a general sense. But there was no physical techniques in what you translated.

3. Imho, in past 60 years people just keep making lots of his- story and now cannot face reality. These days When the cards are open one by one. I know it is painful to accept reality but it is more suffering trying to fight it because one never be able to change the facts of the past.

The reality is that it seems the documents you have may describe concepts and ideas, but they do not describe physical motion. There can be lots of physical interpretations of concepts and ideas!

KPM

10-24-2013, 04:24 AM

Listen, I wouldn't even want to bring the guy up, but since you seem to be getting your misinformation from Robert Chu,

Why turn this into a Robert Chu-bashing post? I said Robert had a comment about YKS and Chi Sao. I didn't ask and he didn't have anything to say about HFY. So you are jumping to some pretty big conclusions. I came up with the question about Garret Gee and Chi Sao all on my own I assure you! ;)

Secondly, we've had over what, 12 chi sao workshops documented on this forum, other forums and various blogs and websites around the net. Not one of them mentions luk sao, and here's why: "Luk" is something of a slang term, really all it means is rolling hands.

And in my exchanges with Spencer on this thread I went to lengths to point out that "Luk Sao Chi Sao" was simply a convention in terminology I was using to get across to people that I was talking about what YM & YSK lineages do and not the "Poon Sao" circling hand Chi Sao platform that some of the other lineages use.

It's in the differences, such as Hung Fa Yi's time/space/energy chi sao or 3 bong sao focus compared to something like Moy Yat's Teui Ma or Jip Sau Jow Sau style of training that show what our different systems are really about.

Sure. Those may be refinements. But again, to make things as clear as possible....I am talking about the basic rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages........one arm rolling from Bong to Tan while the other arm follows the partner's Bong & Tan with a Fook Sao. This basic rolling method with both arms is what I am seeing as developed by YKS and shared with YM and Yui Choi. So how did Garrett Gee come by it in his system?

Heck, my Sifu has been to China like 10-15 times in the last 5 years, and touched hands with senior people in Sum Nung, Gu Lao and Yip Man lineages - not one of them has ever had the opinion we're doing the same thing.

I personally touched hands with Garrett Gee briefly at the Friendship Seminar in Dayton. We rolled for a bit. He did the basic rolling platform that I am talking about......one arm Bong/Tan, the other arm Fook Sao. Are you saying that you don't do that????? And just as an aside....he kept his Bong and Tan motion rather high....much like they do in TWC!!!

LoneTiger108

10-24-2013, 08:53 AM

in my exchanges with Spencer on this thread I went to lengths to point out that "Luk Sao Chi Sao" was simply a convention in terminology I was using to get across to people that I was talking about what YM & YSK lineages do and not the "Poon Sao" circling hand Chi Sao platform that some of the other lineages use.

Wah! I sincerely hope our little conversation hasn't caused a whole politically motivated business bull fight! :o

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 09:29 AM

That's what I'm doing Hendrik! No agenda, no politics. When I look, I do not see anyone doing the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform from the generation prior to YKS and YM.--------

How can one deny the evidence,
the snake crane wing chun note 1890 wrote specifically in Chinese the term :Luk Sau. And the kuit of Luk Sao.

Does YKS invent the Luk Sao term for Wck pre 1890 before he was born in 1889?

Those are rather broad and vague guidelines. ------

That is not the case.

The above line I post is specifically under the Luk Sao section of the note .There are chi sau section, ....etc.

They do not describe physical actions. ------

There is no vague here.

1. It wrote in Chinese 1890 Luk sau. The ancient Chinese are very specific. There are different type of chi sau described in the note.

2. The law family exist and passing the art for four generation father to son until today, and practice what they practice.

How can you say that this is talking about the specific two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by the YKS and YM lineages? -------

As I have mention previously, YKS And Yip man can evolve, create their own variations but please do not speculate they invent Luk Sao chi sau platform which evidentally existed pre 1890 might even before YKS or Ipman was born.

I think that's what Robert meant when he said there would be no Luk Sao "in the modern sense" without YKS. --------

YKS is free to evolve or create his version of Luk Sao. But Luk Sao platform exist in Wck before he was born by evidence.

It is not the 1890 note that following YKS to call it Luk Sao but YKS is following the old Wck tradition to call it Luk Sao and possible evolve.

One can say a specific Luk sau is the YKS type , but one cannot say YKS invent the Wck Luk sau chi sau platform.

And, as Eric pointed out, "Luk Sao" just means "rolling hands." I have NOT been talking about rolling hands in a generic sense. ---------

Luk sau is a specific term define and used in 1890 by wing chun kuen .

It is not up for everyone to define it, if one talk Wck as it is.

I think I have been very clear to show I am talking specifically about the two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages. -------

Ok. Then, be really specific
Called it

two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages

So there is no misunderstanding as yks invented the Luk Sao chi sau platform of Wck.

What you have translated above could apply equally to the "Poon Sao" type rolling platform used in Pin Sun Wing Chun and other methods that don't roll like YKS & YM lineages. ---------

The note specifically wrote Luk sau in look sau section.

How can that be translated? When the writing say car can that translate to train?

How can you say that what you translated for us was a record of the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform used by YKS and YM lineages???? :confused: ---------

I have never say that. Read my previous post.

I say there is Luk sau chi sau platform in Wck pre 1890. Yks and Ipman lineage can evolve their own type of Luk sau chi sau. And YKS and Ipman lineage do not invent the Wck Luk sau chi sau platform. They are an evolution of what exist in Wck , they are not the inventor.

As some one from YKS line put in the YouTube interview that YKS designed the Wck three sets. Or YKS Kidney Qigong is Wck qigong. That is not true by evidence.

The reality is that it seems the documents you have may describe concepts and ideas, but they do not describe physical motion. There can be lots of physical interpretations of concepts and ideas! --------

Your reality is you think everything is an equal speculative idea. Everyone's idea is valid.

Instead of knowing Wck is a well define art or technology in term of body dynamic, power generation, momentum handling, and combat strategy .

This is exactly the result of missing the systemic picture but trying to deny what the ancient Wck description.

This is exactly the issue of one thinking southern mantis is the same with Wck before one learn Wck don't do those southern mantis side ward block.

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 09:45 AM

Some says

The reality is that it seems the documents you have may describe concepts and ideas, but they do not describe physical motion. There can be lots of physical interpretations of concepts and ideas!"

Is that true?

Nope.

The kuit says exactly how to play Luk sau chi sau.
Why ?

Because playing Luk sau Chi sau is about occupied the center line. Thus , it has to response to force at the first instance at the contact point to capture the centerline , who fast who win, instead of moving the limbs .

Thus the kuit of Luk sau says

轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground

It reveal the specifical of the way how Jin is handle at the first instance direct at the center line , where the game is occupied and capture the center line without moving the limps.

This is not poon sau, this is going right into center line , this Jin type is exactly the same description in the siu nim tau Sam bai fut section. The one tan three fook going into center line . How to using downward and upward Jin flow.

This cannot be poon sau where the arm position is not as in Luk sau chi sau position.

This is exactly as what I pointing out previously, if one doesn't know the ancient Wck description one practically don't know what it is even the top secret is open in front of ones eyes. Wck technology is not a blank paper which can be fill by any idea. It is a technology which is specifically define.

Sure, I can be wrong. But that is what the kuit says black and white

KPM

10-24-2013, 09:59 AM

How can one deny the evidence,
the snake crane wing chun note 1890 wrote specifically in Chinese the term :Luk Sau. And the kuit of Luk Sao.

Does YKS invent the Luk Sao term for Wck pre 1890 before he was born in 1889?

Hendrik, I have made it very clear through-out this thread that I am not talking about terminology. I am talking about a specific physical action. How many times do I need to repeat that? Luk Sao just means "rolling hands." Its a general term that could apply to ANY Chi Sao action.

1. It wrote in Chinese 1890 Luk sau. The ancient Chinese are very specific. There are different type of chi sau described in the note.

Is it actually described? Or does it talk in concepts and not describe a physical action, like the other passage?

2. The law family exist and passing the art for four generation father to son until today, and practice what they practice.

But do they practice the two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages???

Again Hendrik, how do you know exactly what physical rolling platform that passage was referring to??? Use of terminology can shift and change over generations. How do you know that the "Luk Sao" of 1890 was the "Luk Sao" done in the YKS & YM lineages?

YKS is free to evolve or create his version of Luk Sao. But Luk Sao platform exist in Wck before he was born by evidence.

The only evidence is a term, a name. Your document doesn't describe what that term was referring to. Does Yik Kam Wing Chun use the same "Luk Sao" two-arm rolling platform as YKS & YM lineages???

Luk sau is a specific term define and used in 1890 by wing chun kuen .

It is not up for everyone to define it, if one talk Wck as it is.

But you don't know how THEY defined it!! :confused:

I think I have been very clear to show I am talking specifically about the two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages. -------

Ok. Then, be really specific
Called it

two-arm rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages

Sure. But that's WAY TOO CUMBERSOME to do every time I refer to it. That's why early on in this thread I qualified what I was talking about when I used the term "Luk Sao." Did you miss that?

How can you say that what you translated for us was a record of the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform used by YKS and YM lineages???? :confused: ---------

I have never say that. Read my previous post.

And again....THIS HAS NEVER BEEN ABOUT TERMINOLOGY!!! Please go back and reread the entire thread.

YKS and Ipman lineage do not invent the Wck Luk sau chi sau platform. They are an evolution of what exist in Wck , they are not the inventor.

They were all experts at Wing Chun. So sure, they drew upon things already done in Wing Chun. But no one before them seems to have specifically rolled in the Bong/Tan & Fook Sao way. I already noted early in this thread that if one has done both the "Poon Sao" rolling platform as seen in Pin Sun WCK, and the "Luk Sao" rolling platform done in YKS & YM WCK that it is easy to see how one developed into the other. But again, no one was actually doing that that I can tell in the generation before YKS. So yes, he developed it or invented it based on his background knowledge. He chose to refer to it as "Luk Sao" because it certainly has a "rolling" quality. The Pin Sun version has much more of a "coiling" or "circling" quality. So it seems like a good choice of terms to me!

As some one from YKS line put in the YouTube interview that YKS designed the Wck three sets. Or YKS Kidney Qigong is Wck qigong. That is not true by evidence.

I have said nothing about who may have developed the 3 sets. I have only written about Chi Sao.

Instead of knowing Wck is a well define art or technology in term of body dynamic, power generation, momentum handling, and combat strategy .

This is exactly the result of missing the systemic picture but trying to deny what the ancient Wck description.

Then please describe for us how Luk Sao Chi Sao is actually physically performed...based on the ancient WCK description.

KPM

10-24-2013, 10:10 AM

The kuit says exactly how to play Luk sau chi sau.
Why ?

Because playing Luk sau Chi sau is about occupied the center line. Thus , it has to response to force at the first instance at the contact point to capture the centerline , who fast who win, instead of moving the limbs .

Capture the centerline with what? A Bong Sao? A Jum Sao? A Tan Sao? A Fook Sao? Where does the passage say what technique to use?

This is not poon sau, this is going right into center line , this Jin type is exactly the same description in the siu nim tau Sam bai fut section. The one tan three fook going into center line . How to using downward and upward Jin flow.

So there is no Bong Sao in this passage? What are the physical techniques involved?

This is exactly as what I pointing out previously, if one doesn't know the ancient Wck description one practically don't know what it is even the top secret is open in front of ones eyes. Wck technology is not a blank paper which can be fill by any idea. It is a technology which is specifically define.

So what is the ancient WCK description of the physical act of Luk Sao Chi Sao? That sure doesn't seem so "black and white" to me!!

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 10:14 AM

Hendrik, I have made it very clear through-out this thread that I am not talking about terminology. I am talking about a specific physical action. How many times do I need to repeat that? Luk Sao just means "rolling hands." Its a general term that could apply to ANY Chi Sao action. -------

I don't talk terminology. I talk technology in specific which is define by the ancient. Luk sau is not a general term.

Example:
when I say Ipad. It is not a terminology it is refer to a technology.
Probably you Have not notice but you interplate what Ipad means as a terminology.

Here I repeat again The 1890 note has Luk sau and chi sau section. Thus it is specific.

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 10:18 AM

Capture the centerline with what? A Bong Sao? A Jum Sao? A Tan Sao? A Fook Sao? Where does the passage say what technique to use? -----

That is where direct or double helix Jin or force vector is used to penetrate centerline at contact point.
A sau is too late.

KPM

10-24-2013, 10:18 AM

Here I repeat again The 1890 note has Luk sau and chi sau section. Thus it is specific.

Then I repeat again, please describe for us the physical acts of Luk Sao and Chi Sao according to the ancient descriptions so that we can know what you are talking about.

KPM

10-24-2013, 10:20 AM

Capture the centerline with what? A Bong Sao? A Jum Sao? A Tan Sao? A Fook Sao? Where does the passage say what technique to use? -----

That is where direct or double helix Jin or force vector is used at contact point.
A sau is too late.

That is not an answer. What PHYSICAL TECHNIQUES are involved? How does your double helix Jin manifest in a physical way??

kung fu fighter

10-24-2013, 11:37 AM

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 12:04 PM

Then I repeat again, please describe for us the physical acts of Luk Sao and Chi Sao according to the ancient descriptions so that we can know what you are talking about.

The kuit above has describe the first key of Luk sau .

Eric_H

10-24-2013, 12:04 PM

Listen, I wouldn't even want to bring the guy up, but since you seem to be getting your misinformation from Robert Chu,

Why turn this into a Robert Chu-bashing post? I said Robert had a comment about YKS and Chi Sao. I didn't ask and he didn't have anything to say about HFY. So you are jumping to some pretty big conclusions. I came up with the question about Garret Gee and Chi Sao all on my own I assure you! ;)

So you're basically repeating rumors Robert's been known to spread (on this very forum) in the past after admitting talking to him just a short time ago and you think I'm jumping to conclusions? Something smells like a rat there.

And in my exchanges with Spencer on this thread I went to lengths to point out that "Luk Sao Chi Sao" was simply a convention in terminology I was using to get across to people that I was talking about what YM & YSK lineages do and not the "Poon Sao" circling hand Chi Sao platform that some of the other lineages use.

So you're saying what you're talking about is one specific exercise that's in the Yip Man/YKS lineage and a sequence of bong and tan. Fair enough, why did you try and bring my lineage into it then?

Sure. Those may be refinements. But again, to make things as clear as possible....I am talking about the basic rolling Chi Sao platform used by YKS & YM lineages........one arm rolling from Bong to Tan while the other arm follows the partner's Bong & Tan with a Fook Sao. This basic rolling method with both arms is what I am seeing as developed by YKS and shared with YM and Yui Choi. So how did Garrett Gee come by it in his system?

Now you're just playing games, there's not a refinement when the underlying technology and training method/purpose is different. The basic assumptions of operation between HFY and Yip family WC are very far apart. Also, as I've already explained, we don't do anything called luk sao.

Because he was able to roll with you and you call it luk sao doesn't mean anything. That's like if I bridge with a Tai Chi guy and he starts saying my WC has to have incorporated push hands at some point. It's a bunch of bologna.

I personally touched hands with Garrett Gee briefly at the Friendship Seminar in Dayton. We rolled for a bit. He did the basic rolling platform that I am talking about......one arm Bong/Tan, the other arm Fook Sao. Are you saying that you don't do that????? And just as an aside....he kept his Bong and Tan motion rather high....much like they do in TWC!!!

Wow, the years old TWC rumor, smells like ratty Robert once again.

I've just stated this but I'll say it again: The HFY chi sao platform is able to work with any other WC chi sao platform, including your luk sao, it doesn't mean that we're doing the same thing.

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 12:08 PM

Luk Sao is an application which involve unique strategy , momentum, force flow handling.

The kuit has specifically tell one how to applied the force under what dynamic condition.

One needs to develop the Jin path and Jin flow before one can play that properly. It is an inner gate direct compete for center line play certainly not a chasing hand art.

The kuit describe what happen at listening to Jin , receive Jin, and issue Jin, and how. But if one taking a different translation instead of the ancient one , one will not be able to see what it is .

Luk sau is a center line capture play where both party face square and compete for center line. It is an inner gate play. Poon sau is a different story. Luk Sao is it not a drill of hand technics at is core . It is a play of how not leaving the inner gate and force the opponent out in the micro way at contact.

轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground

That is not an answer. What PHYSICAL TECHNIQUES are involved? How does your double helix Jin manifest in a physical way??

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 12:18 PM

Keith, if you take a good look at the pin sun wck version of chi sao, your can clearly see it's a combination of luk sao and circling hands (sheung huen sao) put together in one drill. Therefore both chi sao platform existed way before yip man or YKS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KpRjsFlL1Q

As I mentioned before, the luk sao platform is just a variation of pin sun dai lim tao two man set.

Navin,

1. I believe in credit is given to who the credit belongs. I do think YKS has evolved and develop great things.

But I think too many stories we need to verify, disregards of lineages.

2. Here are samples As in the next issue of new hero magazine the following kuit exist in 1890 note of snake crane Wck lineage. See for your self details document existed.

A. 黐手秘要（24 句） chi sau key ponts kuit (Total Twenty four verses)

『來留去送逢甩直衝敵一移動 ....... Come accept return send it back, meeting disengage thrust in, at opponent move.....

B, 轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
子午要中 Your center line needs to align center.

There is no reason in 1890 people record this with the description just for hendrik. They don't prepare for Hendrik to argue to Keight in 2013. You can see here the Luk sau is started in the inner gate center line play. Very direct. No longer as in chi sau. It won't give an inch away. It response right the way. As for the chi sau is a different play.

3， to truely resolve these stuffs, one needs to verify and compare writing from different lineages . That is the reason one needs to study ancient Wck. Otherwise one don't know what is going on. Since every lineages have those stories which make it sounds as the only the true lineage or the sifu is the only true guy. In reality that is not the case. No one has it all, and nothing comes out from the thin air.

KPM

10-24-2013, 12:23 PM

Keith, if you take a good look at the pin sun wck version of chi sao, your can clearly see it's a combination of luk sao and circling hands (sheung huen sao) put together in one drill. Therefore both chi sao platform existed way before yip man or YKS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KpRjsFlL1Q

As I mentioned before, the luk sao platform is just a variation of pin sun dai lim tao two man set.

Navin, that is simply not true!

First, as I have already pointed out.....the DLT drill is ONE arm at a time and is a DRILL. It is not a rolling platform for free technique.

Second, I have trained in the Pin Sun version of Chi Sao, with Jim Roselando! If you look closely, the roll has a coiling/circling nature and the energy goes side to side. They circle COMPLETELY around each other's forearms very close to the wrist. In contrast, the YKS/YM roll is truly a "rolling" motion that goes more up and down and is centered closer to mid-forearm. The Bong/Tan hand STAYS on the inside of the partner's hand and the Fook hand STAYS on the outside of the partner's hand. There is a completely different energy and dynamic involved. Now granted, Jim does something much closer to a Bong Sao that you see others do in this rolling platform. For instance, just take a look again at the Vietnamese WCK clip that started this thread. But even in what Jim is doing, Bong Sao is not a prominent part of the roll as it is in the YKS/YM version.

Third, again as I have already stated, there is not a big jump from what Jim is doing to the YKS/YM version. It just seems that no one actually made that "jump" until YKS!! I guess we could argue about whether that means he truly "invented" it, or simply "adapted" what he already knew. But regardless, I don't see anything to contradict the idea that YKS was the "innovator" either way.

KPM

10-24-2013, 12:30 PM

The kuit above has describe the first key of Luk sau .

You seem to be missing the point Hendrik. Please describe the PHYSICAL ACTIONS involved. What does Luk Sao look like, according to the ancient descriptions????

KPM

10-24-2013, 12:36 PM

So you're basically repeating rumors Robert's been known to spread (on this very forum) in the past after admitting talking to him just a short time ago and you think I'm jumping to conclusions? Something smells like a rat there.

No rats involved, truly. If you wanted to go back and look, I think I probably asked that very question here myself years ago.

So you're saying what you're talking about is one specific exercise that's in the Yip Man/YKS lineage and a sequence of bong and tan. Fair enough, why did you try and bring my lineage into it then?

Because I've seen your lineage do the same rolling platform.

The basic assumptions of operation between HFY and Yip family WC are very far apart. Also, as I've already explained, we don't do anything called luk sao.

And I've explained that I'm not concerned about terminology. I asked before and you didn't answer, so I'll ask again and little more clearly. In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

Wow, the years old TWC rumor, smells like ratty Robert once again.

I assure you that this is based upon my own observations and conclusions. Robert has nothing to do with it.

I've just stated this but I'll say it again: The HFY chi sao platform is able to work with any other WC chi sao platform, including your luk sao, it doesn't mean that we're doing the same thing.

Please see my re-stated question above!

KPM

10-24-2013, 12:41 PM

Luk Sao is an application which involve unique strategy , momentum, force flow handling.

The kuit has specifically tell one how to applied the force under what dynamic condition.

One needs to develop the Jin path and Jin flow before one can play that properly. It is an inner gate direct compete for center line play certainly not a chasing hand art.

The kuit describe what happen at listening to Jin , receive Jin, and issue Jin, and how. But if one taking a different translation instead of the ancient one , one will not be able to see what it is .

Luk sau is a center line capture play where both party face square and compete for center line. It is an inner gate play. Poon sau is a different story. Luk Sao is it not a drill of hand technics at is core . It is a play of how not leaving the inner gate and force the opponent out in the micro way at contact.

轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground

You STILL haven't answered by request. Please describe for us the PHYSICAL ACTIONS involved in Luk Sao and Poon Sao so that we can all see what you are talking about, have an idea what they look like, and know what the difference between them is.....according to the ancient descriptions. I have already done this (according to modern descriptions) for my understanding of Luk Sao and Poon Sao in my reply to Navin. I am trying to see what the difference is, but so far you have posted no descriptions at all, only Kuen Kuit!!!

kung fu fighter

10-24-2013, 01:19 PM

Luk sau is a center line capture play where both party face square and compete for center line. It is an inner gate play. Poon sau is a different story. Luk Sao is it not a drill of hand technics at is core . It is a play of how not leaving the inner gate and force the opponent out in the micro way at contact.

so luk sao is an inner gate play, what's the story for Poon sau?

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 01:31 PM

so luk sao is an inner gate play, what's the story for Poon sau?

Navin,

If you look at these kuit and description from 1890.

A. 黐手秘要（24 句） chi sau key ponts kuit (Total Twenty four verses)

『來留去送逢甩直衝敵一移動 ....... Come accept return send it back, meeting disengage thrust in, at opponent move.....

B, 轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
子午要中 Your center line needs to align center.

The above chi sau kuit is describing the poon sau type of play, which can be both outer or inner door but mostly outer door play. Where one move. And not that high density target into the inner gate center line.

The Luk sau kuit is describing the inner door play. It has to response there at center line at that instant per contact. Not moving away but take on spot play.

So these two platforms exist in the writing in 1890 or the platform exist before yks was born in 1889.

As we here in this forum or even in this thread often say "this is not Wck because this is not facing facing center line. " that is because one taking the Luk sau type as Wck. But in fact in 1890 both existed in Wck.

So, by these writing there is no question Luk sau type chi sau platform and poon sau type chi sau platform existed before 1890.

As for how Yks or Ipman implement their version is a different story.

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 01:33 PM

I let kuen kuit tell the story.
It is very clear based on the kuit as I have just told Navin above.

You STILL haven't answered by request. Please describe for us the PHYSICAL ACTIONS involved in Luk Sao and Poon Sao so that we can all see what you are talking about, have an idea what they look like, and know what the difference between them is.....according to the ancient descriptions. I have already done this (according to modern descriptions) for my understanding of Luk Sao and Poon Sao in my reply to Navin. I am trying to see what the difference is, but so far you have posted no descriptions at all, only Kuen Kuit!!!

Eric_H

10-24-2013, 01:36 PM

And I've explained that I'm not concerned about terminology. I asked before and you didn't answer, so I'll ask again and little more clearly. In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

Our single handed Chi Sao contains transitions from 3 different types of Bong Sao, some go to Taan sao or Taan Kiu (different tools), some don't. It depends if we fall into Chi Sao or Kiu Sao or free hand sparring type of leverage based on the contact.

We don't follow the bong/taan exchange with a fook the way I learned in Moy Yat's lineage, but often use a fook to neutralize a taan sao.

So again, HFY has the technology to play with the Luk Sao platform, but that's not what we're doing. Is that clear enough?

kung fu fighter

10-24-2013, 01:38 PM

Navin, that is simply not true!

First, as I have already pointed out.....the DLT drill is ONE arm at a time and is a DRILL. It is not a rolling platform for free technique.

Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can't comment on something you've never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

Second, I have trained in the Pin Sun version of Chi Sao, with Jim Roselando! If you look closely, the roll has a coiling/circling nature and the energy goes side to side. They circle COMPLETELY around each other's forearms very close to the wrist. In contrast, the YKS/YM roll is truly a "rolling" motion that goes more up and down and is centered closer to mid-forearm. The Bong/Tan hand STAYS on the inside of the partner's hand and the Fook hand STAYS on the outside of the partner's hand. There is a completely different energy and dynamic involved. Now granted, Jim does something much closer to a Bong Sao that you see others do in this rolling platform. For instance, just take a look again at the Vietnamese WCK clip that started this thread. But even in what Jim is doing, Bong Sao is not a prominent part of the roll as it is in the YKS/YM version.

Keith just to break it down for you

PSWC poon sao=cycling of bong, tan, fuk, huen, and a light under grab in transition

luk sao= cycling of bong, tan, fook (some linages pair fook with upper gan or kei jang)

double circling hands (sheung huen sao) =huen and a light under grab in transition

when you combine the techniques of luk sao with the tecniques and cycling of double circling hands, you end up doing the poon sao chi sao platform of PSWC.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one. Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 02:28 PM

Navin,

IMHO, here is the systemic picture

1.Wck philosophy , strategy, concept = capture center

2. Platform to realized Wck strategy

A, Poon sau = out side gate play mainly = out gate in, in gate out play.

B, Luk sau = high density inner gate play = inner gate center line min moving play.

3. Implementation derive from platforms: yks, Ipman, scwc, pin San......etc
Different technics , hands shape.....etc can be used. Many variation.

If you keeping look at technics you get into seeing threes not the forest.

Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can't comment on something you've never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

Keith just to break it down for you

PSWC poon sao=cycling of bong, tan, fuk, huen, and a light under grab in transition

luk sao= cycling of bong, tan, fook (some linages pair fook with upper gan or kei jang)

double circling hands (sheung huen sao) =huen and a light under grab in transition

when you combine the techniques of luk sao with the tecniques and cycling of double circling hands, you end up doing the poon sao chi sao platform of PSWC.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one. Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.

anerlich

10-24-2013, 03:53 PM

And just as an aside....he kept his Bong and Tan motion rather high....much like they do in TWC!!!

I was fortunate enough to spend a couple of hours with duende, an HFY guy from this forum, a few years back, when he visited Sydney.

Anyone who thinks there is more than a superficial resemblance between TWC and HFY knows very little about either.

The whole Robert Chu / HFY *****fest came about because of an ego clash between Robert Chu and Benny Meng, neither of whom could be described as anything other than amateur historians seeking undeserved academic legitimacy, same as Hendrik. And I'm being charitable in giving them that much.

KPM

10-24-2013, 05:29 PM

I let kuen kuit tell the story.
It is very clear based on the kuit as I have just told Navin above.

You are delusional Hendrik. You won't describe the physical actions because you can't! Those Kuen Kuit are not "descriptions." The don't "describe" anything. They are not "very clear." They are guidelines, or concepts. You DON'T KNOW what physical form or expression those Kuen Kuit were providing guidelines for in 1890!!!

KPM

10-24-2013, 05:36 PM

Our single handed Chi Sao contains transitions from 3 different types of Bong Sao, some go to Taan sao or Taan Kiu (different tools), some don't. It depends if we fall into Chi Sao or Kiu Sao or free hand sparring type of leverage based on the contact.

We don't follow the bong/taan exchange with a fook the way I learned in Moy Yat's lineage, but often use a fook to neutralize a taan sao.

So again, HFY has the technology to play with the Luk Sao platform, but that's not what we're doing. Is that clear enough?

Was that a "yes" or a "no", because I can't really tell!! I pulled my copy of "Mastering Kung Fu" by Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, and Richard Loewenhagen off the shelf tonight. I hadn't looked at it in a long time. I flipped it open and almost immediately came to page 57. There is a photo showing Gee and Loewenhagen standing facing each other. Gee has his right hand in Taan, while Loewenhagen is in Fook. Gee's left hand is in Fook on Loewenhagen's Bong. Identical position to YKS/YM "Luk Sao Chi Sao." Identical structure that I rolled with Garrett Gee. So I'll ask again, since the above comment didn't really seem to answer the question.

In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

KPM

10-24-2013, 05:40 PM

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 06:14 PM

You issue is a common one ,
where one don't know the body of the art or the engine, and fail to see what it is in a specific application platform such as Luk Sao .

Why is Navin right a way ask me if I am delusional?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kung fu fighter
so luk sao is an inner gate play, what's the story for Poon sau?

It you don't clean your cup. You will never taste my tea.

Wck is not as you think. You can't see it when everything is reveal infront of your eyes, If you keep thinking your view is the unversal reference.

The kuit tell exactly precisely what to do

B, 轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
子午要中 Your center line needs to align center.

You are delusional Hendrik. You won't describe the physical actions because you can't! Those Kuen Kuit are not "descriptions." The don't "describe" anything. They are not "very clear." They are guidelines, or concepts. You DON'T KNOW what physical form or expression those Kuen Kuit were providing guidelines for in 1890!!!

KPM

10-24-2013, 06:31 PM

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 07:45 PM

The kuit tell exactly precisely what to do

B, 轆手訣 the kuit of Luk Sao

敵柔我柔 opponent soft I am soft
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time
拑陽落勁 clamping the yang I inject the yin force down to the ground
子午要中 Your center line needs to align center.

1. Exactly? Precisely? ---------

Sure.

2. Opponent soft I am soft: Ok, that one is pretty straight-forward ----

Ok

3. Opponent hard I will receive and issue in the same time: receive with what? A Tan Sao? A Bong Sao? A Fook Sao? Issue with what? A palm? A Lan Sao? Doesn't seem so "exact" or "precise" to me! -------

it is describing while facing each other square situation, bridge contact bridge for each arm, the center line is the war zone both side try to capture .

Once one side make a move. The othe side detect the force flow and at that contact point and location , response with force flow without needs much movements. Advance inch Jin means recieve and issue at that contact point. Otherwise if one move away ,one is giving up the center line . One inject force flow via contact point. It is a force flow play not a hand movement play. This is the game of inner gate center line play.

Chi sau is a game for playing with momentum and force flow. Inner gate play means one needs to stick at center line, response within one inch and one split second of that detection. It is force line and angle, the name of the game is stay in the center line and force him out with min movement and min time.

This is the key of Luk sau the core of the core of Wck center line capture inner gate ability .

4. Clamping the yang I inject yin force down to the ground: Maybe a description of rooting with YGKYM? Again, not very "exact" or "precise." -------

This describe how one use the snake engine to support
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time in the spit of second.

one needs to inject the yin force down into the ground via clamping yang dynamic or loose yin.

Clamping yan means yin side of the particular part of the body is loose. Only yin side is loose the force can inject into ground.

Why inject to ground? Because one needs to dissipate the incoming action force and reuse its reaction force.

It is totally different then the usual rooting concept of nam kuen or holding structure. It is inject force flow into ground effectively.

5. Your centerline needs to align center: Does this mean facing the opponent "square on" with my center directly in front of his? Or does this mean that regardless of the angling of my shoulders and his position I keep my technique or energy directed at his center of mass? Again, not very "exact" or "precise." ------

This means when one perform the force flow receiving and issuing , one keep the center line position as it. It is like one don't move the gun barrier at the instant of firing.

6. Does anyone else think this is all "exact" or "precise" or an actual "description"? ------

This is common basic for anyone who play the inner gate center line game of Wck. This is ancient Wck development of capture center using center via Luk sau.

The name of this Wck concept is called 中門不讓，子午不離。 not give up my center even if it is one inch, never move away from my the center line even if it is one inch. that is the Luk Sao is the test vehicle on this concept.

Welcome to 1850. It is not Kansas. It is the momentum and Jin flow play. One needs the snake engine as ticket for the game. There is no tan bong fok kie, but just receiving and issuing , can be in any technic . That is the game of Luk sau.

One can keep thinking not recognize things are describe clearly precisely in front of ones eyes.

kung fu fighter

10-24-2013, 08:31 PM

The above chi sau kuit is describing the poon sau type of play, which can be both outer or inner door but mostly outer door play. Where one move. And not that high density target into the inner gate center line.

The Luk sau kuit is describing the inner door play. It has to response there at center line at that instant per contact. Not moving away but take on spot play.

thanks Hendrik, that makes sense, what you mentioned coincides with what YouKnowWho mentioned in the post below

When we talk about "centerline", we have to talk about the Chinese spear technique. The spear is used to stab at your opponent's heart (his center) more than any other weapon does.

The Chinese spear technique only has 3 major moves. the

- stab,
- clockwise circle,
- counter clockwise circle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY4azsuTzhM&feature=youtu.be

All WC systems have the stab. Does all WC system also have the clockwise circle and counter clockwise circle? Apparently some WC system have it.

If you can move both of your arms in circle with your

- left arm moving in a clockwise circle, and
- right arm moving in a counter clockwise circle,

you can seal your center line (the intersection of both circles) tightly that no incoming attack can go through.

http://imageshack.us/a/img51/6126/tfep.jpg

Hendrik

10-24-2013, 08:39 PM

thanks Hendrik, that makes sense, what you mentioned coincides with what YouKnowWho mentioned in the post below

You are welcome. I have no secret and let the kuit tell the story of Wck.

Read my other post on the details explanation of the kuit

One thing I keep telling you before on baisee. You guys think I am joking or strange. I baisee to snake crane wing chun present grand master recently. To learn the secret note of 1890. Otherwise I am cheating and stealing. You want it you baisee to get the true transmission. Thus, I have many sifus from different areas of expertise. Learning is a continuous journey.

LoneTiger108

10-25-2013, 02:34 AM

You are welcome. I have no secret and let the kuit tell the story of Wck.

Read my other post on the details explanation of the kuit

One thing I keep telling you before on baisee. You guys think I am joking or strange. I baisee to snake crane wing chun present grand master recently. To learn the secret note of 1890. Otherwise I am cheating and stealing. You want it you baisee to get the true transmission. Thus, I have many sifus from different areas of expertise. Learning is a continuous journey.

Hendrik... if the truth is to be known about traditional/cultural martial Baisi, a Todai need only Baisi to ONE Sifu. Once this has happened there is no further Baisi to anyone else unless you are thrown out of such lineage or you leave of your own accord.

Either way, to then go on and Baisi to a 'second/third/fourth' is soley a monetary exchange for business UNLESS previous Sifus have agreed with your current Sifu and provided references that you are of a 'Journey Man' status of good character?? You would also normally be told to never discuss (publically) your previous learning! I think most people nowadays would have a problem with such old ways, including you sir. So I question your Baisi to the current S&C WCK Grandmaster and yours/his intentions.

I'm not playing anything down here, as I know many guys that have learnt from many Sifus mainly because they had never Baisi to anyone! Do you really think this type of student will be given access to any transmission that may have been keep hidden for so long?!

FWIW The one thing I agree with from all of your comments here so far is that Chisau and Looksau are two different platforms and need to be learnt in such a distinctive manner to understand the wide ranging interactions of our Martial Ancestors. What amuses me is those that are fighting the corner of others can not provide ANY evidence that they themselves even know what they are talking about... through VIDEO not through WRITINGS.

Maybe it is time to re-visit my own project at Flystudio?? I have quite a few clips that demonstrate the differences but very few where I give a verbal/kuit based narration... something for me to look into me thinks if nobody else here can provide anything more constructive?

Hendrik

10-25-2013, 07:13 AM

baisee is not limit to one sifu.

One learn different things from different sifus is a common case in ancient china.
In fact ones sifu will send one to other sifu to learn different things. Since no sifu knows it all.

Look at this bio of Cheng Heng the founder of choy lee fut as real ancient china case, where choy lee fut is the main force of the taiping revolution of china which Wck also participate.

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

Also,

Here is my late sigung Ma li Tang a famous Chinese medical doctor, qigong master and internal martial artist. See how many sifus he has to learn what he knows.

马礼堂（一九O三——一九八九），男，原名马步周，河北省河间市马户生村人。生前为中国文化书院导师、中国气功科学研究会名誉理事、中国体育科学学会武术研究会第一届委员、中山健身会导师、湖南马王堆气功学院顾问兼教授、北京大学气功武术协会名誉会长、养生科学研究所名誉所长，并兼任陕西、吉林、河南等十三个省市气功顾问。1989年5月20日因病在北京逝世、享年87岁。

河间地处沧州地区，自古以来习武成风，直到清末，各村还都设有拳场，所以名家辈出。
马老7岁始学少林潭腿、华拳，13岁随威震武林的表叔张兆东学形意拳、八卦拳。
1931年，经张兆东介绍，马礼堂拜著名拳师郭云深的得意弟子，河北大学武术教授、河北省武术馆馆长刘为祥为师，学习形意拳。此外，他还向太极名家刘采臣学习太极拳，向南北大侠杜心武学习推手。

Also how about the Ipman Leung bik story? That is Ipman second sifu .

In the west, some people get the distorted version of what is going on baisee. Baisee in Chinese custom means education, appreciation, and respect .

I have many sifus , I announce it so that there is no guessing and give credit to who the credit needs to go to.

In my case, now I fully see the two ancient document of red boat wing chun kuen, appreciation Must be given to yik kam lineage and snake crane lineage, without them I will not come this far.

Hendrik... if the truth is to be known about traditional/cultural martial Baisi, a Todai need only Baisi to ONE Sifu. Once this has happened there is no further Baisi to anyone else unless you are thrown out of such lineage or you leave of your own accord.

Either way, to then go on and Baisi to a 'second/third/fourth' is soley a monetary exchange for business UNLESS previous Sifus have agreed with your current Sifu and provided references that you are of a 'Journey Man' status of good character?? You would also normally be told to never discuss (publically) your previous learning! I think most people nowadays would have a problem with such old ways, including you sir. So I question your Baisi to the current S&C WCK Grandmaster and yours/his intentions.

I'm not playing anything down here, as I know many guys that have learnt from many Sifus mainly because they had never Baisi to anyone! Do you really think this type of student will be given access to any transmission that may have been keep hidden for so long?!

FWIW The one thing I agree with from all of your comments here so far is that Chisau and Looksau are two different platforms and need to be learnt in such a distinctive manner to understand the wide ranging interactions of our Martial Ancestors. What amuses me is those that are fighting the corner of others can not provide ANY evidence that they themselves even know what they are talking about... through VIDEO not through WRITINGS.

Maybe it is time to re-visit my own project at Flystudio?? I have quite a few clips that demonstrate the differences but very few where I give a verbal/kuit based narration... something for me to look into me thinks if nobody else here can provide anything more constructive?

KPM

10-25-2013, 07:14 AM

3. Opponent hard I will receive and issue in the same time: receive with what? A Tan Sao? A Bong Sao? A Fook Sao? Issue with what? A palm? A Lan Sao? Doesn't seem so "exact" or "precise" to me! -------

it is describing while facing each other square situation, bridge contact bridge for each arm, the center line is the war zone both side try to capture .

Once one side make a move. The othe side detect the force flow and at that contact point and location , response with force flow without needs much movements. Advance inch Jin means recieve and issue at that contact point. Otherwise if one move away ,one is giving up the center line . One inject force flow via contact point. It is a force flow play not a hand movement play. This is the game of inner gate center line play.

Chi sau is a game for playing with momentum and force flow. Inner gate play means one needs to stick at center line, response within one inch and one split second of that detection. It is force line and angle, the name of the game is stay in the center line and force him out with min movement and min time.

This is the key of Luk sau the core of the core of Wck center line capture inner gate ability .

4. Clamping the yang I inject yin force down to the ground: Maybe a description of rooting with YGKYM? Again, not very "exact" or "precise." -------

This describe how one use the snake engine to support
敵剛我堵 opponent hard I will recieve and issue in the same time in the spit of second.

one needs to inject the yin force down into the ground via clamping yang dynamic or loose yin.

Clamping yan means yin side of the particular part of the body is loose. Only yin side is loose the force can inject into ground.

Why inject to ground? Because one needs to dissipate the incoming action force and reuse its reaction force.

It is totally different then the usual rooting concept of nam kuen or holding structure. It is inject force flow into ground effectively.

5. Your centerline needs to align center: Does this mean facing the opponent "square on" with my center directly in front of his? Or does this mean that regardless of the angling of my shoulders and his position I keep my technique or energy directed at his center of mass? Again, not very "exact" or "precise." ------

This means when one perform the force flow receiving and issuing , one keep the center line position as it. It is like one don't move the gun barrier at the instant of firing.

6. Does anyone else think this is all "exact" or "precise" or an actual "description"? ------

This is common basic for anyone who play the inner gate center line game of Wck. This is ancient Wck development of capture center using center via Luk sau.

The name of this Wck concept is called 中門不讓，子午不離。 not give up my center even if it is one inch, never move away from my the center line even if it is one inch. that is the Luk Sao is the test vehicle on this concept.

Welcome to 1850. It is not Kansas. It is the momentum and Jin flow play. One needs the snake engine as ticket for the game. There is no tan bong fok kie, but just receiving and issuing , can be in any technic . That is the game of Luk sau.

One can keep thinking not recognize things are describe clearly precisely in front of ones eyes.

Hendrik:

Thank you for the explanations! That does make better sense out of the Kuen Kuit. I think we have just been seeing past each other, talking about different things, or just trying to make different points.

You are seeing Luk Sao as a conceptual practice with guidelines from the Kuen Kuit has to how it should work. I was seeing Luk Sao as a very specific physical rolling action used by YKS & YM lineages. So it just seems to be a misunderstanding coming from how we are using the terms.

Anyway, thanks again for elaborating on the Kuen Kuit.

KPM

10-25-2013, 07:33 AM

Now, just to show I have no "agenda", I thought I would throw another theory out there. ;) Again, this is just a theory, but it might also fit with what historical evidence is currently at hand.

Yip Man is said to have studied with Leung Bik when he went to Hong Kong for school as a teenager. He only became one of the "3 heroes of Foshan" in later adult life after he returned to China. It could be that Leung Bik was a cover story for the person that YM really studied with....someone from the HFY lineage! Maybe he used Leung Bik as a cover story because the real teacher was part of the secret societies. Maybe the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform was part of HFY all along. While YM kept what he had learned in Hong Kong pretty much to himself, maybe some small things naturally came out in his Wing Chun. Maybe he shared the LuK Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with YKS rather than the other way around! Maybe Sum Nun told the story that YKS shared it with YM to save face for his teacher since YKS was technically YM's senior.

Then an aging Yip Man is back in Hong Kong. It could be that he did not completely learn the HFY method and had even forgotten some of it by the time he is teaching in Hong Kong. But he decides to share what he remembers with William Cheung. Then William Cheung (or possibly Yip Man himself) fills in the gaps by combining it with YM WCK. So TWC and HFY share some strong similarities, but are also quite different.

If a lineage emerged from China (as the Snake Crane system recently came to public awareness) that was essentially the same or a variation on Garrett Gee's system, then this would certainly strengthen this theory. But right now I would say it is less plausible than what we have already been discussing.

LoneTiger108

10-25-2013, 08:48 AM

Also how about the Ipman Leung bik story? That is Ipman second sifu .

In the west, some people get the distorted version of what is going on baisee. Baisee in Chinese custom means education, appreciation, and respect.

Personally I'm not a big fan of the whole Leung Bik story as I know other stories too that make much more sense (for me)

As for the multiple Baisi 'Ceremonies' I am sorry, for me once you are a disciple and have your Baisi witnessed in the proper manner, you would have to go through what I suggested to Baisi to another Sifu or you would not be representative of general Mo Duk.

Of course, after the Cultural Revolution it became widely accepted that a 'student' can train and study with as many Sifu as they like but you must be aware of the differences of sports and cultural education? This is where and how modern Wushu developed which in essence supported this 'multi-master-style' acceptance in the wider society.

To suggest that 'us in the West' have a distorted view of Baisi is a raw statement, but considering people genuinely feel a Baisi is when you offer your Sifu tea in front of a video camera on Youtube is acceptable I can totally understand your point.

Hendrik

10-25-2013, 09:02 AM

Kieth,

Everyone can has his theory as I have told some wcners lately.

But, we now know the two ancient document one predate Leung jan and one predate yks and Ipman existed.
Also we know what Chinese official history matches with which Wck legend , and what hung mun sect matches Wck lineages uprising involvement.

From these solid reference we can see what is likely to be happen and what is not.

As for the Luk sau chi sau platform ect. We know the Luk sau kuit describe the concept, the platform, the implementation. As for how one implement it , what technics is used is free choice for anyone and any situation. But the concept the power handing the line and angle has to be within the description. Otherwise it is not Luk sau of Wck as state in pre 1890 era.

IMHO, does Hendrik lineage story matter? Leung bik story matter? Technically Checking into the above "DNA" one knows what happen. Story or history or politic can never replace technical reality. And Wck is technology which rely on technical reality instead of anyone's his - story. Knowing those stories or valid or invalidate the story doesn't do a thing or contribute to technical issue .

As for the Luk sau chi sau issue you brought up. After I shows you by evidence the description of what is Luk sau pre 1890 from concept , platform, to details of execution in the previous post. Now I would like to ask you. Why the Luk sau chi sau you state is Luk sau chi sau of Wck? What does it do? By just playing with tan bong fuk different way? What does it achive? How does it fit in to the 1890 note description? Does it fit? If not then why is it called luk sau chi sau?

Now, just to show I have no "agenda", I thought I would throw another theory out there. ;) Again, this is just a theory, but it might also fit with what historical evidence is currently at hand.

Yip Man is said to have studied with Leung Bik when he went to Hong Kong for school as a teenager. He only became one of the "3 heroes of Foshan" in later adult life after he returned to China. It could be that Leung Bik was a cover story for the person that YM really studied with....someone from the HFY lineage! Maybe he used Leung Bik as a cover story because the real teacher was part of the secret societies. Maybe the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform was part of HFY all along. While YM kept what he had learned in Hong Kong pretty much to himself, maybe some small things naturally came out in his Wing Chun. Maybe he shared the LuK Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with YKS rather than the other way around! Maybe Sum Nun told the story that YKS shared it with YM to save face for his teacher since YKS was technically YM's senior.

Then an aging Yip Man is back in Hong Kong. It could be that he did not completely learn the HFY method and had even forgotten some of it by the time he is teaching in Hong Kong. But he decides to share what he remembers with William Cheung. Then William Cheung (or possibly Yip Man himself) fills in the gaps by combining it with YM WCK. So TWC and HFY share some strong similarities, but are also quite different.

If a lineage emerged from China (as the Snake Crane system recently came to public awareness) that was essentially the same or a variation on Garrett Gee's system, then this would certainly strengthen this theory. But right now I would say it is less plausible than what we have already been discussing.

kung fu fighter

10-25-2013, 09:21 AM

Yip Man is said to have studied with Leung Bik when he went to Hong Kong for school as a teenager. He only became one of the "3 heroes of Foshan" in later adult life after he returned to China. It could be that Leung Bik was a cover story for the person that YM really studied with....someone from the HFY lineage! Maybe he used Leung Bik as a cover story because the real teacher was part of the secret societies. Maybe the Luk Sao Chi Sao rolling platform was part of HFY all along. While YM kept what he had learned in Hong Kong pretty much to himself, maybe some small things naturally came out in his Wing Chun. Maybe he shared the LuK Sao Chi Sao rolling platform with YKS rather than the other way around! Maybe Sum Nun told the story that YKS shared it with YM to save face for his teacher since YKS was technically YM's senior.

Then an aging Yip Man is back in Hong Kong. It could be that he did not completely learn the HFY method and had even forgotten some of it by the time he is teaching in Hong Kong. But he decides to share what he remembers with William Cheung. Then William Cheung (or possibly Yip Man himself) fills in the gaps by combining it with YM WCK. So TWC and HFY share some strong similarities, but are also quite different.

If a lineage emerged from China (as the Snake Crane system recently came to public awareness) that was essentially the same or a variation on Garrett Gee's system, then this would certainly strengthen this theory. But right now I would say it is less plausible than what we have already been discussing.

Keith, This theory add up, because if Yip Man really learnt from Leung Bik, then the body mechanics of yip man wck should be identical to Leung Jan's pin sun wck art and it is not. since Leung Bik would have learnt his kung fu from his father Leung Jan.

and Pin sun wck is very different From HFY

Also what do you think about my post below?

Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can't comment on something you've never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

Keith just to break it down for you

PSWC poon sao=cycling of bong, tan, fuk, huen, and a light under grab in transition

luk sao= cycling of bong, tan, fook (some linages pair fook with upper gan or kei jang)

double circling hands (sheung huen sao) =huen and a light under grab in transition

when you combine the techniques of luk sao with the tecniques and cycling of double circling hands, you end up doing the poon sao chi sao platform of PSWC.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one. Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.

Wayfaring

10-25-2013, 09:28 AM

And I've explained that I'm not concerned about terminology. I asked before and you didn't answer, so I'll ask again and little more clearly.

Well, maybe other people ARE concerned about terminology, strategy, approach, and a dozen other things that come into play besides the shape of the instruments used.

Why are you not concerned about these things, and overtly concerned about and directing the examination to the shape of things only?

In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

Usually only when interacting with other WCK families, most especially those that use the Luk Sao training platform like Yip Man lineages. That basic chi sau rolling platform in most WCK lineages is usually one of the 3 main components of WCK training (forms, dummy, chi sau). It is not in HFY.

This is why Eric is answering you about the different approaches. But apparently you don't understand that - maybe it's too foreign of a concept to you. Maybe you'll get it now. In HFY classes and instruction there just isn't the standard rolling platform taught, drilled, etc. Sifu Gee teaches that you don't just compliantly allow someone to step up to you in square stance and lock up a bong/tan into your bridge. In a realistic situation, even getting there would have to be earned.

That said, do students/teachers roll with that platform on their own, with friends, with others in the WCK community? Sure they do. As you said, sifu Gee does that at friendship seminars, and with visitors sometimes, etc.

Is that a little more clear for you?

Wayfaring

10-25-2013, 09:51 AM

Was that a "yes" or a "no", because I can't really tell!! I pulled my copy of "Mastering Kung Fu" by Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, and Richard Loewenhagen off the shelf tonight. I hadn't looked at it in a long time. I flipped it open and almost immediately came to page 57. There is a photo showing Gee and Loewenhagen standing facing each other. Gee has his right hand in Taan, while Loewenhagen is in Fook. Gee's left hand is in Fook on Loewenhagen's Bong. Identical position to YKS/YM "Luk Sao Chi Sao." Identical structure that I rolled with Garrett Gee. So I'll ask again, since the above comment didn't really seem to answer the question.

Yeah. So I looked at p. 57 of the book. It looks like 4 guys standing around while sifus Gee and Loewenhagen are touching hands. We don't really know what they are doing, as the caption of the photo, along with the point of the photo is to communicate hou chou san sau - teaching one on one as opposed to the shapes their arms are expressing in the picture. Not coincidentally, that is also the title of the sub-heading of the section of the book the picture appears in.

In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

It sounds to me like the answer you are looking for is yes, but the truth is the answer is no. You are just looking at shapes and jumping to a conclusion. For example, on p.137 of the book there are similar hand shapes (not identical) but the people are practicing kiu sau (which IS one of the 3 pillars of HFY chi sau).

But then again, you have the book, so you probably know this, or have read it. So are you really looking for an answer to this or are you just going to continue to ask the question until you get the answer that you think you want?

KPM

10-25-2013, 11:28 AM

So I looked at p. 57 of the book. It looks like 4 guys standing around while sifus Gee and Loewenhagen are touching hands. We don't really know what they are doing,

Sure. But it seems to me more than a coincidence that it looks exactly like "Luk Sao Chi Sao"!

You are just looking at shapes and jumping to a conclusion. For example, on p.137 of the book there are similar hand shapes (not identical) but the people are practicing kiu sau (which IS one of the 3 pillars of HFY chi sau).

Yes, I did see that.

So are you really looking for an answer to this or are you just going to continue to ask the question until you get the answer that you think you want?

No, it seems that the answer is "yes, sometimes." I'm good with that. Thanks!

KPM

10-25-2013, 12:25 PM

Keith, This theory add up, because if Yip Man really learnt from Leung Bik, then the body mechanics of yip man wck should be identical to Leung Jan's pin sun wck art and it is not. since Leung Bik would have learnt his kung fu from his father Leung Jan.

Yes, that's what I've thought for a long time. If what William Cheung is doing was taught to him by Yip Man, then it couldn't have been Leung Bik that taught it to Yip Man.

Also what do you think about my post below?

Good post. I've been thinking about it.

Keith I keep repeating myself, Luk sao platform is a variation of PSWC dai lim tao, where both partners hook up both arms at the same time doing bong, tan, and fook as in the luk sao of yip man and ykswc. You can't comment on something you've never seen, in fact all the two-man sets of PSWC have more than one variations of how they are performed. I would bet that you only learnt one version of each of the two-man sets from Jim.

This part I already addressed. If someone is now doing a two-man version of the DLT San Sik with both arms, how can we know that it isn't a modern innovation based on seeing Yip Man people doing rolling hands Chi Sao? Because haven't seen this in what Pin Sun examples I've encountered. Jim would be the guy to ask about this.

Keith the PSWC Poon sao chi sao platform is not different, they just merged or re-packaged the two different chi sao platforms into one.

You make a good point, and I'm almost ready to follow your thinking. Almost. :) How do we know that the Luk Sao rolling platform and the Huen Sao rolling platform existed independantly of each and were around for Pin Sun to combine? And to clarify, I'm talking about the physical rolling method when I say "Luk Sao" and not the conceptual method Hendrik has been talking about. The basic "Huen Sao" roll is very similar to the Pin Sun version. It would be easy to "refine" it a bit to come up with the Pin Sun version without combining it with anything. The Huen Sao roll and the Pin Sun roll have a very similar energy and feel. The YSK/YM roll has a very different feel to it. I can see the Pin Sun roll easily being a more refined version of the Huen Sao roll without combining it with anything. But you do propose an interesting idea!

Just my opinion, but I personally believe the PSWC poon sao is a much more efficient training method. But the other 2 chi sao platform are still valid in case one needs to develop the specific skill that those 2 platforms focus on.

There is much more forward pressure in the YKS/YM roll than in either the Huen Sao roll or the Pin Sun roll. So, depending on what your emphasis or strategy may be, one may be more useful than the other. Just my opinion, but personally I see my Wing Chun as putting pressure on the opponent and breaking his structure. The YKS/YM roll is a much better platform from which to practice that than the other two.

kung fu fighter

10-25-2013, 12:54 PM

Wayfaring

10-25-2013, 01:00 PM

Sure. But it seems to me more than a coincidence that it looks exactly like "Luk Sao Chi Sao"!

No coincidence to me. Sifu Loewenhagen's background under Meng was Moy Yat wing chun - Yip Man. They trained that platform. That photo is probably an accurate depiction of how Sifu Gee provided hands on training (hou chou san sau) to go from where his student was comfortable in Moy Yat wing chun to that which he teaches, HFY. That's why the caption of the picture refers to hands-on training as well a the paragraph in the book surrounding it.

No, it seems that the answer is "yes, sometimes." I'm good with that. Thanks!
No, the answer still is "no they don't train that platform".

But since most other WCK families do they will do friendly exchanges under the typical training format of that platform.

Eric_H

10-25-2013, 03:59 PM

I was fortunate enough to spend a couple of hours with duende, an HFY guy from this forum, a few years back, when he visited Sydney.

Anyone who thinks there is more than a superficial resemblance between TWC and HFY knows very little about either.

The whole Robert Chu / HFY *****fest came about because of an ego clash between Robert Chu and Benny Meng, neither of whom could be described as anything other than amateur historians seeking undeserved academic legitimacy, same as Hendrik. And I'm being charitable in giving them that much.

Hey Anerlich, thanks for putting your 2 cents in, it's good to hear from somebody who had a bunch of WC experience and got a genuine chance to check out what we're doing. First round is on me if you make it stateside :)

Was that a "yes" or a "no", because I can't really tell!! I pulled my copy of "Mastering Kung Fu" by Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, and Richard Loewenhagen off the shelf tonight. I hadn't looked at it in a long time. I flipped it open and almost immediately came to page 57. There is a photo showing Gee and Loewenhagen standing facing each other. Gee has his right hand in Taan, while Loewenhagen is in Fook. Gee's left hand is in Fook on Loewenhagen's Bong. Identical position to YKS/YM "Luk Sao Chi Sao." Identical structure that I rolled with Garrett Gee. So I'll ask again, since the above comment didn't really seem to answer the question.

In HFY, do you use a basic Chi Sao rolling platform consisting of one arm rolling between Bong Sao and Tan Sao on the inside while the other arm follows the partner's Bong/Tan with a Fook Sao on the outside?

Dude, all WC uses Tahn/Bong/Fuk, that's kind of a silly argument that at some point a photo of people doing WC looks like some other WC you might know. For what I think is the third time: WE DON'T DO LUK SAO BUT OUR CHI SAO CAN WORK WITH SOMEONE DOING LUK SAO.

All WC has some overlap with Tahn/Bong/Fuk, but there's been enough presented on this thread to tell you we're not doing any kind of looping exercise like you describe.

If you want to keep asking the same question and getting the same reply, start talking to Hendrik, the guy's been going on and on about SNT and Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma for over 10 years - you guys could be made for each other. Personally, I hate repeating myself, I'm outta here.

KPM

10-25-2013, 06:19 PM

sorry above i meant "don't add up" instead of add up

But what you said by mistake makes more sense. ;)

because if Yip Man really learnt from Leung Bik, then the body mechanics of yip man wck should be identical to Leung Jan's pin sun wck art and it is not. since Leung Bik would have learnt his kung fu from his father Leung Jan.

If Yip Man actually learned from Leung Bik, who was taught by Leung Jan, then you would expect that what he learned would look a lot like Pin Sun WCK. What William Cheung does looks nothing like Pin Sun WCK. So if William Cheung is truly doing what Yip Man taught him, and what Yip Man taught him was what he learned from "Leung Bik", then this "secret teacher" couldn't have been the real Leung Bik. It makes more sense that Leung Bik was simply a cover story for the name of a teacher that he could not reveal. So what you said makes much more sense than your correction. Because how would it not "add up"??

And I tell you what Navin. If you get Jim Roselando to say that the YKS/YM rolling platform existed in Pin Sun WCK all along, I'll be ready to seriously consider changing my opinion. Jim knows his stuff and has been to Ku Lo village and even rolled with the old man himself before he died.

KPM

10-25-2013, 06:24 PM

If you want to keep asking the same question and getting the same reply, start talking to Hendrik, the guy's been going on and on about SNT and Yee Gee Kim Yeung Ma for over 10 years - you guys could be made for each other. Personally, I hate repeating myself, I'm outta here.

Don't get all huffy. I asked a simple "yes" or "no" question and got a theoretical exposition on HFY theory. So I asked again to clarify. Want to talk about being made for Hendrik? Hendrik and you guys are a perfect match when it comes to putting out the high techy sounding theory that no one else is able to follow!! ;)

KPM

10-25-2013, 06:26 PM

No coincidence to me. Sifu Loewenhagen's background under Meng was Moy Yat wing chun - Yip Man. They trained that platform. That photo is probably an accurate depiction of how Sifu Gee provided hands on training (hou chou san sau) to go from where his student was comfortable in Moy Yat wing chun to that which he teaches, HFY. That's why the caption of the picture refers to hands-on training as well a the paragraph in the book surrounding it.

No, the answer still is "no they don't train that platform".

But since most other WCK families do they will do friendly exchanges under the typical training format of that platform.

Thanks for your responses. That does make sense. No theoretical treatises were even necessary. ;)

kung fu fighter

10-26-2013, 12:35 AM

But what you said by mistake makes more sense. ;)

because if Yip Man really learnt from Leung Bik, then the body mechanics of yip man wck should be identical to Leung Jan's pin sun wck art and it is not. since Leung Bik would have learnt his kung fu from his father Leung Jan.

If Yip Man actually learned from Leung Bik, who was taught by Leung Jan, then you would expect that what he learned would look a lot like Pin Sun WCK. What William Cheung does looks nothing like Pin Sun WCK. So if William Cheung is truly doing what Yip Man taught him, and what Yip Man taught him was what he learned from "Leung Bik", then this "secret teacher" couldn't have been the real Leung Bik. It makes more sense that Leung Bik was simply a cover story for the name of a teacher that he could not reveal. So what you said makes much more sense than your correction. Because how would it not "add up"??

or maybe William made up his own version of WCK for marketing purposes by claiming he was the only one taught yip Man's secret Leung bik system which Yip did not even teach his own sons and nephew. Give me a break! I think William did much the same as what Bruce Lee did, TWC is william's version of JKD

And I tell you what Navin. If you get Jim Roselando to say that the YKS/YM rolling platform existed in Pin Sun WCK all along, I'll be ready to seriously consider changing my opinion. Jim knows his stuff and has been to Ku Lo village and even rolled with the old man himself before he died.

Jim is not the sole authority on pin sun wck as he would like everyone on here to believe. Besides good luck trying to to get him to give you a detailed explanation on anything in PSWC.

KPM

10-26-2013, 04:04 AM

or maybe William made up his own version of WCK for marketing purposes by claiming he was the only one taught yip Man's secret Leung bik system which Yip did not even teach his own sons and nephew. Give me a break! I think William did much the same as what Bruce Lee did, TWC is william's version of JKD

That may be true as well! But remember, I said it was a historical theory that also fit with all of the available evidence and even explains why HFY would have the Luk Sao Chi Sao platform (at least when they want to) when it is otherwise not connected to the YKS/YM lineages. I also said I didn't think it was likely true. But it does "add up" as far as fitting with the information that is currently out there. Besides, did you read what I wrote? My theory says that it wasn't really Leung Bik at all, but an unknown teacher in the HFY lineage. Leung Bik was just a cover story.

Jim is not the sole authority on pin sun wck as he would like everyone on here to believe.

He is probably the 2nd or 3rd highest ranking guy in Pin Sun in the United States. I don't think he ever claimed to be the "sole" authority. But he is an authority, and the only one that bothers to occasionally post on these forums.

Besides good luck trying to to get him to give you a detailed explanation on anything in PSWC.

Now that part is very true! ;)