Lan Sao in Chum Kiu

[AndrewP]

Ok, I think I'll start a thread for the first time.

One Kuen Kuit states:

"Lon Sau in Chum Kiu is a forceful technique."

What I want to know is why and how? And in what applications? I have some of my ideas about it and what I was taught but I want to hear from the audience. What makes Lon Sau forceful? Why in Chum Kiu as opposed to SLT?

Thanks to all that respond.

AndrewP

[Mr Punch]

we implement the lan sau in ck as a slightly rising move with a sinking energy, so the weight is very much underside of the arm and in the elbow... we do this by turning the hand inward as we sink into our posture... this gives you the sensitivity to use it as an uprooting lan, or as a downward posture-crushing lan, depending on the situation. either way it's better implemented with a short step. ducks!

not quite sure about your question as to slt, but the lan saus in slt are still part of the development of the forward elbow energy and relaxed shoulders that you still need to be able to put your ck into practice...

maybe!

btw: don't know this kuen kit... do you have a direct translation or a transliteration?

[AndrewP]

Yeah, here is the kuen kuit.

I've seen in more than one place

Chum Kiu lan sau fot loang hoong
The lan sau of Chum Kiu is a powerful technique

[Tongue_of_Colibob]

The way i was tought, Lan sao is also a strike.

[Grendel]

Originally posted by AndrewP

What makes Lon Sau forceful? Why in Chum Kiu as opposed to SLT?

Sorry to answer a question with a question, but where do you find a Lan Sau in SLT?

In Chun Kiu, in turning, the Lan Sau is a strike, simultaneously defensive and offensive. What gives it it's "force" is the connection to the horse.

Regards,

[kj]

Originally posted by Grendel
Sorry to answer a question with a question, but where do you find a Lan Sau in SLT?

Not to butt in, but ... in the same section as the fak sau.

In Chun Kiu, in turning, the Lan Sau is a strike, simultaneously defensive and offensive. What gives it it's "force" is the connection to the horse.

Indeedy, and presuming there is a connection to and through the horse, of course.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[Grendel]

Originally posted by kj

Not to butt in, but ... in the same section as the fak sau.

Indeedy, and presuming there is a connection to and through the horse, of course.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

To the first comment: Double lan sau. How'd I forget? I omitted it in my hasty mental review.

To your second: Of course, of course.

Regards,

[Wingman]

There is a lan sao in SLT and in Chum Kiu. How are they different? I think the difference is their structure. The SLT structure and Chum Kiu structure are different. The SLT structure can be compared to a triangle; and the Chum Kiu structure can be compared to a cone. A cone is essentially a triangle which is rotated on its axis.

The Chum Kiu structure is actually 2 cones. The first cone is upright and the second cone is upside-down and is above the first cone. If you look at it, it looks like an hourglass. When you execute a lan sao in Chum Kiu, your upper and lower body turn in opposite directions. Going back to the cone analogy, the upper and lower cones turn in opposite directions when executing a Chum Kiu technique (not just lan sao). This is why Chum kiu techniques (not just lan sao) are forceful techniques compared to similar SLT techniques.

[kj]

Originally posted by Wingman
When you execute a lan sao in Chum Kiu, your upper and lower body turn in opposite directions.

Interesting. Mine doesn't do that. Instead, I work to keep upper and lower body unified.

If I'm reading right, it seems as if you're twisting from the waist. If so, what do you see as the reasoning and benefit behind it?

I admit I may be completely misunderstanding your description.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[AndrewP]

Ok. This is a great discussion for me. Now, what part of the lan sao do you strike with? Elbow, forearm, hand? Where does the energy end up when doing chum kiu? When I punch I release energy through the hand/knuckles. Where is the energy released if lan sao is a strike? The first application of lan sao when I was taught it was as a block of a shoulder strike when I was 5 months into wing chun. That was at a Fong seminar. I see applications of using the forearm at the opponent's neck if he tries a grab at that level, then using the other arm to punch. I can see using it as a supression of the opponent's arms. I can see it as an elbow strike in chum kiu using rotational force. I have used it at close range while using rotational forearms against a person's body to lift a person's structure to destabilize it. What is the principle of the lan sao motion? Speaking of which, are we on the same page when I refer to the lan sao motion. I have been taught that lan sao is around chest height, flat forearms which is rotated horizontally a bit where the palm is facing forward a bit. And finally, why does the chum kiu lan sao deserve its own kuen kuit? Is it that important?

I have put enough info out there to keep the discussion going a bit. Thanks for all the responses so far and for the future ones.

AndrewP

[Alpha Dog]

strike, defend.. the two-dimensional mind loose in a 3D world -- waste!

[Wingman]

Originally posted by kj


Interesting. Mine doesn't do that. Instead, I work to keep upper and lower body unified.

If I'm reading right, it seems as if you're twisting from the waist. If so, what do you see as the reasoning and benefit behind it?

I admit I may be completely misunderstanding your description.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Hi kj,

Thanks for asking. When I said the upper and lower body turn in opposite direction, I meant that the upper body turn in opposite direction in relation to the lower body. The lower body (stance) need not turn. Only the upper body does the turning.

What is the reasoning/benefit behind it? It would be like twisting a rubber band, then letting it go. The rubber band will unwind because of the release of potential energy acquired when twisting it. My apologies if the explanation is not so clear. Hope to hear from you soon.

regards,
Wingman

[Grendel]

Originally posted by Wingman

Thanks for asking. When I said the upper and lower body turn in opposite direction, I meant that the upper body turn in opposite direction in relation to the lower body. The lower body (stance) need not turn. Only the upper body does the turning.

What is the reasoning/benefit behind it? It would be like twisting a rubber band, then letting it go. The rubber band will unwind because of the release of potential energy acquired when twisting it. My apologies if the explanation is not so clear. Hope to hear from you soon.

Hi Wingman,

Don't you give up your structure when you do as you describe? How do you then maintain the connection between upper and lower body? Isn't what you describe just using upper body strength?

How does a small person do this against a bigger, stronger person?

Regards,

[stuartm]

Hi,

Larn Sau is defence agains the lap sau or pressure on your bong sau, If an opponent performs bong-lap on you, your hand being lap-ed should turn straight to larn sau and press forward using you biu ma. This will pin their strike and you can then punch over your larn or strike beneath it depending on how hi low you larn is.

If some body applies forward pressure on your bong you can change it to larn and step back, while delivering a front kick.

Cant see how larn is a strike, although it is definitely a forceful and positive technique.

Stuart

[Wingman]

Hi kj & Grendel,

Thank you for your questions. It made me think for a minute. I even did part of the Chum kiu form to check on the facts. I may have to eat some of my words here.

I think what opened a Pandora's box is my comment regarding the upper and lower body turning in opposite directions in relation to each other. When doing the lan sao in CK form, I found out that the upper body turns 90 degrees while the lower body only turns about 45 degrees. In relation to the upper body, the lower body is turning in the opposite direction (and vice versa). Do you do the same thing when turning in CK? The turning angle of the upper and lower body are not the same.

Does this mean that there is no connection or body unity between the upper and lower body? I believe that there is still body unity because the upper and lower body rotate on the same axis.