Jong Sao - what is it?

[Rob Wolf]

Jong Sau is indeed performed in the opening of the Wooden dummy, The hands form a triangle and both hands move forward together for optimum structural power,Deflecting incoming movements very well.

Worthy of mention is "BUE JONG SAU" which is the long bridge version of Jong Sau and is introduced in the first section of the Chum Kiu form. Bue Jong sau can be used to shoot into the opponents shoulder joint to utilize a type of "stop Hit" tecnique.(all very much based on angle structure and a type of slipping, while striking)

Jong Sau is Deflective in nature, bieng based on a triangle and is used as a bridge to contact the opponents bridge , continuing into a tan or bong, etc. This is a good example of Wing Chun's touch and go method, I.e. The hands do not "BLOCK" per se yet contact the bridge and flow into response counters......Hope this helps....

Regards , Sifu Lopez www.sillumwingchun.com

[Savi]

I'd like to get a clarification on the following, because it seems a couple of the posts here:

1) are associating Jong Sau exclusively with Bai Jong, or

2) are of the understanding that Jong Sau is used to engage the bridge, which contradicts #1 above, or

3) say Jong Sau is a static positioning of the hands, or

4) say Jong Sau could possibly any 'technique' representing a "post/structure hand"

Just my impression of the posts here thusfar.

I haven't read too many posts here actually describing what their understanding of Jong Sau is, rather, how and where it is used.

For one, Sifu Chaudhuri and Sifu Lopez reference the Wooden Dummy for one application of their Jong Sau. That leaves me with the impression that Jong Sau is first trained at the Muk Yan Jong then in their lineage? Or no?

Also, since Jong Sau is seemingly different within the lineages, may I ask what EXACTLY is Bai Jong to the posters here?

-Savi.

[reneritchie]

Hi Savi,

I think this would be different from Jong Sau discussion. For me to partake in this discussion I can only reference HFY from

I see them as aspects of a whole.

For me to partake in this discussion I can only reference HFY from my information, Rene. I know you do not want to discuss HFY

My problem is that if you talk HFY, and I disagree, it looks like I'm disagreeing with HFY, not with you (even if prefaced by "your understanding of"). Some of the larger arguments have started that way, so I feel avoiding the labels and just sticking to our own thoughts, even if they reflect a silent label, is more productive.

Hi Levi, thanks for joining in!

The inability to "set up" is, in my opinion, one heck of a scary timeframe to find yourself in.

I agree its scary, but also think its common, and that makes it all the more important. You raise some excellent points as well!

The way I learned, the movements/response pattern broke down pretty much:

If you had enough time, you could move into superior position and counter.

If you had less time, you could attain a neutral position and counter.

If you had little time, you could counter for the disadvatageous position to create opportunity to improve position/follow up.

If you had almost no time, you could defend from the disadvantageous position to create opportunity to improve position and counter.

So, in a bad situation, you may only have time to raise an intercepting arm and deflect an attack (maybe only partially), but your body would have to be programmed to take what little opportunity that provided to get into better posture, maybe even position, and begin disrupting the opponent.

WRT how this relates to Jong Sao, I'm a big believer that there are no positions or poses, just actions or motions. Jong Sao is a bit of an exeption in that, in precontact, if there's time, good Jong Sao minimizes your profile (physically by creating angles that would shear away certain lines of attack, mentally by placing threatening elements in the opponent's way.) The opportunity cost of this (*everything* has a risk/reward ratio that you need to understand) is that it telegraphs as well - gives away you structure to a trained eye, gives away that you've been trained, and gives away that you will use that training. For this reason, I learned not to assume my posture until an opponent is close and intent enough that contact is imminent. (the opportunity cost for this is potentially not good enough training/reflex to assume in time).

[woseung]

In a general term Jong Sao is used to set up and properly face an opponent. In more technical discussion some systems use Jong Sao primarily as a guarding position and others use it as a way to target opponents. Some systems even go past the techniques of Jong Sao and use it from a tactical point of view.

" A novice in the discussion of Jong Sao would be concerned with what is and what is not. A practitioner with deeper insight would understand the true nature of Jong Sao is determined by the measure in which a person has attained liberation from self. The total experience of the practioners journey should be realized."

[Savi]

Originally posted by woseung
In a general term Jong Sao is used to set up and properly face an opponent. In more technical discussion some systems use Jong Sao primarily as a guarding position and others use it as a way to target opponents. Some systems even go past the techniques of Jong Sao and use it from a tactical point of view.

Welcome to the form Woseung!

In the HFY family (I am part of), facing is multi-layered and specific in each layer.

1) A general facing is referred to as "Chiu Meen", more of watching the perimeter.

2) A more 'intent' facing where you are aware of the threat we call "Deui Yeng", where your body is oriented to the enemy

3) A 'proper' or complete/total facing we call "Jeui Yeng", where all your weapons are ready to be - or already are - in use against the opponent.

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

Jong Sau in my family is primarily used as a foundation to build the proper expression of several concepts through our body structure and its motions. It might also be viewed as the foundation of many other techniques, being that in our family it is trained first and upfront.

When I use the Jong Sau in the context of targeting, I use it as a means to "lock on" to potential weaknesses in the opponent's defensive or offensive structure.

-Savi.

[taltos]

Originally posted by reneritchie
The way I learned, the movements/response pattern broke down pretty much:

If you had enough time, you could move into superior position and counter.

If you had less time, you could attain a neutral position and counter.

If you had little time, you could counter for the disadvatageous position to create opportunity to improve position/follow up.

If you had almost no time, you could defend from the disadvantageous position to create opportunity to improve position and counter.

So, in a bad situation, you may only have time to raise an intercepting arm and deflect an attack (maybe only partially), but your body would have to be programmed to take what little opportunity that provided to get into better posture, maybe even position, and begin disrupting the opponent.

I totally agree. I've been taight that the most dangerous time in an engagement is before the bridge is built, Jong Sau or not. That's when you are limited to the speed of your eye-hand coordination, because you have no bridge to utilize your sensitivity. That's what I meant by "Clear the threatened space" and "Recover/regain control of the battlefield." The most important thing is to get something between your opponent and you. Preferably something that allows you to immidiately "read" the bridge and tell your feet (and the rest of you) where you need to be.

WRT how this relates to Jong Sao, I'm a big believer that there are no positions or poses, just actions or motions.

Definately. Hand out, palm up is not Taan, because you're not really dispersing anything unless it's in motion and interacting with an external force.

I learned not to assume my posture until an opponent is close and intent enough that contact is imminent.

By this do you mean the Bui Jong point? (We also call it the "Go Point.) I mean, is that range the distance at which the opponent could begin to compromise your reaction time if they get any closer? If so, we train in a basically similar fashion, in that we try to remain "neutral" (only worrying about general facing) and don't "set up" our hands until the opponent is in a range that could allow a long range attack. Then, closer than that, is the "Go Point," the point at which all bets are off, and WC range has been entered (the "line in the sand," if you will).

Thanks for the good points, it definately gives me more to think about.

-Levi

[Tom Kagan]

My problem is that if you talk HFY, and I disagree, it looks like I'm disagreeing with HFY, not with you (even if prefaced by "your understanding of"). Some of the larger arguments have started that way, so I feel avoiding the labels and just sticking to our own thoughts, even if they reflect a silent label, is more productive.

Rene, if we really want to have some fun, imagine if I chose to say that, even though you never met my Sifu, your interpretation of JongSao (and Joy's) is closer to what Moy Yat taught as JongSao than what Savi says is the "Moy Yat method" and that his physical description of how I and most of my SiHings supposedly stand is a bit off the mark.

But I don't want to appear as if I disagree with the "Moy Yat Method" instead of just disagreeing with Savi, do I? So, I won't say it, regardless of what silent label it reflects on me.

Simply put, JongSao just means "neutral", and is more correctly thought of as a concept than a specific hand/stance placement.

As you very aptly pointed out, it's "en garde."

Moy Yat taught that the classic JongSao position (whatever that may be given your lineage or even your particular martial art style) can unecessarily escalate a situation. To anyone who spent enough time with him, Moy Yat gave many example JongSao positions which did not give an appearance of a challange and also a few examples that were intentionally provocative.

As one final thought, JongSao does not specifically apply to martial arts. Even golf has its own JongSao if a person considers it from the proper perspective (how do you say "pitching wedge" in Cantonese? ).

[reneritchie]

Levi,

By this do you mean the Bui Jong point? (We also call it the "Go Point.) I mean, is that range the distance at which the opponent could begin to compromise your reaction time if they get any closer?

Yes, mixed with a read of their intent (your girlfriend when you come home late vs. the masked man oggling your wallet), and constant training to minimize reaction time and maximize quality of reaction.

Hi Tom,

Moy Yat taught that the classic JongSao position (whatever that may be given your lineage or even your particular martial art style) can unecessarily escalate a situation.

My sigung, and hence my sifu, taught similar.

As one final thought, JongSao does not specifically apply to martial arts. Even golf has its own JongSao if a person considers it from the proper perspective (how do you say "pitching wedge" in Cantonese? ).

LOL! True enough. (Ngaw m'sik wan "golf").

[taltos]

Originally posted by reneritchie
constant training to minimize reaction time and maximize quality of reaction.

Well stated! 11 words that basically sums up the focus of virtually all of our training tools.

Thanks for the pleasant conversation.

-Levi

[reneritchie]

Thanks for the pleasant conversation.

Same here!

[Savi]

Hi Tom,

Originally posted by Tom Kagan
if we really want to have some fun, imagine if I chose to say that, even though you never met my Sifu, your interpretation of JongSao (and Joy's) is closer to what Moy Yat taught as JongSao than what Savi says is the "Moy Yat method" and that his physical description of how I and most of my SiHings supposedly stand is a bit off the mark.

No need for the discretion... I am quite open for conversation Tom! The description below is MY understanding of the Moy Yat family Jong Sau as Sitaigung Moy Yat discussed here at Mengs of AZ back in 1999. Not to say anything bad about you or anyone, but I did spend some valuable private time with him where he gave me some invaluable insights. The words below were not specifically his words, but my own. I did preface that it was my understanding of the MYVTK Jong Sau.

Originally posted by Savi
Again, the information below is what I understand from my family only...

Originally posted by Savi
Space:
Jong Sau takes into account proper spacing of your body’s parts. In the Moy Yat family, the Jong Sau aligns the wrists on the center of the body averaging about one fist and a thumb between the body and the wrist for the back hand, and another ‘fist and thumb’ from the body to the elbow – to measure the extension of the lead hand. Both elbows must be pointed down to the ground as much as possible. The height of the hands is oriented anywhere between the diaphragm and the shoulder height.

If my description is accurate enough...

What is your understanding of Jong Sau if I may ask? I am quite interested in how different your response may be.

Regards,
-Savi.

[yuanfen]

Savi asks:For one, Sifu Chaudhuri and Sifu Lopez reference the Wooden Dummy for one application of their Jong Sau. That leaves me with the impression that Jong Sau is first trained at the Muk Yan Jong then in their lineage? Or no?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly- NO. The dummy motions incorporate movements from the 3 hand forms. The jong motion is very much there in the first section of the mok yan jong form.
To do it right one must master some chum kiu.
And as Rob Lopez pointed out the biu jong sao is early in the chum kiu. Once learned jong sao can be apllied in many different contexts always coordinated with the other hand. Jong sao is a devastating can opener and can be used for striking, deflecting, breaking and even throwing- depending on "listening jing".
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Taltos sez:That's what I meant by "Clear the threatened space" and "Recover/regain control of the battlefield."
----------------------------------------------------------------
Levi- a comment on phraseology. FWIW- I am not fond of battlefield analogies. The southern arts and wing chun in particular was not developed in set battlefield dynamics as some of the Northern arts---in the use of the kwan do, stretching exercises for jumping off horses etc.
Wing chun is as close quarters as there is. The battlefield is when you are in contact with the other person- a wing chun person is looking for contact. Wing chun always prepares for contact- because that is a dangerous time. Pre contact is actually lessdangerous IMO.

[Savi]

Originally posted by yuanfen
Briefly- NO. The dummy motions incorporate movements from the 3 hand forms. The jong motion is very much there in the first section of the mok yan jong form.
To do it right one must master some chum kiu.
And as Rob Lopez pointed out the biu jong sao is early in the chum kiu. Once learned jong sao can be apllied in many different contexts always coordinated with the other hand. Jong sao is a devastating can opener and can be used for striking, deflecting, breaking and even throwing- depending on "listening jing".

Thank you for the explanation Sifu Chaudhuri.

Originally posted by yuanfen
FWIW- I am not fond of battlefield analogies. The southern arts and wing chun in particular was not developed in set battlefield dynamics as some of the Northern arts---in the use of the kwan do, stretching exercises for jumping off horses etc.

How does this affect/influence your POV on the militaristic histories presented by pre-red boat era Wing Chun? Also by your above statement, how does that explain the existence of the 9-12 ft Gwan in Wing Chun as a close range fighting system?

Originally posted by yuanfen
Wing chun is as close quarters as there is. The battlefield is when you are in contact with the other person- a wing chun person is looking for contact. Wing chun always prepares for contact- because that is a dangerous time. Pre contact is actually lessdangerous IMO.

I know this is just your opinion, but aren't the more grappling-oriented arts more "close quarter" than Wing Chun? I gues that's my opinion...

-Savi.

[taltos]

Originally posted by yuanfen
FWIW- I am not fond of battlefield analogies.

Fair enough. Words are just words, and can be restated to convey the same material in a more inclusive way. Perhaps "Clear the threatened space" and "Recover/regain control of the battlefield" could be rephrased as "meet and neutralize the incoming threat" and "recover/regain control of the situation."

The battlefield is when you are in contact with the other person

I agree with this, but I would also include in that definition (let's use "area of potential attack" instead of "battlefield" to avoid military terms) the space near the bridge that would also allow a vector of attack. I'm a cautious guy - I like to cover all my bases.

a wing chun person is looking for contact.

Agreed. Without contact - without a bridge - you severely hamstring yourself and your options.

Wing chun always prepares for contact

Agreed, for the same reasons stated above.

because that is a dangerous time.

Definately. Any time you are in conflict with another being is dangerous.

Pre contact is actually lessdangerous IMO.

I would agree that pre-contact when the opponent is in no position to launch an immidiate attack (including long range attacks) is less dangerous. I was only refering to that split second of time when the two fighters begin to "share" their immidiate space, and there is yet no bridge.

As an illustration, in training we do blindfolded chi sau. That's not really all that hard when you know what you're doing and you have a bridge to serve as your information finder. If I try that from a bridgeless position, I am FAR less confident that I will safely keep my opponent from hurting me. From immidiate precontact to building the bridge, you are more reliant on your eyes that in arguably any other stage in the game when a bridge is present. And eye-hand coordination leaves a lot to be desired in close quarter combat, at least IMHO.

It appears that we agree on most of the statements - there was just an ambiguity on what I meant by "pre-contact." I hope this was a little more specific.

-Levi

[reneritchie]

I think Joy makes a good point. China has both civil, militia, and military (and other) martial developments, and we WCK folks don't seem much with the regiments 8).

Interesting if disturbing: I was reading about the history of Sambo (Russian blend of Judo and ethnic former-Soviet Republic wrestling) and why they favor leg breaking to the more commonly seen stangulations and arm locks of arts like Judo. They figure if you break a guy's arm, he can still fight. If you choke him out, he can wake up and fight. If you break his leg, he's stuck there, and will occupy 2 or 3 of his friends to carry him away as well. So overall, it removes more opponent's from the field. Not sure the logic is all worked out there, but still, rather cold analytical attempt.