Is the modern Wck structure and chi sau a problem in reality?

[Hendrik]

Is the modern Wck structure and chi sau platform evolution from ancient the circle chi sau platform is a problem in reality?

What is your view?

[Hendrik]

This chi sau and Wck structure holding seems to tell the story of an evolution into a long fist art.

[Hendrik]

IMHO, the above is the root of the issue of this thread.

IMHO, this evolution of Wck as in the YouTube doesn't work facing western boxing .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXzzg2ZnTMc

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?67510-wing-chun-range-and-angles&p=1265350#post1265350

[LFJ]

Is the modern Wck structure and Luk sau chi sau platform evolution from ancient the circle chi sau platform is a problem in reality?

In reality? It's for development. We don't actually fight in this position with both arms extended.

[Hendrik]

General Modern Wck chi sau end up this way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL9ZUe88Tik&feature=youtube_gdata

[Hendrik]

In reality? It's for development. We don't actually fight in this position with both arms extended.

Then, why train it this way ? What skill does one develop beside programmed into stuck ness?

[LFJ]

Then, why train it this way ? What skill does one develop beside programmed into stuck ness?

It's not a 1on1 match. It's an exchange of force to develop various attributes. That's all. One will not be mal-programmed as long as they have the right idea and are free sparring.

[Hendrik]

It's not a 1on1 match. It's an exchange of force to develop various attributes. That's all. One will not be mal-programmed as long as they have the right idea and are free sparring.

IMHO,
When the body is condition in a way that is not going to work in real life, what is the point?

[LFJ]

IMHO,
When the body is condition in a way that is not going to work in real life, what is the point?

No idea. This is a relevant question to those who take chi-sau as a fight simulation.

[Paddington]

I think Hendrik does have a point, though only to a certain extent. I am perhaps not the best person qualified to state such an extent. However, I do agree that speed and strength are overly used. In my experience accusations of 'your using too much speed' or 'you are using too much strength' were quite common from my previous Sifu but if you watched him and his instructors chi sau, almost all hits were obtained via speed beginning with a longer bridge; the case of not leading by example, 'do as I say not as I do!, Now, where is my money? What? You can't afford £8k for the one year fast track? Well f*** off then!' Sorry to digress a little at the end.

[BPWT..]

IMO ;)

The first picture (of a typical Poon Sau position), is not a problem because it is a starting position for this type of partner training. It can be trained at this distance, or slightly further away or slightly closer in (I like to train different distances) as it is a contact point - a starting position that makes the assumption we've already reached a bridging range.

The problem is more with the second picture. There the person's range is bad, as they are at almost full extension with their punch, yet the fist is only just reaching the target. IMO, not the best way to transfer force into the target.

I think that once you break from the Poon Sau cycle (at your own initiative or because a gap appeared or you received pressure in a particular way), the gap needs to be shortened/reduced so both people are closer - a more optimal range for applying the system and issuing force.

[LFJ]

The question was if it is a problem "in reality". Do you guys actually fight like this, facing your opponent with two arms equally extended?

[BPWT..]

No, both arms would probably not be equally extended in reality, but once you move out of the Poon Sau cycle and move in closer both arms will also not at that point be equally extended.

But for Poon Sau it makes sense, IMO. You get to train both sides and so many options are available to work with/play with, left and right and inside and outside positions, as well as on top and under points of contact.

So it's a good place to start a drill from, and a nice way to train the correct forward force, etc.

In Lat Sau drills, you deal with (typically), one arm more extended than another, but quickly you see the connection between two training methods and how they relate to contact and striking and controlling (the way we - LTWT - train them).

[KPM]

Is the modern Wck structure and chi sau platform evolution from ancient the circle chi sau platform is a problem in reality?

As maybe being one of the few here that have done Chi Sao from both platforms, I have formed some impressions of my own. To me, what Hendrik is calling the "modern" Chi Sao platform (meaning the one used in YMWCK and YKSWCK) is more structured and has more of an "up and down" energy....lift to Bong, drop to Tan. This "structured" quality ends up making it a game in and of itself for a lot of people. Because it is structured there are many things you can do in Chi Sao that don't work in a real exchange. I'm sure everyone has seen a student or instructor that looked great doing Chi Sao but couldn't spar worth anything! Or vice versa, the student that could kick everyone's butt in sparring but was lousy at Chi Sao. I think that for too many schools or lineages there is TOO much emphasis on Chi Sao. I think this is because it lends itself so well to being a "sparring game" of a sort in and of itself that ends up having little to do with reality. It tends to be too structured! The techniques that work within this platform are Wing Chun techniques. This version of Chi Sao is the height of development of Wing Chun guy fighting another Wing Chun guy. Is that what you are training for? How many thugs you might encounter on the street are going to be using Wing Chun techniques?

On the other hand, the "ancient circle" platform that Hendrik mentions is the Chi Sao you typically see from the other mainland styles. Southern CMA's other than Wing Chun use it as well. It is more "generic." Heck, I had a friend years ago that was a 6th black belt in Kenpo before I ever trained KLPSWCK and learned this platform. But they use a version of it in Kenpo and he and I used to do Chi Sao together all the time using it. This platform is less structured and more "open-ended." It circles side to side rather than going up and down. The more refined version actually "coils" as much as it circles. I agree with Hendrik that it doesn't "hold structure" as much as the "modern" platform. Because it is less structured there is less "gamesmanship" involved in practicing from here. It is much more of just a carrier motion to put you into contact with the opponent and go from there. As Hendrik noted, the other platform creates more of a barrier that the partner has to penetrate. This in itself creates much of the Chi Sao-specific gamesmanship that we see with the "modern" platform. And therefore it also tends to keep each partner at a wider distance.

Is one platform better than the other? I guess that depends on what your goal is for training. But I do think that the "ancient" platform potentially leads to more realistic technique application and attribute development than the "modern" platform, simply because it is less structured and more open-ended. Actually, you could grab a buddy that is a boxer show him the basics of the "ancient" platform in about 2 minutes and he could roll with you and actually attempt some boxing technique. Can you say the same about the "modern" platform?

[LFJ]

Because it is less structured there is less "gamesmanship" involved in practicing from here.

I don't know. I see a lot more people playing "tag" with that type. Doesn't appear to have a lot to do with practical development.

The structure of pun-sau is exactly what should make it less open to "gamemanship" because it serves a specific developmental purpose. It turns into a game by those who don't understand that purpose and use it as a fight simulation.

I could never do the circling thing because it's all wrists; exactly what we aim to train away from the beginning of the system, starting with SNT, bringing the mind back to the elbow.

[Hendrik]

IMHO,

if I might using the following public YouTube as an example, the modern platform typical lead one to stay in a region as mention in my two pictures above.

Too far for close body stick, to short for long fist distance . End up chasing hand and most are hand play .

So where is Wck advantage skill? beside playing Wck game and see who is faster or both crush in and exchange fire .



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8WLqmyT3UI&feature=youtube_gdata

[Hendrik]

I don't know. I see a lot more people playing "tag" with that type. Doesn't appear to have a lot to do with practical development.

The structure of pun-sau is exactly what should make it less open to "gamemanship" because it serves a specific developmental purpose. It turns into a game by those who don't understand that purpose and use it as a fight simulation.

I could never do the circling thing because it's all wrists; exactly what we aim to train away from the beginning of the system, starting with SNT, bringing the mind back to the elbow.



IMHO, IMHO


the general way of so called-- holding the structure of sink the elbow to the center line in front of one body --- is exactly the creation of a barrier between the opponent and oneself, block one off from entering close body and to short to against long fist. In one end get trap and close in by bjj on the other hand get dis arm by western boxing. Ie As the arms cut off from the body to dis arm in the following picture.

IMHO, there are holes in the modern type of platform bio mechanically.

[LFJ]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8WLqmyT3UI&feature=youtube_gdata

Perfect example of raping pun-sau. They are neither rolling properly nor using it properly. Trying to fight like this is complete nonsense and utterly useless.

[LFJ]

one end get trap and close in by bjj on the other hand get dis arm by western boxing.

I don't pun-sau with BJJ or Boxers. I don't fight like that, so this is kind of like those who look at chi-sau and shout "just kick him in the nuts!"

[Hendrik]

I don't pun-sau with BJJ or Boxers. I don't fight like that, so this is kind of like those who look at chi-sau and shout "just kick him in the nuts!"

Again, what is that training good for in a mma era where people combine bjj and boxing is the norm?

[Hendrik]

the following platform from Alan Orr or Robert Chu is what is realistic. Thus Alan can use it in mma . IMHO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM3V4P-5nN0&feature=youtube_gdata

[Hendrik]

Kpm,

The question is what skill is Wck good at?


How to face, bjj close body, western boxing long fist, and the spm center door hard impact as the following YouTube ? What is the advantage? Or just to be able to parr and handle them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhvZjvTZeUE&feature=youtube_gdata


I think the Alan Or platform is a more realistic one. Imho







Is the modern Wck structure and chi sau platform evolution from ancient the circle chi sau platform is a problem in reality?

As maybe being one of the few here that have done Chi Sao from both platforms, I have formed some impressions of my own. To me, what Hendrik is calling the "modern" Chi Sao platform (meaning the one used in YMWCK and YKSWCK) is more structured and has more of an "up and down" energy....lift to Bong, drop to Tan. This "structured" quality ends up making it a game in and of itself for a lot of people. Because it is structured there are many things you can do in Chi Sao that don't work in a real exchange. I'm sure everyone has seen a student or instructor that looked great doing Chi Sao but couldn't spar worth anything! Or vice versa, the student that could kick everyone's butt in sparring but was lousy at Chi Sao. I think that for too many schools or lineages there is TOO much emphasis on Chi Sao. I think this is because it lends itself so well to being a "sparring game" of a sort in and of itself that ends up having little to do with reality. It tends to be too structured! The techniques that work within this platform are Wing Chun techniques. This version of Chi Sao is the height of development of Wing Chun guy fighting another Wing Chun guy. Is that what you are training for? How many thugs you might encounter on the street are going to be using Wing Chun techniques?

On the other hand, the "ancient circle" platform that Hendrik mentions is the Chi Sao you typically see from the other mainland styles. Southern CMA's other than Wing Chun use it as well. It is more "generic." Heck, I had a friend years ago that was a 6th black belt in Kenpo before I ever trained KLPSWCK and learned this platform. But they use a version of it in Kenpo and he and I used to do Chi Sao together all the time using it. This platform is less structured and more "open-ended." It circles side to side rather than going up and down. The more refined version actually "coils" as much as it circles. I agree with Hendrik that it doesn't "hold structure" as much as the "modern" platform. Because it is less structured there is less "gamesmanship" involved in practicing from here. It is much more of just a carrier motion to put you into contact with the opponent and go from there. As Hendrik noted, the other platform creates more of a barrier that the partner has to penetrate. This in itself creates much of the Chi Sao-specific gamesmanship that we see with the "modern" platform. And therefore it also tends to keep each partner at a wider distance.

Is one platform better than the other? I guess that depends on what your goal is for training. But I do think that the "ancient" platform potentially leads to more realistic technique application and attribute development than the "modern" platform, simply because it is less structured and more open-ended. Actually, you could grab a buddy that is a boxer show him the basics of the "ancient" platform in about 2 minutes and he could roll with you and actually attempt some boxing technique. Can you say the same about the "modern" platform?

[BPWT..]

the following platform from Alan Orr or Robert Chu is what is realistic. Thus Alan can use it in mma . IMHO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM3V4P-5nN0&feature=youtube_gdata

The irony here is that what Alan is teaching in that clip is exactly what I was also talking about in the other thread - striking and controlling, close body work, bridge work, playing a Chi Kiu strategy and in the range that requires, etc.

[Jansingsang]

Perfect example of raping pun-sau. They are neither rolling properly nor using it properly. Trying to fight like this is complete nonsense and utterly useless.

Agreed total misrepresentation of good Poon Sao platform this was a complete nonsense, & only hitting the body why bother:rolleyes:

[KPM]

IMHO,

if I might using the following public YouTube as an example, the modern platform typical lead one to stay in a region as mention in my two pictures above.

Too far for close body stick, to short for long fist distance . End up chasing hand and most are hand play .

So where is Wck advantage skill? beside playing Wck game and see who is faster or both crush in and exchange fire .



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8WLqmyT3UI&feature=youtube_gdata

Interesting video! Note how they start out with the "modern" platform and after the 3 count and the "go!" they essentially abandon it and almost end up in the "ancient" platform by default!

[KPM]

I don't know. I see a lot more people playing "tag" with that type. Doesn't appear to have a lot to do with practical development.

The structure of pun-sau is exactly what should make it less open to "gamemanship" because it serves a specific developmental purpose. It turns into a game by those who don't understand that purpose and use it as a fight simulation.

I could never do the circling thing because it's all wrists; exactly what we aim to train away from the beginning of the system, starting with SNT, bringing the mind back to the elbow.

Well, I don't know what you've seen. But it shouldn't be "all wrists." You don't do a Huen Sau with just the wrist do you? The circling/rolling action should come from the elbows connected to the hips.

In this clip starting at about 30 seconds in these guys are doing a decent job of rolling. This is the little bit more refined version that "coils" that I mentioned. Notice that the movement appears to be at the wrists, but there is elbow behind it connected to the hips. Just because the elbow isn't going up and down like the "modern" platform doesn't mean the elbow doesn't have a role in driving things. As far as "playing tag", I've seen that equally often in either platform. The guys below look like they are playing tag at times. That's just because they are going slow and indicating openings rather than really trying to nail each other.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XQ0j53-0zE

How can increased structure lead to less gamesmanship? Its like any activity, the more rules you impose the more specific things people attempt to "work" the rules. The more structured something is the less "open-ended" it becomes. But I do agree it shouldn't be a fight simulation.

[KPM]

The irony here is that what Alan is teaching in that clip is exactly what I was also talking about in the other thread - striking and controlling, close body work, bridge work, playing a Chi Kiu strategy and in the range that requires, etc.

Precisely! And all of this is what we DIDN'T see in that MMA clip he posted! Have we seen it in any of the MMA clips?

[Hendrik]

Perfect example of raping pun-sau. They are neither rolling properly nor using it properly. Trying to fight like this is complete nonsense and utterly useless.

They are doing thier best with the platform they have.

[KPM]

Kpm,

The question is what skill is Wck good at?


How to face, bjj close body, western boxing long fist, and the spm center door hard impact as the following YouTube ? What is the advantage? Or just to be able to parr and handle them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhvZjvTZeUE&feature=youtube_gdata


I think the Alan Or platform is a more realistic one. Imho

What "Alan Orr platform" are you talking about Hendrik? Alan is using the "modern" rolling platform like every other Yip Man WCK lineage. He's just saying that one shouldn't stay at that range, but should use the rolling platform to create the opportunity to close in and take control.

And I'm not sure what you are asking or suggesting in your above post. :confused:

[Hendrik]

Interesting video! Note how they start out with the "modern" platform and after the 3 count and the "go!" they essentially abandon it and almost end up in the "ancient" platform by default!



This platform stuffs can be analogy as driving in the icy back road say Lake Tahoe .


The platform is like is it a two wheel drive or a all wheel drive.

Driving skill sure matter, but either it is a two or a four wheel drive platform set the boundary or the limit.

A junior driver can drive a four wheel drive in the icy road safely. While a senior driver with good driving skill is struggling with a two wheel drive.


So, it is more a what technology platform one is using then personal skill.


This also is a problem in common Chinese martial art instruction as if one keep practice SNT , some days who knows when magic will happen , and no one know what type of magic to expect.

Vesus

the western scientific way of get to the bottom line to make sure the seven bows function like a four wheel drive to begin with, expect result in a few days and not exepecting magic at all , but better and better seven bows handling as the realistic expectation.




So, the idea is not who is better who's skill is more advance, but focus on what type of platform is that ? Because the platform define the limits or boundary of whether it can do it job?

[Hendrik]

What "Alan Orr platform" are you talking about Hendrik? Alan is using the "modern" rolling platform like every other Yip Man WCK lineage. He's just saying that one shouldn't stay at that range, but should use the rolling platform to create the opportunity to close in and take control.

And I'm not sure what you are asking or suggesting in your above post. :confused:


I am referring to Alan switching platform type as the above utube.

His platform in play is no longer the common modern platform .

[KPM]

I am referring to Alan switching platform type as the above utube.

His platform in play is no longer the common modern platform .

Then what platform is it? Maybe you need to describe what you mean by "platform"?

[Hendrik]

Then what platform is it? Maybe you need to describe what you mean by "platform"?


Ok.
IMHO, Alan or Robert is using a CSL dynamic platform which is no longer the modern generic Wck platform.
And this platform is rely on CSL power generation which is a seven bows based technology.

So, explicitly, it might looks generic in the beginning, but while in action it is a different type.


Csl dynamic platform can be analog to a four wheel drive for all range play, while genetic platform is a two wheel drive bounded by its structure and power generation for barrier range play.


The cars looks similar but not under the hood. If Csl doesn't have their special engine, it cannot go into a certain range.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265710]Ok.

while genetic platform is a two wheel drive bounded by its structure and power generation for barrier range play.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'

Hendrik is entitled to his views. But my considered opinion is that there is no "genetc" (generic?) platform.

There are many varied "platforms" depending on lineage and teacher and student.

Hendrik's analyses is full of straw man models which he criticizes. Watching lots of videos can create a false reality as well.

But then again- each to his own.

[kung fu fighter]

I personally believe the luk sao modern chi sao platform was intended to be a two-man san sik drill to develop the structure and energy of Bong, Tan, fuk sao, and gan or Kei depending on linage, much like the bong lap sao drill, and not a freestyle chi sao platform. The freestyle chi sao platform should be the circling hands platform where everything previously learnt are integrated including all the two-man san sik drills.

However in my opinion the integrated whole body power generation is more important than any platform. If one has the correct power generation, the platform is secondary, and does not matter too much. But all wing chun should be performed at close range regardless of the platform. In YKSWC luk sao is performed closer in than in YMWC to develop elbow range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIUcjt6skLw

[Hendrik]

IMHO,

Just Tan bong fook is not complete , these three doesn't fully cover the 3D or "+ " .

It needs to have two couple or four technics cover four type of momentum to cover the "+" with the middle of the + is the center

And they are :

tan, spread

[Hendrik]

Took , cover

[Hendrik]

Bong, horizontal

[Hendrik]

Kei, vertical.


Bong and kie are couple. Bong without kei is missing one element.


the 1848 YKSLT kuit says:


Ya2下旋往上企肘膀
Spiral downward then up turn into the vertical elbow wing.

Ya4膀肘拗腰流下訪
Wing elbow bending waist visit (the opponent ) under the flow

[Vajramusti]

Bong, horizontal
----------------------------------------------

Inferences from your own straw man models!!!

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265723]IMHO,

Just Tan bong fook is not complete , these three doesn't fully cover the 3D or "+ " .

----------------------------------------------------
Guilty by Hendrik's proclamation!

[Hendrik]

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

Inferences from your own straw man models!!!



Got nothing to do with me.

It is there in wing chun 1848. And it makes sense because it covers required dimension.

As for the common modern evolution : tan bong fook only seeds doesn't . The so called three seeds don't cover the full dimension. +


You are free to believe what you like .

[Hendrik]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265723]IMHO,

Just Tan bong fook is not complete , these three doesn't fully cover the 3D or "+ " .

----------------------------------------------------
Guilty by Hendrik's proclamation!


Got nothing to do with me, horizontal without vertical doesn't fully cover +.




The bottom line is either one wants to believe in a religion believing what ever the chief says is the truth

or

one wants to look at the biomechanics in an engineering way such as intelligent robotic to see how many degree of freedom and range is covered or not.



Same with the renessance era, you want to believe in the church or starting to look at the planet earth is round.

[KPM]

I personally believe the luk sao modern chi sao platform was intended to be a two-man san sik drill to develop the structure and energy of Bong, Tan, fuk sao,

Interesting idea! Yip Man Dan Chi Sao would logically be the first step of that, with it becoming Luk Sao when the other hand is added. But since YKSWCK doesn't use the same Dan Chi Sao, Luk Sao likely came first.

In YKSWC luk sao is performed closer in than in YMWC to develop elbow range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIUcjt6skLw[/QUOTE]

I don't know what you mean by that. Those clips look just like Yip Man Luk Sao. Yip Man Luk Sao will close in to elbow range at times as well depending on the circumstance.

[KPM]

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

Inferences from your own straw man models!!!

Joy, I don't even know what that means! Do you have a counterpoint?

[KPM]

Kei, vertical.


Bong and kie are couple. Bong without kei is missing one element.


the 1848 YKSLT kuit says:




Interesting! What is "kei"? KLPSWCK has a "Sao Sao" hand the looks very similar to what you are doing in that picture. And how does Bong have "Kei"?

But I would point out that some do the "modern" platform with more of an up and down motion of Bong/Tan than others. That would seem to cover the vertical line to me. In fact, I would argue that the "modern" platform puts more emphasis on the vertical line than the horizontal line! And the "ancient" platform puts more emphasis on the horizontal line than on the vertical line! Neither one really covers all 4 directions.

[KPM]

Ok.
IMHO, Alan or Robert is using a CSL dynamic platform which is no longer the modern generic Wck platform.
And this platform is rely on CSL power generation which is a seven bows based technology.

So, explicitly, it might looks generic in the beginning, but while in action it is a different type.


Csl dynamic platform can be analog to a four wheel drive for all range play, while genetic platform is a two wheel drive bounded by its structure and power generation for barrier range play.


The cars looks similar but not under the hood. If Csl doesn't have their special engine, it cannot go into a certain range.

I still don't understand what you are saying. Is the platform the rolling structure or not? I was seeing the "modern" platform as rolling with Bong/Tan/Fook and the "ancient" platform as rolling with Huen Sao. CSL still rolls with Bong/Tan/Fook, so what you are referring to as a "platform"? Do you mean the mechanics used for power generation? Because if you do this conversation has been completely off because we have been talking about different things! :eek:

BTW...what are you wearing on your feet in those photos? Your feet look huge!

[Vajramusti]

Joy, I don't even know what that means! Do you have a counterpoint?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Counterpoint" is often a debating term. Debating has rules and judges.


A different analytical point- tan, bong and fook are three major families of motions- each family has many children- they cover
all dimensions and directions. And of course wing chun in application is a two handed system- so bong on one side can be accompanied by a wu or a kuen
on the other side for balanced issuing of force.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265741]You have said in well on the platform, that is what I mean

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

Hendrik-KPM's statement had several parts. Which part do you agree with.?

[Hendrik]

Interesting! What is "kei"? KLPSWCK has a "Sao Sao" hand the looks very similar to what you are doing in that picture. And how does Bong have "Kei"?

But I would point out that some do the "modern" platform with more of an up and down motion of Bong/Tan than others. That would seem to cover the vertical line to me. In fact, I would argue that the "modern" platform puts more emphasis on the vertical line than the horizontal line! And the "ancient" platform puts more emphasis on the horizontal line than on the vertical line! Neither one really covers all 4 directions.



1.

Kei is vertical way of using the part of the arm as bong is horizontal way.

Kei and bong cover the "+" . Thus, with both of them, it is a balance coverage. At least the 1848 YKSLT data point it is a balance one .


Kei is a vertical elbow type of arm where bong is horizontal wing elbow. Kei is pressing forward vertically while bong is pressing forward horizontally.


If you still lost, think about if bong is related to the horizontal forward elbow strike. And kei is related to the vertical forward elbow Strike.

2.

These days, everything is called tan . Seem people likes to define as they like it.


As for 1848 data point,
The attach photo is Zhao Yang , it is not Tan but now a day many called it tan.

So, there are kei, zhao yang, tan. They represent different mechanics

Tan is hand at chest level travel from chest outward , zhao yang is end up in shoulder level, starting from lower chest level with kind of 45degree forward and upward. Kei is pressing forward with some rotation

[Hendrik]

I still don't understand what you are saying. Is the platform the rolling structure or not? I was seeing the "modern" platform as rolling with Bong/Tan/Fook and the "ancient" platform as rolling with Huen Sao. CSL still rolls with Bong/Tan/Fook, so what you are referring to as a "platform"? Do you mean the mechanics used for power generation? Because if you do this conversation has been completely off because we have been talking about different things! :eek:

BTW...what are you wearing on your feet in those photos? Your feet look huge!


"Starts with the modern platform and then it switches into the ancient range " type of platform is what I mean.

It is not an ancient huen sau platform
but it is no longer the modern platform which keep a barrier infront of ones body, (barrier as in the two pictures in the beginning of this thread. Which keep one away from moving close into the opponent body)




It was freezing winter so I wear a feet warmer shoe

[kung fu fighter]

I don't know what you mean by that. Those clips look just like Yip Man Luk Sao. Yip Man Luk Sao will close in to elbow range at times as well depending on the circumstance.

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.

[Vajramusti]

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Luk sao can be close.

[LFJ]

Again, what is that training good for in a mma era where people combine bjj and boxing is the norm?

And again, I don't use pun-sau to fight. This question is as ignorant as asking what use SNT has against BJJ, since they can easily take you down.

It's a stage of development only, not fighting. If you are progressing through free sparring and fighting and understand what you're doing in pun-sau you won't ask this question.

[LFJ]

In this clip starting at about 30 seconds in these guys are doing a decent job of rolling. This is the little bit more refined version that "coils" that I mentioned. Notice that the movement appears to be at the wrists, but there is elbow behind it connected to the hips.

That's not how the elbow is used in the system I study. It's like a whole different martial art concept.


How can increased structure lead to less gamesmanship? Its like any activity, the more rules you impose the more specific things people attempt to "work" the rules. The more structured something is the less "open-ended" it becomes. But I do agree it shouldn't be a fight simulation.

If you look at the structure as imposed "rules", you are looking at chi-sau as a form of (unrealistic) sparring. That is a game. The less structure there is, the more you're just doing unrealistic sparring (playing a game).

One of the first things we are training when we begin chi-sau is the use of the elbow. The structure of pun-sau is to develop its use in an exchange of force with a partner. Even when we get into gwo-sau we're still developing these behaviors under increased pressure.

If we want to do something free form that is going to be relevant to facing BJJ and Boxing as Hendrik mentions, then we need to do realistic free sparring/fighting where we are applying what we have been developing with the system. Pun-sau is structured in such a way because it is developing something specific. If we want to do a free form exchange, we should be moving onto sparring, imo. Chi-sau being too free form turns into slaphappy nonsense with zero relevance to actual fighting which gives you nothing.

[KPM]

And again, I don't use pun-sau to fight. This question is as ignorant as asking what use SNT has against BJJ, since they can easily take you down.

It's a stage of development only, not fighting. If you are progressing through free sparring and fighting and understand what you're doing in pun-sau you won't ask this question.

I don't know LFJ, seems like a legitmate quesiton to me. Chi Sao is training. If you are always training at that intermediate range that is neither close in or at boxing distance, then your Chi Sao may not be training you very well to deal with those distances. It seems to me that's all Hendrik is saying.

[KPM]

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

"Counterpoint" is often a debating term. Debating has rules and judges.


A different analytical point- tan, bong and fook are three major families of motions- each family has many children- they cover
all dimensions and directions. And of course wing chun in application is a two handed system- so bong on one side can be accompanied by a wu or a kuen
on the other side for balanced issuing of force.

An actual reply is all I meant. No need to get technical. Its seems too often lately that you post simply to say someone else is wrong, rather than contribute to the discussion and say WHY you think they are wrong.

[KPM]

Kei is vertical way of using the part of the arm as bong is horizontal way.

Kei and bong cover the "+" . Thus, with both of them, it is a balance coverage. At least the 1848 YKSLT data point it is a balance one .


Kei is a vertical elbow type of arm where bong is horizontal wing elbow. Kei is pressing forward vertically while bong is pressing forward horizontally.

Cool! That sounds exactly like the KLPS "Sao Sao" or "cover hand." But how does that factor into either the modern or the ancient Chi Sao platforms?



As for 1848 data point,
The attach photo is Zhao Yang , it is not Tan but now a day many called it tan.

So, there are kei, zhao yang, tan. They represent different mechanics

Tan is hand at chest level travel from chest outward , zhao yang is end up in shoulder level, starting from lower chest level with kind of 45degree forward and upward. Kei is pressing forward with some rotation

Zhao yang does not sound familiar to me. I'm still not sure how it is different from Tan? Or...is it the "Tok Sao" that some lineages refer to? Does it lift forward and upward using the palm rather than the outside edge of the forearm?


"Starts with the modern platform and then it switches into the ancient range " type of platform is what I mean.

It is not an ancient huen sau platform but it is no longer the modern platform which keep a barrier infront of ones body, (barrier as in the two pictures in the beginning of this thread. Which keep one away from moving close into the opponent body)

Ok. Understood! Thanks!

[KPM]

I was referring to the first clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0, I rarely seen ymwc luk sao played that close.

Really? Who have you been watching doing YMWCK Luk Sao, because that still doesn't look any different to me!

[KPM]

That's not how the elbow is used in the system I study. It's like a whole different martial art concept.

Elbows down and connected with the hips. That's how to generate good power in a strike and how to maintain good structure to transmit and receive force. I can't say how different that is from what you are doing.


If you look at the structure as imposed "rules", you are looking at chi-sau as a form of (unrealistic) sparring. That is a game. The less structure there is, the more you're just doing unrealistic sparring (playing a game).

There may be some truth to that. But also consider that the more structured it is, the more things have to "fit" with that structure. The things that "fit" with that structure are Wing Chun techniques. Granted, there are plenty of attributes you can develop training with a fellow Wing Chun partner, but at the end of the day Wing Chun technique is not what you will have to deal with in a real situation. So to me, the more "open-ended" the better!

[LFJ]

Chi Sao is training.

Specific skill development, not free fight training.


If you are always training at that intermediate range that is neither close in or at boxing distance, then your Chi Sao may not be training you very well to deal with those distances. It seems to me that's all Hendrik is saying.

Yeah, well, no sh!t. It's not meant to be fight training. If you understand the training process and aren't stuck at that stage of development, this question won't come to mind. It's like saying SNT isn't practical because your susceptible to takedowns.

I still fight like I train though, because free sparring is part of the process for me. You'll fight the way you do with increased pressure, and that comes in free sparring, not chi-sau. So why look at chi-sau in terms of practicality? Just like training SNT, it's a specific skill development at a certain stage, not free sparring or the way you're going to fight when the pressure is high.

I doubt Hendrik has ever done free sparring or fighting of any kind, so I understand why he would ask that question... but then again I don't. Facing BJJ or Boxing has likely never been a concern of his.

[LFJ]

but at the end of the day Wing Chun technique is not what you will have to deal with in a real situation. So to me, the more "open-ended" the better!

For me, free sparring is where the day ends!

Chi-sau, whatever form, isn't fighting and that's not why we do it. If we want to work with what has to be dealt with in a real situation, we shouldn't be talking about chi-sau but should be free sparring. Chi-sau is just where we go to develop certain skills and correct errors revealed under pressure in sparring, just like the basic training forms.

[Vajramusti]

Specific skill development, not free fight training.





I doubt Hendrik has ever done free sparring or fighting of any kind, so I understand why he would ask that question... but then again I don't. Facing BJJ or Boxing has likely never been a concern of his.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hendrik has done kyokushin karate and therefore sparring.

[LFJ]

Hendrik has done kyokushin karate and therefore sparring.

That won't help you understand the development process of Wing Chun from SNT to fighting. It's a newb' question he's asking about the practicality of the chi-sau structure in reality against BJJ and Boxing.

[KPM]

That won't help you understand the development process of Wing Chun from SNT to fighting. It's a newb' question he's asking about the practicality of the chi-sau structure in reality against BJJ and Boxing.

Yeah, whatever dude! :rolleyes: You said "I doubt Hendrik has ever done free sparring or fighting of any kind" Now you are told that isn't true and its still not good enough. I have the feeling it wouldn't matter what anyone here said.

[kung fu fighter]

Really? Who have you been watching doing YMWCK Luk Sao, because that still doesn't look any different to me!

Keith when it comes to YMWC, I've seen quite a bit, please post one clip of YMWC where they are controlling above the elbow in chi sao in in that clip, usually YMWC play luk sao using their arms as a "barrier" like Hendrik mentioned in the beginning of this thread, which doesn't allow close body range.

[Hendrik]

[B]



Zhao yang does not sound familiar to me. I'm still not sure how it is different from Tan? Or...is it the "Tok Sao" that some lineages refer to? Does it lift forward and upward using the palm rather than the outside edge of the forearm?





Zhao yang is a fujian white crane inheritance which relate to zhao yang momentum. See attached
One can see these in fujian white crane similar to the side outward block , but instead it cut into the center line for Wck. Since Wck doesn't block side way.



Start 1.55 of the following video is tan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnC98RuI9j4&feature=youtube_gdata

[Hendrik]

Yeah, this Zhao yang shape and its 'mechanics' are known to me.....but we just call it Tan sao.

Please see my reply above on tan sau.


These days we call everything we like as Tan sau.

[Hendrik]

Specific skill development, not free fight training.



Yeah, well, no sh!t. It's not meant to be fight training. If you understand the training process and aren't stuck at that stage of development, this question won't come to mind. It's like saying SNT isn't practical because your susceptible to takedowns.

I still fight like I train though, because free sparring is part of the process for me. You'll fight the way you do with increased pressure, and that comes in free sparring, not chi-sau. So why look at chi-sau in terms of practicality? Just like training SNT, it's a specific skill development at a certain stage, not free sparring or the way you're going to fight when the pressure is high.

I doubt Hendrik has ever done free sparring or fighting of any kind, so I understand why he would ask that question... but then again I don't. Facing BJJ or Boxing has likely never been a concern of his.



You are right!

Hendrik is like this guy in the picture. He doesn't even exist in real world.

[kung fu fighter]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265799]Zhao yang is a fujian white crane inheritance which relate to zhao yang momentum. See attached
One can see these in fujian white crane similar to the side outward block , but instead it cut into the center line for Wck. Since Wck doesn't block side way.
[QUOTE]

What is the purpose/function of Zhao yang, is it to establish contact like a man sau? or to cover the high gates which tan sao can't?

[Hendrik]

[QUOTE=Hendrik;1265799]Zhao yang is a fujian white crane inheritance which relate to zhao yang momentum. See attached
One can see these in fujian white crane similar to the side outward block , but instead it cut into the center line for Wck. Since Wck doesn't block side way.
[QUOTE]

What is the purpose/function of Zhao yang, is it to establish contact like a man sau? or to cover the high gates which tan sao can't?


Zhao yang is just today so called high tan sau , it is use in center line capture or entering. Most of today Wck tan sau is zhao yang. While the original tan sau not often seen.

Tan sau is used in a different way as the above video shows

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, that motion at around the 1:55 mark is in the dummy form. Thx.

BTW, what lineage are the guys in that video?


Yks if I am not wrong.

[KPM]

Yks if I am not wrong.

I don't speak chinese, but I get the impression that the older gentleman in the white shirt is a visiting YKSWCK sifu and the everyone else appears to be Ku Lo WCK. I say this because he refers to one technique as "Dap", which is typical of YKSWCK, when in KLPSWCK the same motion is called "Lim." Other clips of the same training session shows most of the guys doing some of the two-man training from KLPSWCK and applying some of the San Sik in their Chi Sao. That's just my impression.

[KPM]

Zhao yang is a fujian white crane inheritance which relate to zhao yang momentum. See attached
One can see these in fujian white crane similar to the side outward block , but instead it cut into the center line for Wck. Since Wck doesn't block side way.



Start 1.55 of the following video is tan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnC98RuI9j4&feature=youtube_gdata

Sorry Hendrik, but I'm still not following you. The Tan in the video is clear enough. That is the Tan from KLPSWCK as well. So what is Zhao Yang? What is the blocking surface and which way is the energy directed?

[Hendrik]

Sorry Hendrik, but I'm still not following you. The Tan in the video is clear enough. That is the Tan from KLPSWCK as well. So what is Zhao Yang? What is the blocking surface and which way is the energy directed?


Zhao yang is just today common Wck tan sau. Or high tan sau.

[deejaye72]

Well, I don't know what you've seen. But it shouldn't be "all wrists." You don't do a Huen Sau with just the wrist do you? The circling/rolling action should come from the elbows connected to the hips.

In this clip starting at about 30 seconds in these guys are doing a decent job of rolling. This is the little bit more refined version that "coils" that I mentioned. Notice that the movement appears to be at the wrists, but there is elbow behind it connected to the hips. Just because the elbow isn't going up and down like the "modern" platform doesn't mean the elbow doesn't have a role in driving things. As far as "playing tag", I've seen that equally often in either platform. The guys below look like they are playing tag at times. That's just because they are going slow and indicating openings rather than really trying to nail each other.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XQ0j53-0zE

How can increased structure lead to less gamesmanship? Its like any activity, the more rules you impose the more specific things people attempt to "work" the rules. The more structured something is the less "open-ended" it becomes. But I do agree it shouldn't be a fight simulation.

the video starting at 30 seconds; looks like what they are doing is fu hok yao gong fut pai. they mainly use clockwise and counter clockwise circles. tiger crane; a rare style suppossibly created by ng mui to counter wing chun. if you believe all that legend stuff.

[deejaye72]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkzE8UShW1w

[deejaye72]

close body chi sao is something my father has us doing from time to time. its performed a lot closer then what the gentleman are doing in the referenced video. my father was taught this by sifu jason lau in the 70's. sifu lau was taught by jiu wan. jiu wan was from fatshan. i would imagine he had exposure to all sorts of wing chun flavors.

i really think hendrik loves what he does and has a passion for wing chun. the guy is a wealth of knowledge. i would love to train and just sit down and talk to him. the stuff about structure and the 7 bows is in a lot of yipman wing chun. rare, but its there. yipman actually taught it. he didnt have a teaching method so it took like ten years to pass it along. go ask the moy yat guys they know. moy yat developed a drill to practice this structure;he called it tsui ma.

What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.

[deejaye72]

8355 some more fu hoc stuff. i dont know a whole alot about it. i was exposed to it years ago. it was interesting to say the least.

[KPM]

the video starting at 30 seconds; looks like what they are doing is fu hok yao gong fut pai. they mainly use clockwise and counter clockwise circles. tiger crane; a rare style suppossibly created by ng mui to counter wing chun. if you believe all that legend stuff.

I don't know about all that Eddie. But this is the basic rolling Chi Sao platform I learned as part of Ku Lo Pin Sun. "Tiger crane" was never mentioned.

[KPM]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkzE8UShW1w

I'm not sure what that is! But I'm not very impressed!

[deejaye72]

I don't know about all that Eddie. But this is the basic rolling Chi Sao platform I learned as part of Ku Lo Pin Sun. "Tiger crane" was never mentioned.


i guess i should have mentioned it looked similar to me oops! southern style circles?

[KPM]

Zhao yang is just today common Wck tan sau. Or high tan sau.

Ah! Ok. Thanks for clearing it up! So then what is the "original Tan Sau not often seen"?

[KPM]

i guess i should have mentioned it looked similar to me oops! southern style circles?

Probably! Like I wrote before, this "Huen Sao" based rolling platform is found in a number of Southern CMAs.

[deejaye72]

to be more specific; i wasnt saying that it's "tiger crane" these wing chun men are doing. i just see smilarities. southern style
that uses circles as appose to the modern luk sao platform. the young man in the video was a beginner. there is no footage on the internet of this rare style. i had to use what i could find. the people i was exposed too were very skilled, and they looked more like the
wing chun video earlier posted. i am not a practioner of this style. i was merely exposed to it a long time ago.

[KPM]

Keith when it comes to YMWC, I've seen quite a bit, please post one clip of YMWC where they are controlling above the elbow in chi sao in in that clip, usually YMWC play luk sao using their arms as a "barrier" like Hendrik mentioned in the beginning of this thread, which doesn't allow close body range.

Heck, I didn't even have to look hard Navin. I stumbled across this one on facebook. This is Michael Watson from Lee Shing WCK. He posts here in the forum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=t3RdYmSe44Q

Or how about this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TSAczAuxtg

Both videos show times where they close past the "barrier" to a "close body" position and manipulated the partner's balance.

[kung fu fighter]

Heck, I didn't even have to look hard Navin. I stumbled across this one on facebook. This is Michael Watson from Lee Shing WCK. He posts here in the forum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=t3RdYmSe44Q

Or how about this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TSAczAuxtg

Both videos show times where they close past the "barrier" to a "close body" position and manipulated the partner's balance.

sorry Keith neither of those videos show close body Luk Sao, If you look closely at the video I posted, you will notice they move past the elbow range to control and strike.

The first video you posted they are using their arms as a "barrier", in the second video sifu Fong does go past the elbow range a couple of times, but he seems to be mixing in a lot of non wing chun moves to do so, such as than jujitsu arm lock where he goes to the floor. and I know you are going to say it's wing chun chin-na, but it's not since it does not follow wing chun principles.

[Hendrik]

Ah! Ok. Thanks for clearing it up! So then what is the "original Tan Sau not often seen"?

Yes. Lol. Now you see , a tan sau is not a tan sau .

And you see lots of so called oldest lineages snt set doesn't have the proper tan sau but a mis name tan sau.

That tell you is their lineages are the olderst or a modern creation.

Facts can be read if one knows where and how to read.

[kung fu fighter]

the video starting at 30 seconds; looks like what they are doing is fu hok yao gong fut pai. they mainly use clockwise and counter clockwise circles. tiger crane; a rare style suppossibly created by ng mui to counter wing chun. if you believe all that legend stuff.

Hi deejaye72,
The fu hok yao gong fut pai is an interesting style, I used to converse with a gentleman that was a Jason Lau wing chun sifu who left wing chun in favor of this style. Wing chun has very similar circular stepping at the advance level as well as the circling hands chi sao platform, except we apply it in very close range. The gentleman in the video you posted seems to be using it at a long fist range, which leads me to believe it's a typical southern fist art. So Based on the evidence I find it hard to believe this system was created to defeat wing chun, I also head a similar story that Bak Mei was invented to defeat wing chun. But I believe these stories were created based on folklore.





close body chi sao is something my father has us doing from time to time. its performed a lot closer then what the gentleman are doing in the referenced video. my father was taught this by sifu jason lau in the 70's. sifu lau was taught by jiu wan. jiu wan was from fatshan. i would imagine he had exposure to all sorts of wing chun flavors. .

Can you tell us what the definition of close body chi sao is in Jason Lau's wing chun system. are they still square to each other or in side body?



What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.

I agree!

[deejaye72]

The fu hok yao gong fut pai is an interesting style, I used to converse with a gentleman that was a Jason Lau wing chun sifu who left wing chun in favor of this style. Wing chun has very similar circular stepping at the advance level as well as the circling hands chi sao platform, except we apply it in very close range. The gentleman in the video you posted seems to be using it at a long fist range, which leads me to believe it's a typical southern fist art. So Based on the evidence I find it hard to believe this system was created to defeat wing chun, I also head a similar story that Bak Mei was invented to defeat wing chun. But I believe these stories were created based on

the guy that was training at my das's school was actually a francis fong student who went to fu hok. maybe we are talking about the same guy. i think we are; as there are very few practioners. very nice man by the way. i dont believe the folklore either.




Can you tell us what the definition of close body chi sao is in Jason Lau's wing chun system. are they still square to each other or in side body?

we go real soft and get in real close; shifting somewhat sideways. very tai chi like is the only way i could describe it. i guess you could say side body. its very tight in close lot of lop da. sifu lau's sensitivity training was soft and flowing, and snapping with power when needed. the perfect blending of hard and soft. my father also studied tai chi with william c.c. chen. the soft aspects are ingrained in him. he trained boxing in gleasons gym in the 80's. my father was blessed with great martial arts teachers. sorry i had to brag about sifu lau and my pops lol

I agree![/QUOTE]

[Hendrik]

I brought this new post up because it is the core basic of Wck embedded in SNT.


http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?67530-Basic-Seven-bows-technology-in-SNT&p=1265843#post1265843



Sensitivity, force flow or Jin, are all there in snt.

No need to get other engine like taiji from other style at all.

Chisau is about sensing and playing with force flow. Jamming force flow path ....etc.



platform and distance , long fist or shor strike is about sau fatt or application , seven bows is about San gung or body gung. Sau fatt and San gung go hand in hand like the two wings of the bird.

Now we can see pretty clearly what are they.

[LFJ]

Yeah, whatever dude! :rolleyes: You said "I doubt Hendrik has ever done free sparring or fighting of any kind" Now you are told that isn't true and its still not good enough. I have the feeling it wouldn't matter what anyone here said.

Maybe a comma will help; "free sparring, or fighting of any kind".

Obviously I'm referring to sparring as a progression of WC training, and fighting with it at any level of intensity or protection. That's why he's asking such a newb question about the practicality of chi-sau structure in reality against BJJ and Boxing. That's not a question anyone who has gone beyond that level of training, or understands its purpose, would ask.

[kung fu fighter]

Thanks you for the reply Eddie,
it's refreshing to have a productive discussion on KFO for once lol.

the guy that was training at my das's school was actually a francis fong student who went to fu hok. maybe we are talking about the same guy. i think we are; as there are very few practioners. very nice man by the way. i dont believe the folklore either.

Yes I believe we are speaking about the same gentleman, super nice person that was very generous with his knowledge. He Helped my research out quite a bit at that time. I will always be greatful to him for that.



we go real soft and get in real close; shifting somewhat sideways. very tai chi like is the only way i could describe it. i guess you could say side body. its very tight in close lot of lop da. sifu lau's sensitivity training was soft and flowing, and snapping with power when needed. the perfect blending of hard and soft.

Nice are there any clips on youtube ?

[Hendrik]

That's why he's asking such a newb question about the practicality of chi-sau structure in reality against BJJ and Boxing.

.


So, please educate me, what is chi sau for ?

[LFJ]

So, please educate me, what is chi sau for ?

Specific skill development and the correction of errors revealed under pressure in free sparring.

[KPM]

Yes. Lol. Now you see , a tan sau is not a tan sau .

And you see lots of so called oldest lineages snt set doesn't have the proper tan sau but a mis name tan sau.

That tell you is their lineages are the olderst or a modern creation.

Facts can be read if one knows where and how to read.

Ok. But that doesn't answer my question. What is the "original Tan Sau that isn't seen"?

[KPM]

sorry Keith neither of those videos show close body Luk Sao, If you look closely at the video I posted, you will notice they move past the elbow range to control and strike.

The first video you posted they are using their arms as a "barrier", in the second video sifu Fong does go past the elbow range a couple of times, but he seems to be mixing in a lot of non wing chun moves to do so, such as than jujitsu arm lock where he goes to the floor. and I know you are going to say it's wing chun chin-na, but it's not since it does not follow wing chun principles.

I don't mean to be argumentative Navin, but please tell me how the guys in this video that you posted are doing things any differently than in the videos I posted? They are still rolling with the "modern" Luk Sao platform. They are still using their arms as a "barrier". Heck, they don't even close in to the close body position like in the videos I posted!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0

[deejaye72]

Nice are there any clips on youtube ?

there are no clips that i know of. maybe i'll make one.

i agree its been a nice discussion

[Vajramusti]

sorry Keith neither of those videos show close body Luk Sao, If you look closely at the video I posted, you will notice they move past the elbow range to control and strike.

The first video you posted they are using their arms as a "barrier", in the second video sifu Fong does go past the elbow range a couple of times, but he seems to be mixing in a lot of non wing chun moves to do so, such as than jujitsu arm lock where he goes to the floor. and I know you are going to say it's wing chun chin-na, but it's not since it does not follow wing chun principles.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navin- I have not looked at the video yet. I differ from your views. Fong sifu does wing chun and chinna comes naturally at advanced levels of wing chun when the opportunity is there.
Breaking, throwing and cavity attacks are functions that are performed naturally....with wing chun joint and body unity and balance and the center line and knowledge of the central axis of the body.

[kung fu fighter]

I don't mean to be argumentative Navin, but please tell me how the guys in this video that you posted are doing things any differently than in the videos I posted? They are still rolling with the "modern" Luk Sao platform. They are still using their arms as a "barrier". Heck, they don't even close in to the close body position like in the videos I posted!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKH0uAFst0

Keith if you watch the clip again you will notice, at 0:08 into the clip these guys are doing the luk sao platform with their elbows touching each other's elbows, an then at 0:18 and 0:23 when they attack they move past their opponent's elbow to trap and control his bridge on the humerous bone of his arm to distroy his balance and structure. Although these guys are beginners and not very good, this was the best clip that I could find online to demo what I am referring to since Decipled YKSWC is still kept private.

But of course here we are only talking specificly about the luk sao platform difference, to truely get into wing chun close body range you need to apply side body facing principle which is usually done using the circling hands chi sao platform, which is very seldomly seen in the luk sao platform.





Navin- I have not looked at the video yet. I differ from your views. Fong sifu does wing chun and chinna comes naturally at advanced levels of wing chun when the opportunity is there.
Breaking, throwing and cavity attacks are functions that are performed naturally....with wing chun joint and body unity and balance and the center line and knowledge of the central axis of the body.

Don't get me wrong Joy, I really like sifu Fong's as a kung fu instructor and find him to be very humble and skileed. I can certainly appreciate what he is trying to do. However I feel turning away from the facing principle, not in side body but completely away, and having two of my hands and even entire body committed to one of the opponent's arm to be far from applying wing chun principles. I do believe that wing chun is a complete art with it's own way of applying chin-na and throwing as part of the art, However When I apply these aspects of the system I adhere to all wing chun principles. I even have chin-na where my structure is holding the opponent or breaking a joint leaving both of my hands free without the need to grap with my fingers while I am striking.

[Hendrik]

Ok. But that doesn't answer my question. What is the "original Tan Sau that isn't seen"?

The original tan sau is not the high tan sau.
The original tan sau is the type of tan sau as shown in the above video clip in my previous post

[Hendrik]

Specific skill development and the correction of errors revealed under pressure in free sparring.

How can a barrier limited and range limited practice develop skill for under pressure free sparing which is boundless and no barrier?

How can one take pressure from free sparing with that type of limited skill, such as swiming in a swing poor to handle ocean swiming?

[LFJ]

How can a barrier limited and range limited practice develop skill for under pressure free sparing which is boundless and no barrier?

How can one train a static position as in SNT to develop skill for fully dynamic sparring and fighting?

You've been involved in WC for several decades, right? Why don't you understand the stages of development?

[Hendrik]

How can one train a static position as in SNT to develop skill for fully dynamic sparring and fighting?

Simple, just activate the seven bows. Then one has the handling in the force flow and momentum.

A transformer doesn't have to be program to unlimited movement, it just has to have basic inteligent joints handling training.



You've been involved in WC for several decades, right? Why don't you understand the stages of development?



Your question in SNT above tell me you are I doing different type of wing chun.

SNT is static position ? Not as I know.


My SNT is training multiple direction force flow and momentum dynamic with minimum physical adjustment. So, we sure practics a complete different Wck.

[LFJ]

So you can fight without moving your feet. That's amazing!

[KPM]

The original tan sau is not the high tan sau.
The original tan sau is the type of tan sau as shown in the above video clip in my previous post

Well, that's the Tan Sau I've been doing for years! ;) The height varies depending on the application and need. I really don't see the need to give it a different name if I end up using it higher than shoulder level.

[KPM]

So you can fight without moving your feet. That's amazing!

That's not what he's saying. Don't you understand the stages of development? You learn a body dynamic and power expression before you ever even take a step. But wait, maybe you don't do that in your Wing Chun?

[Hendrik]

So you can fight without moving your feet. That's amazing!

Feet dynamic on seven bows force flow handling doesn't have to step out, and it doesn't mean stand still. There are x y z axis and straight or spiral handling action and reaction force dynamic as in the attach photo.

At close body short strike art, one stick into the opponent body, without those micro feet movement dynamic how is a short strike art suppose to work without force flow axis develop?



If one doesn't develop the seven bows, force flow, and the dynamic axis, what does one develop in snt?
Just moving arm around in a limited range in that lock up stance which break ones body into two parts?

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1265892] However I feel turning away from the facing principle, not in side body but completely away, and having two of my hands and even entire body committed to one of the opponent's arm to be far from applying wing chun principles.
------------------------------------------------------
Navin our understanding and perceptions are different on this point and that is ok with me.. The two hands are committed to controlling the other person not just one arm.

[Hendrik]

Well, that's the Tan Sau I've been doing for years! ;) The height varies depending on the application and need. I really don't see the need to give it a different name if I end up using it higher than shoulder level.


Tan is a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement.

Zhao yang is a ~ 45(? )degree forward and upward movement .

Different force flow type.

[KPM]

Tan is a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement.

Zhao yang is a ~ 45(? )degree forward and upward movement .

Different force flow type.

Ok. Yes. That makes sense. Thanks!

[kung fu fighter]

[QUOTE=kung fu fighter;1265892] However I feel turning away from the facing principle, not in side body but completely away, and having two of my hands and even entire body committed to one of the opponent's arm to be far from applying wing chun principles.
------------------------------------------------------
Navin our understanding and perceptions are different on this point and that is ok with me..

Agreed Joy! but that's the great thing in a discussion forum


The two hands are committed to controlling the other person not just one arm.

The question is would sifu Fong attempt such a technique in a real life or death situation, I highly doubt that, I think he was just playing around to make the footage more flashy and interesting. The problem I see with such techniques is that it would take way to long to recover if the opponent counter's it, you would end up in a bad position, and won't be able to recover in time before being hit. The principles of wing chun are there to protect us by keeping our movements simple direct and economical when followed. Of course there are always exceptional individuals who can pull things off that most of us can't such as a Muhammed Ali or Bruce Lee, perhaps sifu Fong is such an individual.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1265928]

Agreed Joy! but that's the great thing in a discussion forum



The question is would sifu Fong attempt such a technique in a real life or death situation, I highly doubt that, I think he was just playing around to make the footage more flashy and interesting. The problem I see with such techniques is that it would take way to long to recover if the opponent counter's it, you would end up in a bad position, and won't be able to recover in time before being hit. The principles of wing chun are there to protect us by keeping our movements simple direct and economical when followed. Of course there are always exceptional individuals who can pull things off that most of us can't such as a Muhammed Ali or Bruce Lee, perhaps sifu Fong is such an individual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navin-he is showing development of TIMING....the technique is not the most important thing.

[JPinAZ]

Tan is a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement.

Zhao yang is a ~ 45(? )degree forward and upward movement .

Different force flow type.

Only for your snake+crane wing chun maybe - but for mine this is utter nonsense.
Again, this is the downfall of those that no longer practice or apply thier WC with a partner, their 'conclusions' are not based on actual experience - only guesswork and conjecture.

[kung fu fighter]

Only for your snake+crane wing chun maybe - but for mine this is utter nonsense.
Again, this is the downfall of those that no longer practice or apply thier WC with a partner, their 'conclusions' are not based on actual experience - only guesswork and conjecture.


It's not only guesswork and conjecture, Hendrik has done his homework. Before even meeting Hendrik i knew in YKSWC Tan sau is also a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement. same in Kulo side body boxing, Same in Yik Kam wing chun and snake crane wing chun. I suspect the same in PFLWC. do you see a pattern here lol.

When tan sau is done above chest level without the spiral horizontal forward movement, it does not function the same way.

[Hendrik]

It's not only guesswork and conjecture, Hendrik has done his homework. Before even meeting Hendrik i knew in YKSWC Tan sau is also a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement. same in Kulo side body boxing, Same in Yik Kam wing chun and snake crane wing chun. I suspect the same in PFLWC. do you see a pattern here lol.

When tan sau is done above chest level without the spiral horizontal forward movement, it does not function the same way.



When ones full set of snt doesn't have the chest level tan sau. That is the signature of modern evolution.

[JPinAZ]

It's not only guesswork and conjecture, Hendrik has done his homework. Before even meeting Hendrik i knew in YKSWC Tan sau is also a chest horizontal forward with spiral movement. same in Kulo side body boxing, Same in Yik Kam wing chun and snake crane wing chun. I suspect the same in PFLWC. do you see a pattern here lol.

When tan sau is done above chest level without the spiral horizontal forward movement, it does not function the same way.

There was a visitor to HFY headquarters years back that tried telling our practitioners that the high tan sau in our form was incorrect and that it wouldn't pass this his supposed 'structure tests'. Needless to say, he couldn't budge our high 'straight' tan sau when put to his 'test' ;)

That said, the usage of a tool is dictated by WC principle and concept - contact point on the kiu, position and leverage, etc - not because it's done a certain way in a form. In our lineage we have 5 total tan sau - 3 'tan sau's (1 center-line and 2 5-line) and also 2 'tan kiu's, and yes, one has more of a spiralling/twisting nature than the other.But, the energetic and position is based upon the things I mentioned above once contact is made. You can do both spiral and non-spiral tan sau to the high reference. While we do both to our upper/high reference in our forms, I also know they work at this position from training them in application against live partners. Having someone like Henrdik, who never trains this way, come and say something can't work is utter nonsense.

Which is why any discussion that is to be had on low vs. hi tan in application (spiral or otherwise) simply can't be had with Hendrik - as he does not train partner applications and admittedly doesn't spar. Which, BTW, are the only ways to know what is right/wrong or works/doesn't work in any MA system. So no, he hasn't done his homework :rolleyes:

[LFJ]

That's not what he's saying. Don't you understand the stages of development? You learn a body dynamic and power expression before you ever even take a step. But wait, maybe you don't do that in your Wing Chun?

It's called sarcasm. If Hendrik can understand that SNT is to develop specific skills and we don't actually fight in that stance with one arm out, then why doesn't he understand that chi-sau is to develop specific skills and we don't actually fight in that stance with both arms equally extended? It's like all he has ever learned is SNT.

[tc101]

It's called sarcasm. If Hendrik can understand that SNT is to develop specific skills and we don't actually fight in that stance with one arm out, then why doesn't he understand that chi-sau is to develop specific skills and we don't actually fight in that stance with both arms equally extended? It's like all he has ever learned is SNT.

Most of this discussion revolves around people thinking the model is the application or that the model is what is important.

[YouKnowWho]

The original tan sau is not the high tan sau.

If your opponent is 7 feet tall. When he punches at your head, do you have to raise your arm a bit higher in order to block it? The height of your block dose not depend on you but depend on your opponent's punch.

[JPinAZ]

If your opponent is 7 feet tall. When he punches at your head, do you have to raise your arm a bit higher in order to block it? The height of your block dose not depend on you but depend on your opponent's punch.

haha, forget 7 feet tall - Hendrik's mid level tan sau wouldn't defend against someone your own height punching at your head, let alone somone taller!

[YouKnowWho]

haha, forget 7 feet tall - Hendrik's mid level tan sau wouldn't defend against someone your own height punching at your head, let alone somone taller!

Many years ago I tried to help someone to polish his solo form. For every "horizontal punches" that he did, I asked him to punch 30 degree upward. The reason is simple. He is only 5 feet tall. :D