The Pole

[CFT]

Finally, someone mentions the infamous 'no two sounds' maxim!

This is connected to attacking concepts, and ideally should be implemented in pole work when drilling. Very similar to the way the wrist/forearm of your fistwork can clear the centreline for the strike. The pole does the same.

Mind you, there were some occassions where the one sound WAS the kill... and other 'training' occassions where there were limitless sounds of interacting sticks!

I think this concept is illustrated by knights jousting with the lance.

[chusauli]

Again, you're using other arts to explain/justify what you do with your Wing Chun. Do you teach like this? I find it quite strange, originating from one teacher who also was only taught by one teacher.

He used other styles as examples, but not in the way you do. More in the way of highlighting strengths/weaknesses.

Spencer,

Strange? I find that you're strange... ... maybe you need to see more of the world.

Perhaps if you learned from other systems and other teachers, you'd know that what I said has its parallel in other systems and WCK is not unique, and the people I mentioned are considered examples in their respective arts.

[k gledhill]

As I see it, "gwun mo leung heung" refers to making contact and staying in contact with the opponent's weapon/body/etc. -- which makes only one sound with the initial contact. That requires a fairly close range. The WCK pole is a much closer range weapon IMO than is typically demonstrated (where the opponent beyond the end of the pole, much like fencing with the pole). At that range, you really have no leverage, and leverage is what the pole is all about. Instead, your opponent is well within the "end" of the pole, and you are using leverage/pressure to keep your opponent off-balance, to limit his actions, etc. while you maneuver for openings. This also explains why the thrust isn't the main offensive action.

you have odd ideas about the pole ...it teaches [or in your case not] ballistic 'removal' of anything in its way, like vt hands , short sharp blasts of energy that will shock a pole out of your hands , thus clear the way for free hands to strike or pole tip to strike...not to make contact and stay in contact...thats a sticky idea from guys who dont know what they are doing, so take chi-sao to the pole too rolling pole

[t_niehoff]

you have odd ideas about the pole ...

Actually, it's most WCK people who have"odd ideas" about the pole -- because that is ALL they have: ideas. And where did these ideas come from? From people who can't fight with the pole!

So we have the blind leading the blind -- people who can't do it telling others how it should be done.

it teaches [or in your case not] ballistic 'removal' of anything in its way, like vt hands , short sharp blasts of energy that will shock a pole out of your hands , thus clear the way for free hands to strike or pole tip to strike...not to make contact and stay in contact...thats a sticky idea from guys who dont know what they are doing, so take chi-sao to the pole too rolling pole

Instead of rolling your eyes, why don't you spend your energy actually earning some experience with the pole -- get some partners, and it's critically important that they are nonWCK partners who aren't going to try and do what you do, and put in some significant time sparring (hard) with the pole? If you do that, as I have, I think you'll see that you won't be able to make your "ideas" work. (Interestingly, that is what the Dog Brothers did with the stick, and found that much of the "wisdom" in FMAs didn't work).

[LoneTiger108]

Spencer,

Strange? I find that you're strange... ... maybe you need to see more of the world.

Definitely. Although it's harder to get around these days with the family and work.

I've always been strange. I just like to be clear in one way. Study under one Sifu. I learn from everyone, and every experience, but I'll still always only have one Sifu. Does that make me bad?

Perhaps if you learned from other systems and other teachers, you'd know that what I said has its parallel in other systems and WCK is not unique, and the people I mentioned are considered examples in their respective arts.

I would love to, but in the UK most elder Wing Chun guys know me, or of me, so are shy in exchange. I'm very interested in other arts and have met some great people but I've never felt inspired enough to ask them to teach me anything. Although Neil Adams was as cool as Braulio Estima!

Especially when it's the Wing Chun Pole we're talking about...

[chusauli]

In college, one has many teachers, in Masters programs, you have many teachers and in Doctorate programs you have many teachers.

There is no big deal in learning more. Who you say your "sifu" is personal, and that's fine. There is no good or bad in that.

One can always learn more.

[k gledhill]

Actually, it's most WCK people who have"odd ideas" about the pole -- because that is ALL they have: ideas. And where did these ideas come from? From people who can't fight with the pole!

So we have the blind leading the blind -- people who can't do it telling others how it should be done.



Instead of rolling your eyes, why don't you spend your energy actually earning some experience with the pole -- get some partners, and it's critically important that they are nonWCK partners who aren't going to try and do what you do, and put in some significant time sparring (hard) with the pole? If you do that, as I have, I think you'll see that you won't be able to make your "ideas" work. (Interestingly, that is what the Dog Brothers did with the stick, and found that much of the "wisdom" in FMAs didn't work).

whatever froggy... how deep is that well, well, well ....

[t_niehoff]

whatever froggy... how deep is that well, well, well ....

It's the people who never question what they are doing, who never critically examine or think about what they do, who blindly accept the views of their "master", who they believe is "great" and has "the right concepts", that are lost.

The blind following the blind.

[k gledhill]

It's the people who never question what they are doing, who never critically examine or think about what they do, who blindly accept the views of their "master", who they believe is "great" and has "the right concepts", that are lost.

The blind following the blind.

You will never see beyond the well your in....you need to travel more. crickets wont come to you all the time.

[t_niehoff]

You will never see beyond the well your in....you need to travel more. crickets wont come to you all the time.

Why don't you tell us what you believe are the main differences between the Yip Man, YKS, and Gu Lao pole sets?

What? You don't know and haven't seen the YKS or Gu Lao pole sets? You don't know numerous variations of the Yip Man pole sets?

OK, then, why don't you tell us about what you learned with your experience sparring with the pole against nonWCK people?

Oh, can't do that either. Hmmm.

I see. But I'm the one who should get out and see more. Right.

[LoneTiger108]

In college, one has many teachers, in Masters programs, you have many teachers and in Doctorate programs you have many teachers.

There is no big deal in learning more. Who you say your "sifu" is personal, and that's fine. There is no good or bad in that.

One can always learn more.

I'm open to learning more, as I've said before I learn every day. Maybe I'm not so into the formalities of education though.

To get back on subject, IMO the wing chun pole form itself, as taught by Lee Shing and my Sifu, would take more than three years of continued training to get close to a decent standard.

With a good foundation in Wing Chun first, three years become three months

[k gledhill]

Why don't you tell us what you believe are the main differences between the Yip Man, YKS, and Gu Lao pole sets?

What? You don't know and haven't seen the YKS or Gu Lao pole sets? You don't know numerous variations of the Yip Man pole sets?

OK, then, why don't you tell us about what you learned with your experience sparring with the pole against nonWCK people?

Oh, can't do that either. Hmmm.

I see. But I'm the one who should get out and see more. Right.

your like a child sometimes

[canglong]

Robert I suppose next you will be telling us Chusaulei.com is not your website.

originally posted by Robert Chu
I'm just a martial artist sick of the BS in TCMA...
Its all a process of being a work in process, and the honest conversations you have with yourself.

That may be the only time you are ever honest. In conversation with yourself and even that is questionable.

originally posted by Phil Redmond
Weak attempt at baiting.
I never said that people were taught wrong. What I can say is that there is more.

Sifu Redmond is a recognized master of TWC and has every reason to denounce your little attempt to denigrate
his art and his sifu. Fact William Cheung answered your c0cky questions with his own hands.
Fact Lei Mu San turned you away as a student.
Fact Moy Yat would not teach you starting at the weapons he wanted you to start from the beginning.
Terence readily admits he can not "make it work" it being Chusaulei. Obviously Hawkings Cheung could not "make it work" after his alledged fight with a couple none martial artist in an L.A. parking lot after which his own students said he disappeared for 3 months because he was so badly injured. Obviously Robert you didn't care to find out if you could "make it work" when you ran from Kenneth Chung in Monterey Park.

Clearly it is only your large and inflated ego which motivates you to lash out and bad mouth those you feel have wronged you in the past with your biased and uneducated critiques of others schools and families abilities and or training methods. There is no sincerity in your words and no honor in your actions and no one is falling for you or your students feeble attempts to come off as neutral on any topics on this forum. The only person not able to face the reality of this situation is you. Again just like Moy Yat tried to explain to you after lei Mu San gave up on you that it was in your own best interest to start over from the Siu nim tau level and you didn't understand. Now again it would be in your own best interest to start facing the truth of the matter which is Robert you can not "make it work" and if you yourself would commit to more practice and less talk maybe then you might possibly be able to make your wing chun work and we wouldn't have to lsiten to Terence cry all the time about how your wing chun "sucks". That alone would cut down on all the "BS" on this forum.

[m1k3]

Tony, I am confused by your post. You seem to think avoiding fights is shameful. You also imply that losing is a disgrace also. Personally I think avoiding a fight is the highest of skills and not an easy one. It is difficult to keep your ego in check during such high stress situations.

On the topic of losing, are you saying that your wing chun can not be beat, even against multiple opponents?

I don't understand what about Robert's post that upset you so? Perhaps you find the thought of cross training to be distasteful?

Sorry for the rambling post, I am still on my 1st cup of coffee.

Now, back on topic, would most of you consider the pole primarily a thrusting weapon or a striking weapon? And if it is a striking weapon wouldn't the pole's weight and size be a limiting factor on how it could be used in that fashion?

Thanks.

[t_niehoff]

your like a child sometimes

Really? Hmmm. You tell me that I should get out and see more (in a snide way, remember"cricket"?) and I point out that I've seen much, much more than you to rebut your remark. And this is your retort. Classic.