Anti `No forward pressure` campaign

[old jong]

Somebody mentionned not wanting the opponent to know the intentions as a reason why he is against forward ''pressure''!....

Well as Wing Chun practitioner,I can say that my intents are only to stike at the center of my opponent,nothing else!...My light forward pressure or intent (as you prefer) gives me a headstart in offense if I feel a gap in my opponent structure and...My opponent's light forward pressure gives him the same in defense.As Wing Chun's motions generaly are forward motions we, this way, don't have to overcome inertia in attacking or defending. The motion is always in gear if I can say so!...

I hope this makes sense to you!

[S.Teebas]

Miles Teg writes:

Yes, but we don't try to hide our intentions of going forward.

Well for another point of view from someone of the same linage i say we do aim to hide our intentions. Somewhat one of the ideas of relaxation and initiation of movement from the centre of gravity. Usually the opponent isnt sensitive enough to feel the body movement attacking them till its too late, then their balance is gone.
A large percentage of schools ive seen practice with sensitivity reacting to the opponents arms, but few reacting to the body.

[YungChun]

Originally posted by S.Teebas


i say we do aim to hide our intentions. Somewhat one of the ideas of relaxation and initiation of movement from the centre of gravity. Usually the opponent isnt sensitive enough to feel the body movement attacking them till its too late

People doing Chi-Sao will invariably play, often the ego is a major factor here. That said, strict interpretation of the exercise as I have learned it include the following components:

1. Both partners should be trying to control/attack/fill (their part of ) the Centerline all the time.

2. Both players should use forward energy and correct structure to do #1.

3. Both partners use Luk Sao (Rolling - not too fast) to maximize control of the Centerline.

4. If both partners maintain sufficient control of the Centerline nothing should happen except rolling - perfect Chi-Sao.

5. An 'attack' (a technique) is the result of a defect in one of the partner's energy/structure.


6. A valid striking technique should have at least one single stroke follow up available (Fan Sao.)

So the attack, in a very real sense begins at number 1 above. The 'attack' begins when rolling begins. One may turn up the attack and use more energy. One may even use impure energy to gain an advantage but will sacrifice part of his structure or energy in so doing. This kind of artificial attack is nullified when playing with an advanced senior - where this kind of attack will either get you bruised up or airborne.

Ultimately, attack is a constant in Chi-Sao - it's more a matter of intensity. One can only ask if the attack is correct and pure or clumsy and artificial. Clumsy and artificial 'attacks' will often work (and confuse) your Si-Dai; while correct and pure 'attack' will keep your Si-Hings and Si-Dai's (and you) honest and promote good and effective training.

[Miles Teg]

S.Teebas
I think I see what you mean, and as your much further down the track than I am (WC years, not other) you have a better picture of the whole thing than I do.

PS You dont have any class mates that have moved to Japan by any chance have you? Otherwise have you heard of any TST people in Japan?
Im getting WC with drawl over here!

[YungChun]

Originally posted by kj
I always enjoy the water analogy.

Why only wrists? Why so far apart?

Can you be more precise as to what blows your mind in others' practice? Is it, as examples,

[list=a][*]when there is no contact[*]when there is more contact (e.g., full forearm)[*]when there is intermittent contact[*]other?[/list=a]

Re semantics: I've noted the following terms bandied about in this thread thus far:

• pressure
• intent/intentionality
• force
• forcefulness
• energy
• ... others?

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

Hey kj,

Sorry, just realized I hadn't responded to you.



>>Why only wrists?

Wrists are the starting point for Luk Sao. The tools can equally share the line at the wrist - like two long 90 degree inverse triangles fitting together to form a long rectangle - that long rectangle entirely fills the Centerline, while each individual triangle (tool) occupies half the space of that area. Once the two triangles form a rectangle, moving them closer or further away distorts this 'filling' of the Centerline in terms of efficiency. Note that wrist to wrist represents a balanced starting point, which would change later if a defect in energy/structure exists.

A deviation of say 0.25 inches out of ideal position at the wrist will be enough room for a good player to gain complete control with. Likewise a deviation of more than say 15% of forward energy from one player would be enough 'error' to lose control of the line to a good partner.


>>Why so far apart?

Well for me wrist to wrist has my Tan Sao about 8-10 inches away from his chest - not far to me. The exercise is supposed to be training the horse to move as well as the hands. If we train at a distance where we are already in range to strike then how can the horse be trained to move? Is that a realistic distance? When you attack your opponent in a fight will you start from kissing distance or will you have to work to get there? Chi-Sao was designed to allow for the training of almost every attribute and technique in the system, all hand techniques, strikes, elbows and Sticking legs included - that is a fairly wide range, but it all fits in when starting at wrist to wrist range.

>Can you be more precise as to what blows your mind in others' >practice? Is it, as examples,

>>when there is no contact

With few exceptions (Jow Sao, ?) there would always be contact (using forward energy) in order to fill the Centerline.

>>when there is more contact (e.g., full forearm)

Not sure what this means. Full forearm in contact with what? I am not aware of any technique that has the full forearm in contact with anything.

>>when there is intermittent contact

There could be a temporary disengagement as in Jao Sao, Jao Da, Running Tan Da, but the key is that as soon as one leaves the line - Jao - one must return - Jip - to the line and go forward again with contact.

Note: Contact means either tool to tool (obstruction) or Tool to target (hit to Centerline).

[S.Teebas]

[/i]Miles:[/i]

You dont have any class mates that have moved to Japan by any chance have you? Otherwise have you heard of any TST people in Japan?

Sorry i havent heard of any going over there, ill let u know if i hear anything.

[kj]

Originally posted by crimsonking
kj - thanks for the reply, agreed, especially about going very heavy but relaxed, using strucure, alignment, root etc... anyhow, sorry to nitpick, but one thing you said left me slightly curious. you said 'especially for training purposes' - what do you mean by this?

Just a reiteration that applying pressure is not the ultimate goal, yet something that is necessary along the way for development. Since pressure does incur increasing vulnerability (something that can be used against me), sensitivity and responding "at the slightest suggestion" and before pressure builds is a higher goal, IMHO.

If things go well, one may never be called upon to rely on employing heavy pressure in an unfortunate "reality" encounter too early on, and one may be past need of relying on it at later stages of development. In such a case, it's utility would have been primarily for training.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[kj]

Originally posted by crimsonking
Also,
I much prefer the spring analogy to the saying - this makes it sound like 3 discrete steps - in my book its continuous, and this is very important. for instance the 'retain when it comes' - there is still forward pressure, even though 'retaining' - and this same forward pressure charges forward when the pressure is released - no sudden change between the 3 steps. I have experienced chisao with people who thought they understood lut sau jik choong - but only punched forward when they felt the pressure go. IMO wrong. always leaves a slight gap or delay, which someone springing correctly will always fill.

I follow you. I think there are lots of ways to misunderstand the sayings or their context; yours is a good example.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

[kj]

Originally posted by crimsonking
again, i disagree somewhat ...

Cool with me. Besides, what fun would it be if we agreed 100% on everything?

Thanks to you and the others for the thoughtful exchange.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo